Proposed Pre-Existing Condition Ban Doesn't Reach Far Enough

I'm Sean Smith and I'm going to be posting on Mondays. I am a freshman at Occidental College in Los Angeles, California, originally from Salt Lake City, Utah. I tend to fall in the conservative-leaning moderate section of the political spectrum. That being said, I have liberal opinions on some issues and conservative opinions on others, and I like to form my opinions based on the specific issue or candidate. On the issue of healthcare, I tend to favor stronger regulations on private health insurance companies rather than socialized medicine or a government option.

One of the biggest problems plaguing our healthcare system is the denial of coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. This practice creates a system where those who need coverage the most are oftentimes the people who don't have it. One of the new Democratic proposals in Congress would ban excluding anybody under nineteen years of age due to a pre-existing condition. The problem with this proposal is that it leaves everybody over nineteen out in the cold; it doesn't reach far enough.

According to an October 4, 2009 article on CNN's website, eight states and the District of Columbia still allow insurance companies to count domestic violence as a pre-existing condition, even though domestic violence isn't generally considered a health condition at all. This evil form of insurance company trickery is still routinely used to deny abused women the right to purchase health insurance. Women who had a pregnancy prior to coverage are also often excluded.

The exclusion of people with pre-existing conditions amounts to a modern day system of Jim Crow laws for sick people; a disgusting blight on American decency. It is time for morally upright people in all political parties to stand up and rectify this profound injustice.