The Affordable Care Act is Coming Home to Roost

[Doc]

So the plan all along was to destroy the individual market, since apparently it is largely made up of "invincibles," and force them into Obamafail where they'd subsidize care for the rest. Now that this ruse has been uncovered, Barry, as is his wont, is playing politics with this "you can keep it for a year..." since the state insurance commissioners and insurance companies themselves will never go for it, and he wanted to head the Repubs off at the pass because they were preparing their own bill.

 

Worst...president...ever.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

You have to pass it to see what's in it!!!???? ......what too soon? :shrug:

[B-Man]

President Obama’s “Administrative Fix” Will Make the Problem Worse

 

By now you have no doubt heard that President Obama, in a disastrous and meandering news conference, has announced that he will attempt, via executive fiat, to implement something very similar to the Upton Plan, which will purportedly allow (but not require) insurance companies to continue to offer plans that were made illegal by Obamacare. Without wading into the politics of this move, as a matter of policy, it is going to be a disaster. That the President would even attempt it indicates that he does not have even a rudimentary understanding of how insurance works – which is a minor problem seeing as how he apparently sees fit to unilaterally dictate insurance policy for the whole country as of today.

 

Insurance premiums today are set and fixed by an incredibly byzantine process that is the product of decades of often nonsensical federal and state regulation. Speaking in gross generalizations, insurance companies have complex actuarial algorithms that attempt to capture what a risk pool will look like, the parameters of which are, again, generally set by law. Once generated (again, generally speaking) insurance companies must submit requested premium to state insurance commissioners who permit those premiums if they fit a profit model that is set by the regulatory framework.

 

If the previous paragraph caused your eyes to glaze over, just know this: rolling out policy particulars and setting premiums is a lengthy process that cannot be easily short circuited. It is not as simple as adjusting the price of a widget to compensate for a 10% increase in its gross cost. The current premiums (which are giving people sticker shock) are built upon assumptions, already baked into the actuarial tables, about what the risk pool would look like given that the old plans would be illegal and no one would be on them.

 

 

.

 

 

 

[birdog1960]

YEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

yes, it was clearly a mistake the magnitude of "nucular" said 500 times or so. or of making complex problems seem simple so everyone thinks they can be easily and painlessly solved. where were his handlers there? unforgivable. Edited November 15, 2013 by birdog1960

[DC Tom]

yes, it was clearly a mistake the magnitude of "nucular" said 500 times or so.

 

"Bush!" That's all you got?

 

or of making complex problems seem simple so everyone thinks they can be easily and painlessly solved.

 

See also: Affordable Care Act.

[keepthefaith]

Before this is over, they are going to have to haul a few Democrats away to the looney bin. They'll be muttering:

 

"Cheney" "Bush" "Tea Bagger" "Palin" "WMD"

 

as they get hauled away.

 

However, the paramedic is a wiseass libertarian, so, ever mile or so, he look back and yell "OBAMACARE!", and touch off another outburst of crazy.

You forgot that they'll also mutter "Fox News".

[birdog1960]

"Bush!" That's all you got?

 

 

 

See also: Affordable Care Act.

bush was a presidential opponent of his that somehow won. it's an apt comparison.

 

the aca isn't and never was simple. i can't think of anyone claiming such. as i've stated many times, the recognized goals of the aca could have much more simply been accomplished by a single payor plan. that was not feasible but i do feel obama gave up too quickly on it and the rollout of the aca has been a disaster.

Edited November 15, 2013 by birdog1960

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

Dennis Miller Show @DennisDMZ

 

Obamacare is Prohibition if they had been drinking when they crafted Prohibition.

 

6:55 PM - 14 Nov 2013

 

 

 

 

 

2 more of Dennis's tweets

Obama's now trying to stop the bleeding. I liked the old days (last month) when Doctors stopped the bleeding.

 

 

Keep your distance from your Lib acquaintances in the next few weeks. Many zealots tend to get vile when their pet notions crater.

 

 

 

.

Edited November 15, 2013 by B-Man

[3rdnlng]

bush was a presidential opponent of his that somehow won. it's an apt comparison.

 

the aca isn't and never was simple. i can't think of anyone claiming such. as i've stated many times, the recognized goals of the aca could have much more simply been accomplished by a single payor plan. that was not feasible but i do feel obama gave up too quickly on it and the rollout of the aca has been a disaster.

 

Well, I'm glad you admit the ACA is a disaster. It does bother me that you find "nucular" such a crushing indictment of a President. Do you find "corpse man" equally distasteful?

[DC Tom]

bush was a presidential opponent of his that somehow won. it's an apt comparison.

 

the aca isn't and never was simple. i can't think of anyone claiming such. as i've stated many times, the recognized goals of the aca could have much more simply been accomplished by a single payor plan. that was not feasible but i do feel obama gave up too quickly on it and the rollout of the aca has been a disaster.

 

"Making complex problems seem simple."

 

Christ, you're an idiot.

[OCinBuffalo]

howard speaks the truth: http://www.politico....95.html?hp=t3_3. obama needs to listen. now.

Yeah, you keep digging schitheel. By all means, don't let me stop you.

 

By all rights, given the nonsense you've spewed here about this issue, and your propensity to claim moral superiority over us all, you should be flat out embarrassed and silent, because REAL people are going to be really hurt by this fiasco you and the clowns like you put upon the rest of us.

 

Are your unintended consequences, and the absolute certainty with which you inflict them on people, moral, in any way?

 

No. If you've given Ds any $, or your vote, you are now directly responsible for harming people, doctor. Enjoy owning that.

 

By all rights, I should tell you the STFU.

 

But, I won't . Instead, you want me to help dig? Want some water? IF you and Dean and the rest of the absolutely despicable people in that article want to dig a bigger whole, one that you will never climb out of again?

 

Where do I sign up?

Edited November 15, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Alaska Darin]

howard speaks the truth: http://www.politico....95.html?hp=t3_3. obama needs to listen. now.

Your liberalism knows no bounds. That might be the dumbest article I've ever read and the greatest indictment of the retarded left ever.

 

You sir, are an unmitigated moron.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

 

 

Well, I'm glad you admit the ACA is a disaster. It does bother me that you find "nucular" such a crushing indictment of a President. Do you find "corpse man" equally distasteful?

57 states?? Lol. And didn't he move Charleston, sc to the gulf coast as well?

[Nanker]

I must admit this is quite entertaining - seeing the left in full melt-down and turning on the incompetent affirmative action President they put in power. They don't have a clue. He doesn't have a clue, and the country is watching this like Hank and Marie looking in stunned disbelief at Walt's taped "confession".

Yeah, but Bush pronounced nuclear, nucluar. Well, Lyndon Johnson called black people !@#$s.

[Doc]

bush was a presidential opponent of his that somehow won. it's an apt comparison.

 

the aca isn't and never was simple. i can't think of anyone claiming such. as i've stated many times, the recognized goals of the aca could have much more simply been accomplished by a single payor plan. that was not feasible but i do feel obama gave up too quickly on it and the rollout of the aca has been a disaster.

Barry had a small window in which to cram through his healthcare takeover. He didn't have time to convince people to go single payer. Never mind that it wasn't going to happen considering Joe Lieberman alone was enough to kill the public option.

[Gary M]

No one's stopped him yet.

 

More seriously: my understanding is that the cancellations were prompted by HSS regs written in a very narrow interpretation of the law, and not the law itself...so yes, the executive can reverse that decision. With regards to delaying the mandate...probably not, but he already delayed the employer mandate unconstitutionally, so there's precedent.

 

The truly sickening thing is how many people think this is acceptable. Let's just go ahead and pass an Enabling Act - we can even call it the "Law to Remedy the Distress of People and The Homeland."

 

How about "Simple Healthcare Insurance Truce"

 

AKA S.H.I.T.

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

I must admit this is quite entertaining - seeing the left in full melt-down and turning on the incompetent affirmative action President they put in power. They don't have a clue. He doesn't have a clue, and the country is watching this like Hank and Marie looking in stunned disbelief at Walt's taped "confession".

Yeah, but Bush pronounced nuclear, nucluar. Well, Lyndon Johnson called black people !@#$s.

Bush was mocked for his accent and pronouncement of words, but at least he knew what he was saying. Obama is !@#$ing clueless. Bush wasn't the brightest but the media never cut him a break. If obama and bush were both judged with the same vigor obama would have been exposed for the fraud that he is back in 2007.

 

So you mean this is the result of electing a community organizing, junior senator, that has no real experience other than voting present and thinking we have 57 states?? Shocking.

 

Forward!

Edited November 15, 2013 by drinkTHEkoolaid

[Nanker]

Face it, Obama would be a janitor in Maui if he were white. His intellect is on a par with one.

He's Peter Pan - a boy that never grew up.

[B-Man]

Obama’s sorry story

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/obama-story-article-1.1517751

 

 

 

 

 

 

Backpedaling Bam is fumbling and bumbling

 

On Thursday, President Obama conducted the “Springtime for Hitler” of press conferences. He came out at noon and proceeded to blather his way through an hour of self-justifications and evasions and apologies and complaints.

 

And as he went on, you could almost see America reacting as the audience in “The Producers” did to the happy-talk number about Adolf romping at his retreat in Berchtesgaden — with gaped-mouth astonishment.

