John Bel Edwards: “The insurance company says: You can take oral medication; you don't need insulin. He appeals. During the time the appeal…”

“The insurance company says: You can take oral medication; you don't need insulin. He appeals. During the time the appeal is being considered, 3, 5, 7 days, he has a stroke and goes blind. Then the independent review says: Of course, he was entitled to keep his insulin. So the insurance company says: All right, we will provide insulin now. Now we have a 55-year-old man who has had a stroke; he is blind; he cannot work anymore; he cannot care for his family. Where does he go? Who is going to help his family? The insurance company cannot be held responsible for what they did, not under this proposal. This language matters. It is critically important, what the language says. A young boy, Ethan Bedrick, with cerebral palsy, 5 years old, all his doctors say he needs to have physical therapy, every one of them. The insurance company says he doesn't need it. They appeal. The independent reviewer happens to be somebody who has absolutely no experience with children with cerebral palsy. This is a real-life example. So he says: The insurance company is right; we are not going to give this 5-year old child with cerebral palsy physical therapy. Where does he go? The independent reviewer, who knows nothing about children with cerebral palsy, has denied coverage. The insurance company has denied coverage, coverage for which his parents have been paying for 20 years. So where does he go? For the rest of his life he has cerebral palsy.”