[YellowLord]

Hello All,

I am not trying to be a spammer, rather I am a concerned citizen and I am trying to get information out to those affected by diabetes about a terrible piece of legislation called the Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization and Affordability Act (HIMMA, S. 1955). This act would override state guidelines on what insurance companies must cover in their plans meaning insurance companies would NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE COVERAGE FOR DIABETES CARE!

This will be coming to a vote on the Senate floor within the next two weeks and if it passes GOD help us and all those families afflicted by diabetes.

What can you do? This comes directly for the American Diabetes Association

Here is another thing that you can do to try to prevent the passing of the bill S.1955...I am copying these instructions directly from the moderator at the American Diabetes Association Forum.

Things you can do to oppose S. 1955 include:

* Register with our Online Action Center at http://advocacy.diabetes.org/site/Pa...me=AC_homepage
Once you register, you will see this issue under the heading, "Preserve Diabetes Coverage Laws!"
Click on that link and send an email to your U.S. Senators. Sample language is already prepared.

* Know your U.S. Senators or one of their staffers personally or interested in getting to know them? They are on recess this week, so schedule a meeting in the district office before March 27th to talk about why S. 1955 will harm people with diabetes. Use these talking points for meetings: http://advocacy.diabetes.org/site/Pa... Interest=2401

* Have five minutes to make a phone call? Phone calls can really have a big impact. With five minutes, you can call your Senators’ D.C. offices to urge a NO vote on undoing state mandated health insurance coverage. Use these talking points for your phone call.

Become more familiar with S. 1955. Access the S. 1955 Fact Sheet and more.
http://www.diabetes.org/advocacy-act...nter/s1955.jsp

[TAutry]

Hello YellowLord,

Thank you for joining the forums. I have researched the bill to which you refer. It appears that your information is legit.

Ordinarily we frown upon new members who represent a 'cause' in their first post. Feel free to post a brief introduction so that in the future you don't have to warn us that you aren't a spammer.

While this topic will remain open, it will be watched carefully. Should it degenerate, it will be closed and deleted.

[Cyborg]

I'd like to get a list of our government representitives that our supporting this act so that I know who to vote against! With diabetes becoming an epedemic in the U.S. these people do not deserve to be representing us. As far as I'm concerned they are traitors.

[KickStart101]

I agree Cyborg. I am not American but since Travis says what
Yellowlord says is legit, I would be hopping on the bandwagon to
do my best to make sure that this Bill does not pass. That's
outrageous. You people have enough Bull to contend with over
there. You's certainly don't need this on top.

Pardon me for sticking my nose in.

[lgvincent]

This is something that worries me very much.

[greendavid]

This bill (S. 1955, the "Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization and Affordability Act" or HIMMA) is opposed by social workers, psychologists, health-care consumer organizations, Planned Parenthood, and the American Diabetes Association.

Find your senators (each state has two) and e-mail him or her, today! (Google their name if you know it, or your state and the word "senator" if you don't.) Ask them to oppose S. 1955 - HIMMA. Say "please" and "thank you."

[duck]

This is one of those ****ed things that really pisses me off. The bill, and it's "intended" purpose, is to allow small businesses, like my mothers, to be able to pool together to purchase and provide a better level of healthcare for their employees. And then they tack **** like this into a bill that otherwise does a good thing?

I've read about this, and read about it. The parts where it would allow states and governments to deny healthcare benefits currently afforded to say, diabetics, isn't written to do just that, but the end result could be just that. The part I can't get my head around is why those provisions are even in there, except maybe to try and lower the cost of purchasing healthcare for small businesses.

This is such an apostasy. I know contractors who have no healthcare because they can't afford it...I know realtors who make a decent wage, but have 0 healthcare because it is unaffordable...My mother's employees have no healthcare. This bill is supposed to create some affordable possibilities for such people, but look what it does on the back-end.

[Lynne1]

I also read about this on something I received from JDRF. They recommend voting against the bill also. I think it was countdown magazine.

[duck]

Originally Posted by Lynne1

I also read about this on something I received from JDRF. They recommend voting against the bill also. I think it was countdown magazine.

My perception from my "research" is any disease-advocacy group will be opposed to this legislation, and any group that advocates for small businesses/self-employed will be for this legislation.

[Cyborg]

Originally Posted by duck

This is one of those ****ed things that really pisses me off. The bill, and it's "intended" purpose, is to allow small businesses, like my mothers, to be able to pool together to purchase and provide a better level of healthcare for their employees. And then they tack **** like this into a bill that otherwise does a good thing?

I've read about this, and read about it. The parts where it would allow states and governments to deny healthcare benefits currently afforded to say, diabetics, isn't written to do just that, but the end result could be just that. The part I can't get my head around is why those provisions are even in there, except maybe to try and lower the cost of purchasing healthcare for small businesses.

This is such an apostasy. I know contractors who have no healthcare because they can't afford it...I know realtors who make a decent wage, but have 0 healthcare because it is unaffordable...My mother's employees have no healthcare. This bill is supposed to create some affordable possibilities for such people, but look what it does on the back-end.

The tacking on of this type stuff is the reason why we need to bring back the line item veto.

[seacomp]

Originally Posted by Cyborg

The tacking on of this type stuff is the reason why we need to bring back the line item veto.

You make assumptions about a president with a brain and a heart.

[duck]

Originally Posted by Cyborg

The tacking on of this type stuff is the reason why we need to bring back the line item veto.

Agreed, but from what I am reading, the provisions are included in order to make healthcare more affordable for small business...By now, you would think congress would see the unintended consequence of these provisions (if they are indeed unintended).

I shouldn't have said "tacked" like it was an add-on...

Ergh. The system is broken.

[seacomp]

Originally Posted by duck

(if they are indeed unintended).

That's the rub, I'm paranoid enought to believe that such results are very intended for many of the people involved, whether from ideology or self-interest.

[Cyborg]

Originally Posted by seacomp

That's the rub, I'm paranoid enought to believe that such results are very intended for many of the people involved, whether from ideology or self-interest.

Greed?

[duck]

Originally Posted by Cyborg

Greed?

I have a buddy whose theory is that congress (and legislative bodies worldwide) create laws with built-in flaws...later, after the flaws cause great consternation, the lawmakers go back and make new laws to fix the problems they created, and then take credit for fixing the problems during the next election cycle. I don't necessarily subscribe to that theory, but sometimes...