 

First, he said he had not been “informed directly that the Web site would not be working.” What on earth does that mean? Was he somehow informed indirectly? In an affronted tone, the president said he wouldn’t have been so stupid as to have promised a great Web site if he’d known it was lousy.

 

Which makes you wonder: Did he ask?

 

Oh, and how about that now-infamous lie The New York Times hilariously dubbed an “incorrect promise” the other day? Here the president squirmed: “With respect to the pledge I made that ‘If you like your plan, you can keep it,’ I think — you know, and I’ve said in interviews — that there is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate.”

 

So he wouldn’t say he lied, which is understandable. He did say — three times — that the ball was “fumbled,” and that he’s been doing some “Monday-morning quarterbacking” on himself.

 

The only problem is that if he gets benched, Joe Biden has to come in from the sidelines, and nobody wants that.

 

 

 

.

[birdog1960]

"Making complex problems seem simple."

 

Christ, you're an idiot.

what about the word "more" do you fail to understand, idiot?

 

Well, I'm glad you admit the ACA is a disaster. It does bother me that you find "nucular" such a crushing indictment of a President. Do you find "corpse man" equally distasteful?

no, i admit the rollout is a disaster. it can be fixed. obama's statements on keeping your insurance are a political disaster. he should just suck it up, admit he was wrong and move on. the plan itself hasn't even fully started so how could anyone label it a success or failure? i believe it will improve access for 10's of millions of americans and maintain access for nearly everyone else. we'll see.

[B-Man]

The "Rule of Law" is for the little people:

 

Megan McArdle: ObamaCare Is Whatever Obama Says It Is.

 

“It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Obamacare is going very badly indeed, and that the president knows it is going very badly. Until sometime in late October, he was clearly still confident that, despite some setbacks and embarrassments, the system would soon be up and working, and the public would rally behind it. Now he sees his polls rapidly declining, and with them the political capital that he may need to fix any further problems that crop up. Turning the insurers into scapegoats, when he still needs their help to make this law work, was an act of desperation. How many acts does this play have left?”

[IDBillzFan]

howard speaks the truth: http://www.politico....95.html?hp=t3_3. obama needs to listen. now.

 

I love how the person who isn't sure who he'd choose between Hillary and Christie thinks what the president needs to do is listen to Howard Dean, who's answer is to throw MORE money at hiring MORE people to get people to do something that absolutely NO ONE is able to do because all paths lead to the same broken portal.

 

So as a conservative, I say "Yes, Obama. Good plan. Listen to Howard Dean."

[3rdnlng]

what about the word "more" do you fail to understand, idiot?

 

no, i admit the rollout is a disaster. it can be fixed. obama's statements on keeping your insurance are a political disaster. he should just suck it up, admit he was wrong and move on. the plan itself hasn't even fully started so how could anyone label it a success or failure? i believe it will improve access for 10's of millions of americans and maintain access for nearly everyone else. we'll see.

 

Why do you believe that it will "maintain access for nearly everyone else"?

[keepthefaith]

bush was a presidential opponent of his that somehow won. it's an apt comparison.

 

the aca isn't and never was simple. i can't think of anyone claiming such. as i've stated many times, the recognized goals of the aca could have much more simply been accomplished by a single payor plan. that was not feasible but i do feel obama gave up too quickly on it and the rollout of the aca has been a disaster.

 

The vast majority of our population does not want single payer. People don't want the post office and the IRS or anything that is run with typical government culture managing their health care and for good reason. Medicare and Medicaid have plenty of problems and solving a disagreement with the government is nearly impossible. Single payer? Who pays? It is a myth that people could not get health insurance before the ACA was passed. Anyone could easily buy insurance and it was priced pretty competitively with employer provided insurance. Most uninsured simply had other spending priorities. The number of people who are citizens of this country who truly needed help was/is certainly less than 10% of the population. The law as written is a horrible piece of work.

[Nanker]

If Obama was an NFL quarterback he would have been cut in training camp. He's an incompetent, lying buffoon.

[TheMadCap]

what about the word "more" do you fail to understand, idiot?

 

no, i admit the rollout is a disaster. it can be fixed. obama's statements on keeping your insurance are a political disaster. he should just suck it up, admit he was wrong and move on. the plan itself hasn't even fully started so how could anyone label it a success or failure? i believe it will improve access for 10's of millions of americans and maintain access for nearly everyone else. we'll see.

 

I think you meant to say "will cause thier previously acceptable and desirable level of insurance to decrease in coverage and explode in premiums". I know mine will, I've looked on the exchanges, and buddy, let me tell you, it's enough to even make my wife, who's father blames the GOP for every problem the world has, who has NEVER voted for anyone other than one with (D) after their name, to see the light...

