Some observations from Richard Epstein:
The Obamacare fiasco now flunks Justice Holmes’ extreme rational basis test in the 1905 decision of Lochner v. New York: “I think that the word liberty in the Fourteenth Amendment is perverted when it is held to prevent the natural outcome of a dominant opinion, unless it can be said that a rational and fair man necessarily would admit that the statute proposed would infringe fundamental principles as they have been understood by the traditions of our people and our law.”
In the light of day, Obamacare is that bad, even if the minimum wage law is not. Even the most ardent defender of government power must concede that it is sickening when a president tells people without healthcare insurance that they must navigate his government websites or go without. If “the right to healthcare” is fundamental, Obamacare violates it. Delay here is no option. If left in place, every single structural problem that besets Obamacare today will continue to wreck innocent lives a year from now. Striking it down is an act of mercy for the American people.
Bottom line: other than that it is logistically impossible and unconstitutional, the president’s “fix” is just fine.
[Update a while later]
I’m sure there are more than three, but I agree with them.
it is sickening when a president tells people without healthcare insurance that they must navigate his government websites or go without
When has Obama said that? There’s no requirement to get insurance from an exchange, and you can get insurance from an exchange without navigating a website (remember everyone making fun of Obama repeating the toll-free number like a TV pitchman?).
What would actually be sickening is going back to a status quo where insurance companies could tell people without health insurance that they must go without, full stop.
“What would actually be sickening is going back to a status quo where insurance companies could tell people without health insurance that they must go without.”
And why should they not have the right to do so?
You appear to believe the insurance companies are adding value in this process.
You tell ’em, Jim! Going to a status quo where insurance companies can tell people they must do without insurance is horriblebad!
The GOVERNMENT must tell them they must go without insurance, and tehn FINE THEM when they do! Only then can Utopia be achieved!
I thought I read somewhere that in order to receive any subsidy for which the applicant is eligible, the policy must be purchased through an exchange. E.g. healthcare.gov or the state equivalent where applicable.
Didn’t I also read that calling the 1-800-number was merely adding an additional layer between the applicant and the website? E.g. the representative is filling the data in on the website instead of the applicant doing so.
I say that while appearing to be eligible for a $400+/month subsidy myself. (I say “appearing to be” because I have not fully investigated it). Applicants with my family size appear to be eligible for subsidy if their MAGI is below $126K. Below $79K they are additionally eligible for “Cost Sharing Reductions”
in order to receive any subsidy for which the applicant is eligible, the policy must be purchased through an exchange
That’s correct, although I believe they’re working on changing that (you’d go directly to the insurer, and the insurer would talk to the government to arrange the subsidies).
the representative is filling the data in on the website instead of the applicant doing so
Right, but it spares the applicant the need to have a computer and the patience/skills to deal with a glitchy website.
“you’d go directly to the insurer, and the insurer would talk to the government to arrange the subsidies”
So now we are forcing the insurance companies to do the government’s jobs? Why did we spend $5 billion on federal and state websites and hire so many Democrat activist groups as navigators if we are going to turn around and force the burden on insurance companies?
Also, insurance companies would still have to go through the same government computer system that is currently not working. But I guess it would mean Democrats could continue to blame others for their policy problems and keep lying and pushing misinformation about Obamacare.
So now we are forcing the insurance companies to do the government’s jobs?
I don’t know that anyone’s being forced to do anything, and it’s in the insurers’ interests to make it easy and affordable (i.e. with subsidies) for customers to buy their product. Insurers would rather have the customers go directly to them than through Healthcare.gov, where they can compare offerings from multiple carriers, and might pick a competitor.
still have to go through the same government computer system that is currently not working
It’s a different part of that system, and the report is that it’s working better.
don’t know that anyone’s being forced to do anything
Do you know the definition of mandate?
Do you understand the phrase “law of the land”?
We know you are ignorant Jim, but while it may be blissful for you; you’re arguing with people that have lost their insurance and know far more about the impact of the law than you do. But please, carry on with your lies.
And I don’t recall this: “(remember everyone making fun of Obama repeating the toll-free number like a TV pitchman?)” I do recall people noting that the navigators used the same website that was down. And I also recall news organizations warning people of scam artists.
“I don’t know that anyone’s being forced to do anything”
Ya, we don’t know what the President said to the CEO’s. What carrots and what sticks were offered?
” and it’s in the insurers’ interests to make it easy and affordable”
Affordable doesn’t matter when people are required by law to purchase their product.
“Insurers would rather have the customers go directly to them”
Then why did they team up with Obama for the health insurance exchange?
“than through Healthcare.gov, where they can compare offerings from multiple carriers,”
People could do that under the old system. It was called “shopping”.
I admire your dedication to bashing insurance companies though. Just remember the blame lies with the politicians telling them what to do.
“It’s a different part of that system, and the report is that it’s working better.”
Yes, a different part of the system that does not even exist yet. In regard to healthcare.gov, improvements don’t matter if it is still a total failure.
Yes, a different part of the system that does not even exist yet.
You’re getting confused. ACA IT has lots of parts, including:
1) A customer-facing website
2) A direct-entry system for accepting enrollments from insurers
3) A system for paying subsidies to insurers.
We’re talking about 2). 3) is the part that isn’t done yet (and won’t be used until January at the earliest).
In regard to healthcare.gov, improvements don’t matter if it is still a total failure.
By definition, if something improves it is no longer a “total” failure. Not that it ever was a “total” failure — a handful of people managed to enroll even on the first day.
