Join the debate
Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
Jump in the Crossfire by using #Crossfire
on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
April 8th, 2014
11:40 AM ET
Reloaded: How we'll know if Obamacare is a success
7.1 million people signed up for health plans under the Affordable Care Act. Does that mean it's a success? See what S.E. Cupp thinks.
|
|
Posted by CNN's Christina Manduley Filed under: Reloaded • S.E. Cupp |
Meet the Hosts
Author, documentary filmmaker, historian, Speaker of the House (1995-1999), and 2012 Republican presidential candidate
Fmr. Obama Deputy Campaign Mgr. and W.H. Sr. Adviser, founder of Precision Strategies, fmr. Sr. Adviser to Maj. Leader Reid and Sen. Kennedy
Conservative columnist for New York Daily News, contributing editor at Townhall Magazine, commentator and author
Former Special Adviser for Green Jobs under President Obama, co-founder of Rebuild the Dream, author and attorney
OBAMACARE had a CRIMINAL penalty if you did not have health insurance.Why should you go to prison if you didn’t buy insurance? That the Republicans managed to have stricken. But what remains inside this toxic bomb is something far more dangerous and it will not hit the economy with a soft caring touch. This is what has become known as the Cadillac Tax component and if the press would tell the people about this, the Democrats will lose the Senate. You never heard of that? Well, thank the media that is behind Obamacare not to tell the truth. If they have not told you the truth, then if that was not intentional, they are too stupid to be journalists and are contributing to the destruction of the United States by their ignorance.
Obamacare does not have a criminal penalty. It has a civil penalty in the form of an additional tax for those that choose to go uninsured. Going without health insurance when it is available to you is essentially planning to make a burden of yourself on the taxpayer when and if you get sick or injured. Requiring people who plan to do that to pay a little extra upfront is hardly unreasonable.
You will NEVER know for certain about anything from Washington... Since 2008 it has started to rot from the inside out and will take more than a century to heal... Thanks to yhe "O" voters.....
I don't think Obamacare is working very well at all. I have seen people around me who work for state government get dropped from their family practitioners because the doctors couldn't afford to pay the rising costs or for Medicare/Medicaid related bills. Another growing trend for the people around me is some of the family doctors are going to concierge medicine just to stay open. My doctor recently went to this style of medicine. In order to keep my doctor that I've had for 28 years, I will be forced to pay $1600 a year on top of what I already pay. I've looked around at other doctors in town, but there are huge waiting lists for the decent ones. The whole process has felt like a punch to the gut and my wallet.
OK, I made some errors in grammar. "Percentage" is singular. I stand behind my arguments.
But will it actually lower prices of medical care? That's the question they should have asked.
Southerngent: The OLD system was costing over $50B ( that means billion) a year. The ACA cost to insure everyone is about $11B a year. The OLD system was about to collapse as taxpayers and people with insurance were paying for the ones that didn't have any. For example....my father in law could not work anymore because of cancer, pre-existing so could not get insurance and lost his house, filed Chapter 7. Taxpayers or charity picked up all $3.2M over the last 13 years. In both cases, you tell me what would be cheaper and a smarter way to do it. At least now, people are paying for over half of their own medical care. No way in hell would we want to go back to the way it was....it was about to bankrupt the whole system. The ACA is here to stay. Not a chance by 2016 that any GOP would still want to repeal it, with 20% of their constituents on it by then, and loving it. Just ask Ted Cruz who had over 80% of the 50,000 + respondents to his question say the LOVE the ACA.
This statement alone proves your ignorance of the nightmare of obamacare!
" The OLD system was costing over $50B ( that means billion) a year. The ACA cost to insure everyone is about $11B a year."
According to the CBO the cost of obamacare will be $1.383 TRILLION by 2025. 11 billion a year is a long way from 1.3 trillion. That doesn't include Trillion for a web site and billions on ads. 50 billion a year is still 0.5 trillion, not good with numbers are you!
I'm not going to go through every point with you like I did with tony. You both can not comprehend the harmful effects of this national embarrassment.
Some people don't want to buy coverage until they are injured or sick. Those same people would like to hold off buying their car insurance until after they have had an accident. Sorry, that's not the way insurance works. The 'young and healthy' believe that when they have a motorcycle or car accident they can go to the local emergency room and have 'free' care, and send the bill to the rest of us. Again, it CANNOT work that way any longer. The sooner emergency rooms actually COLLECT from those DEAD BEATS the better it will be for the rest of us. People who can afford insurance but refuse to buy it should be IMMEDIATELY turned over to collection agencies or for a court judgement against them. NOTHING is free. Someone always has to pay.
Insurance is priced based on two factors; cost of payout and probability of payout. A person who has a 100% chance of costing the insurance company $1, and a person with a 1% chance of costing $100 dollars have the same average hazard, and in large groups they cost the insurer the same.
Obamacare implements price controls that force low-risk (young) customers to pay more, so that high-risk (old) customers will have rates lowered. This is separate from the direct cash subsidies the government is paying out, but it is a subsidy and a structural inefficiency nonetheless.
example....my father in law could not work anymore because of cancer, pre-existing so could not get insurance and lost his house, filed Chapter 7. Taxpayers or charity picked up all $3.2M over the last 13 years.
Why didn't your father in law have insurance pre-cancer, which is how the pre existing clause came in to being. To prevent people who say it won't happen to me from then going to insurance companies demanding coverage when it does happen. I'm sorry he lost his home but I have done everything I can to ensure my family and my self maintained insurance because cancer and heart problems is very much in my family. After having open heart surgery I realized I made the right move. A good friend even borrow against his home to pay his health insurance when he fell on hard times. The point is he got the treatment he needed, regardless of your perception of this law.
With respect, you don't understand. Probably because it hasn't happened to you. As long as your health insurance is through your job, it's tied to your ability to work. You get cancer, you get too sick to work, you lose your job, you lose your health insurance (after your COBRA runs out, or when you can no longer afford the $1200 or so a month). That's when you can't get any kind of insurance anymore. The health insurance company spin is that anyone who doesn't have insurance didn't want it until it was too late. That's BS, like pretty much anything else that their propaganda machine has to say.
There is basically not a chance in hell that the ACA will ever be repealed or not reach over 30 million people by the end of this presidents term. It's popularity will be in the 60 – 70% range by then, as over half the new insured are from poor red states and states that do not want to take the Medicaid money. Those states are actually helping the numbers and really backfiring for the GOP.
I agree. Republicans fought Medicare when it first came out, which is the best health care system in the country. Obama made a HUGE mistake when his timidity as president and his desire to 'court' the Republicans prevented him from expanding Medicare with a 'single payer' option. I voted for Obama the first time, but he isn't a very effective president in his own right, and always blaming someone or something else for his ineffectiveness has made him now one of the most unpopular Democratic presidents in a long time. I did not vote for him last time because I saw the writing on the wall from his spineless approach to the presidency.
While I agree with you in principle,I would point out that however distasteful Obama's seemingly lily-livered approach might appear to be,we are all still American's and on the same team and he is our President and must seek to heal our differences as well as move the country forward with malice toward none and empathy for all.
Republican's sooner or later will either have to change with the nation or go into the wastebin of history but either way it must be a decision of their own making
The 12M new insured on the ACA does not include the number of children, to age 26, that are on their parents new insurance, so that 12M is quite a bit higher actually.
As I look into my crystal ball.....ah, what do I see??? It looks very impressive for this ACA thing....I see many Republicans jumping on board because most of their constituents like it and it's made a huge change on their lives. I also see it going down as the greatest piece of legislation ever passed by congress and the senate. Knock it all you want, it looks like it is here to stay, and growing pretty well every day. Obama will praise the 30 million that will be on it as he departs office. I'm really not kidding, the GOP will embrace it eventually.....just ask Ted Cruz why.......he's the one with the survey that said over 80% of the people of the 50,000 polled love it. It will end up being a tremendous success........as the ball turns clear.
The indicator you are failing to mention is that the law is so good that the dems that voted it in are not signing up. You also did not mention in your crystal ball what is going to happen when obozo dumps 80 million non insured workers into the system this or next year. Anything the govt runs is full of costs and corruption, socialized medicine does not and has not worked in any system, ask England, France, Germany, etc why they are running from it.
As of today over 8 million have signed up. At this rate by November over 20 million will have signed up. Looks real bad for the Republicans saying the ACA is flawed and unworkable. I received a summary of my medical visit costs last week. A doctor visit is down over $55 from last year. Republicans talk a nasty game of gloom and doom but my costs are lower and I bet millions of others are, too. I look for a Democratic majority in Senate and House in November.
If what was promised comes to be. Coverage for the uninsured, lower health insurance costs for the people, same or better access to good health care. If these do not occur, OCare will not be a success. For the $$$ we are spending, all must occur. At this point, it doesn't possible it will be a success. So far, uninsured are not getting coverage, costs are rising very fast, good health care access is becoming less available. Simple, O promised things to get OCare passed, turns out he lied to get it passed and now we are stuck with health insurance that for most of us will be worst than what we had.
Not a word of your complaint is true. Enrollment is higher than predicted, costs are lower than predicted, and none of the absolute standards you attempt to impose were ever promised by any of ACA's advocates.
I see the Koch roach trollers are earning their pay today.
Yawn! Same o same o from another uninformed liberal!
More clarifications. The ACA allows people to get into the health care system earlier, before they get sick or injured. Having insurance allows them to go for regular checkups, which is better than showing up in emergency rooms when they have no choice.
If they can pay the monthly premium now they could pay for checkups before or use public health clinics, those clinics also provided free immunizatios for children and free flu shots. Most other clinics also offered payment options. Serious medical issues for all, to my knowledge was always covered. The CBO states over thirty million will still be without insurance, so repeating this same old liberal crap no longer works now the the average working American realized they got shafted by this adminstration.
And for the privilege of paying 3-6K a year in premiums, they can now pay the 6K per year deductible. Even if they get subsidized for the Premium they still have to pay the deductible which many of them can not afford.
Stan
And for the privilege of paying 3-6K a year in premiums, they can now pay the 6K per year deductible. Even if they get subsidized for the Premium they still have to pay the deductible which many of them can not afford.
April 17, 2014 at 2:49 pm |
Thank you! Someone else who understands! This is exactly what happened with the housing bubble. We gave affordable housing to people who couldn't afford it. Taxes, insurance, utilities, furnishings, up keep, then kaboom!
You go to the free clinic!!!!!
Dh
You go to the free clinic!!!!!
April 18, 2014 at 8:39 pm |
Wow, really struggled to come up with a come back, huh!
By the way! Do you have a problem with free clinics? You don't want to help those who truly need help or do you just want to make sure the average hard working American is force to share their wealth even though we aren't wealthy?
And family doctors as we all know, are ten times cheaper than ER's.
And if you can afford the monthly payment now you could afford a family clinic visit before!
Any law that is passed through deceit and lies will never succeed in the long run. It will only damage the American infrastructure with cost overruns. Any bill/law that was passed this way will never be trusted by most Americans. People will applaud it failure and expect it failure because of the dishonest way it was railroaded through the system. It is most unfortunate because intelligent health care is sorely needed in the USA.
There won't be cost overruns. The only government insurance in the ACA is Medicaid. Otherwise, the government provides subsidies to help people buy insurance from private insurance companies. The government does not provide full subsidies, and it does not bear full cost, except for Medicaid. Because the subsidies help pay for private health plans, the government does not pay benefits on the plans.
