# Are You Ready for Obama Care?



## SeaBreeze

I'm paying a lot now for my husband and I to have acceptable health insurance from Kaiser.  I'll be interested to see if Kaiser is going to offer some plans we can use at a more reasonable cost.  We rarely see the doctor at all, but we always have health care coverage for serious surgeries we may need in the future, or unexpected car accident, or other emergency medical needs.  I always had good Kaiser coverage through my union job, for little to no cost to me...well worth the union dues to get that.  I did continue it through Cobra for as long as allowed, then we had to re-apply and review some plans to continue coverage.  Here's some info with the basics of the Affordable Care Act...



> Call it The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obama Care (ObamaCare) the open enrollment phase begins next week on October 1, 2013.
> 
> The enrollment process begins at what is called the Health Insurance Exchange or Health Insurance Market Place (the Market Place). This is the federal insurance information site where individuals, families, and business owners can learn about coverages, compare options, levels and prices on available health care plans. The Market Place will send you to a state run site if your state has one.
> 
> *Some important things to remember are:
> *
> •Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program participants are covered and do not need to use the Marketplace.
> 
> • It is fraud for someone to sell Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program participants a Marketplace insurance plan.
> 
> • The Marketplace is for use if you do not have coverage now or if you have it but want to look at other options.
> 
> • Marketplace coverage starts as soon as January 1, 2014.
> 
> 
> *Four things women should know:
> *
> •You will not be charged more for health insurance just because you are a woman.
> 
> •You cannot be denied coverage or charged more due to pre-existing conditions, like cancer or being pregnant.
> 
> •You can choose from any primary care provider, OB-GYN, or pediatrician in your health plan’s network without a referral.
> 
> •You will get free preventive care like mammograms, well-woman visits, contraception, and more.
> 
> 
> *When you visit the site this is how the Marketplace works: *
> 
> 1.You will create an account - First provide some basic information. Then choose a user name, password, and security questions for added protection.
> 
> 2.Apply - Starting October 1, 2013 you will enter information about you and your family, including your income, household size, and more. Here is the governments checklist to help you gather the information you will need.
> 
> 3.Pick a plan - Next you will see all the plans and programs you are eligible for and compare them side-by-side. You will also find out if you can get lower costs on monthly premiums and out-of-pocket costs.
> 
> 4.Enroll - Choose a plan that meets your needs and enroll.
> 
> 
> Published September 24, 2013
> http://www.silverplanet.com/health/...e/are-you-ready-obama-care/58956#.Ukev6qnnaos


----------



## Anne

I'm not even ready for Obama..........

But that's another story.  Thanks for the info and link, Seabreeze.  Hubby had me look something up, but that was just for Missouri; we've been wondering just what's in that bill, and this will help.  Confusing, even so, but at least we have some idea what to expect.  Good to know that about pre-existing conditions, as I wondered about that, too.

Although it looks now like they might delay it for a year, so we'll see what happens there.


----------



## rkunsaw

The company ( Whirlpool) I worked for for 43 years quit offering medicare supplement insurance last year. Noe they send us each a check every month to help cover the cost and we can choose which plan we want. I like it this was but I'm afraid obummercare is going to change everything or at least make it too expensive.
We've gotta take control of the senate away from the democrats in 2014 or we'll all go broke.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Well, I'm hoping that prices for health care come down a bit, one thing I can say is that we're all taken to the cleaners when we need medical care, the costs for everything is outrageous, especially hospital stays, etc.  From what I hear for example, they can charge $6 for a band aid if you need one, although they buy them in bulk and it's just pennies for them...lots of greed out there it appears...not fair to the average American who's worked hard all their lives to be responsible and self-sufficient.  Some folks spend their life savings going through a medical emergency, that's just not right.


----------



## TICA

We probably have the highest taxes in Canada, but we don't pay for medicare.   If someone needs to go to the hospital or a doctor, $$ doesn't influence the decision.  You show up, show your card and get taken care of.   I have extended medical which I do pay for - about $20 per month and that covers 90% of any drugs I might need.  So....although we all bitch about high taxes, I'm comforted to know that no one has to choose between medical attention and money.   

I've heard about the Obamacare debate and admit that I don't know the details, but I was under the impression that he was trying to accomplish something similar to what we have?   Obviously from reading these posts, I'm wrong so the only choice is for you all to move here.


----------



## That Guy

Something is just plain wrong about all this.  I'm still not over the shock of a government ordering me to buy something under penalty of law and the whole process is just confusing.


----------



## Katybug

We've been screwed to the wall on health care in the country for decades.  Good example was given, a hospital band aid costing $6 and on and on and on, to the point of absurdity.  You can stay on a beach in Hawaii for less money than the cost per night of a small hospital room.  I'm not nearly as up on changing the program as I need to be, but I truly believe all Americans are entitled to health care.  I was also under the impression of accomplishing something similar to what Canadians have.  And for all the moaning and groaning from the left and the right, they say it is being postponed for a year.


----------



## TICA

That Guy said:


> Something is just plain wrong about all this.  I'm still not over the shock of a government ordering me to buy something under penalty of law and the whole process is just confusing.



I agree!  From what I understand, the point is to make sure that everyone in the US has health care.  So, the choice is to make it mandatory so that individuals buy it or raise taxes and have the government provide the coverage.   I can certainly see why people are upset and I'm sure I've seen discussions on how employers seem to be taking the brunt.    Health care insurance companies are making a fortune off of this and god forbid the rich have to pay taxes to ensure their less fortunate citizens can go to the hospital.

I guess because medical coverage has never been an issue for me, I'm having a hard time understanding the debate.  On one hand, no one wants the gov't telling them what to do, but on the other, everyone also wants medical coverage.  Canada provides health care - period.  In my province, the taxes pay for it and everyone has equal coverage.   When I lived in BC, the taxes were a bit lower, but we had to pay an extra premium for the Provincial health care.  Each province has a different way of doing it, but yes, it is mandatory and if you can't pay, then it is subsidized for you. 

I should really bow out of this conversation, as I don't know enough about your system but I have a strong belief that everyone should have access to a hospital without having to sell their soul to do that.  OK - I'm backing out slowly.....................


----------



## Jackie22

As I understand it the new healthcare plan does not affect anyone that is currently on Medicare or if you like your existing health plan you can keep it.

Below are some links explaining different aspects of the plan....


Marketplace open enrollment is a 6 month period, from October 1 to March 31. 

*Health Insurance Marketplace: You can create your Marketplace Account beginning on Oct. 1. 

https://www.healthcare.gov/ 

https://www.healthcare.gov/quick-answers/#step-1 

https://www.healthcare.gov/creating-an-account-and-logging-in/ 

Kaiser Foundation Subsidy Calculator. There is important information for you at this link, and you can get an estimate of the insurance subsidy you may be eligible for here: 

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/ 

There are four types of plans: 

•	Bronze: Your plan pays 60%. You pay 40%. 
•	Silver: Your plan pays 70%. You pay 30%. 
•	Gold: Your plan pays 80%. You pay 20% 
•	Platinum: Your plan pays 90%. You pay 10%. 

How to find the Health Insurance Plan that is right for you: 

https://www.healthcare.gov/blog/how-to-find-the-health-insurance-plan-that-s-right-for-you/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_campaign=hcgov_25dayslearn&utm_content=09_06_13

Prices will be available for Marketplace Insurance Plans on Oct. 1: 

https://www.healthcare.gov/how-much-will-marketplace-insurance-cost/ 

10 Essential Benefits you receive from the Affordable Care Act – What is covered under Marketplace Insurance Plans: 

1.	Ambulatory patient services 
2.	Emergency services 
3.	Hospitalization 
4.	Maternity and newborn care 
5.	Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment 
6.	Prescription drugs 
7.	Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices 
8.	Laboratory services 
9.	Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management, and 
10.	Pediatric services, including oral and vision care 

http://www.healthinsurance.org/learn/health-reforms-10-essential-benefits/ 

The ACA and Women: 

http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/factsheets/2012/03/women03202012a.html 

Premium Tax Credit 

https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/premium-tax-credit/ 

Qualifications For Lower Premiums: 

https://www.healthcare.gov/will-i-qualify-to-save-on-monthly-premiums/ 

Some FAQ 

http://kff.org/health-reform/faq/health-reform-frequently-asked-questions/ 

Medicaid Eligibility 

http://www.medicaid.gov/AffordableCareAct/Provisions/Eligibility.html 

Who is required to obtain insurance under the ACA: 
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision 

The main ACA IRS homepage is: 
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Affordable-Care-Act-Tax-Provisions-Home 

What is the Affordable Care Act? 

