House Health Reform Bill Outlaws Treating Domestic Violence As A Pre-Existing Condition
House Health Reform Bill Outlaws Treating Domestic Violence As A Pre-Existing Condition
This morning, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) unveiled the re-tooled Affordable Health Care for America Act (HR 3962). The bill will cost $900 billion over 10 years, extending health coverage to 36 million Americans (6-7 million more than the Senate Finance Committee’s version). As Igor Volsky points out, it also “includes a national public option that reimburses physicians at negotiated rates and requires individuals to acquire coverage and large employers to provide it.”
A less-noticed — but still significant — part of the bill would ensure that insurers in the individual market would no longer treat domestic violence as a pre-existing condition:
A health insurance issuer offering health insurance coverage in the individual market may not, on the basis of domestic violence, impose any preexisting condition exclusion (as defined in section 2701(b)(1)(A)) with respect to such coverage.
Eight states currently allow insurers to reject women who have survived domestic abuse for coverage. As the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim has explained:
Under the cold logic of the insurance industry, it makes perfect sense: If you are in a marriage with someone who has beaten you in the past, you’re more likely to get beaten again than the average person and are therefore more expensive to insure.
In human terms, it’s a second punishment for a victim of domestic violence.
This provision is part of the bill’s larger ban on pre-existing conditions, which stipulates that insurers cannot discriminate based on “health status, medical condition, claims experience, receipt of health care, medical history, genetic information, evidence of insurability, disability, or source of injury (including conditions arising out of acts of domestic violence) or any similar factors.”
In 2006, Senate Democrats on the Health Education Labor & Pensions Committee tried to end domestic violence as a pre-existing condition, but lost in a 10-10 vote. All the “nay” votes were Republicans. Women currently pay up to 50 percent more for health insurance than a man would shell out for the same coverage, and most individual health insurance markets don’t cover maternity care.
The inclusion of a ban on domestic violence being treated as a pre-existing condition fulfills a promise Pelosi made earlier this month. “Think of this,” Pelosi told reporters. “You’ve survived domestic violence, and now you are discriminated [against] in the insurance market because you have a pre-existing medical condition. Well, that will all be gone.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
How are insurance companies ever going to make a profit if the government encourages payment for domestic violence. /sarc
October 29th, 2009 at 1:03 pmDomestic violence considered a pre-existing condition had to be thought up by a repug. No normal human being could accept that.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:05 pmIn 2006, Senate Democrats on the Health Education Labor & Pensions Committee tried to end domestic violence as a pre-existing condition, but lost in a 10-10 vote. All the “nay” votes were Republicans.
____________________________________________________________
Um…these wouldn’t be the same Republicans who think it’s OK for U.S. contractors to gang-rape their female employees?
October 29th, 2009 at 1:05 pmYay, legislation closing sleazy loopholes! It may not be perfect, but it’s a step in the right direction.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:07 pmProgress!
October 29th, 2009 at 1:08 pmThis is nice, but let’s be honest it is just lip service to make progressives like us think that this bill is anything other than a handout to private insurance companies. Let all of us buy into the public option!
October 29th, 2009 at 1:08 pmpessimistically optimistic
October 29th, 2009 at 1:09 pmone thing is for SURE.
it’s more than we ever would have got from the GOP.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:10 pmI thought that ALL pre-existing condition exclusions were prohibited.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:10 pmGood bah good bah good
October 29th, 2009 at 1:13 pmRab says:
Domestic violence considered a pre-existing condition had to be thought up by a repug. No normal human being could accept that.
To repiggies, it’s ok to beat their wives to submission and making sure they can’t get coverage for the injuries they inflict on them.
That’s why they honor no coverage for domestic violence. It’s their conniving way of making sure their corporate masters ensure maximized profits to make their share holders happy…. and that they reap the gifts their corporate lobbyists line their pockets with.
See how it works….. for them and them only???
Mentally sick people.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:15 pmThis proves how EVIL insurance companies are. Over 40,000 Americans DIE a year because of lack of health care. That is immoral. Babies either too fat or too thin. Women who cant afford mammagrams to forcing women too pay for birth control but are more than willing to give men Viagra. This has got too stop.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:16 pmNo!!! -=Shclafly=-
October 29th, 2009 at 1:17 pmNo pre-existing conditions
Rescission
Its an investment with no returns
October 29th, 2009 at 1:20 pmHow this wasn’t already law is mind-boggling. It’s really a shame this provision didn’t get put to the vote. It would’ve easily passed…and the few (undoubtedly GOP) members who voted against it would have that albatross around their necks.
