Comment

Video: George Zimmerman's Father: 'So Much Hate Coming From the President'

173
Rightwingconspirator3/29/2012 6:35:37 am PDT

I liked the medical plan Gov Schwarzenegger proposed. It was a state based tax and benefit plan. I favor state based plans not a national master plan because of the needs of a state like Rhode Island are so different than Texas, California & others. Population, demographics, income all make a substantial difference. Let the states regulate within a framework of minimums and protections.

Schwarzenegger Proposal: ABX1 2

Key Provisions:

The proposal would cover an extimated 4.1 million Californians.
Employes would contribute based on a sliding scale from 0-4% of total payroll based on payroll size.
Californians would have to obtain a minimal level of health insurance, either through their employer or by purchasing it individually. The plan would provide for a $5,000-deductible minimum for each person, with a maximum expense of $10,000 per family.
Low-income Californians would pay for insurance based on their gross annual income in relation to the federal poverty level. 0-150% FPL would pay no premium or out of pocket costs. Families at 151-200% FPL, would pay up to 4% of income for premiums. Families at 201-250% FPL would pay no more than 5% of income. And finally, 250-350% FPL would receive a tax credit if their costs of insurance is more than 5% of the their income.
Partial subsidies to people with incomes up to 3.5 times the federal poverty rate.
All children who live below 300 percent of the federal poverty line would receive insurance under the plan. The state would provide health insurance to all children. Illegal immigrant children would also be included under this part of the plan.
630,000 indigent adults not currently eligible for benefits would receive expanded Medi-Cal coverage.
Hospitals would have to pay a 4% provider tax. This would raise an additional $3.5 billion in money to pay for the plan. 85% of their revenue would have to be spent on services.
Insurance companies would no longer be able to reject individuals because of negative medical histories. 85% of their revenue would have to be spent on services.
Individuals would receive health care discounts for undergoing assessments that determine potential health risks and suggest ways to modify behavior. Those patients would be re-evaluated every two years.