April is Autism Awareness Month. The General Assembly passed a bill that would require insurance coverage for children, ages 2-6. Interestingly enough, support for the bill comes from both sides of the aisle.
First there was this blog post from conservative Lee Talley. He blasts those from the AFP, who call the coverage “Obama-care lite.”
What is your solution to the issue using the existing laws in Virginia and at the Federal level to solve this problem of covering our children and not placing an undue burden on small businesses?
And in a strongly worded editorial, The Roanoke Times urges the General Assembly to reject Governor Bob McDonnell’s amendments to the autism bill.
We hope that lawmakers, who passed this bill by hefty margins, will vote at this week’s veto session to reject the amendment and give McDonnell no second chance to veto the legislation.
McDonnell’s amendments deserve to be rejected. And those who argue that such mandated insurance coverage is inappropriate need look no further than all of the other mandates for coverage currently included in insurance. Drawing an arbitrary line in the sand here just doesn’t make sense.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Here’s the problem: insurance premiums are based on expected outlays. If the insurance premium is based on having a cap, and that cap is removed, the premium was too low to cover expenses. If, as the governor proposes, that coverage can be dropped if the cap is invalidated by federal law, then the premium was too high up to the point the coverage was dropped.
So, we need three things from the insurance companies. The nominal price of the policy, the additional cost that must be paid by the insured parties if the cap is removed, and the amount that the insurance company will refund to the insured if the coverage is dropped.