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act (ACA), is a United States federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010. Together with the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, it represents the most significant regulatory overhaul of the country's healthcare system since the passage of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. 
The ACA aims to increase the quality and affordability of health insurance, lower the uninsured rate by expanding public and private insurance coverage, and reduce the costs of health care for individuals and the government. It provides a number of mechanisms—including mandates, subsidies, and insurance exchanges—to increase coverage and affordability. The law also requires insurance companies to cover all applicants within new minimum standards and offer the same rates regardless of pre-existing conditions or sex. Additional reforms aim to reduce costs and improve healthcare outcomes by shifting the system towards quality over quantity through increased competition, regulation, and incentives to streamline the delivery of health care. The Congressional Budget Office projected that the ACA will lower both future deficits and Medicare spending. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_Care_Act 

Full Text of the Affordable Care Act (this is a pdf file): 

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf*


----------



## Katybug

Thanks for the good info and excellent reference links.


----------



## Warrigal

Tica said:
			
		

> I should really bow out of this conversation, as I don't know enough about your system but I have a strong belief that everyone should have access to a hospital without having to sell their soul to do that.  OK - I'm backing out slowly.....................



Here! Here! Like you, Tica, I have maintained my own private cover but underneath that is the government system, paid for by an income tax levy of 1.5% to which the lowest income levels are exempt. No-one has to mortgage the family dog to get medical treatment in this country. It is a great blessing for everyone, especially children who need treatment.


----------



## SeaBreeze

TICA said:


> We probably have the highest taxes in Canada, but we don't pay for medicare.   If someone needs to go to the hospital or a doctor, $$ doesn't influence the decision.  You show up, show your card and get taken care of.  So....although we all bitch about high taxes, I'm comforted to know that no one has to choose between medical attention and money.



I heard a man from Canada calling in on a radio show last night, he was also very happy with the heath care system there, he said that all the stories of waiting months for treatment or an operation are all myths.



That Guy said:


> Something is just plain wrong about all this.  I'm still not over the shock of a government ordering me to buy something under penalty of law and the whole process is just confusing.



I don't like the government telling me anything to do really, but I look at it realistically.  I've never been without health care coverage, and I think it's everyone's responsibility to take care of themselves and their families.  When people don't have their own coverage, what happens when they end up in the hospital, who pays for that?  ALL of us.   Good thing about the Affordable Care Act, is that the cost will be much lower for those who couldn't afford it before, so to me, that's a good thing.



Warrigal said:


> Here! Here! Like you, Tica, I have maintained my own private cover but underneath that is the government system, paid for by an income tax levy of 1.5% to which the lowest income levels are exempt. No-one has to mortgage the family dog to get medical treatment in this country. It is a great blessing for everyone, especially children who need treatment.



I'm not completely against universal health care either.  Everybody's covered, and the medical providers are kept in check with costs.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Jackie22 said:


> As I understand it the new healthcare plan does not affect anyone that is currently on Medicare or if you like your existing health plan you can keep it.



Thanks for the info and links Jackie.  Kaiser sent me a letter saying that my health plan will be discontinued on January 1st.  They said in order not to have a lapse in coverage, I had to sign up for a new plan with them or someone else by Dec. 15th.  They're supposed to send an open enrollment packet to me in September, well, they're running out of time...sure I'll have to hound them for it.  But, I didn't want to keep my plan as is, if there's something less expensive available out there.


----------



## SifuPhil

It's times like these that I truly appreciate being a monk. See, having paid health insurance is against our religion, so I can just sit back and watch y'all runnin' around like headless chickens, trying to figure out dozens of different legal papers and begging someone to cover you.

They want to throw me in jail? *Fine!* I'll get free healthcare. There's no downside! Three hots and a cot, learn a trade, free education AND free healthcare - it doesn't get much better than that.


----------



## JustBonee

Jackie22 said:


> As I understand it the new healthcare plan does not affect anyone that is currently on Medicare .....


I believe that is true. ..  but the whole thing is so confusing.


----------



## Jillaroo

*Phil wrote*

They want to throw me in jail? Fine! I'll get free healthcare. There's no downside! Three hots and a cot, learn a trade, free education AND free healthcare - it doesn't get much better than that.

_*Hey move over Phil i might join ya, that sounds damn good to me, hope the beds are comfy.*_


----------



## That Guy

Re:  The informative post by Jackie22.

The LAST thing I wanna do is have to read through all that confusing stuff.  I appreciate the great references but . . .


----------



## JustBonee

_Happy Obamacare Day!    _


----------



## atwhatcost

If Obamacare is good enough for us, why isn't it good enough for D.C. politicians, the largest companies in our country, and unions? Why have they all been "personally exempted" for another year, by special creation of law by Obama himself? (Who, for the record, isn't supposed to create law.) Why won't he and the Democrats talk to Republicans about this to resolve the closing of federal services? Why has he refused to talk or arbitrate with Republicans ever? Neither side ever enjoyed compromising, but both did anyway, until one man went with, "Last I checked, I won. Be quiet."

It's a chess game, and we're the pawns. Three hots and a cot? Dream on. Try $95 a month or 1% of your income--whichever is the higher price. No one is going to prison over this. They're being "fined." The Supreme Court said it was legal? Guess again. They said it's not a fine, it's a tax. Then, and only then, did the Democrats use the word "tax."

People on Medicare are fine now? That's good to hear, because we weren't fine before. Last read, my "Medicare and You" book told me I had to pay $100 a night plus 20% of cost for the first 10 days in a hospital. I don't know about you, but I only make a little over $900 a month on Disability, so $100 + 20% is already outside my budget. I've resolved that "little" problem. I'll die before I go to a hospital over night. That resolves the issue of "preventative care." No use finding out if I have heart disease or cancer, because I can't afford to be treated if I have it. Oh, and I already spend $173.50 a month on supplement insurance, because I can't afford the other cost to that really helpful deduction called "Medicare."

We've been "helped" by the government before with something called "Part D." Whereas I used to spend $50 a month to afford my meds, once that was enacted, my insurance rose to $100 a month to cover the same thing, except then there was a doughnut hole that wasn't there before.

Rumor has it the doughnut hole is disappearing now. So is my $100 a month supplemental insurance. It was $125, when Obamacare became law. Now it's $173.50, and only half of what I used to get. No telling how much the cost is growing (and benefits are decreasing) now that all parts of the law are in effect--at least for those of us who don't work as federal legislators, aren't union members, and don't work for the largest companies in the country.

Every time the federal government "helps" me, I lose more and more money. I could use less help.

Add to that, the whole purpose of this act was to help those who couldn't afford health insurance. The 2%ers, who genuinely couldn't afford it, not the 20%ers who were young and healthy, so chanced no insurance. The 2%ers were helped? How? Now they're charged $95 a month, because they still can't afford insurance?

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. It's all smoke and mirrors anyway. But feel free to blame the Republicans for shutting down the government. After all, how dare they ask the obvious? "If it's okay to exempt Congress and the President, the largest companies and unions for one more year, why is it not okay to exempt everyone else too, just for one more year?" Too much to ask? How about that!

No, this is different than Canada. This has nothing to do with taking care of people who couldn't afford insurance or good insurance. This was capturing a rook with a pawn. The pawn was sacrificed. The average American citizen was the pawn. The Republicans were the rook. (Guess who the king and queen are. lol) Americans just don't get that yet.

I've been getting that since Part D. The more Baby Boomers retire or become disabled, the more Americans catch on to the game.


----------



## Jambi

rkunsaw said:


> We've gotta take control of the senate away from the democrats in 2014 or we'll all go broke.



How do we get it away from the RINO's?





atwhatcost said:


> If Obamacare is good enough for us, why isn't it  good enough for D.C. politicians, the largest companies in our country,  and unions?



*DING DING DING!!!!!!!*


----------



## Jambi

TICA said:


> We probably have the highest taxes in Canada, but we don't pay for medicare.   If someone needs to go to the hospital or a doctor, $$ doesn't influence the decision.  You show up, show your card and get taken care of.



Tell that to my friend the former elevator repairman who went to the hospital after being hit by a car on his motorcycle. They gave him pain pills and told him to leave, no x-ray or diagnostics.

Three days later when he couldn't walk at all, they did the x-ray. Fractured pelvis. Due to the nerve damage incurred over the delay, he can no longer climb multiple flights of stairs.

Now that's great healthcare.


----------



## SifuPhil

atwhatcost said:


> It's a chess game, and we're the pawns. Three hots and a cot? Dream on. Try $95 a month or 1% of your income--whichever is the higher price. No one is going to prison over this. They're being "fined." The Supreme Court said it was legal? Guess again. They said it's not a fine, it's a tax. Then, and only then, did the Democrats use the word "tax."



While I appreciate their enthusiastic and creative use of the term "tax", I still defy them to get blood from a stone. I don't _have_ it to pay, and what happens when you can't pay your taxes? There's no more debtor's prison, right?

*Wrong*. It's alive and well, when the government wants it to be. So I'll go, happily.


----------



## That Guy




----------



## Jackie22

ASK FACTCHECK

[h=1]Congress Exempt from Health Bill?[/h][h=4][/h]

Q: Does the health care bill specifically exempt members of Congress and their staffs from its provisions?

A: No. This twisted claim is based on misrepresentations of the House and Senate bills, neither of which exempts lawmakers.