Do you know the definition of mandate?
Yes, but there’s no mandate for insurers to offer direct enrollment with subsidies outside Healthcare.gov. It’s just in their interest to do so.
you’re arguing with people that have lost their insurance and know far more about the impact of the law than you do
In what sense have you lost your insurance — I thought you were on an employer plan?
I lost my insurance in the sense that the plan I had in 2013 isn’t offered in 2014. For that matter, my 2012 plan wasn’t offered in 2013. Instead, I had to choose a new plan. But unlike a year ago, I had a new option — Healthcare.gov — where my options were much better. I do know something about the impact of the law.
“We’re talking about 2). 3) is the part that isn’t done yet (and won’t be used until January at the earliest).”
Correct, the part of the system that doesn’t exist yet but was supposed to.
“By definition, if something improves it is no longer a “total” failure.”
Just a failure then?
” Not that it ever was a “total” failure”
Obamacare is more than just a website Jim and the entire thing is a failure.
Obamacare is more than just a website Jim and the entire thing is a failure.
Yes, it’s more than a website, but the website is the thing that has performed the worst. It’s also state-run websites, and some of those (CA, KY) are doing great. It’s also a big expansion to Medicaid, and that has been going well (in the states that allow it). It’s also an effort to slow the growth of health care spending, and that has been going better than anyone expected.
Fortunately, the ACA’s biggest problem — the federal exchange website — is probably the easiest aspect to fix. Do you really think people are going to be complaining about Healthcare.gov in 2016?
Jim said:
I’m not aware of any proposed bill before either house of congress, which is the only party able to make that change. The law seems quite clear that going directly to the insurer is not an available option.
26 USC 36B(b)(2) reads:
PPACA 1311(f)(3) reads:
What good is getting Obamacare insurance when they haven’t yet written the parts of the code that cover paying the doctor or hospital, as was revealed today? Sure, the front end of applying for insurance might work by December or March, but the part where the insurance pays for part of your medical treatment won’t be done by then, which means the insurance is a worthless and fraudulent product that no hospital is going to accept for more than a few weeks.
What makes you think that the insurance companies don’t have systems for paying doctors and hospitals? They’re doing that today!
Do you mean the system for the government to pay subsidies to the insurance companies? That hasn’t been written, but isn’t needed until January, so they have some time. If it isn’t ready on time (which isn’t hard to imagine) it’ll be tough on insurance company cash flow, but it wouldn’t affect customers, doctors or hospitals.
“That hasn’t been written, but isn’t needed until January,”
It was supposed to be done by now. Obama unleashed a fraudulent website on the country and told everyone to use it despite knowing well in advance that the website doesn’t work and has layer upon layer of security flaws. He even went so far as to shut down the federal government rather than delay implementation despite knowing all the problems.
” If it isn’t ready on time (which isn’t hard to imagine) it’ll be tough on insurance company cash flow, but it wouldn’t affect customers, doctors or hospitals.”
Jim Jim Jim. If insurance companies don’t have the cash, doctors wont get reimbursed and the doctors will scale back services. If the subsidies don’t get paid out it will most certainly affect customers, doctors, and hospitals. And it wont just be people who get subsidies but all of us who subsidize their coverage because the funding shortfall will come out of our Obamacare tax increases.
Also, you seem to be arguing that the subsidies don’t matter in terms of providing health insurance or health care to people, so why did we have to pass Obamacare?
you seem to be arguing that the subsidies don’t matter
Subsidies matter, but paying those subsidies in February or March instead of January wouldn’t be the end of the world. Insurance companies would carry more accounts receivable than usual, but there’s no doubt that the bills would be paid eventually. Businesses are quite familiar with the phenomenon of customers paying late.
That hasn’t been written, but isn’t needed until January, so they have some time.
They had three years Jim, and they couldn’t get it done. If you think a billing system can be written in 60 days; you’re an idiot on top of being a liar.
“Subsidies matter, but paying those subsidies in February or March instead of January wouldn’t be the end of the world.”
Or June or July or October? It took 3 and 1/2 years to get to where they are now and they haven’t even started on the system to pay out the subsidies. We don’t have any reason to believe that it will only be a few months to get the system ready. Reality doesn’t operate on blind faith and hope.
” Insurance companies would carry more accounts receivable than usual, but there’s no doubt that the bills would be paid eventually. ”
You are talking about fronting health insurance and health care for tens of millions of people for an undetermined period of time. People need paychecks both at insurance companies and at health care facilities. Supplies need to be purchased and facilities need to be maintained. Each day bills go unpaid is a day closer to the total collapse of the system and even if there isn’t a collapse serious damage will be done.
So that whole distribution of subsidies that Obamacare is based on is critically important. Why Obama thought his program was ready to go live when he cant even do the hand outs yet is a good example of the incompetence that permeates this administration and the federal government at large.
Shutting down the government rather than delay the individual mandate looks pretty stupid now doesn’t it? Especially since Obama tried to decree a delay then vowed to veto a bill that would codify the same action.
It was supposed to be done by now.
Says who?
the funding shortfall will come out of our Obamacare tax increases.
First you say that doctors won’t get paid. Then you say that the money will be made up by “Obamacare tax increases”. You’re flailing.
If the payment system isn’t ready, there will be a pile of money in government coffers that is owed to insurers, and a pile of unpaid bills on insurer balance sheets. Everyone involved will know that the pile of money will eventually be paid to the insurers. That isn’t a great situation, but it isn’t the end of the world.
There are plenty of real problems with Healthcare.gov today. There’s really no need to get worked up about a possible much less serious future problem that may not even happen.
“It was supposed to be done by now.
Says who?”
You mean it was intentional that the system would not be able to be implemented when it was supposed to go into effect?
“First you say that doctors won’t get paid. Then you say that the money will be made up by “Obamacare tax increases”. You’re flailing.”
When the insurance companies don’t get paid the subsidies, the doctors don’t get paid and the taxpayers have to pick up the bill in the form of increased premiums. Insurance premiums are now a tax btw.
” Everyone involved will know that the pile of money will eventually be paid to the insurers.”
But during the lag time there are still expenses that have to be paid and insurance companies and providers are fronting those expenses. They have money but not an endless amount. Remember about how you freaked out over the government shutdown? This will go on longer than two weeks.
You mean it was intentional that the system would not be able to be implemented when it was supposed to go into effect?
The subsidy payment system is supposed to go into effect in January. It isn’t January yet.
When the insurance companies don’t get paid the subsidies, the doctors don’t get paid
Since when? That’s like saying that when you’re late paying the furniture store for your sofa, the furniture store doesn’t pay its electric bill. That isn’t how it works.
and the taxpayers have to pick up the bill in the form of increased premiums.
Wow, so much ignorance in one sentence. Premiums are fixed for the duration of the insurance contract, and premiums (aside from subsidies) are paid by enrollees, not taxpayers.
Insurance premiums are now a tax btw.
No, they aren’t.
But during the lag time there are still expenses that have to be paid and insurance companies and providers are fronting those expenses. They have money but not an endless amount.
That’s why there are credit markets.
Obamacare is a tax and when you pay a premium you are paying the tax. That is what SCOTUS said is what makes Obamacare constitutional. If insurance comapnies lose money due to government not living up to obligations, premiums will go up. Remember insurance policies don’t last forever or are you now arguing that insurance policies can’t be changed and last forever?
And when you bring up credit companies do you realize the cost of borrowing money? What is 5% of $20 billion? Do you see how things can get out of hand very quickly? Remember we are not talking about weeks but months and years.
Update: in today’s daily conference call with journalists the Center for Medicare Services reported that they are accepting enrollments from private insurers, even for people getting subsidies.
But they still have to go through the same government computer system that is not currently working. From your link:
“Direct enrollment through private insurers is getting easier.”
No, it is the same. You could always buy health insurance directly from a health insurance company. Just more misinformation coming out of the Obama administration about how things worked under the old system.
“The systems to send subsides to insurers haven’t been built.”
So people are sill in limbo until the system is created. It is almost as if you are willfully being dishonest.
So people are sill in limbo until the system is created. It is almost as if you are willfully being dishonest.
Who is in limbo? Who’s dishonest? There’s no suggestion that people who get insurance through direct enrollment aren’t really getting insurance. The question is whether the insurers will get government subsidy checks on time or late, and that’s an issue between the government and the insurers. It doesn’t affect the insured at all.
“Who is in limbo?”
People who need subsidies to pay for their health insurance, insurance companies, and health care providers.
“Who’s dishonest?”
Obama, the Democrats, and their defenders.
“There’s no suggestion that people who get insurance through direct enrollment aren’t really getting insurance.”
I thought that was Obama’s excuse for cancelling everyone’s policies, that they weren’t really insurance?
“The question is whether the insurers will get government subsidy checks on time or late, and that’s an issue between the government and the insurers. It doesn’t affect the insured at all.”
It does have an effect on consumers, providers, and insurance companies. Stop being dishonest.
It does have an effect on consumers, providers, and insurance companies.
How can you be so sure? It hasn’t happened, and may not happen. Has any insurance company stated what they will do if subsidy payments are delayed? Or are you just imagining dire consequences, because it suits your political preferences?
“How can you be so sure?”
It is literally impossible for there to be zero effect as you claim and I listed some of the groups that feel those effects.
“Or are you just imagining dire consequences, because it suits your political preferences?”
What I am not doing is taking Obama and the Democrats at their word. I am saying that there will be negative effects and not counting on the unicorn cavalry to ride to the rescue.
It is literally impossible for there to be zero effect as you claim
Again, how can you be so sure? What expertise do you have in the financial management of health insurance companies? Remember that exchange plans will represent a small fraction of 2014 health insurance policies (most are group policies), and subsidized plans a fraction of those, with subsidies making up only part of the premiums due. How can you so sure that there will be major effects if that small percentage of insurer revenue is late to arrive?
Wodun…you’re wasting your time. Obama could start every day with a puppy smoothie and Jim would praise him for his courageous efforts to control the pet population.
Know what experience I don’t have Jim? Is claiming I run my company’s health plan then turn around and say, well in my state only and not for the whole company and I am the only employee in my state oh and I don’t even get insurance through my work.
I can imagine the conversation you had with your boss. “Well Jim, we can’t give you a raise but we are going to give you a promotion. You are now in charge of the company health plan for everyone in NH. This is a pretty big deal Jim don’t mess it up. I know you wanted more money but we just can’t swing it. Instead you get a new title and responsibilities. It will look great on your linked in profile and we will send you new business cards.”
“Uhhh thanks for the promotion. I wont let you down. Should I talk to corporate to maintain industry best practices?”
“Knock your socks off Jim. We will give you whatever support you need.”
Corporate HR: “Hey Jim, just got your mail. You are in charge of finding a health insurance plan for one person. Also, we don’t have a company plan so basically you are in charge of buying your own plan on the private market. Sorry there isn’t a raise to help out with expenses. Oh, did you get the memo regarding office supplies? You have to buy your own business cards now. Keep an eye on your budget, it looks like you recently expensed a copy of “Health Insurance for Dummies” because we don’t have a company plan, that is not an item that can be expensed. Great talking to you Jim. Let me know if you have ny other questions.”
Oh and Jim, in your last paragraph you said group plans offered through work would not be affected. That is wrong. Not sure why you keep spreading disinformtion.
Jim, read your link again, and keep in mind that for three years these same people have been lying and saying everything is great.
They’ve had three years to write the front end Obamacare code and FAILED. They haven’t even started writing the code that sends subsidies to the insurance companies, since they don’t need it till January. By their current performance, that part won’t work till sometime in 2016, so the people applying for insurance will be on the hook for the full payments because the government won’t be subsidizing them, and either they cough up the money or the insurance company will drop them like a rock for nonpayment, or the insurance companies will go bankrupt. The chances of Congress writing a blanket bailout of the insurance companies to cover for Obama’s ignominious fuckup stands at zero.
This is quite possibly the worst screw up in government history, and Obama and his minions are so blind that they’re doubling down on it, guaranteeing that Democrats will be a minority party for the next twenty to forty years, because they’re blindingly inept, incompetent, and uncaring.
“The chances of Congress writing a blanket bailout of the insurance companies to cover for Obama’s ignominious fuckup stands at zero.”
IIRC, it is already in the law.
the people applying for insurance will be on the hook for the full payments
No, the government will be on the hook.
This is quite possibly the worst screw up in government history
You must not know much history.
“This is quite possibly the worst screw up in government history”
I don’t know how about
1) The confederate states of america, seceding, starting a war, getting their asses
kicked by a bunch of union volunteers, and having their slaves freed.
or
2) WMD hunts in iraq
or
3) If we trade arms to the iranians, they will give us our hostages?
or
4) Hey lets send 300,000 men to Vietnam without a strategy or
understanding what the other side is fighting for.
“No, the
governmenttaxpayers and people without subsidized insurance will be on the hook.”Fixed that for ya.
Another major Democrat screw up (they still vote for the party of Jefferson Davis) where they wouldn’t do the math, convincing all their voters that things would work out just fine because they were well intentioned and on top of things.
2) The WMD hunts in Iraq went very well. They didn’t find WMD because Saddam Hussein and his staff had been lying to everyone about WMD, just like the way Obama and his staff have been lying about keeping your insurance, keeping your doctor, and lowering your costs. Saddam’s toadies were afraid to tell him that many of his vaunted conventional weapons were illusions, and from all reports, Obama’s toadies were afraid to tell him the Obamacare website wasn’t remotely ready for rollout and would fail spectacularly.
3) The arms deal got us our hostages back and stopped Saddam’s armored assaults. In contrast, Obamacare is a disaster that doesn’t meet any of its promises.
4) Another Democrat screw up where they didn’t think they needed a plan because they were smart and on top of things. Thanks JFK, LBJ, and McNamara!
In today’s polling Obama is down to 37% approval, and only 11% of people think the exchanges are doing well. If this keeps up, Democrats will do about as well in the next election as the Communist Party USA, the Socialist Workers Party, or Lyndon Larouche’s bag of nuts.
@ dn-guy
You read this?
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/
The real travesty regarding Iraq is how Obama squandered the victory handed to him by Bush. You should watch the documentary “The Surge” then take a look at the conditions on the ground now.
Your other examples of policies that have impacted hundreds of thousands or millions of people isn’t the proper scale. Obamacare impacts over 300 million people and all future citizens.
“When has Obama said that?”
Obama constantly pushes people to the website. Never once has Obama said you can go directly to the insurance company to get a policy because that would be admitting failure.
“There’s no requirement to get insurance from an exchange”
Correct, but if you listen to the rhetoric from the Obama administration, they sell the website as the only way to get insurance. Sure it is dishonest but that is par for the course from this administration.
” and you can get insurance from an exchange without navigating a website”
Except calling the phone number doesn’t go through a separate system. The person on the other end simply enters your information into the same crappy website. Just another lie from the Obama administration and their supporters about how the system works.
“(remember everyone making fun of Obama repeating the toll-free number like a TV pitchman?”
Yes, he deserves a lot of ridicule for saying you can call a number to bypass the website when in fact you don’t bypass the website at all.
“What would actually be sickening is going back to a status quo where insurance companies could tell people without health insurance that they must go without”
If this was all about pre-existing conditions, then there were things that could be done that did not involve the destruction of the health care industry and the health insurance industry. Cutting these people a check would have been much cheaper and more honest. It is also important to remember that some people still wont have health insurance. According to various administration reports, this number is in the millions or tens of millions. Then there are stories like this one where the woman was priced out of the new insurance plans, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1oPktLLrmQ
But Obamacare wasn’t supposed to be just about providing insurance to people with pre-existing conditions. It was supposed to lower everyone’s premiums by $2500 among a bunch of other fraudulent claims. The way Obamacare effects every single person in the country goes far beyond forcing insurance companies to sell their products to people with pre-existing conditions. There are some good things in Obamacare but they don’t excuse how the law is a total failure as a whole.
Never once has Obama said you can go directly to the insurance company to get a policy because that would be admitting failure.
No, because it could be depriving the applicant of subsidies or access to Medicaid.
when in fact you don’t bypass the website at all.
