just three points need to be made about this amendment. Point number one, this is an option from which Federal employees can choose. Why deprive them of this additional choice? They do not want the product, they do not have to have it. Why take it away from them? Point number two, just in case these adverse selection concerns are valid, that is why OPM designed this product with identical premiums so it does not occur. So they already addressed the concern just in case there is any adverse selection that occurs out there. But now what we are seeing from the data is that adverse selection not only is not happening. The opposite is happening. Lower-income, older, sicker people are buying health savings accounts. The data we get every day is disproving this notion of adverse selection. But just in case OPM designed this so that the premium is virtually identical to the rest of the premiums so that there is a safety valve, an insurance policy, to make sure that those concerns are not validated, do not manifest themselves. Do not take this option away from 8 million families. I urge a vote ``no'' on this amendment.
Paul Ryan: “just three points need to be made about this amendment. Point number one, this is an option from which Federal employees…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing an amendment related to health savings accounts for Federal employees.
Share
More from Paul Ryan
I'm confident we'll be able to pass a short-term extension and I'd be kind of shocked if the Democrats would want to create a government shutdown because they have been dragging their feet.
I'm excited about this analysis. And, yes, I think they sort of overestimate the uninsured number, just like they overestimated who would be insured by Obamacare. But I do believe that if we're not going to force people to buy something…
I have no doubt we'll pass this, because we're going to keep our promises.
We must be clear, white supremacy is repulsive. This bigotry is counter to all this country stands for. There can be no moral ambiguity.





