Comments by "Paddle Duck" (@paddleduck5328) on "Tulsi Comes Out For 'Medicare Choice'" video.

  1. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    3
  2. The Truth oh...so now you want to change the subject from asking: “did you read her plan”?? Lol
    2
  3. Duplicative coverage is disallowed. Section 106. Or section 107. Same with Jayapals complementary plan in the house.
    2
  4. Seva Koudriavtsev SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    2
  5. david jandrow in Jayapals bill it doesn’t. Neither in Bernie’s companion bill in the senate. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  6. The Truth she has no plan. Yet. Jayapals plan doesn’t allow keeping your private plan. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  7. Political Taoism your wording is very confusing. Tulsi said you can keep your plan. That is not supplemental. That is exactly what duplicative care is. A private plan that duplicates what Medicare covers. On Bernie’s senate M4A plan and Jayapals complementary house M4A plan, that is disallowed. Only supplemental would be allowed. Supplemental would be extra, on top of. You seem to have the terms confused. (Keeping your existing employer private insurance plan is not supplemental. It’s is duplicative.) Section 107 of Jayapals house bill:
    1
  8. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  9. Political Taoism if you’re talking about whatever this new option thing Tulsi is talking about eventually outlining in a couple months. But that is not Jayapals house bill.
    1
  10. Political Taoism it does not line up with the bill. She’s 8 months into the primary and hasn’t proposed an outline for this “option” thing she’s introducing that sounds an awful lot like Buttigieg and Harris’ plans. But until we eventually see something we don’t know. Just clarifying it is not the Jayapal bill she co signed.
    1
  11. Political Taoism I already posted the section it shows you can’t have private duplicative coverage in 1384 Jayapals bill. If you’re gonna say “it sounds like 1384” then you could say that about Harris or Buttigieg plans too?? C’mon. For those of us to who this issue is supremely serious, that doesn’t cut it.
    1
  12. Post the section then.
    1
  13. Because if you’re talking about 303, then no. That just says a person can make a contract with their provider. Meaning they can cash may their doctor. Not a private insurance plan.
    1
  14. *cash pay
    1
  15. Political Taoism aw man, really? Damn, I give you props for reading the whole thing twice! Legalese is a pain in the butt and I actually have an employment background in insurance - life mostly (and also have a cert in basic insurance law, focusing on life insurance) and don’t want to read those hundred pages twice. Seriously i think Niko and Myron are just trying really really hard to make the case because they want to believe and in the process are confusing everyone else. I’m sorry for being so insistent, I’m just so very disappointed.
    1
  16. Richard Carlington Duplicative coverage is disallowed. Section 106. Or section 107. Same with Jayapals complementary plan in the house.
    1
  17. Brian Krueger you’re welcome. Here’s the section from the house bill by Jayapal SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  18. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  19. xDanulicious aw man im sorry but he may still be resting tomorrow from his laproscopic stents put in yesterday. Follow twitter maybe to see updates. He wants to get right back on the trail but those close to him are saying to take a rest for a bit.
    1
  20. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  21. Gene Marx no I’m sorry 1:23 you cannot keep your private insurance plan under Bernie’s and Jayapals bills.
    1
  22. Project Redfoot go to your emails and find a receipt from act blue. I think there’s a hyperlink you can click on that will take you to the page? (I already am on monthly donations to Bernie and accidentally hit the recurring instead of one time - on one of my extra donations - and it was just a couple of clicks to undo. But that’s while I was still on the donation page.)
    1
  23. Darshana Freechild SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1
  24. SEC. 107. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATING COVERAGE. (a) In General.—Beginning on the effective date described in section 106(a), it shall be unlawful for— (1) a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this Act; or (2) an employer to provide benefits for an employee, former employee, or the dependents of an employee or former employee that duplicate the benefits provided under this Act. (b) Construction.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act, including additional benefits that an employer may provide to employees or their dependents, or to former employees or their dependents.
    1