Read the quoted passage. There’s nothing “sickening” about the fact that the person you’re talking to over the phone, or the person reading your paper application, is entering data into a government website. Nobody who isn’t a government employee is being forced to navigate a government website.
If this was all about pre-existing conditions, then there were things that could be done
It’s been 3 1/2 years. The Republicans have not voted on a single proposal that would make it possible for anyone to buy affordable insurance, without being discriminated against for pre-existing conditions. Yes, in theory there are “things that could be done” — but for decades none of them were being done, or even being voted on. As a practical reality, for millions of people (like me) with pre-existing conditions, it’s ACA or nothing. That’s a much bigger issue than problems with a website.
“No, because it could be depriving the applicant of subsidies or access to Medicaid.”
But a lot of people don’t qualify and Obama told them they had to enroll on his website anyway.
“There’s nothing “sickening” about the fact that the person you’re talking to over the phone, or the person reading your paper application, is entering data into a government website.”
Sickening is rather subjective. It isn’t sickening to talk to another person but it is sickening for Obama and his defenders to claim that calling the phone number bypasses the website when it doesn’t. It is dishonest.
“It’s been 3 1/2 years.”
After 3 1/2 years of Obama’s lies and misinformation about his tax Obama has been exposed as a fraud and even with all that time and billions of dollars he still failed.
“The Republicans have not voted on a single proposal that would make it possible for anyone to buy affordable insurance”
You don’t dictate affordability and there doesn’t have to be a fascist government solution to the problem.
“As a practical reality, for millions of people (like me) with pre-existing conditions, it’s ACA or nothing.”
You are not even going through Obamacare right now because your plan is exempt for the next year. Think of all the people going through cancer treatments right now who are losing their current insurance plans and doctors. As a practical reality it turns out, to quote Obama, “health insurance is more complicated than we (he means I) realized.”
“Yes, in theory there are “things that could be done” — but”
But Obamacare doesn’t do the things it was promised to do. It is a terrible bill. Making something worse isn’t a good justification for action.
“That’s a much bigger issue than problems with a website.”
Jim I totally agree with this. Could not agree more. The problems with Obamacare extend far beyond the website.
Obama told them they had to enroll on his website anyway
Obama never told anyone they had to enroll on his website.
it is sickening for Obama and his defenders to claim that calling the phone number bypasses the website when it doesn’t
As far as the applicant is concerned, it does. Obama never claimed that calling the phone number means that the website isn’t used, just that the person calling doesn’t have to use it.
You are not even going through Obamacare right now because your plan is exempt for the next year.
I’ve enrolled in a 2014 plan on Healthcare.gov (it’s gotten better since last month). Our premium is falling from $1,577 to $808.
Think of all the people going through cancer treatments right now who are losing their current insurance plans and doctors
You act as if it’s a new thing to have to change insurance plans. It’s par for the course — I’ve had to change plans every year or two for decades. There was never any legal requirement that insurers offer the same plans year after year.
Jim, I see you’re saving roughly $9000 per year, pre-tax on your insurance payments. Someone else pays for that.
“Obama never told anyone they had to enroll on his website.”
He told everyone to go to the website and enroll and reminded everyone they are compelled to buy insurance. He never presented any alternatives to buying healthcare because the success of his program depends on people using it.
“Obama never claimed that calling the phone number means that the website isn’t used”
Yes he did.
“just that the person calling doesn’t have to use it.”
Obama never made that distinction. People pointing out his lie made that distinction.
“I’ve enrolled in a 2014 plan on Healthcare.gov”
My bad, I thought you said last week you were in charge of your company’s health plan.
“You act as if it’s a new thing to have to change insurance plans. ”
No one changes plans and doctors when they are mid-chemo. This is an example of the unintended consequences of politicians taking over one of the most important sectors of our economy without understanding anything about the industry. Its complicated and it would have been better understand how complicated before writing the bill as opposed to after Obamacare goes live.
I see you’re saving roughly $9000 per year, pre-tax on your insurance payments. Someone else pays for that.
The other way to look at it is that I’m currently paying $9,000 per year for other people’s health benefits, simply because a risk model doesn’t like my health history.
Yes he did.
Show me the quote.
My bad, I thought you said last week you were in charge of your company’s health plan.
I am, but since I don’t have any employees in my state I’m considered a sole proprietor for Healthcare.gov purposes. If I had in-state employees I could have gotten the same plan through the small business exchange.
No one changes plans and doctors when they are mid-chemo.
Of course they do — they don’t have any choice. The plan I had in 2012 wasn’t offered in 2013 — not because of Obamacare, just because insurance plans change all the time. Insurers have never been required to keep offering a plan forever.
And of course, before Obamacare your insurer could drop you altogether when you started chemo — good luck getting a new individual policy then!
“And of course, before Obamacare your insurer could drop you altogether when you started chemo”
Not if your plan covered cancer. It would have been illegal to drop someone for a condition covered by their plan. This is just another example of lies regarding how things worked under the old system.
“Of course they do — they don’t have any choice. ”
Another lie.
“Show me the quote.”
You never watch his speeches? It explains the vast gulf between your understanding of what Obama says and what Obama says.
It would have been illegal to drop someone for a condition covered by their plan.
If only.
Recission is illegal now, thanks to the ACA.
This is just another example of lies regarding how things worked under the old system.
Amazing.
Wow Jim. That is some dishonest spin. I can’t copy/paste from this device but it wouldn’t hurt for you to argue in good faith instead of constantly spreading disinformation. I may have to report you to flag@whitehouse.gov for misrepresenting the health care industry.
