Two Positives About the ACA

[kalm]

Yeah, I think it's a big clumsy attempt and there some issues with it, but a couple of these provisions are flat out huge in their importance.

However, what struck me so clearly at the hearing today was the fundamental lack of understanding about the workings and benefits of the Affordable Care Act.

For example, there has been talk in recent days that some people may not be able to keep their doctor or their insurance. But the government has never had the ability to force doctors to stay with a particular insurance carrier or to prevent insurance carriers from changing the health insurance plans they offer. Because of this, there has always been high turnover -- 35 to 67 percent of enrollees in the individual market leave their plan after a year -- in part because insurance carriers often cancelled plans or individuals found their plans didn't cover all they thought it did when they tried to use it. As insurance companies adjust to comply with the Affordable Care Act, some plans may disappear, but they'll be replaced by new plans that usually offer better benefits and services. (this has been my experience)

There is a distinction between cancelling a plan because it does not provide the necessary, mandatory, essential benefits and withdrawing coverage from someone because -- as they would in the pre-Affordable Care Act days -- they have a preexisting condition, or have reached their lifetime coverage limits. The Affordable Care Act will actually prevent people from getting thrown off of their insurance plans. Before the Affordable Care Act, when you got sick or had medical emergency, insurance companies would pour through your application to find discrepancies or some overlooked previous condition so they could deny your claim. Now, the Affordable Care Act prevents them from denying you insurance based on a preexisting condition.

Before the Affordable Care Act, if you hit your lifetime limit for coverage, that was it. Your insurance company would not pay for any more care and you would not have insurance. Once again, the Affordable Care Act put an end to this practice, and now there are no lifetime limits. (healthcare costs have been the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the past).

Republicans are often touting their own health care plans, but we have yet to see them bring them to the floor for a vote or discuss any specifics. But I seriously doubt that their plan would force doctors to work for insurance companies against their will, or address the twin specters of lifetime coverage limits and preexisting conditions.

The open secret in Washington is that Republicans are so afraid that the Affordable Care Act will succeed that they are barely able to contain their glee when talking about problems with healthcare.gov. I am struck by their rhetorical flexibility: Only a few days ago they shut down the government in an attempt to prevent anyone from signing up. And yet, today, they are outraged that not enough people are signing up? It's clear to the rest of us that the ban on refusing coverage based on preexisting conditions, the lifting of lifetime limits, allowing young adults to stay on their parents care, covering preventative care at no cost, and a slew of other provisions are winning over more Americans every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-earl- ... 75889.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CAA Flagship]

You are trying too hard.
This will make it easier to achieve your goal.

[D1B]

Crickets from the conkets.

What up Blandy and Jizz?

[houndawg]

ASSGreaseFun? ColBogus? Bunco? LeadDolt? Jivytalk? My goodness...they seem to have disappeared...

[CitadelGrad]

There is a difference between the government not being able to prevent insurance carriers from changing insurance policies and coverage, and the government encouraging insurance companies to cancel them by setting mandates that make existing policies too costly.

If Obama thought that mandating coverages (many coverages that are unwanted and unneeded) without raising the cost of existing policies, then he must be dumber than even I thought. It's Econ 101.

[89Hen]

Crickets from the conkets.

What up Blandy and Jizz?

ASSGreaseFun? ColBogus? Bunco? LeadDolt? Jivytalk? My goodness...they seem to have disappeared...

[Baldy]

Crickets from the conkets.

What up Blandy and Jizz?

ASSGreaseFun? ColBogus? Bunco? LeadDolt? Jivytalk? My goodness...they seem to have disappeared...

[Pwns]

But the government has never had the ability to force doctors to stay with a particular insurance carrier or to prevent insurance carriers from changing the health insurance plans they offer.

Who was expecting the law to do that? The point is that Obama says the law doesn't force people to lose their plans, which was patently false. You will only keep if Obamacare approves of your plan.

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah, I think it's a big clumsy attempt and there some issues with it, but a couple of these provisions are flat out huge in their importance.