We’ve received many questions about claims that House and Senate members would be exempt from the health care legislation taking shape in Congress. But neither the House nor the Senate bill exempts Congress from its provisions.
Members of Congress are subject to the legislation’s mandate to have insurance, and the plans available to them must meet the same minimum benefit standards that other insurance plans will have to meet. "All plans would have to follow those requirements by 2019," Aaron Albright, press secretary for the House Committee on Education and Labor, told FactCheck.org. "People actually believe we wrote in the bill that Congress exempts itself from these requirements. That falsehood has been going around since the very beginning."
How did the notion of an "exemption" get started? So far as we can find, the first to make the "exempt" claim was columnist John Fund, who used the word in a June _Wall Street Journal_ opinion piece to describe a draft of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill. Fund wrote that the proposal "would specifically exempt Members of Congress from many of [the Obama plan's] provisions." But that was a misrepresentation.
Rather than listing "many" exemptions, Fund pointed only to page 114. That section stated that individuals who buy their own insurance and small firms (size to be determined) would be eligible to participate in state-based exchanges, which would offer a range of health insurance plans for purchase. Those who already get insurance through Medicare, Medicaid, the military’s Tricare insurance program, or the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program wouldn’t be eligible. All federal employees, including members of Congress, fall under the FEHBP. Those who have coverage from a large employer wouldn’t be eligible, either, unless their coverage didn’t meet minimum benefits criteria or was deemed to be unaffordable.
The exchanges are designed for those who can’t get adequate or affordable coverage. By Fund’s logic, most Americans would be "exempt" from the privilege of buying insurance through the exchanges — not just members of Congress. Fund further claimed that everyone except Congress "would be shunted into health insurance plans under the straightjacket of whatever the government decides is a ‘basic’ plan." But that was also a misrepresentation. The "basic" plan’s minimum benefit standards would have been just that — a minimum. The draft actually called for three tiers of plans to be offered through the exchanges, two of them with more benefits than the "basic" plan.
Even the speculation that Congress’s FEHBP plans would be better than those offered through the exchanges is outdated. The bill passed by the Senate actually _requires_ members of Congress and their staffs to get coverage through the exchanges.
The Senate bill now says:
H.R. 3590: D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.— (i) REQUIREMENT.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are— (I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).​The provision comes from an amendment by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.


more here......http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/congress-exempt-from-health-bill

I'd also add that anyone claiming President Obama and Democrats do not talk or negotiate with Republicans hasn't been paying attention.


----------



## Jambi

Jackie22 said:


> ASK FACTCHECK
> 
> *Congress Exempt from Health Bill?*
> 
> 
> 
> Q: Does the health care bill specifically exempt members of Congress and their staffs from its provisions?
> 
> A: No. This twisted claim is based on misrepresentations of the House and Senate bills, neither of which exempts lawmakers.




*A Project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center*

Well, certainly no bias with that organization. 






> John Bresnahan, a senior congressional reporter at Politico, nabbed a choice Capitol Hill scoop today on the politics of the government shutdown.  The backdrop for the story was the attempt of House Speaker John  Boehner to round up support for a bill eliminating alleged special  health-care treatment for congressional members and staffers.
> As Bresnahan noted, Boehner issued an appeal on the House floor: “Why  don’t we make sure that every American is treated just like we are?”  The proposal was to cut off the subsidies that congressional personnel  would be entitled to receive as they enroll in Obamacare’s insurance  exchanges.
> And yet! Boehner, in private discussions over recent months, has been  working with Democratic leaders to preserve those very subsidies, Politico reports.  It’s a great Washington moment: Boehner was for the subsidies before he  was against them. That revelation comes from documents that were shared  with Politico by, well, you be the judge:
> Boehner and his aides worked for months with Senate  Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer  (D-Md.), and others, to save these very same, long-standing subsidies,  according to documents and e-mails provided to POLITICO. Senate Minority  Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was also aware of these discussions, the  documents show.
> ​




http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...de-on-congressional-exemption-from-obamacare/


----------



## Jackie22

.....and the rest of the article.....

The story goes into extensive and scintillating detail on the efforts of Boehner and his staffers to resolve the issue — the parties even attempted to devise a “cover story” for a meeting with President Obama, so that no one would find out that they were talking about this sensitive matter with the administration. Such a meeting never materialized. What the Politico story doesn’t address, however, is the role that Politico itself played in teaching people like Boehner just how explosive and politically profitable this “exemption” story could be.
On April 24, 2012, Bresnahan and Politico colleague Jake Sherman scooped the first in this series of stories. Its headline read, “Lawmakers, aides may get Obamacare exemption.” Kaboom: The story landed in a fissile news bed of partisan sensitivity, and the mere notion that privileged Capitol Hill types would attempt to cut a special deal for themselves ignited Washington. Five-thousand six-hundred and forty-seven tweets, 105,000 Facebook likes, and an untold number of followup blog posts from conservative news sites piled on. A post on the Heritage Foundation’s site riffed:
For veteran Capitol Hill watchers, shenanigans behind closed doors to enable Congress and its staffers to escape Obamacare come as no surprise. After all, the national health care law was fashioned through repulsive backroom dealing (the “Cornhusker Kickback,” the “Louisiana Purchase,” etc.) that set a record for arrogance and contempt of popular opinion. Favored businesses and unions got special exemptions (more than 1,200 waivers) from Obamacare’s insurance rules. So consider today’s Politico revelation just marquee for a rerun of a tiresome old movie: one set of rules for Congress and another set of rules for the rest of us.
If Congress quietly wants to exempt itself from Obamacare, that’s great—so long as it includes the rest of us in that midnight amendment.
​They were all trafficking a story that got it wrong. It stated the following: “Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, sources in both parties said.”
Except the notion of exempting anyone on Capitol Hill from anything wasn’t happening. As the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein clinically explained in a long-ago blog post, the problem was way too boring, complicated and consequence-less to have precipitated all the outrage. The nub of it is that in the negotiations over the Affordable Care Act, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, determined to stick it to the opposition, authored a provision mandating that lawmakers and staffers, since they love Obamacare so much, must join the health-care exchanges. Democrats assented.
As Klein explained, the law set up a bind:
Large employers — defined in the law as employers with more than 100 employees — aren’t allowed onto the insurance exchanges until 2017, and only then if a state makes an affirmative decision to let them in. But the federal government is the largest employer in the country. So Grassley’s amendment means that the largest employer in the country is required to put some of its employees — the ones working for Congress — on the exchanges. But the exchanges don’t have any procedures for handling premium contributions for large employers.​‘
FactCheck.org has an extensive rundown of the particulars here.
For months, congressional officials and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) worked toward a regulatory solution whereby Capitol Hillers get their insurance on the exchanges while preserving employer contributions. Nothing exemptive about that. “Because of poorly written language in the Senate, it had to be made clear through the regulatory process the intent of the law,” says Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, told the Erik Wemple Blog. “This was never any effort to exempt members of Congress or their staffs but rather to ensure that the intent of the law was ultimately upheld.”
Though Politico never appended a correction to its “exemption” story, it later sort of acknowledged that it may have overreached. One day later, it published a followup under this headline: “John Boehner hits Dems on proposed Obamacare fix.” No more talk of an Obamacare “exemption.”
May it never be said that Politico isn’t the most opportunistic news organization in the land. Think about the turns here. The site starts off by hyping an “exemption” story that delivers Republican talking points about the party’s most reviled piece of legislation. The story animates the right into a full blog-posting convulsion. Republican politicians take note. Having sampled the political appeal of the issue via Politico, Boehner unfurls it in the final hours of a showdown over government funding. Next day, Politico knifes Boehner. That’s my Politico.
Even more stunning is the apparent sourcing reversal. Though Politico’s “exemption” story of April ostensibly relies on sources from “both parties,” it pushes a Republican point of view. Talk of the “exemption,” after all, caused political problems for the Obamacare community. Yet when anti-Boehner sources — presumably Democrats — were looking to hammer Boehner for apparent hypocrisy in taking aim at the health-care subsidies, who did they leak to? That, again, is my Politico!


----------



## SifuPhil

Politics, politics, politics!  :lofl:


----------



## Warrigal

Classic, Phil
:lol:


----------



## atwhatcost

Jambi said:


> Tell that to my friend the former elevator repairman who went to the hospital after being hit by a car on his motorcycle. They gave him pain pills and told him to leave, no x-ray or diagnostics.
> 
> Three days later when he couldn't walk at all, they did the x-ray. Fractured pelvis. Due to the nerve damage incurred over the delay, he can no longer climb multiple flights of stairs.
> 
> Now that's great healthcare.



I'm not keen on national healthcare. (Private isn't better, but there isn't a third choice. lol) But, in all fairness, whether healthcare is national or private does not mean it stops doctors from screwing up. Should we go with national because some fresh-out-of-medical-school doctor practiced on his first patient--me-botched the gall bladder surgery and left me disabled?