Under the old system coverage was dependant on simple math, the number of people in a program divided by the cost of providing those services, and profit margin(capitalism). Obamacare adds other factors to the equation, such as, unnecessary coverage, number of people receiving government subsidy and the collection of same (overhead), governmental bureaucracy including the logistical nightmare of maintaining adherence to the law (overhead) and enforcement of the so called tax (penalty) (overhead). Hence, UNNECESSARY INCREASE IN COST/CONSUMER RATIO, THEREFORE, HIGHER PREMIUMS AND/OR DEDUCTIBLES FOR ALL.
1. The old system also supported an insurance industry, which could make as much profits as they wanted. The ACA mandates that insurance companies must refund premiums to customers if they spend less than 80% of the premiums on medical care and quality improvement activities.
2. The individual mandate and the extra coverage for people are necessary so that insurance companies can afford to insure people with pre-existing conditions. Republicans want insurance companies to insure people with pre-existing conditions, but won't give them anything in return. In other word, Republicans would just impose a mandate on the insurance companies. Obviously, the cost of their mandate would still be passed on to customers.
3. The old system allowed the uninsured to come into the system when they were sick or injured, because a federal law (passed before the ACA) mandates that the uninsured cannot be turned away by hospitals. The uninsured would be given emergency care, which is the most expensive form of care. So, hospitals had to eat the costs of the emergency care. The ACA makes people come into the system first, by paying for insurance before they are sick or injured. They get preventive care, which is a lot cheaper than emergency care.
4. Overhead in government-administered Medicare is a lot less than in private health plans. In ACA, there is no enforcement activity other than the fine, which is administered by the IRS. You pay the fine on your tax returns. The cost of administering the fine does not go into the premiums, because the government does not charge the premiums. Insurance companies do.
"Tony 1. The old system also supported an insurance industry, which could make as much profits as they wanted. The ACA mandates that insurance companies must refund premiums to customers if they spend less than 80% of the premiums on medical care and quality improvement activities.
False, competition maintained premiums, Cost is attributable to rising medical / drug cost.
"2. The individual mandate and the extra coverage for people are necessary so that insurance companies can afford to insure people with pre-existing conditions. Republicans want insurance companies to insure people with pre-existingtheir conditions, but won't give them anything in return. In other word, Republicans would just impose a mandate on the insurance companies. Obviously, the cost of their mandate would still be passed on to customers."
Conflicting statement from #1, mandating insurance companies is what you want. However, why screw 145 million working Americas and their families to fix this issue. Oboviously, as I said, cost/consumer ratio will mean higher premiums and/or deductibles.
"3. The old system allowed the uninsured to come into the system when they were sick or injured, because a federal law (passed before the ACA) mandates that the uninsured cannot be turned away by hospitals. The uninsured would be given emergency care, which is the most expensive form of care. So, hospitals had to eat the costs of the emergency care. The ACA makes people come into the system first, by paying for insurance before they are sick or injured. They get preventive care, which is a lot cheaper than emergency care."
False, the cost was passed on to consumers and insurance companies and is proving to have been more cost effective than obamacare even with many of the mandates delayed, which is why premiums are skyrocketing.
"4. Overhead in government-administered Medicare is a lot less than in private health plans. In ACA, there is no enforcement activity other than the fine, which is administered by the IRS. You pay the fine on your tax returns. The cost of administering the fine does not go into the premiums, because the government does not charge the premiums. Insurance companies do."
False, who do you think is going to provide the necessary verification, but more importantly, look at the just the paperwork which be required to report the adherence to the law and trying to get money from the government for subsidized consumers. Especially when they stop paying.
I didn't address this issue in my reply so here it is:
" The ACA makes people come into the system first, by paying for insurance before they are sick or injured. They get preventive care, which is a lot cheaper than emergency care."
This made no sense, obamacare was not going to make an appreciable difference in overall public health because it is projected there would still be 30 plus million without insurance (CBO). Also, this can be obtained by promoting healthier living. It would be healthier and cheaper for the non-insured to make regular doctor visits but it is also cheaper to use the system rather than making monthly payments.
1. Competition will lower price only if consumers have a choice of not buying the goods. Demand for some goods (for example, gasoline) is inelastic because consumers don't have much of a choice of not buying the goods. Insurance companies can raise premiums because people don't have much of choice of not buying health insurance, unless they are willing to risk medical bankruptcy when they get sick or insured. It should be noted that people are allowed to not buy insurance under the ACA; they just need to pay the fine (which is much smaller than the cost of buying health insurance) and to be willing to risk medical bankruptcy.
2. Not all mandates are bad. For example, the government mandates that drug companies show that their products are safe and effective before they can go on the market. I am not against mandate per se. What Republicans want is a backdoor mandate. They tell voters that they want insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions, but insurance companies get nothing in return. Insurance companies have to eat the costs. Of course, they won't just eat the costs. They would just pass on the costs to customers. The ACA mandates that insurance companies have to insure everyone who wants insurance. In exchange, they get more customers.
3, You did not address my point. Insurance companies have always passed on their costs to customers, before or after the ACA. The key point is that emergency care is more expensive than preventive care, and insurance companies passed on the greater costs to their paying customers. Medical costs have been increasing at a slower rate under the ACA than before the ACA.
4. The enforcement activity and paperwork are not more than what IRS normally handles. Most people obey the law because they are law-abiding citizens. Even though the fine is much smaller than the cost of buying health insurance, 7.5 million people still signed up for private health plans on the federal and state exchanges. You may not know this, but the IRS does not go after everyone who cheats on his or her taxes. The IRS only goes after people who are clearly cheating.
Let me clarify. When I say "come into the system," I mean coming into the health care system, by showing up at hospitals. Many uninsured people don't go for regular checkups, because they can't pay for them. They show up at hospitals when they have no choice, when their medical conditions are worse than they can bear. They go to emergency rooms, because emergency rooms are the only place they can go without paying.
Tony
" 1. Competition will lower price only if consumers have a choice of not buying the goods"
Duh! The freedom to make the best choice for my family and my outweighs your perception of obamacare!
"Demand for some goods (for example, gasoline) is inelastic because consumers don't have much of a choice of not buying the goods."
Uh! You have a choice, which is why when prices climb too fast people cut back on driving and supplies build to the point that prices lower! Supply/demand capitalism!
"Insurance companies can raise premiums because people don't have much of choice of not buying health insurance, unless they are willing to risk medical bankruptcy when they get sick or insured."
Duh! That is why it is called insurance!
"It should be noted that people are allowed to not buy insurance under the ACA; they just need to pay the fine (which is much smaller than the cost of buying health insurance) and to be willing to risk medical bankruptcy."
You had the choice before obamacare WITHOUT A PENALTY.
2. Not all mandates are bad. For example, the government mandates that drug companies show that their products are safe and effective before they can go on the market.
They were already regulating drugs! Courts will still assume the deciding factor.
"I am not against mandate per se. What Republicans want is a backdoor mandate. They tell voters that they want insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions, but insurance companies get nothing in return. Insurance companies have to eat the costs. Of course, they won't just eat the costs. They would just pass on the costs to customers. The ACA mandates that insurance companies have to insure everyone who wants insurance. In exchange, they get more customers.
You can't see past your hate for republicans to understand the truth! If I decide to pay the socialist TAX, then I don't buy insurance, therefore the insurance companies do not get my business or I could decide it would be better if I don't work and get medicaid.
3, You did not address my point. Insurance companies have always passed on their costs to customers, before or after the ACA. The key point is that emergency care is more expensive than preventive care, and insurance companies passed on the greater costs to their paying customers.
The only thing you are correct on, however I addressed it alone!
Medical costs have been increasing at a slower rate under the ACA than before the ACA.
FALSE, more liberal left 'talking point', an extreme economic downturn in 08' due to democrats wanting to give AFFORDABLE (where have we heard that word before) housing to people who couldn't afford it, an administrations failure to address jobs, confusion and uncertainty due to a law unread before passing, along with constant changes by a clueless administration is what kept the increase down.
4. The enforcement activity and paperwork are not more than what IRS normally handles.
We are taking about the added work on insurance entities not the IRS which is a whole new problem.
Most people obey the law because they are law-abiding citizens.
You only have 2 choices, buy the insurance or pay a penalty. This not by individual choice but government intervention, which in my opinion is wrong. PERIOD!
Even though the fine is much smaller than the cost of buying health insurance, 7.5 million people still signed up for private health plans on the federal and state exchanges.
The real number is how many of the 7.5 million were from the 6 plus million people that had policies cancelled (many times that number of individuals are actually affected because for some, our policies also covered family members) and applied for obamacare before the president ( DELAYED, NOT ELIMINATE ) the cancellations. How many have actually paid the first months premium and who will continue to do so month after month. The people that obamacare was supposed to benefit will realize they can still use the system and stop making monthly payments. How many of the healthy enrolled.
You may not know this, but the IRS does not go after everyone who cheats on his or her taxes. The IRS only goes after people who are clearly cheating.
The IRS has recently stated they will vigorously track obamacare adherence. Assume they only track YOU, that in my opinion is wrong. This whole law is wrong. Our loss of freedom to choose what is best for our families and ourselves is wrong. Forced sharing wealth is wrong. Three fourths of the nation agree obamacare is a bad law! Its time for liberals to admit this law was a mistake!
Tony Let me clarify. When I say "come into the system," I mean coming into the health care system, by showing up at hospitals. Many uninsured people don't go for regular checkups, because they can't pay for them. They show up at hospitals when they have no choice, when their medical conditions are worse than they can bear. They go to emergency rooms, because emergency rooms are the only place they can go without paying.
April 16, 2014 at 5:01 pm |
Total bs, they don't go because they know they can abuse the system. There are government run health centers that they can use for free.
1. You have the freedom not to buy insurance. The government has the authority to tax you for placing a burden on the rest of society, because you put the rest of the society at risk of picking up your future medical bills by not buying insurance yourself. Most people use the health care system sometime in their lives, whether they plan on doing it or not. You don't care about the risk. The government does not care about the fact that you don't care about the risk. The government, however, wants to protect the rest of the society from you.
2. Individual mandate was invented by Republicans, specifically the Heritage Foundation, back in the late 1980s/early 1990s. I did not know that Republicans were into socialist ideas back then. Republicans used to call the individual mandate a free-market solution for health care.
3. The fact is, medical costs have slowed down. You admitted it yourself. Before the ACA, medical costs and insurance premiums were increasing faster than they are now.
4. Insurance companies love the extra customers. They are not complaining. Some people qualify for exemptions and they don't need to choose between buying insurance or paying a penalty. Some people have not paid the premiums because they have not gotten the bills from insurance companies. According to the Rand Study, fewer than 1 million people lost their insurance plans and had not bought new ones. Most insurance companies reported that they retained the vast majority of their 2013 customers, by renewing their plans or enrolling them in new plans, so they did not need to go on the federal or state exchanges at all. The IRS does not go after everyone, simply because it can't. It does not have the manpower or the time.
If you want free healthcare for all at least have the nerve to say so! If you want a socialist government at least have the nerve to say so! For me I believe in freedom to make my own choice which was removed by this adminstration and WILL BE CORRECTED! I have disputed everything you wrote. Your extreme liberalism is a joke!
Tony
"1. You have the freedom not to buy insurance."