However, what struck me so clearly at the hearing today was the fundamental lack of understanding about the workings and benefits of the Affordable Care Act.

For example, there has been talk in recent days that some people may not be able to keep their doctor or their insurance. But the government has never had the ability to force doctors to stay with a particular insurance carrier or to prevent insurance carriers from changing the health insurance plans they offer. Because of this, there has always been high turnover -- 35 to 67 percent of enrollees in the individual market leave their plan after a year -- in part because insurance carriers often cancelled plans or individuals found their plans didn't cover all they thought it did when they tried to use it. As insurance companies adjust to comply with the Affordable Care Act, some plans may disappear, but they'll be replaced by new plans that usually offer better benefits and services. (this has been my experience)

There is a distinction between cancelling a plan because it does not provide the necessary, mandatory, essential benefits and withdrawing coverage from someone because -- as they would in the pre-Affordable Care Act days -- they have a preexisting condition, or have reached their lifetime coverage limits. The Affordable Care Act will actually prevent people from getting thrown off of their insurance plans. Before the Affordable Care Act, when you got sick or had medical emergency, insurance companies would pour through your application to find discrepancies or some overlooked previous condition so they could deny your claim. Now, the Affordable Care Act prevents them from denying you insurance based on a preexisting condition.

Before the Affordable Care Act, if you hit your lifetime limit for coverage, that was it. Your insurance company would not pay for any more care and you would not have insurance. Once again, the Affordable Care Act put an end to this practice, and now there are no lifetime limits. (healthcare costs have been the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the past).

Republicans are often touting their own health care plans, but we have yet to see them bring them to the floor for a vote or discuss any specifics. But I seriously doubt that their plan would force doctors to work for insurance companies against their will, or address the twin specters of lifetime coverage limits and preexisting conditions.

The open secret in Washington is that Republicans are so afraid that the Affordable Care Act will succeed that they are barely able to contain their glee when talking about problems with healthcare.gov. I am struck by their rhetorical flexibility: Only a few days ago they shut down the government in an attempt to prevent anyone from signing up. And yet, today, they are outraged that not enough people are signing up? It's clear to the rest of us that the ban on refusing coverage based on preexisting conditions, the lifting of lifetime limits, allowing young adults to stay on their parents care, covering preventative care at no cost, and a slew of other provisions are winning over more Americans every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-earl- ... 75889.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So now, instead of individuals going bankrupt, the whole COUNTRY will go bankrupt as a result. Beautiful plan.

And the bolded statement is absolutely retarded.

[D1B]

Yeah, I think it's a big clumsy attempt and there some issues with it, but a couple of these provisions are flat out huge in their importance.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-earl- ... 75889.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So now, instead of individuals going bankrupt, the whole COUNTRY will go bankrupt as a result. Beautiful plan.

And the bolded statement is absolutely retarded.

Z, you're a gullible dumbass.

[CID1990]

I am still dizzy from the latest spin.

"The government has never been able to compel insurers to allow people to keep their plans in perpetuity, so Obama lying for 5 years is actually no biggie. People should have known!"

Even you guys aren't buying this crap so quit it.

[Ibanez]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

[houndawg]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

Bush didn't have any policies.

[89Hen]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

Bush didn't have any policies.

Bookmarked.

[ASUG8]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

Bush didn't have any policies.

Sure he did....it was all the bad stuff that rendered our current president impotent to correct. You know, bad economic policy that was going to be fixed, a war that was going to stop, a prison that was going to be shut down, a Patriot Act that infringed on everyone's rights. Poor BO never stood a chance, so he just escalated or ignored most of it.

[Chizzang]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

WTF?
Isn't that exactly what the Right is doing right now..? (actually for years now)

I'm confused
please explain to me how different the Rabid right wing factions are than the Rabid Left wing factions

[Ibanez]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

WTF?
Isn't that exactly what the Right is doing right now..? (actually for years now)

I'm confused
please explain to me how different the Rabid right wing factions are than the Rabid Left wing factions

Have I missed the repeated calls for Obamas resignation? I read the news. There have been people saying he and others must step down but I don't think it was like it was during Bush's Reign of Error.