I'm American, but have had experience with Canada's health plan. Hubby took a long jump off a short dock (and didn't realize I was squatting in the nice cool lake), so he broke his foot on our second day of vacation. Our experience was we drove to the ER, he was seen much faster than if we were in the States, X-rayed, put a cast on, and given an option between promising to return the crutches or to pay for them. We weren't driving 12 hours to return the crutches, so we were charged an additional $15. We spent one-third what we would have spent at home (in both time and money), and he found the excuse that made me the one to have to clean the fish we caught for the rest of our vacation. lol

You cannot judge an entire system on one incident. We did talk to the doctors about the differences, and I still have my problems with the idea of national healthcare, but what Canada had (I don't know what they have now--that was when it was new), isn't what Obamacare is.


----------



## atwhatcost

>>"All plans would have to follow those requirements by 2019," Aaron Albright, press secretary for the House Committee on Education and Labor, told FactCheck.org<<

You're right, you should be paying attention more. That IS exempted until 2019. For the rest of us, no such exemption as of October 1, 2013. Reread what I wrote. The Reps what even distribution--either give up on the exemption until 2019 for Congress, or give the rest of the country the same exemption. I think the Reps are wrong on this. They've negotiated all the way down to "just Congress." That is the one and only demand blocking our government from being opened.

I've been following it up too. I hear crickets. For 1.75 days, the Dems wouldn't even let the Reps get through to them on a phone. They were all unavailable. Last night, they met. It was "polite." That's news media talk for "no one listened or budged a finger."

Apparently, the press secretary can tell people what's wrong and people go, "Ooooh, nothing's wrong. Then what's the problem?" The problem is Obamacare is good enough for everyone BUT Congress for the next five years. And people are buying this.

Seriously? In that case, I have some real estate to sell east of Atlantic City.


----------



## Jackie22

*...looks like it starts in 2014, same as ours....

In 2014, Congress gets Obamacare. Here’s how they’ll pay for it.*

Starting in 2014, members of Congress and their staffs will have to get their health insurance through Obamacare's insurance marketplaces. But according to a regulation that the Obama administration's Office of Personnel Management plans to announce on Friday and release next week, the federal government can continue to contribute toward the cost of their health plans.


(Photo by Jessica Rinaldi/Reuters)

The regulation comes after months of worry on Capitol Hill. The Affordable Care Act includes a provision, first proposed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), forcing members of Congress and their staffs to buy insurance through Obamacare. But it didn't provide a clear mechanism for them to do so.

The insurance marketplaces are built for individuals, not employers, and there was concern that the federal government could not continue paying its traditional share of congressional health plans. That would mean the entire cost would fall to members of Congress and their staffs, many of whom would likely flee the institution.
The Obama administration's compromise is to permit the federal government to contribute toward employee insurance on the exchanges, but to render those employees ineligible for any tax credits or subsidies.
"Members of Congress and their staff must go into the exchange," said an administration official. "No ands, ifs, or buts. They will not be eligible in any way for subsidies or tax credits. But they don't lose their current employer contribution."
Congress is the only large employer that has to enter the exchanges -- or is even allowed to do so. Some on Capitol Hill have asked why the White House staff doesn't follow suit.
"We have no legal authority to do that," the official said. "But we would support legislation that would apply the same standard to the President and the White House staff and the cabinet members. We believe the insurance exchanges are a very good deal, a very good benefit, and we're happy to be in them."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...amacare-heres-how-theyll-pay-for-it/#comments


----------



## atwhatcost

Jackie22 said:


> *
> ...looks like it starts in 2014, same as ours....
> 
> In 2014, Congress gets Obamacare. Here’s how they’ll pay for it.*


I don't know which group you include yourself with, but the rest of us started October 1, 2013. Considering The Reps are simply asking for it to start the same time for Congress, I don't see what the fuss is about, unless...maybe it's not good enough for them or they want to fix the problems before they dip their tootsies in.

Funny how the articles change the dates for Congress though. Seems like any date, but now, works.


----------



## Jackie22

Well actually the new healthcare does not affect me at all as I have medicare and a supplement....

October 1, 2013 to January 1, 2014 is the enrollment period, the actual plan starts January 1, 2014.  I think that there are some Medicaid programs that started in 2013.


----------



## Happyflowerlady

*From a friend, PAY CLOSE ATTENTION...posted on the Obamacare website today "I actually made it through this morning at 8:00 A.M. I have a preexisting condition *
*(Type 1 Diabetes) and my income base was 45K-55K annually I chose tier 2 "Silver Plan" and my monthly premiums came out to $597.00 with $13,988 yearly deductible!!! There is NO POSSIBLE way that I can afford this so I "opt-out" and chose to continue along with no insurance. I received an email tonight at 5:00 P.M. informing me that my fine would be $4,037 and could be attached to my yearly income tax return. Then you make it to the "REPERCUSSIONS PORTION" for "non-payment" of yearly fine. First, your drivers license will be suspended until paid, and if you go 24 consecutive months with "Non-Payment" and you happen to be a home owner, you will have a federal tax lien placed on your home. You can agree to give your bank information so that they can easy "Automatically withdraw" your "penalties" weekly, bi-weekly or monthly! This by no means is "Free" or even "Affordable.*

I read this online this morning, and other people are saying similar things, so "Affordable Care" is not proving to be affordable, at least for many people.
I will not be affected by it , as far as I know. Since I have under $5k per year SS pension to live on, I am covered with the low-income Medicare/Medicaid, and could not afford my heart meds without that help.


----------



## That Guy

What a goddamned mess.


----------



## Pappy

That Guy, couldn't agree with you more.....


----------



## That Guy

Very good, Pappy.  Very good.


----------



## Jackie22

...not enough popcorn in the world for this show...

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/10/obamacare-conspiracy-theory-lien-house-debunked


----------



## Happyflowerlady

There are some people who are not required to participate in Obamacare  , for instance, illegal aliens are not required to participate. Neither are convicted criminals, who are serving time. 

One attorney writes about some of the options if you don't want to sign up for Obamacare :

1. If you are a dependent (as defined in section 152) of another taxpayer. Of course, if that other taxpayer doesn't purchase health care insurance for you they will face the penalty. (See 26 USC § 5000A(b)(3)(A).


2. If you are in jail. Hey, at least you get three squares and a place to sleep. (See 26 USC § 5000A(d)(4).


3. Be in the country illegally. (See 26 USC § 5000A(d)(3).


4. If you "cannot afford coverage" under 26 USC § 5000A(e)(1)(A) 
    (A) In general: Any applicable individual for any month if the applicable individual’s required contribution (determined on an annual basis) for coverage for the month exceeds 8 percent of such individual’s household income for the taxable year described in section 1412(b)(1)(B) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. For purposes of applying this subparagraph, the taxpayer’s household income shall be increased by any exclusion from gross income for any portion of the required contribution made through a salary reduction arrangement.


You got that? Good, neither did I. 


5. Join an Amish or Mennonite Church and then opt out of Social Security (See 26 USC § 5000A(d)(2)(A).


6. Become a member of a Health care sharing ministry (See 26 USC § 5000A(d)(2)(B).


(B) Health care sharing ministry:
    (i) In general Such term shall not include any individual for any month if such individual is a member of a health care sharing ministry for the month.
    (ii) Health care sharing ministry The term “health care sharing ministry” means an organization—
         (I) which is described in section 501 (c)(3) and is exempt from taxation under section 501 (a),
        (II) members of which share a common set of ethical or religious beliefs and share medical expenses among members in accordance with those beliefs and without regard to the State in which a member resides or is employed,
        (III) members of which retain membership even after they develop a medical condition,
        (IV) which (or a predecessor of which) has been in existence at all times since December 31, 1999, and medical expenses of its members have been shared continuously and without interruption since at least December 31, 1999, and
        (V) which conducts an annual audit which is performed by an independent certified public accounting firm in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and which is made available to the public upon request.


----------



## SeaBreeze

In #4, isn't it if your income is so low, like $15,000 a year (for a family), you automatically qualify for Medicaid, so you don't have to buy healthcare on the marketplace?   I think we'll be able to get a plan for less money than the one we have, but we're still waiting for Kaiser to send the enrollment package in the mail for more details.  No hurry I guess, our plan now will automatically expire on January 1st, so we have until mid-December to sign up with either Kaiser or another company, so there'll be no lapse in coverage.


----------



## Jackie22

Yes, SeaBreeze, you are right....here is a link directly to Obamacare that corrects the myths, states who is eligible, who qualifies for the subsidies, and exactly what the penalties are...in an easy to understand format....it looks like the the low income for a family is $19,000 though before you qualify for medicaid....UNLESS you live in a state that has Republican leaders that turned down the extra money for medicaid...like Texas.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-facts.php


----------



## SeaBreeze

Thanks again Jackie, the more we all know the better! ositive:


----------



## basefare

Harry Truman first proposed a National Health Insurance. But many people believe that raising their taxes is akin to treason. They've got theirs and to heck with everybody else. They want a government that favors themselves but want somebody else to pay for it. I don't know how or if this present system will work with a portion of our government trying to kill it. We could have if we wanted had a grand national insurance. Instead, we are warriors, preferring to spend that money making war on smaller countries who disagree with us, spying on our friends and enemies alike, having no friends except those we can buy.


----------



## atwhatcost

That depends on which state you live in. 

I was friends with a woman and her husband. He made $1,300 a month through SSDI, but she could never get approved for it, despite living with 1.2 hip joints. (One of her hip joints has disintegrated over the years, but she was denied disability.) So, the two of them live in Section 8 and he gets Medicare, but she only gets Medicaid for the 6 months after a major medical crisis. (Her ulcer perforated, so she was in a coma for a couple weeks and in ICU for a couple more, then, a few years later, she had a heart attack.) She also has diabetes, but they pay out of pocket for that. Even when they were in a car crash, the driver who caused the crash had no insurance, so they had to pay out of pocket for her whip lash. Since the driver came from another state, even the insurance company wasn't going to fight the cost of a lawsuit. After a serious health problem, she is free to get all the healthcare for a whopping 6 more months. Then, they're back on their own.

They're luck in one regard--they could never afford a house and they make so little they don't have to file income tax. They still have the car that was in that crash. It's from the 1990s.

She is part of the 2% that fell through the cracks--one of the people National Healthcare was supposed to help. She still can't get it, still can't get Medicaid (until her next medical emergency--if she survives it again), and now they want to take money out of her every month? Maybe she's lucky in another way. It looks like they can't get money out of someone who has coverage, simply because a family member doesn't. You really can't get blood out of a rock.

Brilliant plan!


----------



## atwhatcost

Jackie22 said:


> Yes, SeaBreeze, you are right....here is a link directly to Obamacare that corrects the myths, states who is eligible, who qualifies for the subsidies, and exactly what the penalties are...in an easy to understand format....it looks like the the low income for a family is $19,000 though before you qualify for medicaid....UNLESS you live in a state that has Republican leaders that turned down the extra money for medicaid...like Texas.
> 
> http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-facts.php



Yes, let's go back to blaming republicans. The new chant of the land.

Better idea. Let's go back to splitting the country again. 25 states didn't accept the plan, therefore, they must all be republican states (which is funny, since my friend doesn't live in a republican state by a long shot), and do exactly what the can't-see-past-your-own-log "democrats" want. Kick republican states out of the United States. Punish them for daring to go against the PC chants. I'd be happy to obliged. Maybe we could get back to what a right-winged President once told us to do, "Ask not what the country can do for you, but what you could do for your country." (And, by today's standards he was right winged. His agenda would never cut it as left-winged by today's standards.)


----------



## atwhatcost

basefare said:


> Harry Truman first proposed a National Health Insurance. But many people believe that raising their taxes is akin to treason. They've got theirs and to heck with everybody else. They want a government that favors themselves but want somebody else to pay for it. I don't know how or if this present system will work with a portion of our government trying to kill it. We could have if we wanted had a grand national insurance. Instead, we are warriors, preferring to spend that money making war on smaller countries who disagree with us, spying on our friends and enemies alike, having no friends except those we can buy.



Nice fairy tale. The first time men argued over national versus private healthcare, Thomas Jefferson was one of the guys against it. At least, if you take the story about it last year in _The Saturday Evening Post_ as truth. They're really is no good side to it, and really a lot of bad side to it--either way. But, then again, it seems so much easier to blame the other side then to deal with the reality of how hard it would be to be truly fair, so on goes the inter-exchange of "always blame the other side."

I guess it's easier to accept it's just a game, if you're a rook and not a pawn. I'm stuck at pawn. I'm disabled, so already stuck on knowing what little the government gives to the least.


----------



## Jackie22

atwhatcost said:


> Yes, let's go back to blaming republicans. The new chant of the land.
> 
> Better idea. Let's go back to splitting the country again. 25 states didn't accept the plan, therefore, they must all be republican states (which is funny, since my friend doesn't live in a republican state by a long shot), and do exactly what the can't-see-past-your-own-log "democrats" want. Kick republican states out of the United States. Punish them for daring to go against the PC chants. I'd be happy to obliged. Maybe we could get back to what a right-winged President once told us to do, "Ask not what the country can do for you, but what you could do for your country." (And, by today's standards he was right winged. His agenda would never cut it as left-winged by today's standards.)



The blame was place where it belongs...see the list below, if you'll follow the links you see that the three Democrat governors were for the expansion of medicaid, but the republican state lawmakers voted against it.


*List of states and Governors who refused to expand Medicaid (updated)*

Last edited Sat Oct 5, 2013, 10:58 AM USA/ET - 
Alabama -- Robert Bentley, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Alaska -- Sean Parnell, Republican -- Term ends 2014 

Florida -- Rick Scott, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Georgia -- Nathan Deal, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Idaho -- Butch Otter, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Indiana -- Mike Pence, Republican -- Term ends 2017 

Kansas -- Sam Brownback, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Louisiana -- Bobby Jindal, Republican -- Term ends 2016 (term limits) 

Maine -- Paul LePage, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Mississippi -- Phil Bryant, Republican -- Term ends 2016 

Missouri -- Jay Nixon, Democratic -- Term ends 2017 (term limits) 

Montana -- Steve Bullock, Democratic -- Term ends 2017 

Nebraska -- Dave Heineman, Republican -- Term ends 2015 (term limits) 

New Hampshire -- Maggie Hassan, Democratic -- Term ends 2015 

North Carolina -- Pat McCrory, Republican -- Term ends 2017 

North Dakota -- Jack Dalrymple, Republican -- Term ends 2016 

Ohio -- John Kasich, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Oklahoma -- Mary Fallin, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Pennsylvania -- Tom Corbett, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

South Carolina -- Nikki Haley, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

South Dakota -- Dennis Daugaard, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Tennessee -- Bill Haslam, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Texas -- Rick Perry, Republican -- Term ends 2015 (retiring) 

Utah -- Gary Herbert, Republican -- Term ends 2017 

Virginia -- Bob McDonnell, Republican -- Term ends 2014 (term limits) 

Wisconsin -- Scott Walker, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

Wyoming -- Matt Mead, Republican -- Term ends 2015 

*State Medicaid and CHIP Income Eligibility Standards Effective January 1, 20141* 
http://www.medicaid.gov/AffordableC...edicaid-and-CHIP-Eligibility-Levels-Table.pdf 

*Kentucky's success makes a mockery of GOP Obamacare foes* 
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023779107 

Updated to add that three Governors on the list support expansion, but are being blocked by their state's legislature. 

*Bullock: Open to all options on Medicaid expansion* 
http://missoulian.com/news/state-an...cle_de9f768c-fbb2-11e2-8109-0019bb2963f4.html 

*Jay Nixon, Missouri Governor, Backs Medicaid Expansion *
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/29/jay-nixon-medicaid-expansion_n_2211925.html 

*Governor Maggie Hassan *

Huge support for Medicaid expansion at yesterday's public hearing. Accepting the $2.5 billion in federal funds available for Medicaid expansion will strengthen our economy and help thousands of hard-working families access critical health coverage. 

https://www.facebook.com/GovernorHassan/posts/659687414044068


----------



## Warrigal

As an outsider I'm curious about the situation where health insurance falls on the shoulders of the employer. We've never had such a system as far as I know in Australia. What we did have before our national health system was a lot of mutual societies where members' small contributions, collected weekly or fortnightly, were pooled and invested to provide defined sickness benefits. Some of these societies grew very large. Our family belonged to two funds - MBF (medical benefits fund) and HBF (hospital benefits fund). We also belonged to a funeral fund. Over time these funds amalgamated and demutualised to become businesses listed on the stock exchange. This system of private cover still exists and to encourage people to take out private cover the federal government provides a 30% rebate of the annual fee. 

The universal healthcare scheme, funded by a flat income tax levy of 1.5% on taxable incomes above a minimum threshold, allows everyone in the country, rich or poor alike, to receive free or subsidised health and hospital care. To discourage well off people from opting out of their private cover there is a tax penalty for the uninsured once you reach a certain age (not sure -35? ) and it gets bigger as you get older. This also discourages people from avoiding health insurance when young and healthy and opting in when health problems are more likely.

As for the employers, all they do is offer to deduct health insurance premiums from the payroll and forward them to the insurer of your choice. They also deduct the 1.5% and send it to the tax office along with your pay-as-you-earn tax instalments. Your health insurance is not fixed to your employer. It is your money, not theirs, that pays for it and it is perfectly portable when you resign or retire. 

As retirees, my husband and I still pay private insurance but as pensioners we pay nothing to visit the GP (he bulk bills the government for our visits) and we have the option of free hospital treatment but we prefer to go 'private' using our health insurance even though we will have some out of pocket payment. It means that we can go to a private hospital rather than a public one where the waiting lists for elective surgery are uncomfortably long. Our private insurance also covers dental treatments and other ancillary services like podiatry.

And yes, we are still in the same funeral fund.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I understand that anyone wanting to sign up for a plan under the Affordable Care Act, must first apply for Medicaid...even if you're income is nowhere near the Medicaid guidelines.  You have to wait up to 45 days for a denial confirmation number before you can follow through with a health plan.  Has anyone done this?  Have you received a prompt acceptance or denial confirmation?  My plan is discontinued on Jan. 1st, and now I'm concerned about waiting for this 45 day Medicaid denial before I can sign up.


----------



## Happyflowerlady

I was  looking at some of the news articles   about   Obamacare.    They were talking about the webpage to sign up , and that it is still not working. So, if we get to the deadline, the website doesn't work, and people have lost their health coverage that they had before, then what happens next ?
Most people will  then have  no coverage at all, and no idea when they will have coverage again. What if it takes MONTHS before they get the Obamacare website working at all ? What about the people with serious health care needs ?         
Even if they get the website up and working, it will be flooded with all the people trying to get coverage again, so it will still take a long time, and it looks to me like people will either die from no medical care, or have to go to the hospital and say they have no insurance coverage, and then the bills will be monstrous.
None of this looks good, pretty much even under the best of circumstances.


----------



## SeaBreeze

We have a state site to use, so we don't have to use that big government site that's having all the problems.  Is there a state site in Alabama?  I've never been without healthcare, and I'm just trying to set something up by mid-December to be sure the new plan is in effect on New Years Day.


----------



## That Guy

Warrigal said:


> As an outsider I'm curious about the situation where health insurance falls on the shoulders of the employer.



Would have to do some research to actually get the story straight.  But, I believe companies began offering insurance coverage as a benefit through good group rates and to attract employees.


----------



## Katybug

atwhatcost said:


> Nice fairy tale. The first time men argued over national versus private healthcare, Thomas Jefferson was one of the guys against it. At least, if you take the story about it last year in _The Saturday Evening Post_ as truth. They're really is no good side to it, and really a lot of bad side to it--either way. But, then again, it seems so much easier to blame the other side then to deal with the reality of how hard it would be to be truly fair, so on goes the inter-exchange of "always blame the other side."
> 
> I guess it's easier to accept it's just a game, if you're a rook and not a pawn. I'm stuck at pawn. I'm disabled, so already stuck on knowing what little the government gives to the least.



When you say you're disabled, I'm amazed that you are a Republican.  I became a very proactive Democrat because of my cerebral palsied daughter.  *When they have been allowed*, the Democrats have always been FAR more $$ considerate of her plight than Republicans, which is absolutely zero to nothing that I know of.  I'm stating the facts as I've known them to be since she became an adult. 

She married a Republican and I told him at the wedding jokingly....let's see how long you remain such a strong Republican. Took him about 3 years to see what I already knew, and now he's a stronger Democrat than I am -- and that's pretty damned strong. 

There is not nearly enough compensation, I know, but I also know for fact which party has been far more generous to the disabled.  I don't wish to debate, just wanted to comment.  This is my last post on the matter.


----------



## rkunsaw

http://allenbwest.com/2013/11/obama-tiger-woods-go-bank/


----------



## That Guy

Ready . . .


----------



## SeaBreeze

Happyflowerlady said:


> I was  looking at some of the news articles   about   Obamacare.    They were talking about the webpage to sign up , and that it is still not working. So, if we get to the deadline, the website doesn't work, and people have lost their health coverage that they had before, then what happens next ?
> Most people will  then have  no coverage at all, and no idea when they will have coverage again. What if it takes MONTHS before they get the Obamacare website working at all ? What about the people with serious health care needs ?
> Even if they get the website up and working, it will be flooded with all the people trying to get coverage again, so it will still take a long time, and it looks to me like people will either die from no medical care, or have to go to the hospital and say they have no insurance coverage, and then the bills will be monstrous.
> None of this looks good, pretty much even under the best of circumstances.



Well, I'm glad we had the ConnectforHealthColorado site, because that made it much easier for those in my state to enroll in a health plan.  It's too bad that politics played a part in which states would have their own website, even powers that be who opposed to Obamacare should have had some consideration for the citizens who needed the service. 

 Anyway, I was not happy about having to first apply for Medicaid just to be rejected, because my income was not in that category...but that's how they're playing this game.   Good thing was, as soon as I filled out the application online and submitted it, I instantly got my rejection code number, which I needed to enroll in a plan.

With the tax credits, the cost is much more affordable for us, as we really hardly every even go to see a doctor, not even those annual check-ups, etc.  So, the new Affordable Care Act, although it caused me to have my Kaiser plan expire at the end of the year, did what I hoped, and saved me and my husband some money. 

 The costs of our healthcare went up each and every year, and the increases were unwarranted and out of control.  They should really put a cap on what those hospitals, doctors and health care providers charge patients to begin with, IMO.  Now we wait for something in the mail about the plan, and arrangement of the first payment.  I can breathe easier now, because I should easily meet my December 15th enrollment, to have coverage on Jan. 1st.

I never have, and never intend to be without healthcare coverage.  I'm of the mindset that if I need some serious life saving surgeries, or get into a terrible auto accident, I (or my husband) won't have to go broke paying over-inflated hospital bills.


----------



## Old Hipster

Boy this is sounding bad. What a pain in the arse and I agree I'd be absolutely terrified to be without medical insurance.

Washington State has an insurance site set up and running, well last time I checked anyway, for individual health insurance.

I think I'll just keep working, maybe longer than I figured, because we have good coverage and it's not going anywhere. The Mister has Medicare starting Dec 1st and his Medigap plan as well. 

We had an investment counselor/retirement guy come to work recently, he said if you get really sick and have huge medical bills, and no insurance, the Uberment will take over, they can't take your house he said, and they will leave you $3,000 and 1 car.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I heard on the radio just now, that President Obama will be announcing that health services can extend their plans for one more year, even if they don't qualify for the ACA.  This is an attempt to save some people from having their coverage cancelled, and also having issues enrolling on the government site.  I didn't bust my hump all these years and saving to be able to retire before I'm dead, to be left with $3,000 and a car...know how long $3,000 lasts nowadays.    I had good coverage through all my working years, a good Kaiser plan for free or little cost, union job, Teamsters.


----------



## Old Hipster

SeaBreeze said:


> I heard on the radio just now, that President Obama will be announcing that health services can extend their plans for one more year, even if they don't qualify for the ACA. This is an attempt to save some people from having their coverage cancelled, and also having issues enrolling on the government site. I didn't bust my hump all these years and saving to be able to retire before I'm dead, to be left with $3,000 and a car...know how long $3,000 lasts nowadays.   I had good coverage through all my working years, a good Kaiser plan for free or little cost, union job, Teamsters.


That's my plan, to retire before I die. I've been busting my hump since I was a teenager and man I am getting tired!

My dad died when he was 50 and I was a teenager, and I still remember him talking about retirement and saying he hoped he would live that long. Sadly he didn't. He was a Teamster and they were good to him.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I know of a couple of people who waited past the point where they could have retired, maybe late 60s...then heard that shortly after they had a severe medical illness that kept them from doing anything, or they died.  So sad.   Hubby and I vowed when we were younger to retire while we could still go camping, boating, etc...we never were into a lot of toys, fancy clothes or jewelry, etc...so it's working out fine.  Forever in blue jeans, and happy as a clam. 

My condolences for the loss of your Dad, that's way too young to move on. :sentimental:


----------



## Old Hipster

SeaBreeze said:


> I know of a couple of people who waited past the point where they could have retired, maybe late 60s...then heard that shortly after they had a severe medical illness that kept them from doing anything, or they died. So sad.  Hubby and I vowed when we were younger to retire while we could still go camping, boating, etc...we never were into a lot of toys, fancy clothes or jewelry, etc...so it's working out fine. Forever in blue jeans, and happy as a clam.
> 
> My condolences for the loss of your Dad, that's way too young to move on. :sentimental:


Thank you. I still miss him.

You and your husband sound just like us. We never wanted a fancy house or cars, or lots of "stuff"  but we live to be able to go camping and just bum around.


----------



## That Guy

Old Hipster said:


> We never wanted a fancy house or cars, or lots of "stuff"  but we live to be able to go camping and just bum around.



Reminds me of a visit to my best friend up north.  We were hanging out; him lying on the couch and me lounging in an overstuffed chair when he calmly proclaimed, "I love doin' nothin'."


----------



## Ozarkgal

Well, folks on Medicare, get ready because in order to help fund Obamacare, they are cutting services or making them harder to get and raising fees.  If you've read your annual Medicare booklet  and compared it to last year you will see how out of pocket fees have dramatically increased.

Our ophthalmologist told Mr.O that if he planned to have the cataract surgery on his other eye he needs to do it before the end of December, because in January when all this kicks in the rules are changing to if you have one good eye, you will be considered good to go and Medicare will not pay for two cataract surgeries.

My gynecologist  and I were discussing joint replacements, he has a hip replacement.  He told me that under the new guidelines that if a patient is overweight, they will not be getting a hip or knee replacement until they lose weight.  I doubt if the geniuses that thought that rule up have ever been faced with a joint replacement.  Once you get to the point where replacement is imminent the pain is usually so debilitating you can barely walk, let alone exercise to loose weight, and in the meantime your body is loosing muscle mass because you can't move, making the surgery even more risky.

I have been on the federal pre-existing condition insurance plan since it came into effect in 2010. The federal government gave the states the choice to administer the insurance themselves or let the feds do it.  Arkansas was one of the states that chose to run the plan themselves, administered by Blue Cross.   This was a pre-cursor to Obamacare being fully implemented. The program will cease to exist on December 31st when Obamacare kicks in, and pre-existing conditions will no longer be an option for insurance companies.  I will have to go on the exchange and choose another plan.

The pre-existing condition insurance program came at a fortunate time for me since hubby retired in 2010, and I lost my insurance under his policy.  He was eligible for Medicare, but I was up a creek, as no insurance company would touch me with my pre-existing conditions, and except for my back, they were not anything chronic or debilitating.   The premiums are steep and we struggle to pay them, in addition to the deductibles and maximum out of pocket expenses.


Then in June, the ball dropped, and I received a letter saying that Arkansas was turning the program back over to the federal government due to lack of funds to continue running the program.  The letter also stated I would have to pay $3250 in further deductibles, on top of the maximum out of pocket expenses of $3000 I had already satisfied for the year.  The premiums would be slightly less, but I would now have co-pays for office visits and my co-insurance would go from paying 20 per cent to 30.  

So half way through the year with my maximum out of pocket satisfied, I was now starting all over for the remainder of the year.  I view this as  insurance fraud, but when you're at their mercy, what are you to do.  I toyed with the idea of telling them to stuff it until I ended up in the hospital shortly thereafter.  Payback, I suppose for my negative attitude.

Oh and one other great item in the bill is that all your medical records will be linked and available to the Department of Homeland Security.  I don't know if you've been to the doctor lately but the doctor is so busy entering your information on the computer he barely can talk to you.  I commented on this to my doctor, and he said it was mandatory that all information about the visit be entered in the government record.  

Pardon me if I have a very negative view of Obamacare being the answer to the country's medical "crisis".  They are continually back peddling, denying and trying to fix things, lying and disrupting lives  on a daily basis.  All the problems should have been thought out before  we had to pass the bill to see what was in it.

 I guess we are now finding out bit by ugly bit what is in it.  What may have been a crisis, has just turned into a major clusterkerfuffle, and we haven't seen anything yet!


----------



## Jackie22

Right wing cyber attacks on Healthcare.gov website confirmed

November 14, 2013


Yesterday, the House Homeland Security Committee published a video on their Youtube page highlighting a portion of the committee questioning Roberta Stempfley, acting assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Cyber-security and Communications, who confirmed at least 16 attacks on theAffordable Care Act’s portal Healthcare.gov website in 2013.



http://www.examiner.com/article/right-wing-cyber-attacks-on-healthcare-gov-website-confirmed


----------



## Ozarkgal

I was wondering if anyone else on this forum is in a position to have to sign up for Obamacare due to having no employer health insurance and being between retiring and the age to receive Medicare, or having no other insurance available to you.

 If so, what are your plans for signing up and experiences with it if any?


----------



## SeaBreeze

Ozarkgal said:


> I was wondering if anyone else on this forum is in a position to have to sign up for Obamacare due to having no employer health insurance and being between retiring and the age to receive Medicare, or having no other insurance available to you.
> 
> If so, what are your plans if any, for signing up.



That's me, already enrolled in another Kaiser plan, as mine will be discontinued on Dec. 31st...just waiting for the final papers and payment plan in the mail.  Went through the Colorado website, so it was less of a hassle as what people are dealing with on the government site.


----------



## Ozarkgal

SeaBreeze, you're fortunate that Colorado has it's own exchanges set up.  Here in AR we have to go through the federal website.  I am scared witless of putting my personal information on their website as it is reportedly very unsecure.  I know I have to get this done, but am taking a stubborn streak right now.  Hopefully in a couple of weeks they will have things sorted out.  

I cannot even for one New York minute think I am going to get by without insurance, as I almost learned the hard way.  Murphy's law was based on my life.

When the insurance disaster I described above  happened in July, I got stubborn and said I wasn't doing it.  Two days later out of the blue, I ended up in the hospital as a lesson.  Luckily, I was still on their computer as enrolled so I was covered.  Whew...that was a blindsided bullet I almost took.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Yeah, numbers are not my friends, and it's been hard going through all this insurance stuff again.  I am very fortunate, several hours and all was complete...now waiting for the final papers to close the deal completely.  I've never been without insurance, right now since retirement, I have no dental insurance.  Been paying that out of pocket, luckily it's been just a couple of fillings and cleanings/x-rays, etc.  Don't know much about the Medicare side of it, but will soon enough, when hubby has to apply.


----------



## Ozarkgal

Ozarkgal said:


> I was wondering if anyone else on this forum is in a position to have to sign up for Obamacare due to having no employer health insurance and being between retiring and the age to receive Medicare, or having no other insurance available to you.
> 
> If so, what are your plans for signing up and experiences with it if any?




Bump, any one else out there?


----------



## That Guy

Not in that situation at this given moment and don't know what the heck I would do.  Have group insurance through my employer and the VA.  

This debacle sure pisses me off, though.  I just can't believe we're being subjected to such insanity.


----------



## SeaBreeze

It's not that insane, IMO.  Our Health Insurance system in the US is broken, someone had to get off their duff and make an attempt to fix it.  My cost for insurance was going up higher in increasing and obscene amounts on a yearly basis.  That's not fair that they leach all my lifetime hard earned savings for retirement, just to line their own pockets.  I don't love Obama, but I have to give him credit for making a move.  What he failed on, and should be ashamed of was, that crappy website that people have to deal with.  Obamacare is law, and if the state leaders gave a crap about the people living in their states, they would have approved individual state sites to make it easy for the residents to enroll...but no, they had to throw their hissy fits because they didn't get their way, and as usual, the people suffer.

Easy for the others to play Monday morning quarterback and slam everything about Obamacare, but they brought no solutions themselves to the table.  Also, those who are so much against Obamacare (or Obama), need to keep in mind that thanks to the Affordable Care Act, health care providers can no longer just drop someone's policy for no reason, they can no longer deny somebody coverage because they have a pre-existing condition, and now there is no annual or life-time limits on the coverage as before, etc.  For someone with a serious medical condition, that means a lot. 

 The whole point of this Obamacare was to make affordable health insurance available to everyone in the US.  People cry that we are paying for those who get tax credits in the new plan, but we paid for all of those people who had no insurance at all anyway, whenever they showed up in the emergency room, at the doctors or the hospitals.  In my opinion, we should just go to the Universal Health Care System that all the other civilized countries have, and are quite happy with.  When the anti-Obamacare (Obama) folks cite some example of someone in Canada waiting months for an operation, they are just jumping on examples and exaggerating them to try to make their case.  We have relatives in Finland that are very pleased with the system, and know some folks from Canada that have absolutely no complaints.

 I'm not very political at all, but I'm a registered independent, and will vote for the lesser of the two evils running for president.  I won't throw out my vote on a third party candidate.  Honestly, both the republicans and democrats disgust me.  Both parties have let this great nation swirl its way down the toilet, instead of using their power and money to make it flourish.  They fight amongst each other like a bunch of spoiled brats, and neither party is doing what they're supposed to do, which is serve the American citizens and give a damn about the citizens that live here.

Barack Obama is president, the Affordable Care Act is law, people need to just accept that, get over it, and move on.


----------



## Anne

Not sure if this has been posted yet.   DH got a call from the ins. co, last week, and they set up an appt. for a home visit.  I asked why, and he said they just 'want to check'....they take your blood pressure, and talk to you.   This kind of stuff never sits well with me, and I said we can take our own blood pressure; we both see a Dr when needed, and what is the real purpose of a visit; this has never been necessary before. 

Then, I found this article.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/58176

  I'm sure they'll now be checking on anyone that smokes, drinks, whatever.....  Do you keep you house clean enough??  Can you handle your own laundry, and other work??   They even asked if we had a pet.  Looks like anyone who has been in the military may possibly be subject to a home visit, also.

ETA:  Seabreeze, our third-party votes will only be wasted as long as they convince us they are; if we don't do something to change our leadership, we're gonna keep sinking, no matter who gets in.   I agree that both parties are useless to us as it stands now.


----------



## SifuPhil

If you pay the piper you have to dance to his tune.

Thank goodness I always stiffed the little sucker.


----------



## Anne

SifuPhil said:


> If you pay the piper you have to dance to his tune.
> 
> Thank goodness I always stiffed the little sucker.



True, tho we are not on any assistance; altho some consider SS and medicare as assistance.  I can imagine that in the future, ins. co.'s will be able to do this for anyone with health problems, etc.  The 'new' healthcare plan will surely include just about anyone.


----------



## SifuPhil

Well, I consider SS to be merely getting back a portion of what you put into the system. Medicare is different.


----------



## JustBonee

SifuPhil said:


> Well, I consider SS to be merely getting back a portion of what you put into the system. Medicare is different.




?? .. Medicare is paid from your Social Security account.
From Medicare website: 



> Medicare is funded by the Social Security Administration. Which means it's funded by taxpayers: We all pay 1.45% of our earnings into FICA - Federal Insurance Contributions Act, if you're into deciphering acronyms - which go toward Medicare. Employers pay another 1.45%, bringing the total to 2.9%. (If you're self-employed, you must cough up the entire 2.9%.) The Medicare deduction on your paycheck might say FICA-HI. The HI refers to Health Insurance, and it's your premium cost for all Medicare coverage.
> While the portion of our FICA taxes that cover payments into the Social Security system are levied only on the first $106,800 in earnings for 2010, the Medicare tax is levied on every penny you earn.


----------



## SeaBreeze

This is related to the last year that I was working, and my paychecks, and my pay never came close to the $106,800 figure...



> *FICA refers to the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, and it covers taxes on payroll for both Social Security and Medicare. Social Security taxes are only paid on the first $106,800 of annual earnings. There is no earnings limitation on Medicare taxes. The tax rate in 2009 was 6.2 percent for Social Security and 1.45 percent for Medicare.*



From the social security.gov site...



> *When you have wages or self-employment income covered by Social Security, you pay Social Security taxes each year up to a maximum amount set by law.
> 
> For 2013, you will pay Social Security taxes on income below $113,700.
> 
> You must pay Medicare taxes on all income.
> *
> *Also, beginning in 2013 you must pay 0.9 percent more in Medicare taxes on earned individual income of more than $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples filing jointly). The tax rates shown below do not include the 0.9 percent:
> *
> 
> 
> *Employees — the Social Security tax rate is 6.2 percent on income under $113,700 through the end of 2013. The Medicare tax rate is 1.45 percent of all income;*


----------



## SifuPhil

Boo's Mom said:


> ?? .. Medicare is paid from your Social Security account.
> From Medicare website:



Pshhh ... shows how much I know about the government. 

I don't plan to ever collect either one, so I never took the time to learn the workings of the system. 

And thank you also, Sea - as Sherlock Holmes once said, "Now that I know it I shall do my best to forget it".


----------



## JustBonee

SifuPhil said:


> Pshhh ... shows how much I know about the government.



Yeah ..  Medicare and Medicaid are two very different animals. 

Medicare is money YOU pay in  ...  Medicaid is the government hand-out to the poor... 

I didn't know much about Medicare or Social Security until I turned 65 and started collecting.  .. The first year on Social Security I didn't sign up for Medicare at all.  I thought, heck, I don't need this medical insurance, I'm very healthy, why bother having them take money from me for nothing!.. 
Second year, everyone convinced me that it's stupid not to have it 'just in case' ... so I  grudgingly signed up ...
Well,  Social Security came back at me with GOTCHA!! ...  $10 extra dollars per month out of SS to make up for not signing on originally with Medicare.   ...  so that was that lesson.  


Also, during the government shut-down ...  and the talk about who should get paid and who shouldn't ...
Well,  SS checks HAD to go out, right?  ... think they were worried about some old people starving or something . .... NAH.
They wanted the Medicare money pulled from SS for their own interests. .. I guess they can't get to it legally otherwise. ..


----------



## Anne

I've heard all this talk about SS and/or going broke.  Well, that wouldn't be happening if they hadn't been dipping into the pot for their own causes...that money was supposed to be set aside and not used for anything else.   Good luck with that one.


----------



## rose481

Sorry, but Obamacare will still leave millions without insurance in this country...even if they ever get the web site working so those who want/need/can afford the so-called Affordable Care Act can sign up.  This program is a disaster and needs to be delayed/repealed/deleted, etc.  No I do not think a family should lose everthing they have because of an illness or accident; no I don't think pre-existing conditions should be reason to deny coverage...yes there is much to fix, but this plan is riddled with things which should scare Americans.  It gives the government too much power, too much input into our lives.  They couldn't build a web site for crying-out-loud, how can they handle our health insurance.  The premium prices are high, the deductibles are outrageous.  How they ever came up with the title "Affordable..." is beyond me.  Oh yeah, I remember, they think the American people are stupid...and sometimes we are!


----------



## Jackie22

SeaBreeze said:


> It's not that insane, IMO.  Our Health Insurance system in the US is broken, someone had to get off their duff and make an attempt to fix it.  My cost for insurance was going up higher in increasing and obscene amounts on a yearly basis.  That's not fair that they leach all my lifetime hard earned savings for retirement, just to line their own pockets.  I don't love Obama, but I have to give him credit for making a move.  What he failed on, and should be ashamed of was, that crappy website that people have to deal with.  Obamacare is law, and if the state leaders gave a crap about the people living in their states, they would have approved individual state sites to make it easy for the residents to enroll...but no, they had to throw their hissy fits because they didn't get their way, and as usual, the people suffer.
> 
> Easy for the others to play Monday morning quarterback and slam everything about Obamacare, but they brought no solutions themselves to the table.  Also, those who are so much against Obamacare (or Obama), need to keep in mind that thanks to the Affordable Care Act, health care providers can no longer just drop someone's policy for no reason, they can no longer deny somebody coverage because they have a pre-existing condition, and now there is no annual or life-time limits on the coverage as before, etc.  For someone with a serious medical condition, that means a lot.
> 
> The whole point of this Obamacare was to make affordable health insurance available to everyone in the US.  People cry that we are paying for those who get tax credits in the new plan, but we paid for all of those people who had no insurance at all anyway, whenever they showed up in the emergency room, at the doctors or the hospitals.  In my opinion, we should just go to the Universal Health Care System that all the other civilized countries have, and are quite happy with.  When the anti-Obamacare (Obama) folks cite some example of someone in Canada waiting months for an operation, they are just jumping on examples and exaggerating them to try to make their case.  We have relatives in Finland that are very pleased with the system, and know some folks from Canada that have absolutely no complaints.
> 
> I'm not very political at all, but I'm a registered independent, and will vote for the lesser of the two evils running for president.  I won't throw out my vote on a third party candidate.  Honestly, both the republicans and democrats disgust me.  Both parties have let this great nation swirl its way down the toilet, instead of using their power and money to make it flourish.  They fight amongst each other like a bunch of spoiled brats, and neither party is doing what they're supposed to do, which is serve the American citizens and give a damn about the citizens that live here.
> 
> Barack Obama is president, the Affordable Care Act is law, people need to just accept that, get over it, and move on.



Thanks, SeaBreeze, for speaking the truth about Obamacare, among a sea of myths and negativity. 

On the Universal Health Care or Single Pay, I think Vermont just voted this in, there is a clause in the ACA that the individual states can do this, if you remember, in the start up planning of the ACA, this was turned down by the Republicans and a few Democrats, so maybe other states will follow.

On the two parties being the same....I have to disagree there, when you start looking at the record of how each party votes, you'll see the difference, Democrats invariably will vote for the good of the people and the country as a whole, are they perfect...no...I agree there are many flaws with both parties, but I'll stand with Democrats, their record speaks for me.


----------



## Anne

I had mentioned a nurse visiting us (post #72 on this thread) to see how we were doing.  Well, she came today, and now I can see where these type of home visits might make it easier to voice concerns, and bring attention to things we might need to see the doctor for later on.
She gave us a better checkup than we usually get at the annual physical; other than taking blood, of course.  Asked a lot of questions, and listened to what concerns we had.  She took a list of all our medicines, and couldn't believe we each take only one (crossing fingers, here), and I gave her a list of all the supplements we take as well....we thought the dr had all of this already, but she wrote it all down again, for whatever reason.

Then she wanted to know about a living will; we do have a family trust.  Also if we could manage the cleaning, laundry, etc, without help (knew that one was coming).  They could find someone to come in occasionally to assist us if need be.

While it's nice to know we could get help if we needed it, I guess I don't like the whole idea of the ins. co. checking everything out - but for some who are alone, this could be a godsend, and who knows; in the future we may be needing it.


----------



## WhatInThe

In the last two weeks alone we have a faux Rose Garden Obama Care 'success' celebration. The government bureaucrat in charge resigns after the fact a day late and dollar short. And then yet another faux claim of success with the president himself bragging about success at 8 million enrollees. But that 8 million doesn't stand up to the 50 million uninsured they bantied about to drum up fear and sympathy for Obama Care. How is reducing the uninsured by 20% over 5 years a success???


----------



## That Guy

And now, of course, it's the Change Your Password  Heart Bleed Bug Plan.  There's a vaccine for that.  It's completely safe.  Honest.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Well, the states whose representatives allowed state websites to sign up don't have that problem.  Where I live we had our own state site that didn't have all the issues of the big main one.  Unfortunately, from what I heard, some state representatives were so much against the thought of the Affordable Care Act, that they denied their citizens of an individual state site for easy sign up.  The average joe always suffers in the end with decisions like this, from biased politicians.


----------



## kcvet

all i need to know


----------

