Consequences of Ten “Essential Benefits”
What's essential for one person may be tangential or inconsequential for others.
One Man's Interpretation of "Essential Benefits" Clause in Health Reform Law
Let me explain in a roundabout fashion where I am coming from: In other languages, one of them a dead language, "One for all, all for one" sounds like this.
Unus
pro omnibus, omnes pro uno. Latin
Un
pour tous, tous pro uno. French
Uno
para todos, todos para uno. Spanish
Obamanese
In Obamanese, It sounds more like this:
One
set of essential benefits for all, all
essential benefits in one standard plan, or no "substandard "health plan for you.
“One for all, all for one,” and its French
equivalent, was the rallying cry for the
Three Musketeers.
Now experts say U.S health plans, under
the ObamaCare law, must contain ten “essential benefits “to qualify
for health exchanges, for health plan members to receive federal subsidies, and
for employers to legally offer any health plan.
It's one plan for all, in the form of its bronze, silver, gold,
or platinum equivalent, and all for one, or needless to add, none for all.
The Ten Essential Benefits
What are these ten essential benefits?
The Affordable Care Act, (sections1302) lists “essential
benefits” as,
A Ambulatory
patient services
· Emergency
services
· Hospitalization
· Maternity
and newborn care
· Mental
health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health
treatment
· Prescription
drugs
· Rehabilitative
and habilitative services and devices
· Laboratory
services
· Preventive
and wellness services and chronic disease management
· Pediatric
services, including oral and vision care.
What Doesn't Matter
Whether you want to receive
this “benefits, is not a matter of whether, you are:
·
young or healthy
·
of sound mind and
·
do not take prescription drugs
·
Have
any need for laboratory have no need for maternity, newborn care, or pediatric
services
·
you are single, and do not have a child who needs dental
care, or eye glasses
·
You do not want to seek preventative,
substance abuse, behavioral health treatment, wellness, chronic disease
management, or rehab or habiliative (whatever that is).
What Matters
What matters is that we are all in this thing
called life and health and citizenship together. It’s all for one, one for all, that’s what
counts.
But now, experts
at the American Institute and the Manhattan Institute are telling us that as
many as 80 million to 100 million Americans may lose their employer-provided
health insurance by 2015 because existing plans do not contain these benefits. No matter that routinely including these benefits
drives up costs on average by 41% in the individual markets (Manhattan Institute).
Middle class Americans
who do not qualify are aghast and angry that routine inclusion of ten essential
benefits for services they do not seek or want, is causing them to lose plans
they chose and drives up health premiums and deductible to unaffordable levels
in a health law ironically title “The Patient Protection and Affordability Act.”
How Could This Be?
How could this be?
It’s really quite simple. Their plans
do not meet federal standards. Ergo, their plans are “substandard.”
This
state of affairs stems from the doctrine of “essentialism,” namely, that all
health care services are essential to society and should be available to all
regardless of individual abilities, skills, need, education, or economic
status. Essentialism ignores merit, risk, and economic growth. These factors
apparently deserve no special rewards. Presumably, when government homogenizes
humankind into one lump, all will be well, and the nation's level of health
will be elevated.
Every
American, in more prosaic language, should have equal access to comprehensive
care, regardless of age, health, pre-existing illness, geographic location,
insurance coverage, or citizenship status.
- If you are young and healthy, you should pay the
same as the old and sick, even if you cost society nothing in the short
run. In the long run, you will become old and sick.
- If you are poor, the government should subsidize you
to raise you to the level of more affluent citizens.
- If you are in a small business, you must pay for
comprehensive coverage of your young healthy employees as you would for a
more mature and older work force.
Charity for all and all
eggs in one basket is the goals of progressive, as long at government is
directing the effort and the "rich" are paying their "fair shar
No doubt this is a noble goals The problem is, of course, that
even an affluent society like America cannot afford “Gold,” “Platinum,” and
“Cadillac” plans for all and still provide services that allow for personal
freedom and choice that fits the needs of individual segments of the
population.
In
America, the land of capitalism, individualism, meritocracy, entrepreneurialism
diversity, and regional variation, one-size-fits-all does not fit all and
will raises the cost for many.
Tweet: Health reform doctrines such “comprehensive essential benefits,” have enormous
cost and cultural consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment