-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Let's ask Julie Rovner about the federal health law. Proposed changes to that law will be even more up for the public debate this week, as we learn just how much a Republican plan to replace Obamacare may cost. Julie's a longtime NPR correspondent, now with Kaiser Health News, who's covered health care roughly forever. So she's the perfect person to ask. Hi, Julie.
JULIE ROVNER: Hey, Steve.
INSKEEP: And we take this one question at a time. This week's question comes from Rich Renner of Collingswood, N.J. Here's his question.
RICH RENNER: If the ACA is repealed1 and whatever replaces it does not include a pre-existing conditions provision, are there any programs in place at the state level that would step in to help?
INSKEEP: Julie.
ROVNER: Well, not right now. This is something that actually was overtaken by the federal Affordable2 Care Act. So there's nothing at the moment.
INSKEEP: Isn't it a promise of the Republicans now, who say they want to replace the ACA, that they would keep the pre-existing conditions rule?
ROVNER: Yes, it is. And they've been saying that all along. But it's not going to be easy for them to do. First of all, a lot of people have pre-existing conditions, about 1 in 4 adults. And prior to the ACA, people could be excluded from individual insurance for things as minor3 as hay fever or having been treated for a bad back. So it's not just the serious diseases.
Now, this hasn't been a problem in the group market for 20 years. That was taken care of. But in the individual market, it was harder because insurers didn't want to sell to all the sick people. They were afraid that prices would go up, and healthy people wouldn't want to join.
INSKEEP: OK, President Trump4 says he wants to keep this very popular provision of the Affordable Care Act. Republicans in Congress say they want to keep it. Why do you say it's going to be hard?
ROVNER: Well, at the moment, they actually haven't touched it in the bill that they're proposing. And that's not because they didn't want to but because they can't. The budget rules they're operating under to let them avoid a filibuster5 in the Senate mean that they...
INSKEEP: Oh, they can't change the entire law anyway, OK.
ROVNER: That's right. This is one of the things they can't change. But they did change a different piece of it. There are eliminating the penalties for people who don't buy insurance. And those were, of course, to get more healthy people to buy insurance so insurers wouldn't go broke covering the sick people. So what could happen now is if people don't have to join, only the sick people will sign up. And the insurers might not be there to offer coverage6.
INSKEEP: Wait a minute. So the mandate7 to buy health insurance, which Republicans want to get rid of, is connected to this guarantee for people with pre-existing conditions?
ROVNER: That is exactly correct. That mandate was to help ensure that enough healthy people bought insurance to help offset8 the costs of the sick people that insurers are now required to cover because of the ban on pre-existing condition exclusions9.
INSKEEP: What are Republicans trying to do instead?
ROVNER: So instead, Republicans have said that if you have a break in coverage, if you want to buy coverage again, you'll have to pay a 30 percent higher premium10 for a year. But what analysts11 say, the problem with that is that then healthy people really won't come in because now they're looking at...
INSKEEP: Really steep prices.
ROVNER: Right. And so they'll wait until they get sick to buy in.
INSKEEP: Is it entirely12 clear to people in the industry that this is going to work?
ROVNER: It is not entirely clear to people in the industry that it's going to work. And this is one of the reasons I think Republicans keep calling this bill a work in progress.
INSKEEP: Julie, thanks very much.
ROVNER: Thank you.
INSKEEP: She's with Kaiser Health News. And she will be back next week to take another of your questions about the health law and the effort to change it. You can tweet us @MorningEdition using the hash tag, #ACAchat.
1 repealed | |
撤销,废除( repeal的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 affordable | |
adj.支付得起的,不太昂贵的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 minor | |
adj.较小(少)的,较次要的;n.辅修学科;vi.辅修 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 trump | |
n.王牌,法宝;v.打出王牌,吹喇叭 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 filibuster | |
n.妨碍议事,阻挠;v.阻挠 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 coverage | |
n.报导,保险范围,保险额,范围,覆盖 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 mandate | |
n.托管地;命令,指示 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 offset | |
n.分支,补偿;v.抵消,补偿 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 exclusions | |
n.不包括的项目:如接受服务项目是由投保以前已患有的疾病或伤害引致的,保险公司有权拒绝支付。;拒绝( exclusion的名词复数 );排除;被排斥在外的人(或事物);排外主义 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 premium | |
n.加付款;赠品;adj.高级的;售价高的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 analysts | |
分析家,化验员( analyst的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 entirely | |
ad.全部地,完整地;完全地,彻底地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|