Got to say..the House Bill looks marginally better than the proposed Senate bill. A national public option, regardless of current insurance status, is an absolute must.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:20 pmThe insurance industry’s deliberate discrimination against victims of domestic abuse reveals the true lack of compassion of this industry. Most of the medical office workers I talk to that have to deal with them believe corporate insurance companies should be abolished. I agree.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:20 pmWell sure. Why should Haliburton have all the fun? Insurance companies want to rape you too.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:20 pmOver/under on the number of GOOP cosponsors for the inevitable proposed amendment to remove this section is hereby set at 80. I’ll take the over.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:24 pmshoeless@17, I bet some of those Repugs regret that. They all got flak in their home states. I bet many women were offended. But they keep electing these guys over and over again. Sigh.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:26 pmKstreetPUNK
You are a liar and a fool. Just STFU. Your ignorance is nothing to be proud of
October 29th, 2009 at 1:27 pmIt’s a secret. Of course it’s online for you to find but it might as well be in fort knox. You’ll never find it.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:28 pmSo, months and months of debating behind closed doors was all about one domestic violence issue or was that just a diversion?
No, it was about making some frivolous 912 stuff instead of an actual alternate reform plan.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:30 pmAll the “nay” votes were Republicans.
Compassionate Conservatives…yeah, right, got it….f’n pigs.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:31 pmSo, months and months of debating behind closed doors was all about one domestic violence issue or was that just a diversion?
Yes, it took King (R-IA) that long to come up with his plan to demand an apology from Goodell for Lush Blimpblob
October 29th, 2009 at 1:32 pmPeople like K think Americans want a free ride. That’s bullsh*t. We want what’s is FAIR. Big difference. Why can’t Americans have the same options as the idiots in Washington get? We friggin pay for THEIR insurance. So screw people like K.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:32 pmTool.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:33 pmoooohh. Someone is clicking us down again. I think my feelings are hurt. Snark.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:33 pmSpeaking of rides, what do you charge for a jump on the K street TRAMPoline KSW [KStreetWhore?]
October 29th, 2009 at 1:34 pmK Street Whore says:
October 29th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
K Street Whore has a terminal case of VDT.
Too bad it doesn’t have enough friends to vote us into oblivion — like we do.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:35 pmK Street Whore says:
It’s just a stupid domestic violence issue. She probably had it coming anyway
I bet you say that to all the blowup dolls
October 29th, 2009 at 1:36 pmShe probably had it coming anyway
October 29th, 2009 at 1:38 pm—
Maybe that skank in kentucky really didn’t have bad teeth afterall. Maybe it was just Mr. Tough Guy….
The fact that it’s necessary to put this into law is depressing. This is more evidence why the profit motive is fundamentally at odds with the goals of health care.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:38 pmK Street must have finished up and gone back down to the lobby.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:45 pmI thought they were going to pass a law outlawing the insurance companies even considering pre-existing conditions. What they will do is tell the insurance companies they can’t deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions and then the insurance companies will charge people with pre-existing conditions a premium they can’t possibly afford. Unless they put some kind of price-controls in health care reform, it will all be a useless proposition and won’t solve any problems.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:45 pmThe real question is how will this and the Senate bill merge? Will the wiggle room for Jellyfish Joe be made available? Or is this going to reconciliation?
Also a point brought up on Thom Hartman’s radio program yesterday, will the rules on how the fillibuster is run be changed to make those who want to fillibuster stand on the floor instead of the way it is now? Mr. Hartman explained it’s a simple majority vote that would change it back to the way they were done.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:45 pmK-Street hosebag is using a Fox technique of selective editing
October 29th, 2009 at 1:52 pmK Street Whore says:
——————————————————————————–
i will be a useless prop and problem
October 29th, 2009 at 1:55 pmDon’t forget who caused the problems. You and your ilk:
http://www.ins.state.ny.us/press/2009/p0906081.htm
Insurance used to work, before newt deregulated them and now they can decide premiums with no oversight or even review.
You can thank us for fixing what you destroyed.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:55 pmDid you find a customer with a Wi-Fi, K Street?
Who are you entertaining?
Some Pharma lobbyist that gets off on you trolling progressive websites?
Great angle!
October 29th, 2009 at 1:57 pmWhore, you’re not only a serial troll but a proven racist who’s come out against interracial couples getting married, you say you hate the 9/11 families and you want to drown the President of the United States.
Your opinions are garbage. No one cares what you have to say.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:57 pmAnother example of how women rate in this country. There had to be a provision to help a victim of domestic abuse, there is no common decency in the health insurance companies. PUBLIC OPTION
October 29th, 2009 at 2:00 pmGreat News! Now when do we abolish the Federal Reserve and print our own money?
When do we get rid of all the politicians, both Republicans and Democrats who propogate these never ending wars?
When do we get the Bush Bailout and Bush Bailout 2 (AKA Obama Stimulus) money back? We are bankrupt. This law is meaningless without fiscal responsibility and returning to the principles of a Constitutional Republic. The game is unfortunately over, the U.S. Dollar will be worthless and suffer the same type of hyperinflation as the German Mark prior to WWII.
People’s life savings will be wiped out overnight. The death of the U.S. dollar will be more catastrophic than the recent depression and stock market crash.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:13 pmConservativeChristian says:
“Great News!”
Voted for Dubya, did you?
October 29th, 2009 at 2:26 pmI wonder if those same insurance companies were denying coverage to men who were victims of domestic violence. It does happen. Ask Willie Nelson. When he would come home drunk, his wife would tie him to the bed and beat him with a baseball bat. He eventually left her because, as he put it, “I got tired of getting beaten up.”
October 29th, 2009 at 2:29 pmConservativeReligionist
It wont happen. Do you consider making up things in your head that you think MIGHT happen and making an argument based on its certainty is anything but plain stupid? I agree with some of your post. I would like to see the Federal Reserve go away. It was one of the vilest scams ever foist on the people of the US. The dollar is not likely to collapse. Our economy is not only still fairly strong but CRUCIAL to the world economy. Also Bushs irresponsibility and incompetence put us in a hole. INVESTING in America is the answer not putting our heads in the sand and going back to the same stupid economic policies that put us IN this hole in the first place. Do you understand what a boon rural electrification and building a highway system was to our economy? Now spending money on useless wars and giving it to the already wealthy is WASTING money it is NOT an investment. If you really are a conservative you should love and believe in America and investing IN America ought to make sense to you
October 29th, 2009 at 2:31 pmConservativeChristian says:
Great News! Now when do we abolish the Federal Reserve and print our own money?
When do we get rid of all the politicians, both Republicans and Democrats who propogate these never ending wars?
When do we get the Bush Bailout and Bush Bailout 2 (AKA Obama Stimulus) money back? We are bankrupt. This law is meaningless without fiscal responsibility and returning to the principles of a Constitutional Republic. The game is unfortunately over, the U.S. Dollar will be worthless and suffer the same type of hyperinflation as the German Mark prior to WWII.
People’s life savings will be wiped out overnight. The death of the U.S. dollar will be more catastrophic than the recent depression and stock market crash.
Hi, ConservativeChristian,
Could you please explain how the US dollar would have any value at all if we “printed our own money”? I’m having trouble understanding that. Thanks for explaining.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:32 pmnoseeum says:
Voted for Dubya, did you?
October 29th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
TWICE.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:36 pmWayne
That is easy enough. We TWICE did just that. The Lincoln greenbacks and Kennedy did it. We just DIDNT pay interest to people who PRETENDED to lend us money. As long as we are fiscally responsible all it does is save us the interest on the debt. Right now the fed just writes and IOU on notepaper and we pay them obscene buttloads of interest. If we lent ourselves that money the only difference is the interest goes away.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:40 pmPrior to 1913 there was no Federal Reserve. The United States printed its own currency which was backed by gold. The United States did not experience inflation until after 1913. The same bankers that own the Federal Reserve Bank, bankrolled both Nazi Germany and Great Britain in WWII. This is just one example of how they play both sides of a conflict.
If we controlled our own currency, we would not have wreckless spending. Wreckless spending is the direct result of the polticians who have achieved their positions through the financing of the Federal Reserve bankers. They (Federal Reserve Owners) are more guilty of war mongering than the military complex.
Printing currency out of thin air, at the rate which we have done during George W.’s reign of terror and now during President Obama’s term is catastrophic. The final death blow is the G20 deciding on a new world currency (this is recent news) and the end of the US Dollar being the “petrodollar”.
