National Health Reform and You (Part VIII)
Nov 06 2009
Now that we have a single, consolidated national health reform bill (H.R. 3962) in the House, let’s take a look at what it says about military and VA health care.
Most important, Section 311 of the bill states explicitly, “Nothing in this subtitle shal be construed as affecting any authority under title 38, United States Code [which covers VA health care] or chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code [which governs all military-funded health benefits, including TRICARE For Life].”
A provision of the bill imposes a 2.5% surtax on individuals who do not obtain “acceptable coverage”, but section 302(d)(2) expressly defines acceptable coverage as including TRICARE, TRICARE For Life, VA coverage and Medicare – so those covered beneficiaries would not be subject to the surtax.
Section 302 limits eligibility to participate in the bill’s Health Insurance Exchange (e.g., its form of “the public option”) to people who do not have “acceptable” or “other qualified health benefits plans”. Because military and VA beneficiaries have acceptable coverage, they would not be eligible to participate in the Exchange. Rep Steve Buyer (R-IN) is considering offering an amendment to establish an exception to allow military and VA-eligibles to enroll in the exchange to cover any contingency (e.g., a member who has VA coverage but not family coverage or a member who is enrolled in VA coverage but lives 100 miles from the VA facility).
Should anyone wonder, Section 329 of the bill specifices “Nothing in this division shall be construed as requiring anyone to enroll in the public health insurance option. Enrollment in such option is voluntary.”
19 Responses to “National Health Reform and You (Part VIII)”
If enrollment starts out as “VOLUNTARY” you can wager that it will not remain that way for long, because what you carry now will increase in cost to such an extent that the only other option will be to let ‘big brother’, ‘big government’ take care of your medical needs. It’s preposterous! The only way to cover all people is to over charge the ones that carry insurance now and prepared for their retirement with choices they made early in life! Don’t buy into this charade! No one can compete with a form of insurance that does not have to show a profit (our government run proposal). Expenses will be costly and will be covered by those that are presently insured but their rates will increase at an alarming rate. Who do these people think they’re kidding? Would like to see all the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches of our government covered under the same medical plan that is now offered to our military veterans, retired and active duty. But NO they have excluded themselves from this makeover. They have the best and it is paid for by the American taxpayer! Shameful!!!
As I read the above, you want us to accept that socialized medicine is OK so long as they don’t mess with military benefits. Have you no principles? This from Feldstein in Wash. Post:
A key feature of the House and Senate health bills would prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions. The new coverage would start immediately, and the premium could not reflect the individual’s health condition.
This well-intentioned feature would provide a strong incentive for someone who is healthy to drop his or her health insurance, saving the substantial premium costs. After all, if serious illness hit this person or a family member, he could immediately obtain coverage. As healthy individuals decline coverage in this way, insurance companies would come to have a sicker population. The higher cost of insuring that group would force insurers to raise their premiums. (Separate accident policies might develop to deal with the risk of high-cost care after accidents when there is insufficient time to buy insurance.)
The higher premium level would cause others who are currently insured to drop coverage, pushing premiums even higher. The result would be a spiral of rising premiums and shrinking numbers of insured. ***
In short, for those who are now privately insured through employers or by direct purchase, there would be substantial incentives to become uninsured until they become sick. The resulting rise in the cost to insurance companies as the insured population becomes sicker would raise the average premium, strengthening that incentive.
The proposed legislation would at the same time increase the number of people who would get coverage through Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program. It would also provide subsidies that would limit the premium cost to some low- and middle-income individuals.
But as the number of those who are currently insured declines, a future Congress might respond by increasing subsidies to middle- and upper-income individuals to buy private insurance. More likely, it would subsidize a public insurance company — whether or not such a public option is in the initial law — just as it now subsidizes Medicare in a way that was not contemplated when the Medicare program was created.
I agraee, it is shameful, if they can vote the program in for the people, they must include themselves, or do they think that they are above the people who voted them into office. I sincerely hope that all those who voted the democrats into office
will somehow learn their lesson the hard way. If they do of course, we will all have to lp;ive with it.
As previously explained, MOAA doesn’t take a position on the national health reform bill itself. We don’t have the staff to do “due diligence” research on a massive bill that in the main doesn’t apply to our members. So we focus on those elements affecting our constituents and make no apologies for it.
Many doctors in my area have been refusing to see Tricare patients for years. This is due to the low reimbursement fees, sometimes even lower than Medicare, voted on by Congress. If the current healthcare bill passes, Tricare beneficiaries will see drastically reduced care.
I agree with Charlotte: It is shamefull that our representatives and senators do not also participate in the new health care plans!!!
I am willing to participate in any plan in which Members of Congress are full participants. I have had a heart transplant operation, and I am convinced that I would be dead today if my situation had occurred under the plan of either the House or the Senate.
