You know, Harry, this message sounds like the author is pushing for his own agenda rather than informing the public. > It is the bill that would do the most for children and adults with > mental retardation and their families. While no one with a brain would dispute that people with mental retardation need good insurance coverage, so do the rest of us. > This means our message to House members is vote FOR H.R. 2723 and against > the others. Not mine, unless I get some information about potential benefit to the rest of the U.S. > (2) There could be a rule passed that attaches "poison pills" like MEWAs > and Medical Savings Accounts to whatever bill passes. I don't see them as poison pills -- they are legitimate subjects. If the author doesn't like them, he should say so and say WHY. > H.R. 2723 is a strong bill that should be enacted into law. Lots of editorializing and telling me what I should think and do -- the hallmark of someone with an axe to grind rather than inform the public. Makes me VERY suspicious of his supposed summary. I was glad to see there are links to other sources, but I wonder if they're all by the same organization (haven't checked them out yet). > * The bill would remove the ERISA preemption and allow consumers to > hold health plans accountable according to state law. This should terrify anyone who works for an interstate corporation and set lawyers dancing with glee. Which state? We're currently covered through my husband's job by a company based in Florida, his company is based in Texas, and we live and work in Wyoming. Two attorneys could retire just on the fees from arguing which state's rules should apply. This bill should be voted down for this provision alone IMNSHO. No one could argue that the current insurance situation needs improvement, but frankly this doesn't sound like a solution. Sylvia Steiger RN SFNP BS, Cheyenne Wyoming USA