**Or pay a penalty, but the problem is my freedom to choose what options are best for my family and myself. Even Unions who were vocal supporters of the president dislike obamacare.
"The government has the authority to tax you for placing a burden on the rest of society, because you put the rest of the society at risk of picking up your future medical bills by not buying insurance yourself."
**Total bs, taxes are not supposed to be a punishment. You just proved the stupitidy of extreme liberal thinking. The role for government by the Constitution of the United States of America:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice (laws of order), insure domestic Tranquility (law enforcement, safety for citizens), provide for the common defence (National Guard, Military), promote the general Welfare (infrastructure, education, the key word here is General not absolute control, remove the word general then we no longer have freedom) , and secure the Blessings of Liberty (freedom) to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
THE CONSTITUTION IS WHAT I BELIEVE IN AND I BELIEVE WHY OBAMACARE IS WRONG! I AM SORRY YOU DON'T BELIEVE THE SAME.
"Most people use the health care system sometime in their lives, whether they plan on doing it or not. You don't care about the risk."
**What I care about is freedom. It is impossible for a government to assume all risk for all people. Personal responsibility must remain a factor for any free society, and the same argument can be applied to this liberal presidents new vote buying for democrats, equality. Equality has never and can never and will never be obtained by any society.
"The government does not care about the fact that you don't care about the risk."
**It is obvious this administration doesn't care about individual freedom. THIS WILL BE CORRECTED!
"The government, however, wants to protect the rest of the society from you."
**And we want to protect freedom for ALL including YOU!
2. Individual mandate was invented by Republicans, specifically the Heritage Foundation, back in the late 1980s/early 1990s. I did not know that Republicans were into socialist ideas back then. Republicans used to call the individual mandate afree market solution for health care.
**So you do agree that obamacare is a socialist program! Obamacare was never designed to benefit anyone. It had 3 reasons for existence, 1. revenge for the failed attempt during the Clinton administration, 2. force (ALL Americans) into a program intentionally designed to share wealth and under the threat of penalty and possible jail time, socialism, 3. ensure the reelection of Obama, accomplished by lying to Americans.
"3. The fact is, medical costs have slowed down. You admitted it yourself. Before the ACA, medical costs and insurance premiums were increasing faster than they are now."
**The fact that premiums are skyrocketing after the 2014 implementation of the obamacare is being ignored by you, however given your extreme liberal mindset of hiding truth it is foreseeable. The fact that the adminstration for 5 years has chosen to focus on handouts, and intrusion on American freedoms rather than economic recovery and jobs is apparently beyond your comprehension for cause/effect.
"4. Insurance companies love the extra customers. They are not complaining."
**Ha, ha, ha, wait, I can't stop laughing, the same companies you were complaining about ripping off consumers and proclaim obamacare has fixed, ha ha, ha!
"Some people qualify for exemptions and they don't need to choose between buying insurance or paying a penalty."
**Delayed mandate and not eliminated.
"Some people have not paid the premiums because they have not gotten the bills from insurance companies."
**However, most realized obamacare is more expensive and choose to pay the penalty. But the real question, which you continually ignore, will be how many will make the payments month after month after month.
"According to the Rand Study, fewer than 1 million people lost their insurance plans and had not bought new ones."
**Ha, ha, ha, even our own liberal president admitted to multi-millions, and the data was reported state by state by insurance providers. Multiply even one million by the number of family members covered and that number grows substantially.
"Most insurance companies reported that they retained the vast majority of their 2013 customers, by renewing their plans or enrolling them in new plans, so they did not need to go on the federal or state exchanges at all."
**Yet, the employer mandate has been delayed (not eliminated), how many will be affected at that point. The consensus is by the CBO and others 30 to 50 million existing policy holders will be affected, This nightmare has only just begun, another point you choose to ignore!
The IRS does not go after everyone, simply because it can't. It does not have the manpower or the time.
**So what, if they go after 1, or 1,000,000 or 10,000,000. It is wrong. The IRS is notorious for ruthless and bullying behavior and under this administration it has multiplied ten fold. Would you like to be a recipient of their wrath. The general publics fear of intimidation by the IRS is another reason this law is bad.
1. You think your freedom allows you to do anything or not to do anything. The law makes sure that your freedom does not burden other people. If you believe that the government is punishing you for your freedom, that is your opinion. The rest of us have the freedom not to share your opinion. Good luck not paying taxes just because you think it is your freedom. By the way, the Supreme Court decides what is constitutional, not you.
2. I am confused. So you think that the Republicans proposed a socialist program as their answer to Hillarycare, and the Democrats enacted Republicans' socialist program to have revenge on the Republicans? I did not know that Republicans actually think that their idea was socialism, so my sarcasm was completely lost on you.
3. I don't know where you get your information, but no reputable source has reported skyrocketing premiums. The CBO just reported that insurance premiums on the exchanges were less than it had originally projected. The CBO did not project skyrocketing premiums.
4. You need to stop projecting. I never said that the ACA fixed everything. If you need help for your hysterical laughter, you should go see a doctor. Hopefully you can afford it without insurance. At least you will have your freedom.
5. The president just announced that 8 million people signed up for private coverage on the exchanges. That is private coverage, meaning that it does not include Medicaid, which is public. Yes, I know that you are going to say the president is lying about the number. I can say that your are lying about your numbers too. Go ahead and prove that you are not lying. If you have a compulsive desire to make up whatever numbers you like, you should go see a doctor. Hopefully you can afford it without insurance. At least you will have your freedom.
Tony
1. You think your freedom allows you to do anything or not to do anything.
**What a joke, no concept of freedom!
The law makes sure that your freedom does not burden other people.
**This law is a burden on the average working American.
If you believe that the government is punishing you for your freedom, that is your opinion.
**This nightmare law does punish Americans for not purchasing by this tax.
The rest of us have the freedom not to share your opinion.
**We are doing our best to keep it that way but progressive liberals like you make it difficult. Be careful what you wish for you just might get it.
Good luck not paying taxes just because you think it is your freedom.
**You are amazingly clueless!
By the way, the Supreme Court decides what is constitutional, not you.
**Nor you!
2. I am confused. So you think that the Republicans proposed a socialist program as their answer to Hillarycare, and the Democrats enacted Republicans' socialist program to have revenge on the Republicans?
**It is obvious you are confused.
I did not know that Republicans actually think that their idea was socialism, so my sarcasm was completely lost on you.
**Understanding anything is lost on you!
3. I don't know where you get your information, but no reputable source has reported skyrocketing premiums.
**Here is just one, research yourself, DUH! . "There are certain regulations and certain requirements that had to be in there. And because of that it's driven up the costs of these benefits," says John DiVito of the Flexible Benefit Service Corporation, which represents hundreds of agents.Rate hikes include ten essential health benefits along with more than 20,000 pages or regulations.
The CBO just reported that insurance premiums on the exchanges were less thanit had originally projected. The CBO did not project skyrocketing premiums.
**INCREASE, INCREASE, INCREASE, will be less than expected! How come that is so difficult for you to understand!
How about this from the CBO report.
cbo.gov/publication/43471
"What Would be the Effect of Repealing the ACA on Discretionary Spending? In addition to those effects on direct spending and revenues, by CBO’s estimates, repeal of the ACA would reduce the need for appropriations to the Internal Revenue Service by between $5 billion and $10 billion over 10 years. Repealing the ACA would also reduce the need for appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services by between $5 billion and $10 billion over 10 years, CBO estimates. Such savings might be reflected in reductions in total discretionary spending, or they might free up room for additional spending for other purposes under the caps on discretionary appropriations that were established by the Budget Control Act of 2011. H.R. 6079 would also repeal a number of authorizations for appropriations, which, if left in place, might or might not result in additional appropriations."
4. You need to stop projecting. I never said that the ACA fixed everything. If you need help for your hysterical laughter, you should go see a doctor. Hopefully you can afford it without insurance. At least you will have your freedom.
**Ha, ha, ha, you need to stop showing your ignorance. Ha, ha, ha, you need help for your hate!
5. The president just announced that 8 million people signed up for private coverage on the exchanges. That is private coverage, meaning that it does not include Medicaid, which is public. Yes, I know that you are going to say the president is lying about the number. I can say that your are lying about your numbers too. Go ahead and prove that you are not lying. If you have a compulsive desire to make up whatever numbers you like, you should go see a doctor. Hopefully you can afford it without insurance. At least you will have your freedom.
**Ha, ha, ha, I knew you wouldn't resist mentioning that. As before, how many paid, how many will continue to pay, how many lost the insurance. there is more but your not capable of comprehending the cause/effect.
Tony
I am ending my reposte to you.
You have provided no intelligent argument for obamacare. Every misguided point you tried to present was crushed. 75 precent of the country believes obamacare is a bad law. Only liberals, takers and you owe me low lifes, think otherwise. It is sad liberals like you can't admit this law is a mistake. There is no end to the demand of {government for me} attitudes. After obamacare passed, thinking the republican party was dead, there were people saying obama should now push for government run home and car insurance programs, gas subsidy, free college education programs, and other nonsense.
Sadly, those people who truly need our help receive less because of unnecessary social programs like obamacare and growing abusers of the system (TAKERS), .
America is reaching a saturation point of being able to provide for the (takers and the you owe me low life's). Meaning, we the providers, can not maintain a minimum standard of living for our own family and personal needs because takers and you owe me low lifes have demand more of our hard EARNED income than we are able to provide.
When that point is reached the American dream is gone and your wish has come true.
THIS SATURATION POINT GAP NARROWED TO DANGEROUS LEVELS AFTER OBAMACARE WAS PASSED. LIBERALS LIKE YOU ARE ECSTATIC ABOUT IT. NOT ONLY DID AMERICA LOSE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND DAMAGE TO THE BEST HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IN THE WORLD DUE TO OBAMACARE. DAMAGE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS BECOME APPARENT AS WELL. THAT DAMAGE IS EXPANDING DAILY SINCE THIS PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION HAS EMBARKED ON AN (IN YOUR FACE) ASSAULT ON AMERICAN RIGHTS, IGNORED THE NEED TO ADDRESS THE LACK OF JOBS AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY, AND ALSO, TURNED US INTO A NATION OF NO LEADERSHIP AND WEAKNESS. UNLIKE YOU, I BELIEVE IN MULTIPLE PARTY GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT CREATES CHECKS AND BALANCES. WHENEVER THIS CHECK AND BALANCE IS ABSENT IS WHEN WE GET LAWS LIKE OBAMACARE.
I KNOW, THIS IS ALL ABOVE YOUR HEAD BUT MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE NOT SO DENSE WILL UNDERSTAND.
ACTUALLY, I FEEL SORRY FOR YOU!
YOUR HATE FOR REPUBLICANS AND INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVES HAS PREVENTED YOU FROM SEEING THE TRUTH. YOU AND OTHER {GOVERNMENT FOR ME} LIBERALS FORGET A CONSERVATIVE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IS WHY OBAMACARE IS STILL LAW BUT YOU HAVE NO DESIRE TO ACCEPT THE TRUTH WHEN PRESENTED.
JUST REMEMBER, BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR BECAUSE SOME DAY YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT.
1. It is clear that your concept of freedom means your own freedom. Other people's freedom doesn't count. Millions of people signed up for insurance under this law. They are entitled to their choices. You don't get to make their choices for them, by repealing their choices. Fight the IRS if you are upset about the fine. You have the freedom to go to jail. Leave the rest of us alone.
2. As usual, Republicans conveniently ignore the historical fact that they invented the individual mandate. It is impossible to have an intelligent argument with Republicans when they think that they are entitled to their own facts, history and evidence be damned.
3. Never heard of this group. There have been increase, increase, and increase in insurance premiums as long as insurance companies are around. Insurance companies are private companies, so they are free to raise their premiums. Go ahead and propose a system in which insurance premiums don't increase. I am sure that your fellow Republicans will disown your idea, like they did with the individual mandate.
You obviously missed the part where the CBO says that the ACA will reduce the overall deficit.
4. You still need help with your hysterical laughter. You have the freedom to keep your hysterical laughter. The rest of us will just laugh at you.
5. Republicans like to ask questions. They don't like to answer them. Here are some questions for you. What is your health care plan? What is your alternative?
6. The Gallup Poll said that 4% of adults are newly insured. The 2010 U.S. Census said that there were 234 million adults in the U.S., so about 9.4 million adults are newly insured, using the 2010 number. The real number of newly insured is obviously higher, since the U.S. has added more people since 2010. About half of the 4%– 2.1%– signed up through the exchanges. That is 4.9 million people signing up through the exchanges who are newly insured. Once again, the real number is higher.
The Gallup Poll said that young people are signing up for insurance. In Gallup poll's own words, the newly insured are, on average, "much younger than the overall population." The newly insured are "slightly more overrepresented in the 18 to 29 age category than in the 30 to 49 and 50 to 64 age categories." This will help to keep the premiums down.
The Gallup Poll also said that the percentage of uninsured adults have dropped to the lowest level in 6 years, to 15.6%. No, the Gallup Poll did not ignore "people who were happy with their insurance plans and lost them under Obamacare." This means the percentage of uninsured adults have dropped to the lowest level in 6 years even when "people who were happy with their insurance plans and lost them under Obamacare" are taken into account.
OK, I made some errors in grammar. "Percentage" is singular. I stand behind my arguments.
From the Gallop web site.
"Four percent of Americans are newly insured this year. About half of this group obtained their new health insurance through a health exchange, and half got it using some other mechanism."
318 MILLION AMERICANS
318,000,000 x .04% = 12,720,000 divide by 1/2 = 6,360,000
Let's use your number.
234,000,000 x .04 = 9,360,000 divide by 1/2 = 4,680,000
WHOOPS!
This is even less than what you and the president said signed up using obamacare!
The Gallup Poll numbers refer to adults. Not all of the U.S.'s 318 million people are adults. Besides, the Gallup Poll said 2.1%, not 2%. 2.1% of 234 million adults, using 2010 Census number, is 4.9 million. The actual number of people who have signed up through the exchange and are newly insured should be higher, because the U.S, has added more adults since 2010.
Let me repeat: 2.1% is the percentage of adults who have signed up through the exchanges AND are newly insured. The 8 million people that the president was talking about are the people who have signed up through the exchanges. Some of them are NOT newly insured. I thought Republicans know that.
The government will provide FULL reembursement to ALL insurance companies that lose money due to OCare. Therefore, there is NO motivation for insurance companies to price their premiums appropriately since they can't lose anything. This will drive Gov costs through the roof for the next three years.
Because of the 80/20 rule in the ACA- insurance companies must refund excess premiums if they spend less than 80% of the premiums on medical care, or more than 20% of the premiums on administrative costs and overhead– there is no incentive for insurance companies to charge excessive premiums. Besides, the ACA has built-in "corridors," which use contributions from insurance companies to protect themselves if some of them end up losing money. In other words, insurance companies are insuring themselves.
Let's use your number. 234,000,000 x .04 = 9,360,000 divide by 1/2 = 4,680,000
OK! Its now 2.1, your number keeps changing.
236,000,000 x .021=4,956,000 or 276,000 more, bells and whistles are screaming.
Meanwhile, many times that amount lost their insurance, and 145 million more have gotten screwed. Pardon me, but I don't feel like celebrating. I am being forced to help pay for your insurance that you could have bought in the first place.
My number did not change. I said in my post: "The Gallup Poll said that 4% of adults are newly insured....About half of the 4%– 2.1%– signed up through the exchanges. That is 4.9 million people signing up through the exchanges who are newly insured." Republicans are the ones who are adjusting the number of "people who were happy with their insurance plans and lost them under Obamacare" upward, as the number of people who have signed up through the exchanges keeps increasing.
You said "many times that amount lost their insurance," all without proof. You ignore the fact that there is a significant net decrease of people who are uninsured, according to the Gallup Poll.
I am going to give you an example of 1, uno, one, single, after zero before 2, STATE. RESEARCH THE REST YOURSELF!
California insurance commissioner announced more than 1 million had lost health insurance due to the aca.
You continue to ignore all facts of obamacare.
I can't believe that this article is still here. So, how many of those one million people have replaced their old plans with new ones? How many people have gained insurance for the first time? What is the net result?
From the California HealthLine, a service of the California Healthcare Foundation (04/23/2014):
"Nearly 1.4 million state residents signed up for private health coverage during the insurance exchange's first open enrollment period, which ended April 15.
In addition, about 1.9 million California residents signed up for Medi-Cal coverage during the same period. Medi-Cal is California's Medicaid program....
Gerald Kominski, director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, said enrollment in the ACA's health insurance exchanges is a three-year process and likely will increase in the near future.
Kominski predicted that the majority of uninsured state residents will have health coverage by 2017."
Tony
I can't believe that this article is still here.
**Its still here because it is real.
So, how many of those one million people have replaced their old plans with new ones
**"Because of aca", they lost their plans! If any bought under obamacare they were force into it, because they had no choice. Obama didn't apologize for nothing. He did delay (not eliminate) the inevitable, after several weeks losing their plans!
FYI! To ensure no lapse of coverage for people with ongoing problems, they were forced into this national travesty. This is different from the preexisting conditions you clueless liberals like to scream about.
How many people have gained insurance for the first time?
**How many would have gained insurance without obamacare?
What is the net result?
**The net result is 145 working Americans got screwed!
From the California HealthLine, a service of the California Healthcare Foundation (04/23/2014):
"Nearly 1.4 million state residents signed up for private health coverage during the insurance exchange's first open enrollment period, which ended April 15
**How many were those who lost their plan? How many would have bought insurance without obamacare?
How many paid, will continue to pay? Where else were they going to go? How many fear reprisal from the IRS?
Just too many wrongs with this bad law. PERIOD!
In addition, about 1.9 million California residents signed up for Medi-Cal coverage during the same period. Medi-Cal is California's Medicaid program....
**How much will this add the states debt? For a state in a serious money crunch do you really think they needed this?
Gerald Kominski, director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, said enrollment inthe ACA's health insurance exchanges is a three-year process and likely will increase in the near future.
**Some mandates have been delated until 2016, we won't know the real harm from this nightmare until more mandates are implemented.
Kominski predicted that the majority of uninsured state residents will have health coverage by 2017."
**And many believed they could keep their plan and most believed they could keep their doctor and most had no clue their hospital would not be covered and are finding sticker shock when purchasing a plan and most subsidized people will revert to their old way of using the system instead of paying a monthly premium and many subsidized people have no clue that they will have to pay thousands of dollars in copays and deductibles!
**No matter how hard you try obamacare is a bad law!
Even the most liberal democrats up for reelection are running from this nightmare and the rest are doing their best to change the subject!
74% of Americans say you are wrong.
I guess that you have replaced the southerngent. Here is more information for you to digest. The L.A. Times reported on March 30 that the vast majority of people receiving cancellation notices stayed with their insurance companies, because they were allowed to keep their plans or their insurance companies moved them to other plans that they offered. So the vast majority of people receiving cancellation notice stayed with the same companies and did not need to use the exchanges. I will provide the link to the article. The information that I just alluded to is near the end of the article.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/mar/30/nation/la-na-obamacare-uninsured-national-20140331
As a result, most of the people signing up through the exchanges were not forced to replace a plan; they were first-time buyers. Remember our little discussion about people signing up through exchanges who are newly insured. At least 4.9 million out of 8 million people signing up through the exchanges are newly insured, meaning that they did not have insurance before. That was a conservative estimate, because I used the 2010 Census number for adults. I did not even count the people who bought insurance off the exchanges. Among the 4% of people who are newly insured, according to the Gallup Poll, 1.9% bought their plans off the exchanges. This means 4.4 million people did not have insurance before and bought insurance plans off the exchanges. Together, more than 9.3 million people have bought insurance on and off the exchanges for the first time. That is considerably more than the people who have ended up losing insurance. In fact, the Rand Study reported that fewer than 1 million people nationwide have lost their insurance and have not gotten new plans. This was from the same L.A. Times article that I alluded to above. That is why the overall uninsured rate has gone down, as various polls have confirmed
It is not true that people had no choice but to buy insurance. More than 30 million people still do not have insurance. Many Republicans have said that they would rather pay the fine than buy insurance. They could do that, because the fine is much smaller than the cost of buying insurance. On the other hand, many people have decided that they would rather have insurance. They want to move on with their lives. The March 26 Kaiser Health Tracking Poll reported that 53% of Americans are tired of the ACA debate. Among independents, 51% are tired of the debate. Even 47% of Republicans say that they have enough of the debate. Almost 60% of Americans oppose an outright repeal: 49% of Americans want Congress to keep the law and work to improve it, and 10% would keep the law as it is. Only 18% want an outright repeal.
Just for the record, the information from the L.A. Times article that insurance companies kept most of their customers who had received cancellation notices is not near the end of the article. I did not scroll down when I looked at the article this morning. But it is in there.
I actually feel sorry for you! Undoubtedly, you received a subsidized insurance and are afraid of losing it. Welcome to the real world of obamacare. Ask any of the people with canceled insurance how it feels to receive the letter. Ask them about the knot they got in their stomach. Ask about the fear that embraced them when they tried to get insurance online and couldn't get through. Ask the people who found out they can't keep their doctor. Ask the people who found out their normally close hospital is not on their plan. Ask the people on medicaid that are having problems finding doctors.
This just some of the problems with this nightmare! It will be corrected in 2016 so start talking to these people about how it feels!
I could care less if you don't have insurance after then, not because of obamacare but because as someone who did everything I had to do to make my sure family and myself had health insurance when it was a struggle to pay bills and help put kid(s) through college without loans. I have no sympathy for 40 million people who didn't make an effort to do the same. Don't come back with some sob story. The real people that need our help can not received that help because our government has created a government for me culture to which your persistent defense of obamacare indicates you belong.
The most important reason is because to force all Americans into a program intentionally designed to share wealth in my opinion is socialism! So as I wrote before if you want a socialist government have the nerve to admit it. If you want free health care stop whining about obamacare and have the nerve to say so, because obamacare was never designed to address the real issue of entitlement and millions will still be dependent on the system.
You have never addressed the issue of why screw 145 million Americans to fix your entitlement. Answer this before posting more meaningless bs.
Southern provided valid argument to all of your post as well as I. This is a stalemate, because I believe in the individual freedom to choose what health choices are best for our families and ourselves and you believe in entitlements, therefore continued posting is pointless. All I ask is you answer the question of why screw all other people with good insurance plans (you liberals say the plans that were canceled were junk plans, so ok what about the other 136.5 million).
Use heartfelt wording instead of the liberal crap you keep dig up online. For every data point you quote I can counter.
This makes two people who feel sorry for me without ever meeting me. For all you know, I could have been a Republican back in the days when the individual mandate was a Republican idea and a free-market solution to health care. That was only 5 years ago. Mitt Romney wrote an USA Today op-ed in 2009, arguing that his Massachusetts health care law, based on the idea that everyone should buy insurance, also known as the individual mandate, should be a model for the nation. Only when Obama accepted Romney's advice and enacted Romneycare nationally, did Republicans conveniently and completely forget that they were the ones who invented the idea. If Republicans have new ideas for health care, they should make sure that amnesia is covered.
I am amazed at the amount of empathy you have for people who received cancellation notices. Usually, Republicans are more interested in tax cuts, deficits, and entitlements. They are not concerned about people who are not good enough to make it on their own. In fact, you sounded like a typical Republican when you casually dismissed 40 million people, who apparently do not work hard enough to make enough money so that they can afford insurance under the current system. If you feel all the emotions you were describing for the people who received cancellation notices, why don't you let them speak for themselves. These people have not appointed you as their spokesman, and neither have the 145 million working people in the U.S. Not all working people think like you. You don't speak for all of them.
If you are one of the people who had lost insurance, say so. At least they, or you, had insurance to start with. And most of them still have insurance, despite your insistence to the contrary. Most of them have replaced their old plans with new ones, and they would like to move on with their lives, because most people are sick and tired of the ACA debate, as the Kaiser Poll showed. If you have any sympathy for them, don't make them lose their insurance again, by repealing their new plans.
Since you feel sorry for me, I feel sorry for you too. I feel sorry for you because your party is stuck on a crusade entirely of its own making. If your party is against the individual mandate, why did your party invent the idea in the first place? At least have the nerve to admit that you are against the individual mandate only because Obama is for it. Had Mitt Romney defeated McCain in the Republican primary and won the presidency in 2008, he would have been the one to enact Romneycare nationally, and Republicans would be singing its praise, instead of trying to repeal it 50 times, and counting.
I miss the days when I could have a normal conversation with people, without the other person throwing around insults and the word "socialism." Don't feel sorry for me, though. I can take it. No sob story from me. I have insurance.
I think my first attempt at a response has failed, so I will try again. By the way, CNN, if you are sick and tired of the ACA debate, join the club. A lot of people are sick and tired of the debate.
This makes two people who feel sorry for me without ever meeting me. For all you know, I could have been a Republican back in the days when the individual mandate was a Republican idea and a free-market solution to health care. That was only 5 years ago. Mitt Romney wrote an USA Today op-ed in 2009, arguing that his Massachusetts health care law, based on the individual mandate, which means that everyone is required to buy insurance, should be a model for the nation. Only when Obama accepted Romney's advice and enacted Romneycare nationally, did Republicans conveniently and completely forget that they were the ones who invented the idea. If Republicans have new ideas for health care, they should make sure that amnesia is covered.
I am amazed at the amount of empathy you have for people who received cancellation notices. Usually, Republicans are more interested in tax cuts, deficits, and entitlements. They are not concerned about people who are not good enough to make it on their own. In fact, you sounded like a typical Republican when you casually dismissed 40 million people, who apparently do not work hard enough to make enough money so that they can afford insurance under the current system. (For people who have lost insurance, please read the last sentence again, and ask yourself if you think Republicans' concern for you is genuine.) If you feel all the emotions you were describing for the people who received cancellation notices, fine, but why don't you let them speak for themselves. They have not appointed you as their spokesman, and neither have the 145 million working people in the U.S. Not all working people share your view. You don't speak for all of them.
If you are one of the people who have lost insurance, say so. At least they, or you, had insurance plans to start with. And most of them still do, despite your insistence to the contrary. Most of them have replaced their old plans with new ones, and they would like to move on with their lives, because most people are sick and tired of the ACA debate, as the Kaiser Poll showed. If you have any sympathy for these people, don't make them lose their insurance again, by repealing their new plans.
Since both of you feel sorry for me, I feel sorry for you too. I feel sorry for you because your party is stuck on a crusade entirely of its own making. If your party is against the individual mandate, why did your party invent the idea in the first place? At least have the nerve to admit that you are against the individual mandate only because Obama is for it. Had Mitt Romney defeated McCain in the Republican primary and won the presidency in 2008, he would have been the one to enact Romneycare nationally, and Republicans would be singing its praise, instead of trying to repeal it 50 times, and counting.
I miss the days when I could have a normal conversation with people, without the other person throwing around insults and the word "socialism." Don't feel sorry for me, though. I can take it. No sob story from me. I have insurance.
I'm amazed at the empathy you have for the 145 working Americans that got screwed by this administration.
However, I'm not surprised you didn't answer the question.
This is a stalemate, I believe in the individual freedom to choose what health choices are best for our families and ourselves and you believe in entitlements, therefore continued posting is pointless.
You should feel sorry for you! Your me, me ,me attitude is why WORKING AMERICA GOT SCREWED.
However, Enough is enough!
I know you will think you won this word fest but 2016 will be the answer to many problems this administration has thrush upon our great nation and in 2017 working America will be restored.
To all others I apologize for not ending this earlier but not for defending American freedom!
I agree with you on one thing. This has gone on long enough.
To the people who felt wronged by this law, please consider what the Republicans are offering. Republicans promise a repeal of the law, and that is pretty much it. The health care law is the only issue that the Republicans are running on this year. If that is the only issue you care about, rejoice. If you care about other issues, you are out of the luck. You are not getting anything else out of the Republicans this year, not even an alternative to the health care law. Republicans know that after they ran on "jobs, jobs, jobs" in 2010 that it is best not to promise things that they can't, or won't, deliver.
People should know that a repeal does not mean you will get your old plan back. Many insurance companies still don't offer their old plans, even though the government allows them to do so. The truth is, insurance companies don't want to go back to the old system. They, as you might have guessed, like new customers. They also like stability Another change in law will cause another disruption of the market. People who have bought new plans to replace their old plans will lose them, again, with no guarantee that they will get their old plans back. Even worse, millions of people who have bought insurance for the first time will lose insurance too.
There will be 30M people on it by 2016, that's about 10% of the country......... the GOP will need those votes to win. The ACA is not going away, ever. They have already added 8M+ paying and 4M more Medicaid. Political suicide to even try to take it away once that many people will be on it in 2016.
There's a dirty little secret about the ACA – it has already worked. The law is a collection of health insurance reforms that, taken individually, are insanely popular. They are held together, in fact made possible, by the individual mandate. Add to that the expanded Medicaid coverage, and you have a package of benefits that enjoy such wide support that they can never be unwound. That is precisely what the GOP feared, and still fears. The ACA is as irreversible as Social Security, and we will be tinkering with both from now on.
The longer it goes the more true your statement. There is another option, repeal obamacare in 2017, create a law instructing insurance providers to restore previous policies with only increases in premiums equal to the rate of their projected increase before obamacare and penalties if proven abuse of such. Focus on job creation to help people get out of poverty rather than handouts that only breeds more handouts. Then the healthcare industry can create a common basic policy to offer obamacare subsidized policy holders and others, which they could purchase at an equal and fair cost across all insurance entities. Anyone wanting more coverage then can purchase a policy from competitive providers according to their need. Medicare would be left to the states according to their financial status.
FrankinSD
There's a dirty little secret about the ACA – it has already worked. The law is a collection of health insurance reforms that, taken individually, are insanely popular
Ha, ha, ha, another uninformed liberal
PLUNGE: New poll shows Obamacare support at 26%
By Seth McLaughlin – The Washington Times Friday, March 28, 2014
Speaking of the uninsured, I inexplicably failed to blog about the latest Gallup results yesterday. Based on polling that goes through mid-April, Gallup now estimates that about 9-10 million people have gained insurance since Obamacare rolled out last year. If you assume that perhaps a million people lost insurance, that's a net increase of 8-9 million. Of this, about half gained insurance through the exchanges. The rest gained it through Medicaid and increased participation in employer plans.
I'm not going to try to analyze this number any further. It basically represents good news, since it's a higher estimate than we've seen before, and it also jibes with the recent Rand numbers suggesting a large rise in people covered by employer plans. Apparently the individual mandate is having a bigger impact on this than anybody predicted. However, it's one data point in a noisy series, and I suspect we still have to wait another month to get a reliable set of numbers from all the polling outfits. By the end of May, unless the various polls are in wild disagreement, I imagine we'll have a fairly good idea of just how big the impact of Obamacare has been so far.
UPDATE: Sorry, everyone else has been leading with a number of 12 million, so that's what I used. But the Gallup poll estimates that 4 percent of US adults are newly insured, not 4 percent of the entire country. That's in the range of 9-10 million. I've corrected the text.
Note, however, that this ignores children who are newly insured, either via exchanges or Medicaid. So the real number is probably a bit higher. Maybe in the 10-11 million range? It's hard to say. There are a lot of different surveys that are all measuring slightly different things, and they're all working on data that's still incomplete. That's why it's probably wise to wait another month or two before we get too fixed on any of these numbers. But popularity seems to be growing by the day at 46% up rom 28%.
And then, there's a newer poll that says that only 32% think it ought to be repealed. Go figure. As for you, southerngent, I know how you feel about subsidies, but I have the same sort of cost savings WITHOUT subsidies. You're not paying a dime of my way, fella.
SHARON: Really enjoyed your comments. Made good sense. Your logic certainly put to rest much of my concerns. Your opposition was routed and put to open shame. Simply put- their lack of knowledge was obvious.
Simply put, Sharon's post was full of misinformation. Her proclamation of being an unbiased professional became obvious early in her writing. Lack of comprehension on your part does not constitute lack of knowledge on our part!
Your arguments hold about as much water as the argument that you're the one who's wrong because you're hopelessly ugly. 🙂
The only way to know if something is a success or failure is to know the true facts on the subject.
We all know that the tinkerbell obama and his destructive democrats are incapable of telling the truth on anything.
no just a small vocal minority think like you do
Really, Seriously,
PLUNGE: New poll shows Obamacare support at 26%
By Seth McLaughlin – The Washington Times Friday, March 28, 2014
As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle, as ten minutes of open-minded skeptical research will tell anyone.
That 26% thing is another example of "how to lie with statistics." Only 26% of YOUNG people polled thought that the ENROLLMENT PROCESS WAS GOING WELL. I personally think that the enrollment process was pretty much bungled; but the fact that American IT professionals typically lack the competence to put out a working piece of software on time and on budget (and yes, I can back that assertion up) has nothing to do with the merits of Obamacare. What's more, you don't have to use the healthcare.gov site to avail yourself of Obamacare plans. You can always deal directly with the providing carrier. So, this is a straw man.
Obama's heath care reform are wildly popular and very successful. The only real problem is the poor in republican controlled states with no way to pay for healthcare. And you know repulicans are not going to invest in community heath centers or charity care. So people will die for lack of healthcare. s tax breaks f or the rich worth the cost in human lives?
Surely you're not so foolish, as to believe the democrat's propaganda.
The democrat party revolves around and its philosophy is based on Lies and Deceptions.
" And you know repulicans are not going to invest in community heath centers or charity care."
A wealthy republican in my city gave MILLIONS to the local county hospital to build a recently opened cancer center. This center will save the lives of many people without regard to race, age, sexual orientation, religion, political views, or any discrimination. This cancer center is run by the county government and will employ many people from doctors and nurses to their support staff to food preparing to maintenance. This center will provide secondary jobs through support businesses. This is called trickle down economics.
What have you done?
Um...spent his life working for wealthy Republicans?
Have you ever heard of Danny Thomas? Search "all about Danny Thomas". Read about St. Jude Children's Hospital located in Memphis, Tennessee that Danny started. No parent of any child at that hospital will ever have to pay for treatment. I hope your child, grandchild, friends child, or anyone you know never has to be a patient there. But if they do first, thank God there is such a wonderful place for hope and treatment, second, thank everyone there for their dedication to each child's welfare, third, give thanks that a republican opened his heart to all children regardless of race, parents religion, or political views.
Despite my waggish comment to the "what have you done?" question, I don't at all agree with your statement that Republicans aren't going to do anything to help the poor.
C
The first casualty of the Republican Obamacare policy. Single mom in Florida dies because Florida opted out of medicare. This story will be only the beginning of thousands we will here about and all from the red states
Obamacare has already started to beats the odds. Too bad, so sad; for the GOP.
Wait for it! Deductibles will shock everyone,prescriptions will sky rocket ,doctors will be scarce and affordable high risk patients won't find the care they need. Then when businesses drop their insurance for Employes (which they will) there wil be outrage! Why do you think Obama has extended the deadline for the mandate until after the Election? He knows the Truth and in the end you won't like it. Obamacare needs to be replaced !
Deductibles are presently capped at $6200, the same as max out of pocket expenses. I'm not at all shocked by that personally.
Obama Has Unilaterally Changed or Delayed Obamacare over 20 Times. As bad as this national embarrassment is now, it will get worse when all parts are full implemented.
Enacting the AFCA was not a pretty process, and it's not reasonable to think it's going to be implemented without some issues. IWe need to accept that it's going to take time to make a program that complicated and large work properly, but passing it was the right thing for the country to have done.
I am a college educated medical professional who personally has no vested interest in whether ACA succeeds or fails. I already have earned 100% retirement medical health care coverage through my large health care provider.
But I have been researching and reading the actual ACA law, visiting HHS website, Kaiser Health Policy Research Foundation, etc. ACA Law addresses medicine and medical health care in US, so of course am quite interested in keeping abreast. Medicine is my field of professional expertise.
What I do find quite alarming are all the misinformation and lies that have been pushed about the law in the news though. Sure am hoping the public do finally take time to actually go to some of sites I mentioned above to learn about the real facts though. News reports usually are not always correct, or they are biased to left or right. Factually there are many good statues, covered benefits, etc provided for under this law. Overall law does not change health care system in US much at all. Just remember it's your medical health care and your pockets books. And there is still no good alternative that has been offered at all even after 4 years since law's passage.
Medical care cost in US was rising at rate of 7-11+% per year prior to passage of ACA Law. Law itself won't entirely stop these increases, but law is designed to help somewhat. The slowing of increases down to 4% since passage of law are most likely due to several factors. But past history in US does reveal private insurance companies always suddenly go on best behavior when any new health care law is considered. This time the law was passed. Yes, there has been some private insurance company flexing of corporate muscle seen with final implementation though. And of course have been seeing many "pass the blame excuse to ACA. Most were/are undeniably proven false.
And yes, there will be bumps in road ahead. No law, or medical care management plan is ever perfect. Addressing the problems, correcting, applying new medical health care delivery policies - all only help to improve medical health care in US.
Also want to remind people this ACA Law is not really about whether one is Democrat or Republican. This is about your medical health care. Don't get yourself caught up in the political disputes.
Question was: Is ACA a success because 7.1 million have signed up for ACA so far in the ACA market exchange?? This number does not include the additional number of Medicaid, some state gin up, etc. signup.
Answer: No unbiased medical professional analyst would ever declare all is a "success" with ACA presently. It will take a few years before any of our unbiased medical health care policy experts will be able to analyze data or be able to declare if ACA Law is successful or not. But do be aware - many of our large health care providers in US have been promoting/practiciing many of the same medical health care delivery approaches for providing/improving better health care for patients for a long time. Also several peer reviewed and approved medical research studies which were approved by AMA, etc. have revealed medical costs do decrease, and patients access to good preventative medical care//good medical condition education do enable them to be healthier, saw improved overall patient mental health status, etc. etc.
Good luck. Take a deep breath. Change is never easy, but just keep in mind there is alot of good in ACA Law. And that says alot, since I have no vested interest since I'm not affected at all. Just trying to offer some sincere, good, unbiased, and objective medical health care policy advice.
Excellent review, thank-you.
This is off topic but you have not included the word "the" at all in your post. I was curious as to why?
MC
I am not sure what you are actually referring to??? Could you please explain in more detail precisely what/where yoiur concern is. Thank you.
There are several "the" throughout Sharon's post.
On another note, I don't agree with Sharon. ACA does more harm than good. If you have to lie repeatly to get approval, then it was not a good plan to begin with. It does nothing to address the rising cost of healthcare to boot.
If this Law was enacted by the states, and approved by the voters in each state I could agree with you. As it is, it is UnConstitutional irregardless of what the Supreme Court Ruled. It is not nor ever has been he pervue of the Federal Government to set up and run Social Programs, collect and disburse money. The worst problem with the ACA is the lack of employment. The second worst thing is the ever rising national debt.
Hector,
Unfortunately, it does sound like you do have a personal held belief the ACA Law is unconstitutional. Yes, you are entitled to your own opinion. But legally law has been ruled constitutional by our highest court in US. So therefore, to date, law is indeed legally constitutional. US has always passed laws for medical health care in US. Various laws are passed at federal and state level. Many of these law are excellent, and only help to provide good quality medical health care in US for all of us.
Your position regarding US does not have a legal right to pass laws which implement social programs or collect taxes, etc. is also your right. Unfortunately, legally you are incorrect most of time regarding this also. US has been passing laws regarding social programs for many years. I won't address whether that is good or bad, as this is off topic.
You said it a plain and simple word. This king of information that what public needs, not GOP/TP Bull Shits.
" I am a college educated medical professional who personally has no vested interest in whether ACA succeeds or fails."
How can a college educated person make such a foolish and selfish statement. Obamacare effects all Americans, by the loss of individual freedom, and the socialist ideal of sharing wealth.
" I already have earned 100% retirement medical health care coverage through my large health care provider."
Sorry Sharon, but you may not be as safe as you think. Your coverage can change in an instant. Obamacare is proving to be such a disaster that your provider may have to increase the rates to a point that your 100% coverage is no longer a viable option assuming they survive the transition. Your selfishness in diminishing the affect this nightmare has and will have on others amplifies the extreme liberal mindset. Pray you won't become one of obamacares victims.
Countingdown
Sadly I realized your comments actually are not coming from a person that is knowledgeable about ACA Law. My comments were soley kept to objective medical health policy within ACA Law without interjecting any partisan political bias. Medicine is my professional work expertise.
As for me mentioning my already earned !00% covered retirement medical health care for rest of my life, and saying I had no vested financial interest – was just to let everyone know I was not pushing a special agenda. I happened to choose the well respected large health care provider I worked for, for many years. And yes, their medical retirement benefits were a very important part of my decision to go to work for them, and since they were good continued working for them all those years to enable myself to receive those retirement benefits. Am I concerned ERISA law will somehow negate my benefits? Nothing is ever 100% re: retirement health care benefits governed by ERISA Law, but I did lots of researching & planning for retirement many years ago and do feel I chose wisely.
And I actually feel my retirement health care benefits are pretty secure per my retirement signed legal contracts. I already retired this year. So yes, I am officially a retiree. I am very familiar with ERISA Law. Plus the health care provider I worked for is quite large with multiple facilities throughout US, and is fairly profitable. The backlash from the medical community for attempting to take away benefits from already retired employees would be huge and quite detrimental to their overall highly held reputation. They have never negated any retirement benefits in past, and do not see that happening in future. But, of course newer hires do not have as good of retirement packages as I have. And I feel very lucky for that. Now me working for this particular health care provider was only my own personal made decision. At least I attempted to the best of my ability to plan well in advance, in attempt, to help make me secure and financially independent in the future. What other people decide is of course their own personal decision, and I truly wish the best to them when they make decisions for retirement planning for the future.
Of course ACA Law addresses everyone. My entire post made inference to such. I am sorry you feel my posted comments were selfish. But I have reread my post, and I still cannot find anything I posted that reflects selfishness at all. I have only offered an objective medical professional health care policy analysis following my extensive research. As a college educated medical professional with many years of management experience I objectively feel I am well qualified to help address some of the health care policies under ACA Law, through my extensive research I did re: the law.. My comments were posted with as a sincere and knowledgeable attempt to hopefully help many of the bloggers posting here. That is all.
The lack of compassion in your writing is perplexing to me. The claim of reading and comprehending 2,409 pages of healthcare (law) is stretching my acceptance. If obamacare is as great a you exclaim, why the need for the president to induce changes and delays. You may very well have a legal document giving you insurance for the remainder of your life, however does it guarantee that provisions contained within will never change. I doubt it. You are lucky to have reached retirement with health insurance intact. At least have understanding for people behind you who won't be as lucky. If as you wrote, you have no vested interest in the success or failure of Obamacare, then sadly, you apparently are pushing a political agenda and chose to ignore the real problems with this law. I will not respond again. Good luck in your retirement.
Countingdown
I am not sure why you continue to attack me. This does perplex me? Especially since my original post just presented some basic health care policy facts and analysis.
Points you still seem to have problems with
(1)You claim I take position ACA Law is great. I never claimed that. I states there are many statues within law that are quite good. Please do go to some of the excellent unbiased websites so you can research this yourself. Most consumers that are aware of some aspects of the law really like many of the additional improved protections and some of the increased benefits, etc. provided for within the law. Of course there are some statues of the laws I have some reservations about, but those questions will eventually be answered for me. As I wrote, no law, no medical care management plan is ever entirely perfect or without some problems. Medicine in US has always continued to try to improve, address, correct, offer new approaches, etc. – all to try to improve medical health care in US. Medicine and Medical sciences in continuously improving and changing. And it's us, the consumers, who benefit when we are suddenly in need of medical care. None of us, no matter what our age is, has a magic genie to predict when we will need some, or possibly extensive medical care. Medical care is very costly, and the need for good medical insurance coverage is high.
(2)As for me reading the whole entire law, I never claimed I did. But I did refer to the actual PDF file of the actual online posted law on HHS website to actually go review and confirm medical legal accuracy to best of my ability, as I ventured along with my research regarding the law. And I have slowly read alot of the law over pass four years. I really advise you to go research some of the sites I mentioned yourself. It's quite educational, and at least you will be able to assess accurate unbiased information regarding the law.
(3)Regarding your attacks about my 100% already earned retirement medical health care benefit – I am also perplexed why you continue to dispute what I posted. Factually you have no knowledge of the specific details. Also I am not concerned ACA Law will be financially detrimental for my health care provider. Won't address here, but I reviewed extensively myself. Also my son who is MD and also CEO of a private corporation, and my husband who is CEO of a medical corporation – we all analyzed. My husband was also appointed to be a state EMS commissioner that recommends many of the states health care laws. Considering all the known existing facts medically and legally, we all feel my retirement benefits for medical health care are pretty secure. I just feel very very lucky I was able to work for such a large highly health care provider that had excellent retirement benefits covering my contracted employment tenure with them.
