William and Mike, I didn't make a statement.  I asked a couple of questions.  You might have infered something that wasn't intended, but to go on and call someone retarded is just uncalled for.

**************

If I misunderstood what you meant, then I apologize. I took it as you saying "Look, the sytem works, we don't need health care reform."

If it was just a question, then yes, they give him to her for free because of the severity of her condition. Before she started taking the Humira, around 50% of her skin was covered and her fingers and other joints were in constant pain. She has a few scaly patches now, but other than that her skin is almost 100% clear and the pain in her joints is completely gone. 

And that's my point, she needed it. Her dermatologist said her condition was in the top 10 worst cases he had ever seen, and yet the insurance company fought covering the drug for 2 years. 2 goddamn years I sat and watched the woman I love suffer, while some pencil pusher decided she wasn't worth the cost of the drug. All the while paying these douchebags $206 dollars a week for the coverage.

Imagine when you can't go out in public without long sleeves and pants because of the way your skin looks. That alone should have been enough to qualify her for the drug. Factor in the joint pain and it should have been a no-brainer. But when your only motive is profit, and not the welfare of your customers, that's what you get, and that's the system we have created in this country. The almighty dollar is more important than the health of the people paying their salaries. Gotta keep them bonuses, you know.

Sorry, we can do better. And we should. Health insurance in this country isn't a little sideline joke anymore. People are suffering and dieing because they get denied treatment.

Again Jeff, if I misread your post, I'm sorry. The whole situation is still a sore subject with me.

"Couldn't you have changed insurance providers?"

Pre-existing condition. To use an analogy with car insurance, it's like realizing AFTER your car has crashed that your insurance company is going to try and short-change you and THEN trying to get your wrecked car insured and paid for by another company.

If ONLY one insurance provider said they'd take people with pre-existing conditions, and cover them fully, they'd be flooded. By people recquiring regular pay-outs in excess of what they pay in. The whole set-up of private insurance is based on having most people pay in without getting anything back most of the time.

If you accept customers that no-one else wants, you end up with a customer pool where most people need pay-outs in excess of pay-in most or all of the time. This, in turn, increases the average insurance costs, driving your healthy customers with many options to companies who don't accept pre-existing conditions who can offer more competitive rates.

A company with only healthy people (or whose sick people never need to be paid for as all their ailments are traced back to pre-existing conditions) can offer lower rates or get higher profits than those who accept and pay out for people with pre-existing conditions.

William, looking back I could have phrased my questions better, but no slight towards you or your wife was intended.  I'm glad the pharma company stepped up and provided the medicine she needed. 

It shouldn't have had to work out that way, but honestly I don't see how the current healthcare/health insurance package that's being rammed thru is going to change any of that.  There is no tort reform and the insurance companies are going to be getting a larger piece of the pie because the government is going to force people to buy insurance.  Just using you as an example, that sure didn't help much a few years ago did it?  Medicare is going to be cut, forcing unfunded mandated back on the states that are already fighting stretched budgets.  We will have to pay into this system for 4 years before any of the benefits start.  These are just a few of the problems I have with the current bill.

The democrats have wasted over a year trying to force something thru without actually working with the republicans on this issue.  And before anyone barks up, the republicans have done the same thing in the past, yes, I know.  It's still not correct, no matter what party is doing it.

We need to look and solve the individual problems with health care on a one-on-one basis.  This huge onmibus bill doesn't even try to do that.

Brad, when you rent the gun, you only are allowed to shoot it onsite at the range.

They don't let people leave the premises!

The current bill is basically the republican bill of the early 90s.