When China and Japan dumps their cache of US dollars, your life savings will be worthless. This should not be, but unfortunately it will be. Unless you divert your assets to gold, silver, platinum, real estate in Europe, etc., you will be financially wiped out. This is if you continue to hold your assets in U.S. dollars, there are other currencies which are far more secure. The Australian Dollar, Brazilian Real, Norwegian Krone are good places to start.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:52 pmK Street Whore says:
It’s just a stupid domestic violence issue. She probably had it coming anyway
So might I ask if you’re pro-domestic violence? After all, women need to be “put in their place,” eh? /sarcasm
October 29th, 2009 at 2:53 pmWow guys! I don’t know how you think I could have voted for George W. Bush. He is the opposite of everything I believe in. I am a Christian. He is basically a Neoconservative Satanist.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:54 pmEugene,
I am not religious. Never have been.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:57 pmConservativeChristian says:
I am not religious. Never have been.
Then why do you call yourself a conservative “Christian” if you aren’t religious and “never have been”? Wouldn’t that be, oh, I don’t know, lying?
October 29th, 2009 at 3:06 pmConservativeChristian says:
He is basically a Neoconservative Satanist.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
And you voted for him how many times…?
October 29th, 2009 at 3:07 pmEugeneDebs,
If you think anything Bush or Obama has done constitutes investing in America you are seriously mistaken.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:07 pmZooey,
I voted as follows: 1988 Dukakis, 1992 Clinton, 1996 Clinton, 2000 Gore, 2004 Kerry, 2008 Barr.
The sad truth is that the last time we had a real President was when John F. Kennedy was in office.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:15 pmChristianity has nothing to do with religion. You are probably confusing what I am with Roman Catholicism or other religious institutions. If you read what Christ said to the “religious” men during his ministry, you will understand better what I mean.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:18 pmFurthermore I call myself a Conservative to point out that being Conservative is the complete opposite of neoconservatism, is not an offshoot or branch of neoconservatism.
Many neoconservatives call me a liberal, because they don’t like what I have to say, but what I have to say is the truth.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:21 pmConservativeChristian says:
I voted as follows: 1988 Dukakis, 1992 Clinton, 1996 Clinton, 2000 Gore, 2004 Kerry, 2008 Barr.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Uh huh. The thing I don’t understand is why you care so much about what I or the others think of you and your voting record.
Inferiority complex much?
October 29th, 2009 at 3:25 pmOhhhhh, I get it.
“Conservative”"Christian” is posting his resume.
I think that’s why the FSM invented Criag’s List…
October 29th, 2009 at 3:27 pmZooey,
You asked in two separate posts about how many times I voted for Bush. I was answering your question. I had no intention of posting this information, but you asked and I was politely answering.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pmI am more interested in why anyone would have voted for Barr.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:29 pmI haven’t once listed any occupational skills, so Zooey I really don’t see how I am posting any kind of resume.
October 29th, 2009 at 3:30 pmCC I may have misjudged you but you are WRONG. The money spent to fix the infrastructure IS investing in America. Also money spent on cutting edge research for green engergy production has the potential to be a VERY lucrative investment. If we make a couple of engineering breakthroughs that allow US to produce and export the hydrogen energy production machinery that is necessarily the future might be the equivalent of rural electrification. Lets leave that for now. The thing is it is clearly an ATTEMPT at that kind of investment. I want to know if you would agree with THAT kind of spending also. Neoconservative Satanist. I like it
October 29th, 2009 at 3:46 pmCC
So far what you have posted is NOT the truth. It is your OPINION. Those two things are NOT the same
October 29th, 2009 at 3:48 pmCC your answer to Zooey
You need to check the dictionary definition of the word resume. It includes a short descriptive summary, as of events
October 29th, 2009 at 3:50 pm“includes a national public option that reimburses physicians at negotiated rates and requires individuals to acquire coverage and large employers to provide it.” Requires individuals to acquire coverage? So we are going to be forced to buy insurance?
October 29th, 2009 at 3:57 pmI commented that when I speak the truth to Neoconservatives they don’t like it and call me a liberal. My remark was about conversations I had with neoconservatives, which you were not part of. Therefore you can not accurately comment on whether they were opinions or facts. You have no information about what was said in these conversations.
Some of the comments I made here are opinions and some of the comments I made are facts. Please don’t twist around things that I write.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:00 pmI will comment on anything I choose to. Get over yourself. You said WHAT YOU SAY is the truth. It wasnt defined that you meant ONLY what you say in THAT context. I responded that what you say HERE is opinion so BITE ME
October 29th, 2009 at 4:02 pmHere’s part of the new reform as posted by Rep. Miller,
“All individuals will generally be required to get coverage, either through their employer or the exchange, or pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of income, subject to a hardship exemption.”
I’ve never been so disgusted with being a democrat. I’ve
e-mailed the white house (it wasn’t congratulatory) and Kucinich (what can he do now?).
If it passes like this with the smallest possible public option – so most everyone doesn’t qualify, it’s bye bye democratic party for me.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:09 pmAgain Eugene you have taken a person’s sentence out of context for no other reason than to start an argument. That sentence was not referring to anything I typed here today.
Who I voted for in past Presidential elections, would be a fact not an opinion. When I state some of the heinous things the Federal Reserve has done, again this is fact.
When I say we would be better off without the Federal Reserve and returning to sound fiscal policy, this of course is opinion.
When I discuss the future of US Currency, this is educated speculation, which will turn out to be either true of false.
My comment about telling neoconservatives the truth was not about anything I wrote here today. It was not even pertinent to the conversation, which was a general discussion about the differences between conservatives and neoconservatives.
Yes you may comment on anything you choose. You are making a public admission that you choose to comment on conversations you did not hear or see the transcript of in print. This most people would consider foolish.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:30 pmRich H,
There are a few good men/women left in the Democratic Party like Kucinich, unfortunately there is little difference between many Republicans and Democrats. We are bombarded by constant propaganda promoting a false left-right paradigm. It is best not to place your faith in men or a political party.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:34 pmCC, giving yourself the name ConservativeChristian is just going to rile people up here, you should have picked another name. I can’t agree with EugeneDebs because the Obama Bailouts are every bit as wrong as the Bush bailouts. To think that taking money from the public will stimulate an economy is ludicrous. If we had a Federal Surplus and we spent some on American businesses, that would be different.
That money came from us. Did people lose sight of this? It came at the expense of the hidden taxation called inflation. When you print money like that, it makes the money we have worth less. This money isn’t free, it came at a price and cost all of us. The concept of taking money from the people and then giving the same money back to the people and calling it stimulating the economy is retarded.
All Obama did was further destroy a declining dollar. I’m not exactly a rich man, but I did convert half of my savings to gold and silver and I’m glad I did.
October 29th, 2009 at 4:51 pmWill this really close the loophole, though? I remember there was some court case which said that the injury that ensued from domestic violence was not the same as domestic violence itself (wasn’t it posted on TP somewhere?). Also, “domestic violence” is never listed as an official diagnosis (although it is documented for non-billing parts of the health record). What I mean to say is that I wonder if insurance companies could still deny coverage for the domestic violence injuries by some crafty wordplay like “past appearance of contusions from hazardous environment.”
October 29th, 2009 at 5:33 pmCC
No I didnt. Learn to read. I said what you post HERE. That can in no way be construed as what you told someone ELSE. You didnt say when you talk to neocons you SPOKE the truth. You said you SPEAK the truth. That is a universal statement. As to your educated speculation I dont see any real evidence of education. More like WILD speculation.
I think what most people would consider foolish. STUPID frankly is misreading a post then chiding ME because YOU arent bright enough to READ. Explain to me again how me saying WHAT YOU POST HERE could POSSIBLY be referring to what you said to someone else? Face it you just arent that bright
October 29th, 2009 at 5:34 pmChristianity has nothing to do with religion.
Really? Nothing at all? That makes no sense.
Judaism has its own laws that say if your mother was Jewish, then you are Jewish. So I can see how it would be possible to be a Jew and not be religious. (I have several co-workers who fit this description.) But Christianity has no such rules. You’re not automatically considered a Christian just because one or more of your parents were Christians. To be a Christian, you have to practice Christianity, which is a religious form of worship. So how can Christianity have “nothing to do with religion”?
October 29th, 2009 at 5:35 pmLiberalLinebacker
Actually it is NOT ludicrous. We TOOK money from the public for rural electrification AND for the public highway system and THOSE project INDISPUTABLY stimulated the economy.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:36 pmI think the people who are cheering the Health Care bills put forward by both the House & Senate are the same people who used to cheer Evil Knievel when he crashed by saying how great he rode his bike all the way to the end of the ramp… they never mentioned that if he had gone a little further, and gone a little faster he would have succeeded and no one would have been hurt…
October 29th, 2009 at 8:35 pm.
thank you, nancy.
good job, madam Speaker.
.
October 29th, 2009 at 9:09 pmThis health care bill is a complete joke. wake up.
October 30th, 2009 at 12:41 amLife is a preexisting condition.
October 30th, 2009 at 8:59 am