Sharon
Countingdown
Sorry, I said I wouldn't respond again, however I want you to know I question your defense of the health care law and in no way intended it to be personal. The problem with Obamacare, in my opinion, is from its inception the law had three reasons for existence. First, it was a (let's do this while we have the numbers) revenge by the democrats for the failed attempt during the Clinton administration. Second, it was intentionally designed to force all Americans into a program to share the wealth with lost of individual freedom to make our own choice. Third, to ensure the reelection of Obama, accomplished through a lie. I'm sure there are good parts to Obamacare but there were equally good parts to the insurance programs that the six million plus of us had and lost. There are already many problems with this law, which has put undue burdens on average working Americans with existing insurance programs. It has become obvious that the burdens will become greater. I hope you enjoy your retirement, but please read about the real effect the law has made,. Some of us were not as fortunate and many more will be affected.
Iamnotfooled The CBO just came out with new numbers and says the ACA will save 104 Billion in the next ten years. That is Great news. It is working. The more that sign up, the more competition will drive the prices down.
April 15, 2014 at 1:27 am | Reply
Read:
The Congressional Budget Office or CBO issued a report Monday saying the average premium for the silver plan this year will be $3800, or just over $300 a month, rising to $4,400 in 2016, 15 percent below its earlier estimates in 2009.
***Meaning PROJECTED increase is less, not actual cost!
Those early, higher estimates make costs now look better – but that does not include deductibles of as much as $5,000
White House Spokesman Jay Carney says, "It shows that marketplace health care costs have gone down because premium estimates have gone down."
*** Meaning PROJECTED increase is less, not actual cost
The CBO also projects future premium increases over the next decade.
"They're going to see an announcement that next year's premium's going to be 25 percent or maybe 50 percent higher than what they're now paying," says John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis.
John Divito of Flexible Benefit Service Corporation says, "we're reading studies where the rates could be 10 to 30, 40 percent higher. Again, it all depends geographically where these rates are being looked at but definitely an increase in rates."
Scott Gottlieb, a medical doctor as well as an analyst, adds, "We've seen insurance premiums go up quite a bit over the period in which ObamaCare started to get implemented."
Insurance executives say the same thing. Marc Bertolini, CEO of Aetna, recently told an earning conference that he anticipates 2014 spikes of 20 to 50 percent, going as high as 100 percent in some markets.
"There are specific states with exorbitant increases," says Gottlieb. "Delaware had 100 percent increase, Florida had a 37 percent increase, Pennsylvania 28 percent increase, California had a 53 percent increase in their premiums."
Rates vary widely, often depending on the state and how highly regulated it was to begin with. Analysts, however, say the main reasons for the higher costs are not medical inflation, but rather the requirements of ObamaCare itself.
"There are certain regulations and certain requirements that had to be in there. And because of that it's driven up the costs of these benefits," says John DiVito of the Flexible Benefit Service Corporation, which represents hundreds of agents.Rate hikes include ten essential health benefits along with more than 20,000 pages or regulations.
The CBO just came out with new numbers and says the ACA will save 104 Billion in the next ten years. That is Great news. It is working. The more that sign up, the more competition will drive the prices down.
Copy/pasteing again huh!
INCREASE would be less than projected not actual cost! From the same report read this:
cbo.gov/publication/43471
"What Would be the Effect of Repealing the ACA on Discretionary Spending?
In addition to those effects on direct spending and revenues, by CBO’s estimates, repeal of the ACA would reduce the need for appropriations to the Internal Revenue Service by between $5 billion and $10 billion over 10 years. Repealing the ACA would also reduce the need for appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services by between $5 billion and $10 billion over 10 years, CBO estimates. Such savings might be reflected in reductions in total discretionary spending, or they might free up room for additional spending for other purposes under the caps on discretionary appropriations that were established by the Budget Control Act of 2011. H.R. 6079 would also repeal a number of authorizations for appropriations, which, if left in place, might or might not result in additional appropriations."
just a few minor points regarding the idea that if you oppose government mandated (no that is not quite right, managed) redistribution you don't believe in helping those less fortunate is patently wrong.
What government managed redistribution/charity does first is deny you choice and control over who/where your contributions go. The assumption is that if the government doesn't take your money and force you to help those in need...you will not do it.
The truth is really quite different. Most Americans I know are very generous with the money that remains after their needs are covered. Most are astute philanthropists which donate to causes that interest them, have better statistics than the government for how much of the donated dollar makes it to the cause.
In this regard the government is indefensible. Also, there is the perversion associated with dangling government benefits in election cycles. Class warfare, vote pandering etc. Philosophically to depend upon government managed, tax supported redistribution undermines the foundation of democracy. To allow what we are allowing leads only one place.
A nation of dependents, expecting mediocracy from government , decrepit infrastructure, dying industry and social bifurcation.
We are Greece. This is the path you are choosing because you so desperately envy those who have a dollar more and a different sense of community
Bush had us headed for Greece. Ryan/Romney would have sealed the Greece deal. Americans were much smarter.
Our health care system was heading for disaster. The number one bankruptcy filing reason in this USA is MEDICAL BILLs. You do know 85% of Americans already have health insur thru their employer, right? My Fortune 500 company has offered health insur for 30 years. I bet your health insur is thru your employer !!
ACA is for folks who have zero insur or had some of those junk plans that were correctly canc.
if you Repubs thought the lines were long on Election Day 2012.... Just wait.
What good is having property rights when the government via the courts get to decide what is and isn't property?
They used that justification in deciding that citizens didn't have Fifth Amendment rights (Property) for Social Security.
That means of course that Social Security payments legally can be levied for paying back any fines associated with not having health care coverage.
Remember, the clause "limiting" liens and levies is called "LIMITATIONS" ON LIENS AND LEVIES. Don't confuse it with the "Waiver" of criminal liability.
The "limitation" on Liens and Levies means that there are some things the government CAN lien and Levy.
Social Security being one of them given previous federal court decisions on the matter.
(Fleming v. Nestor) The government was sued over cutting someone's social security payments off and that person sued on the Fifth Amendment grounds.
The government said that no such citizen had a Fifth Amendment property right to social security payments.
This is the justification that will be used to enforce the ACA penalties.
Don't believe me? Read the Religious exemption clause of the ACA.
----------------------------------
MEMBERS OF CERTAIN RELIGIOUS FAITHS
(1) Exemption
Any individual may file an application (in such form and manner, and with such
official, as may be prescribed by regulations under this chapter) for an exemption
from the tax imposed by this chapter if he is a member of a recognized religious sect
or division thereof and is an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such sect or
division by reason of which he is CONSCIENTIOUSLY opposed to acceptance of the
benefits of any private or public insurance which makes payments in the event of
death, disability, OLD-AGE, or retirement or makes payments toward the cost of, or
provides services for, medical care (including the benefits of any insurance system
established by the SOCIAL SECURITY ACT).
-----------------------------------
Anyone can clearly see that exemption from the tax means not collecting social security ever.
A 15% levy of a social security check of 0 is nothing.
Can't force someone who doesn't have it and never will to pay a tax from it. This is how you know for a fact that the ACA penalties are intended to rob future recipients of social security of their money.
But it's more insidious than that. Future courts could decide that other retirement/death vehicles aren't "property". IRA, 401k, Burial, life and all other sorts of insurance could be levied for the ACA tax.
Remember those are "enumerated" in the ACA by name.
We won't know if Obamacare is a success until they work out all of the glitches. Could be 25 years.
Why am I being moderated?
Lied to again. Told we could buy insurance after the enrollment period ended, but no subsidies. Not true without some sort of qualifying condition. I am tired of the lies and deceit. Impeach the President and file criminal charges, he deserves to be in jail.
I kissed my way up to CEO at a health insurance company. Now I take over $1,000,000 of your health care dollars for NO VALUE ADDED to your health care. And that’s just me. Now think about how many other CEOs, VPs, Directors, Managers, etc. are at my company alone. Now multiply that by thousands of others at hundreds of other health insurance companies. From 10 to 25% of your health care dollars go towards administration that adds NO VALUE to your health care. But my company’s PAC dollars will continue to fool you little people into thinking that a single payer system will be bad. Little people like you are so easy to fool. Little people also don’t realize that a single payer system is the ONLY system that would allow little people (as an entire country) to negotiate better health care prices. Little people don’t realize that the Medical Cartels already know that. And that is the reason why the Medical Cartels spend so much PAC money from the hospitals and doctors lobbying against a single payer system. Some little people say that a single payer system would cost you little people more. But if that were true, then wouldn’t the hospitals and doctors WANT that extra money? Yes they would. So why do the Medical Cartels lobby against a single payer system? It’s because the Medical Cartels know it would allow little people to negotiate better health care prices. And that’s what the Medical Cartels are afraid of. Period.
But us big wigs at insurance companies, hospitals, and pharmacy companies don’t ever need to worry about health care no matter what it costs. We get our health care paid for one way or another by you little people. And we get the little people that work at our companies to contribute to our PACs. And us big wigs say it’s to protect the little peoples’ jobs. But in reality it would be in the little peoples’ best interest to NOT contribute to the PAC. Again, little people are so easily fooled. I won’t ever have to worry about losing my job with so many little people being brain washed by the Medical Cartels’ PAC money. Not only that, the Medical Cartels’ PAC money is used to elect so many republicans that will never allow a single payer system. Republicans have always fought against any meaningful health care reform. But that’s what our Medical Cartels’ PACs pay them for. Politicians can be bought so easily.
Pretty soon the only people that will be able to afford health care is us big wigs. And that’s the way it should be. We don’t want you little people using up the resources when we need them. And once again, I thank you little people for capping my SS tax at the $117,000 level. Now I only pay 1.17% SS tax and you little people pay 6.2%. Also, thank you for extending my tax breaks. I’m using the extra money on my vacation houses.
A Single Payer System? Does that mean I send all my money up to the Government and they take care of me? Now where have i heard that before? Oh, I think it was in the old Soviet Union.
No you moron. It will mean that YOU will LOVE your Medicare. YOU will NEED it.
So what she we have done to bush? if you want to impeach & Jail President Obama!!!!
she/we? I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Even Bush
Simple,
The National Debt will start to come down, people will have jobs, the country will prosper. But I doubt any of that will happen.
I am glad to see your optimism, but if you believe this will happen with democrats and obozo in charge I have a bridge to sell you.
what? all of those "job creators" that we have been giving tax breaks to are not creating jobs? who would have thought
From the LA Times today (4/8/2014), which pretty much answers your question:
"The long-awaited Rand Corp. study of Obamacare's effect on health insurance coverage was released Tuesday and confirmed the numbers that had been telegraphed for more than a week: At least 9.3 million more Americans have health insurance now than in September 2013, virtually all of them as a result of the law.
That's a net figure, accommodating all those who lost their individual health insurance because of cancellations. The Rand study confirms other surveys that placed the number of people who lost their old insurance and did not or could not replace it - the focus of an enormous volume of anti-Obamacare rhetoric - at less than 1 million."
The Rand numbers do not include 3.2 million sign-ups from the surge in enrollments in late March and early April. Yes, Republicans, it is much worse– for you– than you could ever have imagined.
How do we know these numbers are correct when the people supposedly running the program are not providing any real numbers?
The Rand Corporation had been polling 3,300 Americans monthly about their health insurance choices since last fall. The numbers came from the Rand survey. The government will release their numbers sometime this month. Some people got an extension because they started the enrollment process before the deadline.
