Uninsured Rate Drops To Lowest Level Since The '90s

[djs]

The calculators are subsidized and available in affordable monthly payments. You will not pay more than 9.5% of your income for one, but I'm not sure if the family glitch occurs here as well.

If something goes wrong, it is covered under a maintainence plan. You pay the first $3000 in repairs annually but everything is covered after that. Also, the solar battery will be replaced free if needed.

Dan

 

[sman]

Also, the solar battery will be replaced free if needed. Dan

That's only if Solyndra is still in business. Oh wait a minute....

 

[RayNY]

March 19, 2015

This week the news media is bombarding the public with news that 16.4 million formerly uninsured people now have health insurance (Private & Medicaid) thanks to Obama and ObamaCare.

I like how they don't put a time limit on formerly uninsured, nor do they address availability of coverage, nor do they compensate for those who lost it.

It's like one of us saying "I have 500 new clients this year! (but I lost 300 current clients, 100 were with me in the past and came back, and 50 I'm just helping for free.)"

 

[AllenChicago]

I like how they don't put a time limit on formerly uninsured, nor do they address availability of coverage, nor do they compensate for those who lost it.

It's like one of us saying "I have 500 new clients this year! (but I lost 300 current clients, 100 were with me in the past and came back, and 50 I'm just helping for free.)"

Even if all those enrollments were legitimately uninsured prior to 2010, the Congressional Budget Office is still labeling the overall ObamaCare initiative a failure, because it's only met 65% of its projected goal to date.

Excerpt: "When the Democrats rammed Obamacare through Congress in 2010 without a single Republican vote, the CBO said that the unpopular overhaul would lead to a net increase of 26 million people with health insurance by 2015 (15 million through Medicaid plus 13 million through the Obamacare exchanges minus 2 million who would otherwise have had private insurance but wouldn't because of Obamacare).

Fast-forwarding five years, the CBO now says that Obamacare's tally for 2015 will actually be a net increase of just 17 million people (10 million through Medicaid plus 11 million through the Obamacare exchanges minus 4 million who would otherwise have had private insurance but won't, or don't, because of Obamacare).

In other words, Obamacare is now slated to hit only 65 percent of the CBO's original coverage projection for 2015."

Source: CBO: Obamacare to Hit Only 65 Percent of 2015 Coverage Target | The Weekly Standard

 

[FLM2]

Basically the government could have hit these numbers by simply expanding Medicaid and leaving everything else alone.

They would have saved all of the cost of establishing a 'Marketplace' that Healthsherpa replicated for probably under $100K and allowed people to continue with their existing insurance.

Expanded Medicaid +National High Risk Pool= Good solution

Affordable Care Act + Marketplace= Bad Solution (actually, no solution).

 

[russelltw]

FLM2,
You mentioned something that is not correct. I want to point out where the "right" media tries to compare HS to HC.gov. They used to say, "look at these 3 college kids who created a website that works better than HC.gov." That's not really a valid comparison. HC.gov and HS are not the same thing. HS runs quotes (fairly simple) and now ties in with HC.gov (likely more complicated). HC.gov on the other hand had to tie into the IRS, Dept of Homeland Security, and Social Security databases.

I have a friend who works for GCI (who created hc.gov). He did not work on the project, but knows some who did. He said there were issues getting all the systems (IRS, SS, Dept of Homeland, etc) to communicate with each other correctly. Add in all the last minute changes requested by the Feds, and you have hc.gov.

We can definitely agree that hc.gov was a mess. Changing the requirements made it hard for the programmers to complete and test. They kept missing milestones because of the changes. As they got closer and closer to the Oct 1 open date, it became an issue of just getting it to work period, which they could not do.

I am not a fan of this law, but I feel like there are enough issues with the law other than making statements like "HS can do what HC.gov can do." I used HS quite a bit this AEP, but it's not accurate to compare the two.

Stepping of my soap box.

 

[FLM2]

FLM2,
You mentioned something that is not correct. I want to point out where the "right" media tries to compare HS to HC.gov. They used to say, "look at these 3 college kids who created a website that works better than HC.gov." That's not really a valid comparison. HC.gov and HS are not the same thing. HS runs quotes (fairly simple) and now ties in with HC.gov (likely more complicated). HC.gov on the other hand had to tie into the IRS, Dept of Homeland Security, and Social Security databases.

I have a friend who works for GCI (who created hc.gov). He did not work on the project, but knows some who did. He said there were issues getting all the systems (IRS, SS, Dept of Homeland, etc) to communicate with each other correctly. Add in all the last minute changes requested by the Feds, and you have hc.gov.

We can definitely agree that hc.gov was a mess. Changing the requirements made it hard for the programmers to complete and test. They kept missing milestones because of the changes. As they got closer and closer to the Oct 1 open date, it became an issue of just getting it to work period, which they could not do.

I am not a fan of this law, but I feel like there are enough issues with the law other than making statements like "HS can do what HC.gov can do." I used HS quite a bit this AEP, but it's not accurate to compare the two.

Stepping of my soap box.

I'm not blaming the software developers, they can only write code to the specification. It's the administration that completely screwed the pooch on this with a structure that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Obviously I oversimplified the creation of the Marketplace but this is something that was completely unnecessary, it's just created a level of bureaucracy that is almost unprecedented.

All that is really needed is a quote engine and submission capability to the insurance company, not the Marketplace-let people obtain subsidies based on their last filed income taxes with an ability to file an appeal if income has changed (lowered)-the application provides the insurance company with a tax return, the insurance company sends the government a bill, and the Marketplace is completely eliminated.

Or just, as Ann H has said numerous times, have a voucher system that is generated when you file your taxes that is used to purchase insurance. The consumer picks the plan and submits the voucher with the application along with payment.

 

[russelltw]

FLM2,
I don't disagree with you on any of that. I used to think HSAs would be the answer to health insurance back when they were cost effective. At least the client has some skin in the game when it comes to deciding if they need 5 different tests done to make sure it's the flu.

When it's $5 copay and $700 max out of pocket, who cares what you do once you go over your max...
R

 

[scagnt83]

She said she didn't want to go on Medicare. She says she pays $29/mo, $0/$10 copay $5/$10 generic/name brand scripts and only a $500 hospital deductible.

Can that be right?

I took my kid to the urgent care clinic a few weekends ago. The guy paying in front of us had a $2.50 Co-Pay. He paid in quarters!!

Then while waiting in the little room, I hear him talking to the doctor in the hall. The doctor tells him there is no real need to come back, he just has a cold. Long story short the conversation ended with him telling the Doc that if he didnt get better by Thursday he would come back in...

Me, I had a $40 Co-Pay and the last thing I wanted to do was go back!!
If he had the same Co-Pay as me I bet he wouldnt be like that

 

[somarco]

Wonder if the guy had a subsidized Obamacrack plan? Haven't seen anything close to a $2.50 copay, even on union plans, in at least 20 years, maybe even further back than that.