Articles on the implementation of ObamaCare.

“WASHINGTON — How much distance from an immoral act is enough?
That’s the difficult question behind the next legal dispute over religion, birth control and the health law that is likely to be resolved by the Supreme Court.
The issue in more than four dozen lawsuits from faith-affiliated charities, colleges and hospitals that oppose some or all contraception as immoral is how far the Obama administration must go to accommodate them.
The justices on June 30 relieved businesses with religious objections of their obligation to pay for women’s contraceptives among a range of preventive services the new law calls for in their health plans.
Religious-oriented nonprofit groups already could opt out of covering the contraceptives. But the organizations say the accommodation provided by the administration does not go far enough because, though they are not on the hook financially, they remain complicit in the provision of government-approved contraceptives to women covered by their plans”

“WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, reeling from back-to-back blows from the Supreme Court this week, is weighing options that would provide contraceptive coverage to thousands of women who are about to lose it or never had it because of their employers’ religious objections.
The administration must move fast. Legal and health care experts expect a rush to court involving scores of employers seeking to take advantage of the two decisions, one involving Hobby Lobby Stores, which affects for-profit businesses, and the other on Wheaton College that concerns religiously affiliated nonprofit groups. About 100 cases are pending.
One proposal the White House is studying would put companies’ insurers or health plan administrators on the spot for contraceptive coverage, with details of reimbursement to be worked out later.”

“Obamacare advocates in New York have had good reason to celebrate. In contrast to Oregon’s and other state-based exchanges, New York’s exchange rollout was a relatively smooth, successful affair. Indeed by the time open enrollment closed, nearly 1 million enrollees were notched— split between Medicaid (525,000) and private health insurance (370,000). Moreover, state officials estimate that some 80% of enrollees were previously uninsured.
Now for some cold water: New York still has a long way to go. While the state surpassed its first-year goal, total enrollment remains only around 30% of the total eligible population.
Moreover, New York State’s Medicaid program, already among the nation’s largest and most expensive, just grew by 10%. And 87% of the new Medicaid enrollees were eligible under New York’s generous, old rules. This means the state will be picking up 50% of the cost for much of this population—not the 10% headline rate for the newly eligible, childless adult population. When all is said and done New York’s Medicaid program will remain bloated and expensive , claiming 1 in 5 New Yorkers as beneficiaries and 28% of the state budget.

“Obamacare’s technological nightmare might not be over yet.
Due to problems with the backend of the website, the Department of Health and Human Services reported last month that there were nearly 3 million inconsistencies on applications for health insurance. At the time, officials assured the public they were aggressively working to solve the problem.
But now, a new inspector general report reveals that nearly nine out of 10 erroneous applications have yet to be resolved, and the government isn’t really sure how to fix the problem.
The IG said the primary issues with the applications revolve around verifying citizenship status and income. Under the law, legally residing immigrants can receive subsidies, while undocumented residents cannot. Problems verifying income have also affected subsidy eligibility and the amount those who qualified have received. If enrollees received too much in subsidies, they will be required to pay them back through tax returns next year.”

“Much has been written about the possibility that Republicans could win control of the Senate in the 2014 elections. In fact, some prognosticators have given Republicans a better-than-even-money shot at taking the Senate back. If Republicans keep the House and garner the net six seats necessary to win a Senate majority, what does that mean for health policy and politics in the next Congress? In particular, what does it mean for the continued implementation and expansion of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare?
I hear these questions a lot, having served as the Republican health policy director for one of the key Senate health policy committees in 2006, the last time Republicans held a majority in both houses of Congress. The one thing I know for sure is that Republicans simply can’t pick up where they left off in 2006, but that answer is far from satisfying.
This much, we know: if Republicans regain both houses in January 2015, health policy in the 114th Congress will be dominated by a showdown between a Republican Congress and a Democratic White House over the future of Obamacare. The challenge for Republicans will be how to balance the desire of the party faithful for repealing Obamacare with the reality that President Obama would never permit it under his watch.”

“WASHINGTON — An independent audit of insurance exchanges established under the health care law has found that federal and state officials did not properly check the eligibility of people seeking coverage and applying for subsidies, the latest indication of unresolved problems at HealthCare.gov.
In a report to Congress on Tuesday, the inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services, Daniel R. Levinson, said that the exchanges, which enrolled eight million people, did not have adequate safeguards “to prevent the use of inaccurate or fraudulent information when determining eligibility.”
Moreover, in a companion report, the inspector general said that the government had been unable to verify much of the information reported by people applying for insurance coverage and financial assistance to help pay premiums.”

“About 5 percent of Americans who were uninsured last year got coverage in 2014, and more than half of those — about 2.8 percent of the population — obtained their plan through an Obamacare exchange, according to a Gallup poll released Monday. The poll, taken after the close of the first enrollment season, pegged the uninsured rate at more than 13 percent.”

“It’s the tax at the heart of Obamacare, but just more than 1 percent of Americans will end up paying it, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office.

The CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) slashed their estimates for how many people will pay the individual mandate tax penalty in 2016 by a third — to 4 million from 6 million — citing exemptions granted by the Obama administration, including exemptions for people whose plans were cancelled because they did not meet the Affordable Care Act’s requirements.”

“Let’s face it, health reform in 2014 is going to be pretty boring from here on out. Why? It’s an election year. That might seem counterintuitive, since the Affordable Care Act (ACA) demonstrated the haunting dance of partisan politics and policy making at its least consensus building. So why the yawns for 2014? Because the positions of the advocates and detractors of ACA are pretty well set in stone going into the mid-term elections.”

“For months we’ve been hearing about consumers’ struggles with the state’s new health exchange program. Jesse Jones explains that they’re not alone in the fight — even some of the people paid to work the system are having a hard time.

Martha Gant is an insurance agent who’s used to helping others but now she’s the one in need.”