Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (374718)	7/24/2010 3:31:07 PM
From: D. Long	2 Recommendations Respond to of 794286

The best fix for the expansion of federal power would be two constitutional amendments: 1. amend the Commerce Clause to limit it the channels and instrumentalities of commerce, only (ditching Lopez' "substantial effect" and wholly eviscerating the expansive reading of the Commerce Clause); 2. amend the General Welfare Clause to limit the taxing and spending powers to the enumerated powers (wholly eviscerating the nearly unlimited power of Congress to stealth regulate by the taxing and spending powers). Those two changes would dramatically alter the scope and reach of the federal government. Instantly, half of the federal reach built up over the past 80 years would be destroyed. Whole agencies would have to be disbanded. Ahh, but it will never happen. We will keep marching to the cliff.

To: LindyBill who wrote (374718)	7/24/2010 5:06:05 PM
From: FJB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794286

Germany Weighs Tax on the Obese Updated: 1 day ago (July 23) -- A tax on fat? aolnews.com Marco Wanderwitz, a conservative member of parliament for the German state of Saxony, said it is unfair and unsustainable for the taxpayer to carry the entire cost of treating obesity-related illnesses in the public health system. "I think that it would be sensible if those who deliberately lead unhealthy lives would be held financially accountable for that," Wanderwitz said, according to Reuters. Germany, famed for its beer, pork and chocolates, is one of the fattest countries in Europe. Twenty-one percent of German adults were obese in 2007, and the German newspaper Bild estimates that the cost of treating obesity-related illnesses is about 17 billion euro, or $21.7 billion, a year. Walter Willett, a professor of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, described the idea of a fat tax as "not humane." He told AOL News that lifestyle is not the only factor in obesity, with both genetics and urban environments playing major roles. "It's not fair to tax somebody just for being obese," Willett said. "Most people who are obese would prefer not to be so." Health economist Jurgen Wasem called for Germany to tackle the problem of fattening snacks in order to raise money and reduce obesity. "One should, as with tobacco, tax the purchase of unhealthy consumer goods at a higher rate and partly maintain the health system," Wasem said, according to Germany's English-language newspaper The Local. "That applies to alcohol, chocolate or risky sporting equipment such as hang-gliders." Others are suggesting even more extreme measures. The German teachers association recently called for school kids to be weighed each day, The Daily Telegraph said. The fat kids could then be reported to social services, who could send them to health clinics. Willett identified improving children's diets as one of the most effective ways to deal with obesity and spiraling health care costs.

To: LindyBill who wrote (374718)	7/24/2010 8:04:08 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 794286

Some insurers stop writing new coverage for kids Ahead of requirement to cover kids with medical problems, some insurers drop out Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press Writer, On Friday July 23, 2010, 8:03 pm EDT WASHINGTON (AP) -- Some major health insurance companies will no longer issue certain types of policies for children, an unintended consequence of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law, state officials said Friday. Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty said several big insurers in his state will stop issuing new policies that cover children individually. Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner Kim Holland said a couple of local insurers in her state are doing likewise. In Florida, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Aetna, and Golden Rule -- a subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare -- notified the insurance commissioner that they will stop issuing individual policies for children, said Jack McDermott, a spokesman for McCarty. The major types of coverage for children -- employer plans and government programs -- are not be affected by the disruption. But a subset of policies -- those that cover children as individuals -- may run into problems. Even so, insurers are not canceling children's coverage already issued, but refusing to write new policies. The administration reacted sharply to the pullback. "We're disappointed that a small number of insurance companies are taking this unwarranted and unnecessary step," said Jessica Santillo, a spokeswoman for the Health and Human Services department. Starting later this year, the health care overhaul law requires insurers to accept children regardless of medical problems -- a major early benefit of the complex legislation. Insurers are worried that parents will wait until kids get sick to sign them up, saddling the companies with unpredictable costs. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida issues about 9,000 to 10,000 new policies a year that only cover children. Vice president Randy Kammer said the company's experts calculated that guaranteeing coverage for children could raise premiums for other individual policy holders by as much as 20 percent. "We believe that the majority of people who would buy this policy were going to use it immediately, probably for high cost claims," said Kammer. "Guaranteed issue means you could technically buy it on the way to the hospital." Kammer said the company did not make the decision lightly. "We were looking at all our other individual policy holders who pay a lot for coverage, and we didn't think it was fair to given them that kind of an increase to benefit a small population that receives a greater advantage than they do," she said. Industry officials estimate that children's policies account for 8 percent of single coverage plans sold directly to consumers. To get around the problem, insurance companies and state insurance commissioners are pressing the federal government to require an open enrollment period for the guaranteed children's coverage. Parents could only get the guaranteed coverage during a designated month each year, or if the family went through a major change, such as a divorce or a parent losing their job. Open enrollment periods are standard for most employer health plans, and some government programs. "That seems to be a fairly reasonable approach," said Holland, the Oklahoma commissioner, a Democrat. "It would create a mechanism to get children into coverage but limit the ability to misuse the system." State insurance commissioners who have brought the problem to the attention of the Obama administration say many insurers could stop issuing individual coverage for children. "We are attempting to convince (federal officials) that this is a serious enough concern to work with (insurers) to give them some relief," Holland said. Final regulations for the new children's coverage are due before Sept. 23. The requirement to cover kids with pre-existing medical problems will apply to new plans starting after that date. HHS spokewoman Santillo would not say how the administration intends to address the problem. "We are working with the insurance industry to help ensure that quality coverage is available nationwide for children with pre-existing conditions," she said.