As a practical reality, for millions of people (like me) with pre-existing conditions, it’s ACA or nothing.
Thought so. Seems like the only people backing Obamacare have something personal to gain by it. Just remember, some day, that your benefit comes at a considerable cost to others.
your benefit comes at a considerable cost to others
And who do you think was paying for the pre-ACA system?
So Jim agrees that these benefits come at a cost, are not free, and Obamacare does not end this even though it was promised as he usually argues.
Past Jim: “Obamacare will prevent the distributing of costs from people going to the ER for healthcare.”
Present Jim: “Who cares if Obamacare takes money from one group and gives it to another.”
In order to solve the problem of distributing other people’s money we must distribute more of other people’s money.
“It’s been 3 1/2 years. The Republicans have not voted on a single proposal that would make it possible for anyone to buy affordable insurance, without being discriminated against for pre-existing conditions. ”
Moronic statement (as usual).
1) Nothing the GOP passed in the House would see the light of day in the Senate for the last 3.5 years
2) Once Obamacare was passed there was no GOP ability to change anything.
3) Your very statement reveals your Statist Comunist frame of mind. You are still welded to the idea that the government is supposed to supply a solution; or even CAN supply a solution…..
You have not learned this is beyond the government’s ability.
IT’S NOT THE GOVERNMENT’S JOB TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.
4) The government already put in place laws that protect people from getting dropped once they get a condition – it’s called Contract Law
5) Does it really seem odd or bad to you that someone with a pre-existing condition ought to pay more for health *insurance*? NOTE: Not health CARE…insurance.
As a typical kool aid drinker you don’t want to accept reality and we understand that, Jim. But reality is asserting itself right now even as you sit there gaping in amazement at all the destruction and (soon to be) death around you.
1) Nothing the GOP passed in the House would see the light of day in the Senate for the last 3.5 years
2) Once Obamacare was passed there was no GOP ability to change anything.
That didn’t stop them from voting dozens of times to repeal the ACA. They are clearly willing to take time to vote on things they care about, and coverage for people with pre-existing conditions isn’t one of those things.
The government already put in place laws that protect people from getting dropped once they get a condition – it’s called Contract Law
Contract law proved ineffective in stopping insurers from dropping sick people. The financial incentives to do so were enormous.
Does it really seem odd or bad to you that someone with a pre-existing condition ought to pay more for health *insurance*?
Yes, it seems bad to me.
That didn’t stop them from voting dozens of times to repeal the ACA.
Because repealing ACA would return power to the market that, as Gregg notes, is counter to socialist mindsets.
The financial incentives to do so were enormous.
Actually, most of the Republican proposals I recall were directed at changing the financial incentives. For example, tort reform that capped liabilities. This would have removed the financial incentive to sue, but more importantly, it would remove the incentive for doctor’s to request superfluous procedures that raised medical costs while protecting against the much higher cost of a malpractice lawsuit. After all, the incentives showed it was harder to sue for malpractice because the doctor provided excessive care.
So as you write about financial incentives, you point directly to the problems Republicans tried to address before Obamacare, and were told by Progressives “it’s not good enough”.
I should also note, if you don’t like tort reform; keep in mind every western country with socialized medicine also changed the laws in regards to suing for malpractice. Those claims don’t go to civil trial but to a special tribunal with pre-determined actuaries of how much one is compensated based on type of malpractice.
What would actually be sickening is going back to a status quo where insurance companies could tell people without health insurance that they must go without, full stop.
What is sickening is that people believe pre-Obamacare insurance was actually market-driven insurance. Washington state (where I live) was only allowed to have FOUR insurance companies. And, a mandate to provide mental illness to insurance programs drove up the cost of insurance.
I think your argument is completely ignorant.
Ya, our rates have been high for a long time. Plans similar to the one I have were hundreds of dollars cheaper in other states.
It also flies in the face of Obama’s claims that it was the wild west before Obamacare. Every state regulates insurance companies to one degree or another.
Can’t get subsidies without the exchange, Baghdad Jim.
Apparently that’s changing — see the link above to yesterday’s HHS conference call.
It can’t change. It’s the law.
Obama is apparently claiming that you can still get subsidies if you buy the plan directly from an insurer, but that is illegal under the provisions of Obamacare. Megan McArdle link
“unless it can be said that a rational and fair man necessarily would admit that the statute proposed would infringe fundamental principles as they have been understood by the traditions of our people and our law.”
Obamacare is a tax for existing. That is like taxing the air you breath.
Obamacare is a tax for existing
No, you’re free to exist. You don’t have to pay any penalty unless you earn enough money to have to file a tax return, and in that case you’re already paying payroll taxes. Are Social Security and Medicare a tax for existing — they’re much harder to avoid than Obamacare.
“You don’t have to pay any penalty unless you earn enough money to have to file a tax return”
You have to have health insurance regardless of how much money you make. Since Obamacare requires the IRS verify you have coverage, people who previously did not have to file a return, now have to file a return.
“No, you’re free to exist.”
Doesn’t feel like it comrade.
You have to have health insurance regardless of how much money you make.
Not true — see question 6 (“What are the statutory exemptions from the requirement to obtain minimum essential coverage?”), answer 4 (“No filing requirement”). And there are 8 other reasons why a person can be exempt from the mandate.
Since Obamacare requires the IRS verify you have coverage, people who previously did not have to file a return, now have to file a return.
Nope. Where do you get this stuff?
“Nope. Where do you get this stuff?”
