Skip to main content

View Diary: Excellent News From The WH On Contraceptive Coverage! (64 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Q:- 'plans' as in individual coverage contracts (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, elwior

    or overall plan designs?  In other words, is a new enrollment event sufficient to require these changes, or does an individual or company need to buy into a newly designed or redesigned plan?

    What criteria is there for judging when plan amendments are sufficient to deem it a 'new' plan which must include the contraception benefits?

    Ironic footnote.  Prior to federal involvement allowing health services and insurances to be operated for profit, it used to be that health insurance was provided by religiously affiliated 'benevolence societies' that simply spread the risk fairly on a non-profit basis amongst their enrollees and rated their 'premiums' accordingly.  Like the 'Red Cross' the 'Blue Cross' was a religiously based icon.  We should be demanding of Republicans who are demanding that religion insert itself into our national 'for profit' health plans that their supporters instead go back in time to those 1950's style non-profit faith-based insurance plans for each denomination and quit making government meddle in citizen personal health care plans by imposing religious mandates.  

    Another odd thought.  If you have a right to own a gun, needed or not, you ought to  have rights the health care you want and need.

    When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

    by antirove on Fri Jan 20, 2012 at 02:03:27 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site