"The Obamacare implosion is worse than you think"

[Amelia]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYyMMs-WO4U]If you like your senator, you can keep her; if you don't, you know what to do.[/ame]

 

[Vox]

if one wants to cover the illegals - that is pretty simple - change the EMTALA as to cover only some critically delineated help and pay for that by 1% federal sales tax - with a provision that that money can not go to ANYTHING except medical care.

That can cover ALL uninsured, marginally insured and poor people in need of BASIC medical care.

anything advanced should be paid by insurance.

so if you have heart attack - you will get help, which is immediate. any advanced care ( including CABG, pacemakers, stenting) should be covered by insurance - which should have different levels and as any product available for purchase in this country should be available to everybody

 

[Vox]

So if the whitehouse has insured us illegals will not be able to sign up for the plan, why is this even being used as an excuse for low enrollment?

Obamacare enrollment by Latinos hurt by immigration law concerns | Yahoo Health

Well, I can see it. I don't have a lot of empathy for the lawbreakers, but I can understand their concern. You're a parent -- you want to get insurance for your kids -- but to do so you have to input all your personal information including your illegal status and your illegally earned wages?

You're not getting insurance for yourself but your fear of deportation is standing in the way of you getting insurance for your citizen children.

Or you're a spouse of an illegal alien. You want to get insurance for yourself but you'll have to input not only your information but also that of your spouse. Whatever led you to marry someone who is here illegally, you may not be ready to come out of the shadows and say, "Here's all our personal information -- I just want insurance for myself and the kids -- you promise you won't use it against my lawbreaking husband?

I fail to see why buying health insurance should be limited to legal residents only.
If you can buy a business, a car, a home, a boat in this country no matter what your immigration status - you should be able to buy insurance.

Very basic medical care can be covered by federal sales tax - a universal basic level.

everything else can be purchased - with specific plans tailored to specific groups - 20something healthy people will need catastrophic insurance with maternity coverage, immunizations and mental health. 60+ will need a regular insurance with a stress on cardiovascular and oncological help, but they certainly do not need childhood immunizations or maternity care.

 

[Amelia]

So if the whitehouse has insured us illegals will not be able to sign up for the plan, why is this even being used as an excuse for low enrollment?

Obamacare enrollment by Latinos hurt by immigration law concerns | Yahoo Health

Well, I can see it. I don't have a lot of empathy for the lawbreakers, but I can understand their concern. You're a parent -- you want to get insurance for your kids -- but to do so you have to input all your personal information including your illegal status and your illegally earned wages?

You're not getting insurance for yourself but your fear of deportation is standing in the way of you getting insurance for your citizen children.

Or you're a spouse of an illegal alien. You want to get insurance for yourself but you'll have to input not only your information but also that of your spouse. Whatever led you to marry someone who is here illegally, you may not be ready to come out of the shadows and say, "Here's all our personal information -- I just want insurance for myself and the kids -- you promise you won't use it against my lawbreaking husband?

I fail to see why buying health insurance should be limited to legal residents only.
If you can buy a business, a car, a home, a boat in this country no matter what your immigration status - you should be able to buy insurance.

Very basic medical care can be covered by federal sales tax - a universal basic level.

everything else can be purchased - with specific plans tailored to specific groups - 20something healthy people will need catastrophic insurance with maternity coverage, immunizations and mental health. 60+ will need a regular insurance with a stress on cardiovascular and oncological help, but they certainly do not need childhood immunizations or maternity care.

Illegal aliens can get insurance. The question is about participation in plans connected with the government.

 

[Jroc]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKLX7qPU7W0]KBMT-TX: Texas Woman's ObamaCare Application Lost For Third Time By Federal Exchange - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Spoonman]

well when you are only looking to spread the wealth instead of actually fixing the problem, this stuff is bound to happen

The Obamacare ?Shotgun Wedding??Marry or Lose Your Home - Yahoo Finance

 

[Spoonman]

obamacare is bad for your health lol

Four state Obamacare chiefs bolt post-launch

 

[Amelia]

well when you are only looking to spread the wealth instead of actually fixing the problem, this stuff is bound to happen

The Obamacare ?Shotgun Wedding??Marry or Lose Your Home - Yahoo Finance

What a nightmare

 

[Amelia]

Obamacare Initiates Self-Destruction Sequence - Bloomberg

....

However incoherent these fixes may seem, they send two messages, loud and clear. The first is that although liberal pundits may think that the law is a done deal, impossible to repeal, the administration does not believe that. The willingness to take large risks with the program’s stability indicates that the administration thinks it has a huge amount to lose -- that the White House is in a battle for the program’s very existence, not a few marginal House and Senate seats.

And the second is that enrollment probably isn’t what the administration was hoping. I don’t know that we’ll start Jan. 1 with fewer people insured than we had a year ago, but this certainly shouldn’t make us optimistic. It’s not like people who lost their insurance due to Obamacare, and now can’t afford to replace their policy, are going to be happy that they’re exempted from the mandate; they’re still going to be pretty mad. This is at best, damage control. Which suggests that the administration is expecting a fair amount of damage.

 

[william the wie]

OK, if insurance companies lose money they will stop taking new exchange policies and ACA dies right then, right there. But does Obama understand that?

 

[Jroc]

Obama now decrees it's ok to have catastrophic coverage

White House offers option for those who lost health coverage

CNN) - The Obama administration will allow Americans who had their health insurance policies canceled due to the introduction of the Affordable Care Act an option to get new coverage or an exemption from the mandate that they buy insurance.

The change is aimed at preventing people who are losing their plans to at least get catastrophic coverage, if they want it and can afford it, so they don't fall through the health care cracks at the start of the year.

For those who can't afford it, the administration is holding out the possibility of a so-called hardship exemption from the requirement under Obamacare that Americans have insurance or pay a penalty.

White House offers option for those who lost health coverage ? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

 

[Spoonman]

Funny how the democrats refused to budge on this to keep the government from shutting down but now they are willing to do it to save their failed plan. The tea party was right.

Is Obamacare individual mandate cracking?

 

[MeBelle]

Long read...here are the highlights:



Teresa Fryer, the chief information security officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), revealed the findings when she was interviewed Tuesday behind closed doors by House Oversight Committee officials. The security risks were not previously disclosed to members of Congress or the public. Obama administration officials have firmly insisted there’s no reason for any concern regarding the website’s security.


In another security bombshell, Fryer told congressional interviewers that she explicitly recommended denial of the website’s Authority to Operate (ATO), but was overruled by her superiors.

This is the first time a government insider has gone on record challenging the administration's insistence that there were no worrisome security concerns.

"I can tell you that no senior official reporting to me ever advised me that we should delay," Sebelius answered. "We have testing that did not advise a delay. So not -- not to my knowledge.


Fryer says she briefed Sebelius' top information officers at HHS in a teleconference on Sept. 20, recommending the website's launch be delayed for security reasons. Fryer testified that the call included HealthCare.gov's chief project manager Henry Chao, HHS chief information security officer Kevin Charest and HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information Technology Officer Frank Baitman. Fryer says she learned three days later that her advice was not going to be followed.


High security risk found after HealthCare.gov launch - CBS News

 

[william the wie]

There may not be any business exchanges at this rate.

 

[percysunshine]

Long read...here are the highlights:



Teresa Fryer, the chief information security officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), revealed the findings when she was interviewed Tuesday behind closed doors by House Oversight Committee officials. The security risks were not previously disclosed to members of Congress or the public. Obama administration officials have firmly insisted there’s no reason for any concern regarding the website’s security.


In another security bombshell, Fryer told congressional interviewers that she explicitly recommended denial of the website’s Authority to Operate (ATO), but was overruled by her superiors.

This is the first time a government insider has gone on record challenging the administration's insistence that there were no worrisome security concerns.

"I can tell you that no senior official reporting to me ever advised me that we should delay," Sebelius answered. "We have testing that did not advise a delay. So not -- not to my knowledge.


Fryer says she briefed Sebelius' top information officers at HHS in a teleconference on Sept. 20, recommending the website's launch be delayed for security reasons. Fryer testified that the call included HealthCare.gov's chief project manager Henry Chao, HHS chief information security officer Kevin Charest and HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Information Technology Officer Frank Baitman. Fryer says she learned three days later that her advice was not going to be followed.


High security risk found after HealthCare.gov launch - CBS News

Oops.....

It was the NSA's fault. They can fix the problem...in secret.

 

[Jroc]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kdbEKPokM0]W.H. Won't Answer If Anyone Will Be Subjected To ObamaCare's Individual Mandate In 2014 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Amelia]

New Health Law Frustrates Many in Middle Class

Ginger Chapman and her husband, Doug, are sitting on the health care cliff.

The cheapest insurance plan they can find through the new federal marketplace in New Hampshire will cost their family of four about $1,000 a month, 12 percent of their annual income of around $100,000 and more than they have ever paid before.