I suppose from listening to Obama telling everyone they have to buy insurance. Turns out listening to Obama will lead to mistakes like this.
I admit I was in error there, will you admit to any errors?
But we also know the administration does not strictly adhere to the law or its regulations. So just because the regs says something doesn’t mean much.
I suppose from listening to Obama telling everyone they have to buy insurance.
So Obama says that everyone has to buy insurance (although I’m not sure he’s phrased it quite that way), and from that you conclude that everyone will have to file a tax return? You might want to resist jumping to conclusions that way — it’s leading you astray.
will you admit to any errors
Sure, which ones do you have in mind?
Too many to list Jim. You are constantly and consistently wrong and even when shown the error of your ways, you double down with more willfully dishonest arguments.
So I erred by listening to Obama just like all of the Obamacare defenders have erred by taking Obama at his word. Down a little further you claim everyone knew Obama was lying as an excuse for his behavior. So Obama can lie and its ok but for people who disagree with Obama to use his own words as the basis for predicting what will happen are wrong to jump to conclusions.
You know in that list you linked to there is a religious exemption but Obama and the Democrats have interpreted that exemption is such a way that in practical effect, it doesn’t exist. Now, if I listned to the rhetoric, I would claim there is a religious exemption but that would be wrong. I can imagine the mental gymnastics you will go through defending that and it will be devoid of assimilation of the discussion we had in this thread.
You know Jim this is really telling. You have gone from we must all accept Obama is operating in good faith with no nefarious intentions to we should all assume Obama is operating in bad faith with nefarious intentions and its oir fault for not be more critical of Obama.
When are you going to come out of the closet and stop voting for Democrats?
Obamacare is a tax for existing. That is like taxing the air you breath.
It’s worse. Because they’ll be unable to restrain themselves with limitations. “No, you can’t be Evel Knieval, because it will cost taxpayers money.”, Ride along on Grasshopper?, F-1 Racing?, Demolition derbies? Rodeos?
Hell, Football.
When it is a private industry telling someone “It’s fracking stupid to put a house there, we’ll either charge you something ridiculous or refuse you”, that’s one thing. But moron-insuruance means (a) the insurance companies can’t say ‘boo’, and (b) the government won’t be able to restrain itself from forbidding the activities entirely.
“I want to go to Mars” -> “You can go to the funny-farm, it’s cheaper for us.”
Obamacare is a tax for existing. That is like taxing the air you breath.
No, no, no, silly, the tax on the air you breathe is the Carbon Tax.
Well, the good thing about Obamacare is that it will probably be repealed completely sometime this year, as Democrats in the House and Senate start getting screamed at by their own Democrat constituents who have lost access to their doctor and their health insurance. That both scares and deeply angers people. Mitch McConnell is already running some absolutely devastating ads.
If not, then it will get repealed after the 2014 elections, and if Obama vetoes that it will get repealed by the next President, who, after this fiasco, will be a Republican.
Obama’s poll numbers are tanking, and the most important of those polls is the question “Is the President honest and trustworthy.” Obama is now very far underwater on that question, and that’s the one question whose answer is on a one-way-only downward ratchet. “Retrust” isn’t even a word in the English language – because the concept doesn’t exist. For the Obama voters who realize they’ve been conned and lied to, there’s no going back. Combine that with his obvious complete incompetence in implementing their core issue, and the most he can hope for is to be a laughingstock.
Well, the good thing about Obamacare is that it will probably be repealed completely sometime this year
I’d love for that to happen, but my take is that we’ll probably still have it ten years from now. It’s notoriously hard to get rid of bad law.
it will probably be repealed completely sometime this year
Of course it won’t — it won’t be repealed as long as Obama is in office, as you note later in the post.
Come 2016 Obama may have completely lost the trust of the American people (or not — Clinton was very popular even after famously lying to the public), but there will be tens of millions of people getting insurance through Healthcare.gov. Any repeal proposal that doesn’t keep those people insured will be a political non-starter.
Tens of millions?! The real number seems to be tens of thousands.
You should go back to “The Americans are dying in ditches and committing suicide everywhere. We are beating them with shovels!!!!”
“but there will be tens of millions of people getting insurance through Healthcare.gov.”
Well, they don’t have to go through the website remember…
And how many of those people will simply be replacing their cancelled plans? I bet Obama will claim people replacing their cancelled plans are getting insurance for the first time in their lives like he did the other day. People getting insurance who already had insurance, isn’t a sign of success but I fully expect Obama and the Democrats to lie about it.
how many of those people will simply be replacing their cancelled plans?
Plenty, but politically it doesn’t matter. People are upset now because they don’t like change. In 2017 repealing the ACA will require even more change than we’re seeing now. Bias in favor of the status quo will have flipped from being the biggest source of Obamacare opposition, to being a major source of support.
Politically it does matter. Obama will be taking credit for providing health insurance to people who already had it. It will be another outright lie and people will notice. Getting rid of Obamacare wont mean everyone loses their insurance. Just like the old system, people will still buy their own.
Jim, that’s like claiming that once people get used to paying $6.00 a gallon for gas, they’d be upset to go back to paying $2.00 a gallon.
Ugh. Can we not call this a “fix?” It’s not even a patch. You can call it a bandage if you want to dignify it but it’s more like phrenology.
“Yes, but there’s no mandate for insurers to offer direct enrollment with subsidies outside Healthcare.gov. It’s just in their interest to do so.”
