Christian & Davis, LLC
Call for a Free Consultation
Greenville: 864-640-4272 Toll Free: 866-623-4041

Protect Healthcare for all Americans

Protect Health Care For All Americans!

Responding to the tragic shooting in Tuscon, Congress has wisely postponed its House vote on repeal of the Affordable Care Act. The vote is now scheduled for Wednesday, Jan. 19th.

South Carolinians, please urge our congressmen to preserve the new Affordable Care Act ahead of next week's House vote! The new health care law contains too much good for us to abandon it. See below what South Carolina would lose with its repeal, and then please let your voice be heard!

Our partners at Families USA are hosting call-in days on January 18th and 19th to send the message to Congress: Vote NO on repeal. We encourage you to join us in this effort. Please feel free to use their toll-free number to the capital switchboard:


Without the Affordable Care Act:

  • Critical Consumer Protections Would Be Lost:

o 18,100 young adults would lose their insurance coverage through their parents' health plans, sometimes just after they finish school and as they are looking for a job. Families across South Carolina would lose the peace of mind the Affordable Care Act provides by making sure that young adults can stay on their parents plan to age 26 if they do not have coverage of their own.

o Nearly 2.3 million residents of South Carolina with private insurance coverage would suddenly find themselves vulnerable again to having lifetime limits placed on how much insurance companies will spend on their health care.

o Insurance companies would once again be allowed cut off someone's coverage unexpectedly when they are in an accident or become sick because of a simple mistake on an application. This would leave 290,000 people in South Carolina at risk of losing their insurance at the moment they need it most, as one of the worst abuses of the insurance industry would become legal again.

o 290,000 residents of South Carolina would not know if they are receiving value for their health insurance premium dollars, as insurers in state would no longer be required to spend at least 80 to 85 percent of premium dollars on health care rather than CEO salaries, bonuses, and corporate profits.

o New insurance plans would no longer be required to cover recommended preventive services, like mammograms and flu shots, without cost sharing, nor would they have to guarantee enrollees the right to choose any available primary care provider in the network or see an OB-GYN without a referral.

o 714,000 seniors in South Carolina who have Medicare coverage would be forced to pay a co-pay to receive important preventive services, like mammograms and colonoscopies.

o Medicare would no longer pay for an annual check-up visit, so 714,000 seniors in South Carolina who have Medicare coverage would have to pay extra if they want to stay healthy by getting check-ups regularly.

  • 39,717 on Medicare Would See Significantly Higher Prescription Drug Costs: In South Carolina, 39,717 Medicare beneficiaries received a one-time, tax-free $250 rebate to help pay for prescription drugs in the "donut hole" coverage gap in 2010. Medicare beneficiaries who fall into the "donut hole" in 2011 will be eligible for 50 percent discounts on covered brand name prescription drugs. Without the law, the burden of high prescription drug costs would hurt millions of Medicare beneficiaries nationwide.
  • South Carolina Would Not Receive Additional Resources to Crack Down on Unreasonable Insurance Premium Increases: States would not have new resources to review proposed health insurance premium increases and hold insurance companies accountable for unjustified premium increases.
  • South Carolina Would Not Receive Additional Funds to Plan for a Health Insurance Exchange: States would not have new resources to build a new, competitive, private health insurance marketplace for consumers that provides lower costs, one-stop insurance shopping, and greater benefits and protections.
  • South Carolina Would Not Receive Additional Funds to Support a Consumer Assistance Program: States would not have new resources to help protect consumers from some of the worst insurance industry practices.
  • 33 Employers Would Not Be Receiving Help from the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program: Businesses, schools and other educational institutions, unions, State and local governments, and non-profits would not be receiving much-needed financial relief to help early retirees and their families continue to have quality, affordable health coverage. Find a list of organizations in your state that would not have been accepted into this program here.

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
A the A-list 2012 Talk Featured Lawyer The National Trial Lawyers The National Trial Lawyers | Top 40 Under 40 Super Lawyers Peer Review Rated

Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters.