Redraft HR3200

Recently we talked a lot about banks and credit card companies using language that their customers couldn't understand, therefore getting mortgages or credit cards with conditions that were not understood by the buyers. This issue has brought on numerous problems, making legislation necessary to protect the consumer.

Now we are debating something equally, if not more, important: our Health Care system. This new legislation is important for everybody - Democrats, Republicans, Conservatives, Liberals, Independents, and Libertarians alike.

This legislation is not intended for our public servants in Congress or the Senate, but for the those Americans who are uninsured or under-insured. People employed by the government have an excellent health care plan, as I understand it, making this, as all legislation, OUR bill. Therefore this petition proposes to challenge Congress to practice what they preach and rewrite HR3200 in the readable English language spoken and read by Americans who haven't attended law school.

It is imperative, given the current state of this debate, that We The People know what we are fighting over. Being a Liberal, if a Republican says to me, "This is what the bill says..." I wouldn't believe them right away and would go to read it for myself. This goes for all parties. The problem with my own interpretation of this bill as that NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE READING. The people now are resorting to calling each other stupid and telling each other to read the bill, but again, NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE READING.

One page that is getting a lot of attention is pg. 16. Pg. 16 is section 102 of Title I. It reads:
(a) GRANDFATHERED HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE DEFINED. Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term grandfathered health insurance coverage means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:
(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.
(A) IN GENERAL.Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.

We can stop there. If I were referred to this page and hadn't seen on pg. 14 the Title of which this is section 102, I might easily believe that this (1)(a) meant that private insurers could keep who is currently covered, but may not cover anyone new. That sounds bad. Or, I might interpret this to mean that the insurance company could not accept new enrollees under its current terms and conditions as of the 1st day of this legislation being enacted.

There are two interpretations, which are in all probability, both wrong. This is a big problem. We are furiously debating what many of us don't understand to begin with.

For the purpose of meaningful Health Care reform, you, our representatives in the Senate and Congress, are hereby petitioned by We the People to translate and republish HR3200 in readable English, the English spoken and read by Americans today, before further changes are made to the bill and before it comes to a vote in the Senate.