Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

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.

D1B wrote:Crickets from the conkets.

What up Blandy and Jizz?

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

89Hen wrote:

D1B wrote:Crickets from the conkets.

What up Blandy and Jizz?

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

kalm wrote: 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.

kalm wrote: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;

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote: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.

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


Sent from my iPhone

houndawg wrote:

Ibanez wrote: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.

houndawg wrote:

Ibanez wrote: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.

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


Sent from my iPhone

Chizzang wrote:

Ibanez wrote: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

houndawg wrote:

Ibanez wrote: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.

Ibanez wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
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

Chizzang wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
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

Spoiler: show

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

DSUrocks07 wrote: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 wrote:

DSUrocks07 wrote: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.

Chizzang wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
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

Ibanez wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
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.