Rand Corp. is funded by our federal government. The Rand numbers have been exposed. I don't know why this administration keeps spinning the numbers. We are not all stupid. The truth will come out about Obamacare and it ain't pretty.
Who exposed the Rand numbers? You did not cite any source.
And now the Republicans, Cantor, Boehner, Cruz, Rogers, McConnell and others are running Hitler ads now for the AHC. They are supporting Foster Friess in running these ads. Friess wants to get more control over the candidates with his tens of millions in donations. Now Friess is a conservative Christian, so he says. But we all know Christian are the worst, most evil, most criminal and frauds.
Isnt Obumbles care and success an oxy moron!!! LOL I call B.S. period on the success part.
Specifically, what part of RomneyCare don't you like?
Insurance is a huge part of the PROBLEM!!! Insurance wastes 25% or more of your health care dollars for NO VALUE ADDED to your health care. Insurance CAN NOT, WILL NOT, and NEVER HAS been able to control health care prices. A single payer system is the ONLY system that will allow us, as an entire nation, to negotiage better health care prices (the REAL problem).
Ms. Cupp seems to think that if the republicans win in November then ACA was a failure. Preposterous. The success of the law is not measured by electoral success. It was passed to get more people insured. The percentage of people without insurance is going down. Success!
Too bad Ms. Cupp wasn't around when the democrats "lost the south for a generation" by passing the civil rights act. I guess by her measure that was a failure too.
The GOP won't have a veto proof majority in either house so repeal will be as exciting as it was the last 50 times the house voted for it. When Hilary wins and the dems take back both the senate and the house will that mean that ACA is a success?
I understand that as a conservative Ms. Cupp only cares about the power of the GOP. Some of us are Americans before we pledge allegiance to a party. If the GOP did anything that I thought was good for our country I might vote for one of them again.
And is everyone so sure that those who just got insurance for the first time were all democrats? Well, they might be now, and they might think twice before voting for the party that promises to take away their insurance. The election is over 7 months from now. Remember when Hilary was going to be president? Remember when Romney was a sure thing?
Cupp is paid by the lobbyist for your words and voice. She really doesn't have the education or competence to make your own decisions. Cupp is the HO puppet of the conservatives.
The ACA fails to keep the Promises of the President. It is not the health care reform that the President promised the nation so in terms of keeping the President's promises, the ACA is a failure. Through the ACA the federal government is running a national health care system. The constitution does not give the federal government the power to run such a system. That power is reserved for the states.
The GOP Solution: Turn all the Old, Sick, Poor, Non-white, Non-christian, Female, and Gay people into slaves. Then whip them until they are Young, Healthy, Rich, White, Christian, Male, and Straight. Or until they are dead. Then turn them into Soylent Green to feed the military during the next "unfunded/off-the-books" war. And don't forget the GOP all time favorites........TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!!!..........and........GET RID OF SS AND MEDICARE!!!
Paul Ryan budget will do all you suggest. wants to cut 2.7 trillion from Medicare, $137 billion from SNAP(food stamps), $125 billion from the Pell Grant for College students, $315 billions from the school kids, and appeal AHC. But he is proposing to give much of that to Corporations or the 1%. He wants to cut Corporate Tax rate to 25%.
The Republicans mission is to destroy the working class and poor.
Unfortunately, the president's plan isn't what we got.
The reason is we don't have a president who can pass laws. Congress does that. On the campaign trail, Obama said he had a plan that would reduce premiums for Americans an average of 2500 dollars per person. It also had national exchanges rather then state exchanges, stricter rules on insurance companies, larger subsidies, a public option and cost 65 billion dollars a year more then then what got passed.
Obamacare is based on what Obama put forward on the campaign trail. It's not the same plan though... it got made "more moderate" to appeal to the GOP (which caused absolutely none of them to vote for it anyway).
If you're talking about the "keep your plan" thing... well he didn't expect so many insurers to cancel their plans in order to shift people onto the new ones. Obamacare wasn't written in a way to force private business to continue issuing a service that they choose not to issue. It allows them to continue issuing it... but it doesn't force them to. He should have qualified his statement more.
"If you want to keep your plan, you can... as long as your insurer keeps offering it."
Am not sure what broken promises you are referring to??? Could you please explain. Thanks.
Not a failure at all in the sense that this law was a MASSIVE reform to Social Security. When you put it together with previous law, supreme court decisions and what is special about those who are exempt you realize that this was a massive overhaul to social security and that if Social Security payments are not untouchable.
Here is a list of research I compiled:
All that didn't get coverage this year beware. Although the ACA says this:
----------------------------–
‘(B) "LIMITATIONS" ON LIENS AND LEVIES.—The Secretary
shall not—
‘‘(i) file notice of lien with respect to any PROPERTY
of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the
penalty imposed by this section, or
‘‘(ii) levy on any such PROPERTY with respect to
such failure.’’
--------------------------–
Don't misconstrue this to mean that the government can't take anything. It simply means that there are "limits" on what the government can take.
You should still realize that Social Security per the United States Supreme Court's view (See Fleming vs Nestor decision) does not enjoy Fifth Amendment property protections.
Which means that Social Security payments are beyond the limits of protection of the LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES clause.
As such if you accumulate fines the following will happen:
Courtesy of the Tax Payer Relief Act of 1997:
-------------------------------------
In July 2000, the IRS, in conjunction with the Department of the
Treasury, Financial Management Service (FMS), started the Federal
Payment Levy Program (FPLP) which is authorized by Internal Revenue Code
Section 6331 (h), as prescribed by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997
Section 1024. Through this program, we can collect your overdue
taxes(Why it was important to classify the ACA Penalty as a TAX) through
a continuous levy on certain federal payments disbursed by FMS. The
following is a list of federal payments that can be levied through the
FPLP:
certain Social Security benefits paid to you,
"From that point on, FMS may reduce any federal payments subject to
the levy by 15 percent, or the exact amount of tax(WHY THEY HAD TO ARGUE
THE PENALTY AS A TAX) owed if it is less than 15 percent of the
payment. The levy is continuous until
your overdue taxes are paid in full, or other arrangements are made to
satisfy the debt. Each time your federal payment is levied, FMS will
send you a letter of explanation, including information on which federal
payment was levied, and advise you to contact us for resolution."
-----------------------------------
Lastly, you should realize that there is something special about the people that are exempt per the following ACA Clause:
-----------------------------------
MEMBERS OF CERTAIN RELIGIOUS FAITHS
(1) Exemption
Any individual may file an application (in such form and manner, and with such
official, as may be prescribed by regulations under this chapter) for an exemption
from the tax imposed by this chapter if he is a member of a recognized religious sect
or division thereof and is an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such sect or
division by reason of which he is CONSCIENTIOUSLY opposed to acceptance of the
benefits of any private or public insurance which makes payments in the event of
death, disability, OLD-AGE, or retirement or makes payments toward the cost of, or
provides services for, medical care (including the benefits of any insurance system
established by the SOCIAL SECURITY ACT).
----------------------------
This essentially means that someone who doesn't collect Social Security payments aren't subject to government leverage/coercion and therefore must be exempted.
15% of nothing is nothing. The Amish for instance aren't subject to such coercion.
Inversely, people who will collect Social Security are subject to the coercion/leverage as the government has decided years ago that their Social Security payments did not enjoy Fifth Amendment protections. Which means you may not pay now, but you WILL pay later.
Not sure why you think this is a big deal.
There is a law and a penalty for breaking the law. The issue with social security just means that most people won't be able to dodge the penalty forever... at some point they'll be due a federal entitlement (which is what social security is... not an investment), and the money will be taken out from that.
Why should I feel sorry for someone who dodged the penalty for breaking the law when that penalty finally catches up with them?
Considering that the Supreme Court had to "fix" the government's case to make this all possible is a travesty. What is to stop them from mandating that we don't all buy burial or life insurance? We aren't even talking about the other things that the government can levy for back taxes. This opens up the possibility to life, burial, IRA, TSP and many other financial instruments being levied.
For starters these are all listed as being able to be levied in the tax code in writing. All is subject to some court's dubious definition of what is and isn't property. The government potentially has access to vast arrays of wealth under the guise of "helping the little guy."
Let's not even talk about the Equal Protection clause of the constitution. Why should an Amish person have certain protections under the law but you don't? Why is the government expiration date on religious freedoms December 31, 1950(The date that any religious sect had to be in existence in order to be exempt from paying social security taxes(Opting out of Social Security))?
Obamacare has been successful at getting a significant number of uninsured people to have health insurance. When you add up those who bought insurance throught he exhchanges, the new medicaid signups driven through the program as well as those who bought off-exchange private insurance to comply with the mandate... the number of uninsured people will drop by a significant number and continue to drop as years pass.
That's just part of the overall success of the program of course. But it's a very important part.
Now we also have to look at if the coverage is sufficient, if premiums don't rise more then they had been before the program was implemented and if providers sign up for these new plans. All of that will take a while to get a grasp on.
Cupp is completely wrong in thinking a midterm election (where GOP turnout is always stronger) where lots of red states have blue senators facing re-election is a valid referendum on Obamacare.
We're talking about states like Alaska where the democrat won in a presidential year by 1% 6 years ago. That flipping back to the GOP doesn't tell us anything other then the basic logistics of midterm turnout.
Now if states like Colorado, Virginia, Michigan or New Hampshire go red... that might be something you could draw some conclusions from. But Alaska, Louisiana, Arkansas, South Dakota... that's more logistics then any kind of referendum on a policy. The GOP SHOULD ALREADY have those senate seats given the make up of those states.
We're going to see the reverse in 2016... lots of blue and purple states having GOP incumbents who got elected in a midterm having to defend their seats in a presidential election year. States like Arizona (should McCain retire), Florida, Illinois, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvannia and Wisconsin will all have to be defended by the GOP.
I expect the GOP to take the senate by 1-2 seats after 2014... and lose it right back by 3-4 seats in 2016.
My own experience is that I got a new policy that is cheaper and better due to Obamacare and a subsidy. I had insurance that was about to lapse. Put the last couple months on a credit card and it was cancelled in March. So, I guess technically I was without insurance for 2 weeks while i waited for the new policy to go into effect 4/1 after the old policy was cancelled 3/15. Saving $200 a month and just saved $70 on a recurring prescription that was $75 and is now $5. So I am pleased.
I wound up with a policy that is slightly more expensive and offers less coverage than my old policy, yet I'm still pleased overall. Why? Because now I can comparison-shop between different insurance policies on the federal exchange each year and choose the policy and rate that fit my individual needs. What 90% of insured Americans don't realize (even now) is that prior to Obamacare, "shopping" for a private health insurance policy involved spending over an hour on the phone discussing every medical problem you've ever had in your lifetime with a compete stranger... and that was SIMPLY TO RECEIVE A SINGLE QUOTE FOR A SINGLE POLICY.
you're welcome. I expect you'll remember those hundred million or so of us who got gored to pay for your windfall when you hit the powerball with all that newfound surplus cash?
"My own experience is that I got a new policy that is cheaper and better due to Obamacare and a subsidy."
"Saving $200 a month and just saved $70 on a recurring prescription that was $75 and is now $5. So I am pleased."
You saved because people like me are forced to shared our hard earned dollars paying for your subsidy and I am not rich. So I am not pleased.
All statements made by me under this name or any other name are to be considered an opinion only and not in any way personal.