California wants to take on the largely unregulated individual health insurance market — a system within which insurance companies impose waiting periods for pre-existing conditions, offer less comprehensive benefits than employer-based coverage, charge higher premiums and deductibles, successfully exclude high-risk individuals form coverage, charge higher rates to higher-risk patients, offer a limited range of benefits, and spend a relatively small proportion of premiums on actual medical care.

California is proposing new rules to regulate the ‘wild-west‘ environment that is the individual health insurance market:

- The new rules “would set a maximum amount patients would have to pay each year toward their bills” and “restrict insurers’ ability to cancel policies retroactively.”

- Another proposal would “limit cancellations to the first 18 months of coverage and require insurers to obtain approval from regulators before revoking a policy.”

- Schwarzenegger would have “independent arbitrators decide whether an insurer could cancel a policy.”

- State regulators “would sort policies into categories based on the benefits they offer and establish minimum benefits for each category. Presumably, that would allow consumers to compare what competing companies offer.”

- Insurers may be “be required to spend at least 85% of the premiums they collect on medical care, limiting the amount they keep as profit and for administrative expenses.”

The new rules come out of necessity, not regulatory zeal. Nationally, 89% of applicants are unable to find an individual health care plan that meets their needs.

The new rules would provide patients “with preexisting conditions and other medical problems” greater “access to quality, affordable health care” and begin to establish the individual market place as a viable source of insurance for the millions of Americans who are currently denied coverage.

On Saturday, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reported that the number of Americans infected with HIV is “much higher than previously thought.” According to the study, 56,300 people became infected with HIV in 2006, “40% higher than previous figures.”

Responding to the new data, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) pointed out that under the Bush administration, the inflation-adjusted HIV prevention budget “had fallen over the past six years by 19%.” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), while promising to “work closely with non-profit, government, and private sector stakeholders to continue the fight against HIV/AIDS,” would likely continue neglecting America’s domestic AIDS epidemic:

- Has not called for a national AIDS strategy: Even though the United States committed to developing a national AIDS strategy in 2001, it lacks a national plan. “In 2004, the Institute of Medicine determined that fragmentation of insurance coverage, and differing eligibility requirements and services across states, “do not allow for comprehensive and sustained access to quality HIV care,’ in the US.”

- Did not support federal funding for syringe exchange: While McCain opposes lifting the ban on federal funding for syringe exchange programs, “eight federally funded research reports concluded that needle and syringe programs, as part of a comprehensive HIV prevention strategy, are an effective public health intervention that reduces HIV transmission without increasing the use of illicit drugs.”

- Did not support the Early Treatment For HIV Act (ETHA): When confronted by HIV activists, McCain claimed to “look into” the issue. The act would expand “Medicaid to cover poor people who are living with HIV but are not diagnosed with AIDS.”

As senator, McCain rarely supported initiatives to prevent new HIV infections. In 2007, McCain admitted that he has “never gotten into these issues or thought much about” the effectiveness of condoms in stopping sexually transmitted disease,” but regularly opposed expanding access to contraception.

McCain “voted for a Jesse Helms strategy to cut off funding for prevention efforts aimed at the gay community” and “voted against HIV/AIDS programs, funding and research at least seven times.”