Even more striking, for the Chapmans, is this fact: If they made just a few thousand dollars less a year — below $94,200 — their costs would be cut in half, because a family like theirs could qualify for federal subsidies.

The Chapmans acknowledge that they are better off than many people, but they represent a little-understood reality of the Affordable Care Act. While the act clearly benefits those at the low end of the income scale — and rich people can continue to afford even the most generous plans — people like the Chapmans are caught in the uncomfortable middle: not poor enough for help, but not rich enough to be indifferent to cost.

“We are just right over that line,” said Ms. Chapman, who is 54 and does administrative work for a small wealth management firm. Because their plan is being canceled, she is looking for new coverage for her family, which includes Mr. Chapman, 55, a retired fireman who works on a friend’s farm, and her two sons. “That’s an insane amount of money,” she said of their new premium. “How are you supposed to pay that?”

An analysis by The New York Times shows the cost of premiums for people who just miss qualifying for subsidies varies widely across the country and rises rapidly for people in their 50s and 60s. In some places, prices can quickly approach 20 percent of a person’s income.

Experts consider health insurance unaffordable once it exceeds 10 percent of annual income. By that measure, a 50-year-old making $50,000 a year, or just above the qualifying limit for assistance, would find the cheapest available plan to be unaffordable in more than 170 counties around the country, ranging from Anchorage to Jackson, Miss.

A 60-year-old living in Polk County, in northwestern Wisconsin, and earning $50,000 a year, for example, would have to spend more than 19 percent of his income, or $9,801 annually, to buy one of the cheapest plans available there. A person earning $45,000 would qualify for subsidies and would pay about 5 percent of his income, or $2,228, for an inexpensive plan.

In Oklahoma City, a 60-year-old earning $50,000 could buy one of the cheapest plans for about 6.6 percent of his income, or about $3,279 a year with no subsidy. If he earned $45,000, with the benefit of a subsidy, he would spend about $2,425.

While the number of people who just miss qualifying for subsidies is unclear, many of them have made their frustration known, helping fuel criticism of the law in recent weeks. Like the Chapmans, hundreds of thousands of people have received notices that their existing plans are being canceled and that they must now pay more for new coverage.

In an effort to address that frustration, the Obama administration announced on Thursday that it would permit people whose plans had been canceled to buy bare-bones catastrophic plans, which are less expensive but offer minimal coverage. Those plans have always been available to people under 30 and to those who can prove that the least expensive plan in their area is not affordable. But the announcement does not address the concerns of those who would like to buy better coverage, yet find premiums in their area too expensive.

David Oscar, an insurance broker in New Jersey, another high-cost state, said many of his clients had been disappointed to learn that the premiums were much more expensive than they had expected.

“They’re frustrated,” he said. “Everybody was thinking that Obamacare was going to come in with more affordable rates. Well, they’re not more affordable.”

....

I copied more than I usually would since some can't access the NYT. However there is still much more at the link.

 

[namvet]

he screwed the pooch

"I'm in charge, we screwed it up," he said.

link

as if there was ever any dobt

 

[Amelia]

Latest Exemption Shows OCare Unraveling « Commentary Magazine

....

The list of ObamaCare delays is impressive. As the Times noted in the conclusion of their article about the latest one:

The move Thursday followed delays in many other parts of the health care law.

On July 2, the White House abruptly announced a one-year delay, until 2015, in a provision that requires larger employers to offer coverage to their workers or pay penalties.

On Nov. 27, it deferred a major element of the law that would allow small businesses to buy insurance online for their employees through the federal exchange.

Earlier, in April, the administration said that the federal exchange would not offer employees of a small business the opportunity to choose from multiple health plans in 2014.

And in October 2011, the administration scrapped a long-term care insurance program created by the new law, saying it was too costly and would not work.
​

Each of these moves, if taken in isolation, might be defended as the exception to the rule of a smooth rollout. But taken together, it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that what we are witnessing is the slow-motion unraveling of a hubristic and complicated big government plan whose consequences weren’t fully thought out by an administration whose sole focus was putting it in place before it could be stopped by Republicans.

....

 

[Listening]

Minnesota Mulls Obamacare Deadline Postponement: "Zero Policy Cards Have Been Issued" - Cortney O'Brien

Minnesota Mulls Obamacare Deadline Postponement: "Zero Policy Cards Have Been Issued"

A state having issues. You'd think the morons at the federal level would have done some beta testing first. Well, I guess we should thank them because they are sowing the seeds of it's undoing.