Page 11 - Risk Pool News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Condition you paid way more money in health care premium costs. often times uninsurable. that went away. i'm unclear how you'd propose to put it back if -- >> you had states already taking the lead on that. i believe it was vermont. >> there were actually -- florida had a high risk pool closed for 13 years to new entrants. they said we'll give you insurance but won't cover you for the thing you need it for. i did a story about a woman who had breast cancer and was a high risk pool. we'll take you but won't cover your breast cancer. >> we can work together to find ways to do it. i know republic...

How do republicans defend this? >> well, very easily. we want to protect people with pre-existing conditions. we want to be able to protect children who are 26 years old to stay on there, but you don't need to create government-run health care to do that. >> if you strike all of this down in this lawsuit, where does that leave the american people? >> hopefully it will allow us to start over again and go back to the free market principles and put in the guidelines -- >> health care legislation is like impossible to pass on capitol hill. >> unfortunately it is and it's not going to get any easie...

We're trying to move toward a system that provides more options and choices for people that lowers the costs. and i personally - - >>chris: let me jump in because under repeal and replace, the bill you voted for, if someone had a lapse in coverage of 63 days. a lot of cases of pre-existing conditions, then want to buy it. if you had a lapse in coverage for 63 days, states could force those people, instead of buying it from an insurance company to buy it from a risk pool and that meant the premiums would be higher. that's exactly the kind of thing obamacare tried to prevent. >> chris, what we w...

Condition. she's uncovered right now under obamacare. we're trying to move toward a system that provides more options and choices for people that lowers the costs. and i personally - - >>chris: let me jump in because under repeal and replace, the bill you voted for, if someone had a lapse in coverage of 63 days. a lot of cases of pre-existing conditions, then want to buy it. if you had a lapse in coverage for 63 days, states could force those people, instead of buying it from an insurance company to buy it from a risk pool and that meant the premiums would be higher. that's exactly the kind of...

>> let me jump intr here. under repeal and replace, the bill that you voted for, if someone had a lapse in coverage of 63 days or people who don't have insurance on them want to buy it, if you have a lapse in coverage for 63 days, states could force those people to buy it from a risk pool instead of an insurance company and that means premiums will be higher. that's what obamacare tried to prevent. >> chris what we were trying to do is not have the federal government one-size-fits-all top-down approach while allowing state's ability. we have a fund and i advocated for more for maternity a ment...