It is also illegal to for insurance companies to directly sell subsidized plans.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-19/obama-breaks-the-health-law-to-save-it.html
“(III) that is not a health insurance issuer or that is treated under subsection (a) or (b) of section 52 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as a member of the same controlled group of corporations (or under common control with) as a health insurance issuer; or”
But Obama and the Democrats have already established that the law means very little to them, almost as little as telling the truth.
“Of course they do — they don’t have any choice. The plan I had in 2012 wasn’t offered in 2013 — not because of Obamacare, just because insurance plans change all the time.”
Did your old plan meet the mandate? If not, then you lost it because of Obamacare and not because of churn. I am sorry Obama lied to you too.
“Insurers have never been required to keep offering a plan forever.”
But Obama said we could keep our plans…
ACA requirements weren’t in force in 2013, or in 2009, or 2008, or other years when I had to change plans because the old one went away.
But Obama said we could keep our plans
If you really thought that meant that he was going to force insurers to offer their 2010 plans forever, you weren’t paying attention.
Everyone who was paying attention said that Obama was lying when he said, about 39 times, that “If you like your existing plan, you can keep it.”
If you really thought that meant that he was going to force insurers to offer their 2010 plans forever, you weren’t paying attention.
Indeed. Those of us paying attention understood his claim to mean “I’m not going to force insurers to quit issuing your plan”, but then he signed the regulation that did just that and was given the briefings that said it would cause tens of millions to lose the plans they currently had.
I thought Obamacare was supposed to punish insurance companies for actions like dropping health insurance plans but instead it reinforces those negative attributes Obama campaigned on ending. The difference now is that in addition to insurers constantly fiddling with plans we have politicians and unelected political appointees constantly fiddling with plans.
Having every interaction with a doctor monitored and commented on by the government is worse than whatever fabricated and real ills of the old system. Remember, Obamacare is more than a website.
Jim’s reply to this: “the people applying for insurance will be on the hook for the full payments”
is this:
“No, the government will be on the hook. ”
You still haven’t learned…well…anything…about where the government gets it’s money have you? They get it from YOU. The government has no money. It earns no money.
So YOU are on the hook……
You are on the hook for the tax money used to pay this off…
You are on the hook for the principle and interest on the 40 cents on the dollar that is borrowed form the Chinese to pay this off….
and you are going to suffer the consequences of printing money to pay this off.
And so are any descendants or nieces or nephews you might have.
You still have this 7th grade notion that the government bills somehow magically do not affect you.
Socialists think that way…they see a big pile of money and figure if they take it the pile will re-generate itself. Never understanding that the very act of taking it destroys the ability to generate it.
And also never understanding that all sorts of great things for the nation as a whole comes from the owners of that money (which is not the government) using that money in imaginative ways.
Also socialists do not understand that the high cost of health care and high insurance premiums are *DUE* to the very socialistic actions they take.
One of the positives of the Obamacare debacle is that we get to see the collapse due to socialism and centralized governing in real time with a small dt….the collapse is happening rapidly so peole don’t have to wait 20 years to see that it’s a failure.
So YOU are on the hook
Right, but that’s true whether the subsidy payment system is fully operational in January or sometime later.
socialists do not understand that the high cost of health care and high insurance premiums are *DUE* to the very socialistic actions they take
Isn’t it funny that health care procedures are much cheaper in more socialist countries?
No one knows what health-care procedures cost in more socialist countries.
Why not? You can see what the doctor, nurse, hospital, etc. were paid to perform the procedure. You can look at total health spending, and a census of all the procedures provided, and divide.
There’s no way to look at it that would lead you to the conclusion that health care is more costly in countries (e.g. Sweden, Norway, France) that are more socialist than the U.S.
Under socialism, the actual costs tend to be hidden. You can’t know what anything really costs except in a free market.
census of all the procedures provided, and divide
No wonder Dem’s are fighting Texas’s abortion law. They think medical procedures take place in a pasture. There’s no capital expenditures, no investment in new technologies; there’s just operational expenses that you divide to determine the cost per unit. With business minds like Jim’s running our government; is it really any wonder why Healthcare.gov wasn’t operational on Oct. 1?
Healthcare costs cheaper in socialist countries? Sort of like how calling a phone number bypasses healthcare.gov. It doesn’t but as Jim points out, the consumer doesn’t see what happens after the phone call so it doesn’t effect them. Just like the consumer not seeing the financials of providing health insurance and health care because they don’t directly pay for either and then argued as being cheaper or affordable. This strategy is based on dishonesty.
“Insurers have never been required to keep offering a plan forever.”
Yiu keep repeating this as it it actually means something. It means nothing. My insurance policy for the last 20 years has changed slightly (e.g. co pay going up, my monthly costs gone up slightly), but the POLICY has remained essentially the same.
so yes while there are slight changes which allows one to say “it’s not the same” the changes are so miniscule that they are a complete non-factor.
Complete non-factor. Get that?
And while no one forces the companies to keep them largely the same they know it’s good business to keep them the same so they keep them largely the same.
My insurance policy for the last 20 years has changed slightly (e.g. co pay going up, my monthly costs gone up slightly), but the POLICY has remained essentially the same
Good for you, but others have had very different experiences, and if you’d gotten sick you might have been one of them. Your ability to get a similar policy year after year was completely at the mercy of the insurance company’s actuaries.
they know it’s good business to keep them the same so they keep them largely the same
Only if the risk group is performing as predicted. Otherwise it’s in their interest to make the plan go away.
Still waiting to find out why insurance companies do not or should not have the right to choose who they do business with.
Because racism. Because Obama. Also, because shut up.