Sent from my iPhone

[Ibanez]

If this were Bush and his policies, the left would be foaming at the mouth for his resignation.


Sent from my iPhone

Bush didn't have any policies.

Sure he did. You just know them as Obama's policies.


Sent from my iPhone

[Chizzang]

WTF?
Isn't that exactly what the Right is doing right now..? (actually for years now)

I'm confused
please explain to me how different the Rabid right wing factions are than the Rabid Left wing factions

Have I missed the repeated calls for Obamas resignation? I read the news. There have been people saying he and others must step down but I don't think it was like it was during Bush's Reign of Error.


Sent from my iPhone

Really..? Okay thanks for your unbiased report

[DSUrocks07]

Have I missed the repeated calls for Obamas resignation? I read the news. There have been people saying he and others must step down but I don't think it was like it was during Bush's Reign of Error.


Sent from my iPhone

Really..? Okay thanks for your unbiased report

It's easier to say that its "because he's black"

[DSUrocks07]

Two things that should have been the ONLY changes that should have been made.

1) Allow purchase of out-of-state insurance
2) Don't deny for pre-existing conditions

And both of those could have been accomplished by the NAIC.

And also a possible consideration, Instead of Medicare/caid...whatever, the government provides subsidies instead of direct insurance payments to healthcare providers.

But no, we have a 2,000 page law that five years later people are still finding out "what's in it".

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert on the subject but...

Spoiler: show

http://www.striphotels.com/chains/holid ... xpress.jpg

[GSUhooligan]

Two things that should have been the ONLY changes that should have been made.

1) Allow purchase of out-of-state insurance
2) Don't deny for pre-existing conditions

And both of those could have been accomplished by the NAIC.

And also a possible consideration, Instead of Medicare/caid...whatever, the government provides subsidies instead of direct insurance payments to healthcare providers.

But no, we have a 2,000 page law that five years later people are still finding out "what's in it".

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert on the subject but...

Spoiler: show

http://www.striphotels.com/chains/holid ... xpress.jpg

If you make a law that insurance companies cannot deny pre-existing conditions without a mandate for everyone to have insurance or pay a penalty, everyone's health insurance would sky rocket.

[CitadelGrad]

Two things that should have been the ONLY changes that should have been made.

1) Allow purchase of out-of-state insurance
2) Don't deny for pre-existing conditions

And both of those could have been accomplished by the NAIC.

And also a possible consideration, Instead of Medicare/caid...whatever, the government provides subsidies instead of direct insurance payments to healthcare providers.

But no, we have a 2,000 page law that five years later people are still finding out "what's in it".

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert on the subject but...

Spoiler: show

http://www.striphotels.com/chains/holid ... xpress.jpg

If you make a law that insurance companies cannot deny pre-existing conditions without a mandate for everyone to have insurance or pay a penalty, everyone's health insurance would sky rocket.

If you mandate that everyone must have health insurance with mandated coverages, you are creating artificial demand, which also causes premium's to sky rocket. It's Econ 101 supply & demand.

[Ibanez]

Have I missed the repeated calls for Obamas resignation? I read the news. There have been people saying he and others must step down but I don't think it was like it was during Bush's Reign of Error.


Sent from my iPhone

Really..? Okay thanks for your unbiased report

Report. Please prove me wrong.

Unbiased? How is this: Obama is Bush version 2.0. Same shitty policies.

[CID1990]

Really..? Okay thanks for your unbiased report

Report. Please prove me wrong.

Unbiased? How is this: Obama is Bush version 2.0. Same shitty policies.

They are not the same. Clinton started rendition to countries that pulled fingernails.

Bush decided to hang on to some of them and pour water on their faces.

Obama decided that both of the above policies violate basic human rights.

So instead of rendition and water boarding, we just launch a Hellfire missile into said bad guy's house and whack everybody within 50 feet of him.

This policy is quite distinct from the previous two, which had fuzzy lines.