Getting a case dismissed at the outset is almost impossible in most situations. Most legal scholars agree that this suit has a bats ass chance in hell of succeeding. It was filed for political purposes to satisfy constituents who were against health care reform.

With respect to premium increases, let me tell you, before health care reform Blue Shield here in California was about to jack up premiums by 30% percent or more. Before health care reform, premium increase have outpaced inflation for each of the last 20 years. The increases have and will continue to increase with or without health care reform. That is exactly why we need a public option to keep the for profit insurance companies in check!

Sandy I don’t usually like to go into politics on this blog, but you are a valued member so I approved your comment and will respond; health care reform has nothing at all to do with premium increases at the present time because 90% of the bill won’t go into effect until 2014. This argument is a political fiction meant to bolster the republican cause and help get them elected.

Any insurance company that says otherwise, is just trying to get the law repealed so they can continue to screw people and keep their profits high.

I am not a member or any political party. I think the democrats have some good ideas, and I think the republicans have good ideas. With respect the health care reform, I am calling a spade a spade. The republicans had many years to try to get something passed that would help the American public. They are just pissed off that the democrats did it first.

Being an independent, I just sit back and laugh at the whole spectacle. Each party only wants power, they could give a crap less about you or I. Once you realize that, you will start choosing based upon what is best for you and your family, rather than what some party tells you is right or wrong.

Norm

Dragonator there is not supposed to be death panels under the new law. Hell the way I see it now there are already death panels that private corporations control. You see your good friends at Blue Cross, Cigna, Healthnet, Kaiser, etc., all determine what will happen to you right now. Yea a bunch of bean counters who are only concerned with their profit.

Without so-called Obamacare, you have NO rights. With Obamacare, you at least have some rights. They cannot terminate your insurance if you get sick.

The States Attorney generals are wrong. Their lawsuits are frivolous and are a political ploy only to satisfy their constituents.

The Supreme Court has already decided that the government can require you to get private insurance. Here in California we have mandatory auto insurance (prop. 213) which has been upheld. Social Security is mandatory and that has been upheld, State Disability Insurance and Unemployment Insurance is mandatory and that has been upheld.

I myself support the new Health Care reforms. We are the only western power that does not provide medical care to all of its citizens.

Unless you are rich, don’t ever have to worry about going to the doctor, or have guaranteed health insurance for life, that is guaranteed not to be terminated, I do not see how you could be against health care reform, unless your political point of view flat out prevents you from supporting it because Obama was the one who got this thing through, and not the other political party.

I myself, and many people I know, have been screwed by health insurance companies. There must be some control over their control of our medical benefits.

Norm

Maybe he can sue for a defective helmet, since SNELL has a defective test program?

There is no requirement to buy an insurance contract from a private corporation that that pays out only 5% of revenues in claims, pays its executives $200,000 per week per person, up to $35-billion per year per person tax free (Warren Buffet at GEICO). The constitutions trump all unconstitutional laws.

According to dozens of States’ attorney generals, no govt can require anyone to buy private insurance at $800/month (Obamacare). Unless you pass a law requiring all persons be paid $100,000 per year, whether they work or not.

Thanks Norm. I am going to call our agent and get under insured added to our policy.
As always…learned something I did not know.

Who is the blond in the picture with you? Is that a avatar or a human??

Took a 125 mile ride today. Had a great ride. It was a hot one, we are in the mid 90’s!

No. Under insured covers the difference between the defendant’s insurance and what you want to cover. Let’s say defendant has 15k, you could insure for 1 million, so you could get the difference between 15k and 1 million if you have under insured coverage.

Norm

Is that the same as uninsured?? I never heard of under insured.

Make sure you get under insured coverage!

Norm

You are so very right. One needs to purchase enough insurance to cover their own butts. As the old saying goes “you can’t recover blood from a turnip”. In the State of Florida a home is protected under the Homestead Act. Florida is where everyone comes that files bankruptcy after purchasing a mansion to live in.
Again, this is a great article for this blog. I am sure many folks are reading it. I just hope that they take this excellent free advise.

Thanks Sandie.

We do not limit what amount a person can sue for. However, collecting is a whole different matter. If let’s say someone has a 15k policy, and you get a million dollar judgment against them, they can just go bankrupt and there goes your law suit. Now you will get less than 15k, because an attorney will have to go into bankruptcy court to get them to stay the automatic stay with respect to the insurance company paying limits.

I know a person can only purchase what they can afford. That is why it is up to the biker to make sure they have protection.

Norm