One of the main selling points that Obamacare proponents used was that kids could stay on their parent's health insurance plan until they were 26. Remeber this rhetoric? As with all things Democrat, the rhetoric never matches up to realtiy. The language they use is very deceiving.
In this case, Democrats use such words and phrases as "able to stay," "can stay," and "could stay." These words all imply that it is voluntary. Kids can stay on their parents plan if they want to and parents can keep them on their plan if they want to. But this isn't what Obamacare does. What they should say is that parents cannot drop them until they cross the age threshold of 26. There is a difference here and a very important one at that.
Now a story: My brother became a city police officer several months ago. Before he became an officer, he was covered under my parents' policy. Once he became an cop, his health insurance plan was provided by the city in which he was employed. So now what happens to his coverage under my parents' plan? Well, logic would say that since he is covered by his employer, my parents would no longer have to have him on their plan right? Wrong. My parents' insurer said that because of Obamacare, they could not take him off their plan because he is under 26 EVEN THOUGH he is covered by his employer. So my parents are now forced to pay for a child's health insurance when that child is covered by his employer's plan!
I haven't heard about this happening before. I assumed that once a child receives health insurance elsewhere, they could be dropped from their parents' plan but apparently not. Pelosi was right. We are finding more and more out about the bill after it is passed.
How nice.
In this case, Democrats use such words and phrases as "able to stay," "can stay," and "could stay." These words all imply that it is voluntary. Kids can stay on their parents plan if they want to and parents can keep them on their plan if they want to. But this isn't what Obamacare does. What they should say is that parents cannot drop them until they cross the age threshold of 26. There is a difference here and a very important one at that.
Now a story: My brother became a city police officer several months ago. Before he became an officer, he was covered under my parents' policy. Once he became an cop, his health insurance plan was provided by the city in which he was employed. So now what happens to his coverage under my parents' plan? Well, logic would say that since he is covered by his employer, my parents would no longer have to have him on their plan right? Wrong. My parents' insurer said that because of Obamacare, they could not take him off their plan because he is under 26 EVEN THOUGH he is covered by his employer. So my parents are now forced to pay for a child's health insurance when that child is covered by his employer's plan!
I haven't heard about this happening before. I assumed that once a child receives health insurance elsewhere, they could be dropped from their parents' plan but apparently not. Pelosi was right. We are finding more and more out about the bill after it is passed.
How nice.
RSS Feed