“One of Barack Obama’s best-remembered promises was, “If you like your health insurance, you can keep it.” But at the very same time the president was making that promise, lawmakers on Capitol Hill were drafting legislation that would make sure that promise could never be kept.
We call it Obamacare.
Moreover, the problem is not only that millions of people were unable to keep the plan they had in 2010, when the health reform law was passed. They are not likely to be able to keep for long any plan they have selected this year on a health insurance exchange. As we go forward, all health plans will be subjected to restrictions that are likely to change every year. So a plan that meets the Obamacare restriction this year, may not meet the restriction next year or the year after that.”
“The man-made catastrophe known as the “Affordable Care Act” and “Obamacare” still lurks. And nobody should interpret the absence of daily negative headlines as a sign the law’s myriad problems have been rectified, or that there is substance to Harry Reid’s claim of “untrue” horror stories following the law’s implementation.
So, how much damage has been inflicted now that gross ineptitude in foreign policy has replaced gross ineptitude in health care policy?
Let me count the ways … and lies.”
“Supporters of the Obama administration like to create the impression that there is no viable alternative to the Affordable Care Act — i.e., Obamacare. But that is demonstrably not true. Republican senators Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, and Orrin Hatch introduced a plan earlier this year that would cover just as many people with insurance as Obamacare at a fraction of the cost.
Now we have confirmation, in the form of a new cost estimate, that a similarly constructed but slightly different proposal would also cost less, while covering nearly the same number of people.”
” Who’s up for the latest batch of bad Obamacare-related news?
(1) Consumers brace for the second full year of Obamacare implementation, as the average individual market premium hike clocks in at eight percent — with some rates spiking by as much as 30 percent.
(2) “Wide swings in prices,” with some experiencing “double digit increases.”(Remember what we were promised):
Insurance executives and managers of the online marketplaces are already girding for the coming open enrollment period, saying they fear it could be even more difficult than the last. One challenge facing consumers will be wide swings in prices. Some insurers are seeking double-digit price increases…”
“The administration finally released the Obamacare enrollment count this week.
Like everything else about their scorekeeping we got a number. Just one number. A number that was conveniently better than we had expected. And, we got no real context for the number or any of the back-up information.
I thought this quote in a Politico article was telling:
The figure is complex to unravel. The number came from the health insurers, who told the Obama administration every month how many people are covered by Affordable Care Act plans. A CMS official said Thursday that in prior monthly reports, the numbers varied widely, but recently stabilized.””
“Washington is full of ideas to overhaul Medicare. Some would increase the program’s eligibility age, others would charge higher-income beneficiaries more for their coverage. There’s movement to link payment to the quality — rather than the quantity — of care delivered.
Marge Ginsburg decided to ask ordinary Americans how they would change the federal entitlement program.”
“President Obama’s claim last spring that 8 million people had enrolled in ObamaCare recently got a significant downgrade from the head of the agency overseeing the plan.
Marilyn Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, told a congressional committee that “as of August 15, this year, we have 7.3 million Americans enrolled in Health Insurance Marketplace coverage and these are individuals who paid their premiums.””
“The launch of the Affordable Care Act has focused attention on the idea of a health insurance exchange, or marketplace. Separate from the ACA, private exchanges have also started to emerge as an option for employers providing coverage to their workers. This report identifies the different types of private exchanges as well as projects the potential size of the private exchange market, which has the potential to reshape the employer-sponsored health insurance landscape, in the coming years.
Through interviews with representatives of more than fifteen private health insurance enrollment platforms as well as several employers and health plans moving in this direction, this report examines important implications in this quickly-growing landscape, including the potential for cost stability to employers and more choice among health plans for consumers.”
“CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner on Thursday (Sept. 18) pledged the agency would conduct full “end-to-end” testing of healthcare.gov prior to the launch of open enrollment in November, likely either by the end of this month or early October. Tavenner also told members of Congress that the site will see continued improvement but will not be perfect in year two.
The comments came during a sometimes fiery House oversight committee hearing that focused on the security of the exchange website, which took place shortly after the Government Accountability Office released a report finding that healthcare.gov continues to be vulnerable to breaches. On Wednesday, Chair Darrell Issa (R-CA) released a scathing report on the run-up to the launch of the site that highlighted staff concerns about security, attempts to cover-up the reasons behind the failed launch, and a disconnect between HHS and CMS staff.”
“Several unions want the Labor Department to broadly authorize employer-sponsored “wraparound” coverage for workers to supplement their exchange plan benefits and subsidies, according to comments on a rule that is currently being reviewed by the White House.
Under a little-noticed proposed rule the Labor Department issued on Dec. 24, the Obama administration proposed to treat as “excepted benefits” certain limited coverage provided by employers that would wrap around an individual market policy. If the wraparound coverage meets a number of requirements, it’s considered an excepted benefit and would not disqualify the employee from getting subsidized coverage on the exchanges. While unions generally supported the concept, many complained that the parameters the administration proposed would prevent lower wage employees from having access to the coverage and they are the ones that would benefit most.”