Jump to content

The Obamacare Website - How Does It Represent A Failure Of Government?


Leon Troutsky
 Share

Recommended Posts

Another heaping scoop of fail in the form of unintended consequences.

Any teachers who voted for Obama deserve what they get. But their students don’t.

Wait, you mean they are cutting hours for workers to comply with a mandate that doesn't take effect until next year? I hear a lot of these stories, but I'm skeptical about how many of them are grounded in legitimate concerns. In this case, $6 million represents about 4% of the total school district's budget. Not insignificant, but not exactly crushing, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 648
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wait, you mean they are cutting hours for workers to comply with a mandate that doesn't take effect until next year? I hear a lot of these stories, but I'm skeptical about how many of them are grounded in legitimate concerns. In this case, $6 million represents about 4% of the total school district's budget. Not insignificant, but not exactly crushing, either.

You're not over the top in this comment, but I find it amazing that you are still defending this law. You can recognize a disaster as a disaster and not be considered a republican shill or an Obama hater. Your reputation as a left wing hack will survive you stating the obvious concerning Obamacare. wink.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not over the top in this comment, but I find it amazing that you are still defending this law. You can recognize a disaster as a disaster and not be considered a republican shill or an Obama hater. Your reputation as a left wing hack will survive you stating the obvious concerning Obamacare. wink.png

I don't view the policy itself as a disaster. It's had a terrible roll out and Obama over-sold it quite a bit, so that's coming back to bite him and the Democrats in the arze. But the policy itself has worked pretty well in Massachusetts for years now.

I understand why people keep pointing to the policy cancelations, but the better question is why they are losing those policies. In most cases, it's because those policies suck. $60 a month for a policy with a $5000 deductible and a $50,000 lifetime cap is worthless. One serious broken leg could eat up the lifetime cap alone. A case of appendicitis requiring surgery could put you over that. Those policies need to be canceled and replaced with better coverage.

What's the point of having everyone covered if some of the policies are so bad that they effectively result in people going bankrupt because of a major illness and/or not being able to pay for hospital bills that then get passed onto consumers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand why people keep pointing to the policy cancelations, but the better question is why they are losing those policies. In most cases, it's because those policies suck.

You really think that's the reason they're getting canceled? My policy was the best I've ever had and there was really nothing about it I was unhappy with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really think that's the reason they're getting canceled? My policy was the best I've ever had and there was really nothing about it I was unhappy with.

The news reports about the hundreds of thousands of cancelations all point to things like high deductibles and low lifetime caps (which are eliminated by the law).

What specific provisions in your policy made it not comply with the law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news reports about the hundreds of thousands of cancelations all point to things like high deductibles and low lifetime caps (which are eliminated by the law).

What specific provisions in your policy made it not comply with the law?

You probably saw this article.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/09/23/obamacare-killing-traditional-employer-insurance/

So far I've been unable to find a comparable plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news reports about the hundreds of thousands of cancelations all point to things like high deductibles and low lifetime caps (which are eliminated by the law).

What specific provisions in your policy made it not comply with the law?

That opinion is pretty subjective and not shared by many

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-10-13/business/ct-biz-1013-obamacare-deductibles-20131013_1_health-care-overhaul-health-insurance-health-coverage

Obamacare deductibles a dose of sticker shock

Insurance companies requiring higher out-of-pocket expenses to comply with new rules

Adam Weldzius, a nurse practitioner, considers himself better informed than most when it comes to the inner workings of health insurance. But even he wasn't prepared for the pocketbook hit he'll face next year under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

If the 33-year-old single father wants the same level of coverage next year as what he has now with the same insurer and the same network of doctors and hospitals, his monthly premium of $233 will more than double. If he wants to keep his monthly payments in check, the Carpentersville resident is looking at an annual deductible for himself and his 7-year-old daughter of $12,700, a more than threefold increase from $3,500 today.

"I believe everybody should be able to have health insurance, but at the same time, I'm being penalized. And for what?" said Weldzius, who is not offered insurance through his employer. "For someone who's always had insurance, who's always taken care of myself, now I have to change my plan?"

Many Illinoisans buying health coverage on their own next year will face a similar dilemma spurred by the health care overhaul: pay higher monthly insurance premiums or run the risk of having to shell out thousands more in deductibles for health care if they get sick.

To promote the Oct. 1 debut of the exchanges, the online marketplaces where consumers can shop and buy insurance, Obama administration and Illinois officials touted the lower-than-expected monthly premiums that would make insurance more affordable for millions of Americans. But a Tribune analysis shows that 21 of the 22 lowest-priced plans offered on the Illinois health insurance exchange for Cook County have annual deductibles of more than $4,000 for an individual and $8,000 for family coverage.

Those deductibles, which represent the out-of-pocket money consumers must spend on health care before most insurance benefits kick in, are higher than what many consumers expected or may be able to stomach, benefit experts said.

By comparison, people who buy health insurance through their employer have an average individual deductible of just more than $1,100, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Although millions of Americans will be eligible for federal assistance to help offset some of those costs, millions will not, underscoring one of the trade-offs wrought under the law's goal to ensure most people have access to health insurance.

"It's been major sticker shock for most of my clients and prospects," said Rich Fahn, president of the Northbrook-based insurance broker Excell Benefit Group. "I'm telling (clients) that everything they know historically about health plans has changed. They either have to pay more out-of-pocket or more premiums or both. It's an overwhelming concern."

Plans with the least expensive monthly premiums — highlighted by state and federal officials as proof the new law will keep costs low for consumers — have deductibles as high as $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families, the highest levels allowed under the law.

Because the federal website that runs the Illinois exchange remained largely inoperable as of late last week, the Tribune used data from websites of four of the five insurers that will offer plans in Cook County on the marketplace. One insurer, Coventry Health Care, did not have plans available on its website last week but provided data to the Tribune.

Insurers say the price and cost hikes result from new benefit mandates, additional taxes levied as part of the law and a requirement that they can no longer deny coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions.

The vast majority of insurance plans for 2014 must include a list of 10 essential health benefits, some of which, like maternity care, weren't necessarily included in all health plans a year ago.

The law also includes mandatory coverage of mental health and substance-abuse treatment, prescription drugs and rehabilitative care. All preventive care, including annual physicals and routine immunizations like flu shots, must be covered at no cost.

Further, insurers are required to take all applicants, regardless of whether they have pre-existing medical issues that may have locked them out of coverage in the past. And they're prohibited from charging their oldest, sickest members any more than three times as much as their youngest, healthiest members, causing premium prices to rise for many younger people.

Costs associated with those mandates are passed along to all members of a health plan.

Considering those factors, "the rates are actually quite reasonable," said Kelly Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the Illinois health insurance marketplace.

Under the law, most of the estimated 15 million Americans who bought plans individually this year, like Weldzius, will have to choose new insurance coverage that meets federal guidelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That opinion is pretty subjective and not shared by many

http://articles.chic...health-coverage

Obamacare deductibles a dose of sticker shock

Insurance companies requiring higher out-of-pocket expenses to comply with new rules

Adam Weldzius, a nurse practitioner, considers himself better informed than most when it comes to the inner workings of health insurance. But even he wasn't prepared for the pocketbook hit he'll face next year under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

If the 33-year-old single father wants the same level of coverage next year as what he has now with the same insurer and the same network of doctors and hospitals, his monthly premium of $233 will more than double. If he wants to keep his monthly payments in check, the Carpentersville resident is looking at an annual deductible for himself and his 7-year-old daughter of $12,700, a more than threefold increase from $3,500 today.

"I believe everybody should be able to have health insurance, but at the same time, I'm being penalized. And for what?" said Weldzius, who is not offered insurance through his employer. "For someone who's always had insurance, who's always taken care of myself, now I have to change my plan?"

Many Illinoisans buying health coverage on their own next year will face a similar dilemma spurred by the health care overhaul: pay higher monthly insurance premiums or run the risk of having to shell out thousands more in deductibles for health care if they get sick.

To promote the Oct. 1 debut of the exchanges, the online marketplaces where consumers can shop and buy insurance, Obama administration and Illinois officials touted the lower-than-expected monthly premiums that would make insurance more affordable for millions of Americans. But a Tribune analysis shows that 21 of the 22 lowest-priced plans offered on the Illinois health insurance exchange for Cook County have annual deductibles of more than $4,000 for an individual and $8,000 for family coverage.

Those deductibles, which represent the out-of-pocket money consumers must spend on health care before most insurance benefits kick in, are higher than what many consumers expected or may be able to stomach, benefit experts said.

By comparison, people who buy health insurance through their employer have an average individual deductible of just more than $1,100, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Although millions of Americans will be eligible for federal assistance to help offset some of those costs, millions will not, underscoring one of the trade-offs wrought under the law's goal to ensure most people have access to health insurance.

"It's been major sticker shock for most of my clients and prospects," said Rich Fahn, president of the Northbrook-based insurance broker Excell Benefit Group. "I'm telling (clients) that everything they know historically about health plans has changed. They either have to pay more out-of-pocket or more premiums or both. It's an overwhelming concern."

Plans with the least expensive monthly premiums — highlighted by state and federal officials as proof the new law will keep costs low for consumers — have deductibles as high as $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families, the highest levels allowed under the law.

Because the federal website that runs the Illinois exchange remained largely inoperable as of late last week, the Tribune used data from websites of four of the five insurers that will offer plans in Cook County on the marketplace. One insurer, Coventry Health Care, did not have plans available on its website last week but provided data to the Tribune.

Insurers say the price and cost hikes result from new benefit mandates, additional taxes levied as part of the law and a requirement that they can no longer deny coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions.

The vast majority of insurance plans for 2014 must include a list of 10 essential health benefits, some of which, like maternity care, weren't necessarily included in all health plans a year ago.

The law also includes mandatory coverage of mental health and substance-abuse treatment, prescription drugs and rehabilitative care. All preventive care, including annual physicals and routine immunizations like flu shots, must be covered at no cost.

Further, insurers are required to take all applicants, regardless of whether they have pre-existing medical issues that may have locked them out of coverage in the past. And they're prohibited from charging their oldest, sickest members any more than three times as much as their youngest, healthiest members, causing premium prices to rise for many younger people.

Costs associated with those mandates are passed along to all members of a health plan.

Considering those factors, "the rates are actually quite reasonable," said Kelly Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the Illinois health insurance marketplace.

Under the law, most of the estimated 15 million Americans who bought plans individually this year, like Weldzius, will have to choose new insurance coverage that meets federal guidelines.

Wow, I was under the assumption that yearly deductibles were capped under Obamacare. A deductible of $8000-12,500 a year is insane. That's a serious problem with the law.

Edit: I just made it to the end of the article:

Plans with the least expensive monthly premiums — highlighted by state and federal officials as proof the new law will keep costs low for consumers — have deductibles as high as $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families, the highest levels allowed under the law.

That's for a family, which is about $3000-4000 a year per person, not nearly as insane. I think that $6000 a year is too high, but it's not nearly as bad as the article makes it sound, and a $8000 a year deductible for a family of four is not that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I linked that "opinion piece" because I work for one of the three companies mentioned (which has now pushed current employees onto exchanges as well). The reason we were given was simply a greater array of options available on the exchanges, and at the time (we received our letter earlier this year) we were being told that many employees could find plans with lower premiums. Of course this looks like a cost cutting measure to me more than anything, so I blame the company as much as I blame the law.

I've moved to my wife's plan, which we're not as happy with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I was under the assumption that yearly deductibles were capped under Obamacare. A deductible of $8000-12,500 a year is insane. That's a serious problem with the law.

No offense, but you've posted the majority of responses on a 19-page thread for a law you're defending, and you're unaware that people are getting booted from their current plans and finding plans with outrageous deductibles on the exchange? This is what has the rest of us pissed off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I linked that "opinion piece" because I work for one of the three companies mentioned (which has now pushed current employees onto exchanges as well). The reason we were given was simply a greater array of options available on the exchanges, and at the time (we received our letter earlier this year) we were being told that many employees could find plans with lower premiums. Of course this looks like a cost cutting measure to me more than anything, so I blame the company as much as I blame the law.

I've moved to my wife's plan, which we're not as happy with.

So ultimately, it doesn't sound like the law is responsible for you losing your coverage. And if you can find a plan with lower premiums on the exchanges, doesn't that mean that the law is working as it's supposed to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense, but you've posted the majority of responses on a 19-page thread for a law you're defending, and you're unaware that people are getting booted from their current plans and finding plans with outrageous deductibles on the exchange? This is what has the rest of us pissed off.

Actually, I edited the post to note that I was correct about deductibles being capped. $6000 is rather high, but it's not anywhere near as insane as $8000-12500 for individuals. And those are the highest allowed deductibles, which are for policies with much lower monthly premiums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So ultimately, it doesn't sound like the law is responsible for you losing your coverage. And if you can find a plan with lower premiums on the exchanges, doesn't that mean that the law is working as it's supposed to?

That's exactly what I said. Problem is (as I say in my initial post) that THERE ARE NO comparable plans on the exchange. So no, I'd disagree that it's working as it's supposed to, or at least how it was pitched.

Edited by DawgBone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I edited the post to note that I was correct about deductibles being capped. $6000 is rather high, but it's not anywhere near as insane as $8000-12500 for individuals. And those are the highest allowed deductibles, which are for policies with much lower monthly premiums.

So you're saying that people losing their plans had "crappy" plans. Those crappy plans look a heck of a lot better to me than any of these bronze (or even silver) level plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I was under the assumption that yearly deductibles were capped under Obamacare. A deductible of $8000-12,500 a year is insane. That's a serious problem with the law.

Edit: I just made it to the end of the article:

That's for a family, which is about $3000-4000 a year per person, not nearly as insane. I think that $6000 a year is too high, but it's not nearly as bad as the article makes it sound, and a $8000 a year deductible for a family of four is not that much.

Those numbers are very much in line with what I have seen from major insurers over the last few years. Those numbers aren't anything new. The industry was already moving towards pushing costs on to consumers in the form of higher deductibles and maximums.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those numbers are very much in line with what I have seen from major insurers over the last few years. Those numbers aren't anything new. The industry was already moving towards pushing costs on to consumers in the form of higher deductibles and maximums.

But wasn't this law supposed to correct that? Why are we doing this again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I was under the assumption that yearly deductibles were capped under Obamacare. A deductible of $8000-12,500 a year is insane. That's a serious problem with the law.

Edit: I just made it to the end of the article:

That's for a family, which is about $3000-4000 a year per person, not nearly as insane. I think that $6000 a year is too high, but it's not nearly as bad as the article makes it sound, and a $8000 a year deductible for a family of four is not that much.

The guy in the article is a single parent with one child, yet he has to go with the family option. 12,500. is pretty high in my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy in the article is a single parent with one child, yet he has to go with the family option. 12,500. is pretty high in my opinion

Two quick things and then I have to run:

First, I didn't see where it said how many children he has. Yes, $12,500 is high for two people, but then so is $6000 for singles, so it's not really different from the single option.

Second, it also said that his rates would go up to about $440 a month. If he has a single child, that's still not a lot of money given the rising costs of health insurance over the past decade. If he has more than one child, that's actually kind of cheap for three people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...