Since TFL payments are tied to Medicare rates, it seems to me that TFL beneficeries will suffer drastic reductions in coverage and Doctors will be dropping TFL covered patients in large numbers. That statement in the bill that no military plan will affected by this new Obamacare bill is an outright lie.
I appreciate the synopsis and concur that MOAA’s stance should address only issues pertinent to military, veterans, military retirees, their families and surviving spouses. There is not a consensus within MOAA membership on nationalized healthcare in general. But certainly most members believe that people who served their country should have as good or better health care as now and not give up our hard won benefits to even the field.
Just like the “no call” list legislation that allows politicians to call whenever and whomever they choose, the healthcare bill once again excludes the politicians from the bite of the bill by giving them the best healthcare taxpayer money can buy. Remember how they promised us free medical for life and replaced it with a system that maney doctors will no longer accept. These folks no longer represent the people who elected them to office. We have lost the concept of statesman and replaced it with that of self absorbed politician. Shameful…
All due respects Col., but as a member of this organization for a number of years, I find the statement “..main doesn’t apply to our members.” to be at best offensive and undeserving. The bill will affect my children/grandchildren, etc, far into the future, should there be a future, and will directly affect my wife and me, as costs have to increase though higher payments or taxes. And where are the needed extra doctors to come from – India/China. Ha.
As Doctors drop from medicare, Tricare cost could decrease since Tricare only covers services from doctors who participate in medicare. Thanks MOAA for buying into this requirement. I’ve personally run into this problem. While Ttricare was being hailed as the “be all” bill, I sent copies of WSJ articles to MOAA’s lobbiests ( Retired Officers Association, I believe) concerning physicans already refusing to see medicare patients.
Again, as for”the children”, certaintly you and MOAA don’t want to saddle them with probable outcomes as indicated in this article from the WSJ?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704795604574519671055918380.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
I say no, a thousand times no, Sir.
Al Coward
If President Obama and Democratic Congress and Senate want to provide health care to those 30+ million uninsured; they can cut their own salaries, benefits, staff expenses including those expensive junkets under the guise of some practical policy formulation (otherwise known as highly paid vacations) and dedicate the savings to those concerned.
Teruko McEachern
When I entered active duty, we were informed that medical care would be provided to us as long as we served, then would cover us into our retirement years if we served that long. Over time, it became quite clear that the original “promise” to provide life-long medical care to retired soldiers, etc., for our service was in jeopardy. In the mid-60′s, concurrent with implementation of MEDICARE, authorization for civilian medical care annotated on our ID cards was changed from “indefinite” to our 65th birthday. Subsequently CHAMPUS, then TRICARE and TRICARE for Life medical care services were implemented, but only after cliff-hanging suspense of whether or not the such support would be offered. Ms. Johnson’s comments are on target; the current efforts by Congress regarding health care reform have great potential to do severe harm to not just the military, but all American citizens. I also agree with Gen Paulson’s comments regarding socialized health care — although that’s essentially what we have been provided from the time we first took the oath of enlistment/office. Finally, I am disheartened that MOAA has not taken greater efforts to sway members of congress to protect health care benefits already earned and paid for by members of the US Armed Services through their years of dedicated, life-threatening service for their country.
I have been retired for 35 years. I have had no refusal of Tri-Care for Life payment by any medical facility – period…..
What is your source or sources?
Designed, developed, determined, behind “closed doors” with a hand-picked “selected few”… our Democracy in action?
Refusal to put the draft on-line, and an “eleventh hour” weekend call to vote without debate or “due diligence” to be conducted… our Democracy in action?
Remember this well come the next election date for these so-called “representatives” of the people.
Just because they avoided a back-lash from the veteran groups, does not make this “good” for the country, our seniors, and those most likely to most impacted by this calous, undermining action of our congress.
One who benefits from any kind of Federal Healthcare System but is opposed to National Healthcare Reform that includes a “Public Option” is the ultimate hypocrite. Just because a doctor refuses to see TRICARE patients because they say their reimbursement fees are too low doesn’t make it right. This is a moral issue not simply an economic one. The focus of healthcare reform should be on the patients health and how to improve individual health on a broader level. Our representatives in government should not be so concerned about protecting the profit interest of insurance companies or powerful special interest groups who helped finance their elections.
The following are government run health care programs: Military, VA, Tricare, Medicare, Medicaid, and Federal Employee systems. Should we ask Congress to do away with these “socialist” programs? I have received excellent care from the first Four of these programs.
The so-called reform of health care as proposed takes another huge step toward government control. This centralizatino of power is at the taxpayers expense. This cure is worse than the disease. First, do no harm.
<Mark Witton 08 Nov 2009 at 2:04 pm
<I have been retired for 35 years. I have had no refusal of Tri-<Care for Life payment by any medical facility – period…..
<What is your source or sources?
Not sure who you are responding to Mark, but Tricare is a secondary payer to medicare. Google is your friend, but for this I will give you a starter:
http://www.crdamc.amedd.army.mil/default.asp?page=over_65