[B-Man]

LOL................

 

 

The NYT acknowledges Obama's in trouble by reminding us that Bush was really, really bad. Remember?!!

 

At the website front page the teaser headline — which is also the headline in the paper version — is: "As Troubles Pile Up, a Crisis of Confidence for Obama." But if you click to the article, the headline becomes "Health Law Rollout’s Stumbles Draw Parallels to Bush’s Hurricane Response."

 

I can think of a whole bunch of non-parallels:

 

1. Bush's political party didn't design and enact Hurricane Katrina.

 

2. Bush didn't have 5 years to craft his response to the hurricane.

 

3. Bush didn't have the power to redesign the hurricane as he designed his response to it.

 

4. The Republican Bush believed he could not simply bully past the Democratic Mayor of New Orleans and the Democratic Governor of Louisiana and impose a federal solution, but the Democrat Obama and his party in Congress aggressively and voluntarily took over an area of policy that might have been left to the states.

 

5. The media were ready to slam Bush long and hard for everything — making big scandals out of things that, done by Obama, would have been forgotten a week later (what are the Valerie Plame-level screwups of Obama's?) — but the media have bent over backwards for years to help make Obama look good and to bury or never even uncover all of his lies and misdeeds.

 

6. If Bush experienced a disaster like the rollout of Obamacare, the NYT wouldn't use its front page to remind us of something Bill Clinton did that looked bad.

 

 

 

(much more at the link)

[Joe Miner]

what about the word "more" do you fail to understand, idiot?no, i admit the rollout is a disaster. it can be fixed. obama's statements on keeping your insurance are a political disaster. he should just suck it up, admit he was wrong and move on. the plan itself hasn't even fully started so how could anyone label it a success or failure? i believe it will improve access for 10's of millions of americans and maintain access for nearly everyone else. we'll see.

 

Which unicorn fart was it that solidified you in your beliefs?

[Nanker]

Anyone else wonder what the law of the land will be tomorrow when this inept **** wakes up and makes a new pronouncement on what the Law-of-the-Day is?

It reminds me of this:

http://youtu.be/EV4N2dk0cMk

Edited November 15, 2013 by Nanker

[DC Tom]

what about the word "more" do you fail to understand, idiot?

 

Okay, let me spell it out for you:

 

You whined about Bush "making complex problems seem simple."

I referred you to the ACA.

You veered onto a completely different topic, about how the ACA sucks because it's a half-measure.

I tried to get you back on the "making complex problems seem simple" topic.

 

You completely missed my point that THIS administration trying to make a complex problem (health care reform) seem simple, with pablum like "if you like your insurance, you can keep it." Thus demonstrating that you are a halfwit who is more interested in the partisanship of the issue than you are the issue itself (like we didn't know already), else you wouldn't criticize Bush and excuse Obama for embracing the same "making complex problems seem simple" philosophy.

 

Of course, you do that because you know you're full of ****, and can't back up anything you say.

 

The "Rule of Law" is for the little people:

 

Megan McArdle: ObamaCare Is Whatever Obama Says It Is.

 

“It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Obamacare is going very badly indeed, and that the president knows it is going very badly. Until sometime in late October, he was clearly still confident that, despite some setbacks and embarrassments, the system would soon be up and working, and the public would rally behind it. Now he sees his polls rapidly declining, and with them the political capital that he may need to fix any further problems that crop up. Turning the insurers into scapegoats, when he still needs their help to make this law work, was an act of desperation. How many acts does this play have left?”

 

This would be a good time to dig up Obama's "bad apples" speech.

 

If it's just a few "bad apples" cancelling bad insurance plans, then why is it a major political crisis that has to be addressed "administratively?"

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

 

 

Okay, let me spell it out for you:

 

You whined about Bush "making complex problems seem simple."

I referred you to the ACA.

You veered onto a completely different topic, about how the ACA sucks because it's a half-measure.

I tried to get you back on the "making complex problems seem simple" topic.

 

You completely missed my point that THIS administration trying to make a complex problem (health care reform) seem simple, with pablum like "if you like your insurance, you can keep it." Thus demonstrating that you are a halfwit who is more interested in the partisanship of the issue than you are the issue itself (like we didn't know already), else you wouldn't criticize Bush and excuse Obama for embracing the same "making complex problems seem simple" philosophy.

 

Of course, you do that because you know you're full of ****, and can't back up anything you say.

 

 

 

This would be a good time to dig up Obama's "bad apples" speech.

 

If it's just a few "bad apples" cancelling bad insurance plans, then why is it a major political crisis that has to be addressed "administratively?"

Or Obamas answer in a town hall meeting where he says an elderly lady should just take pain pills instead of having surgery to pro long her life as part of his plan.....

[B-Man]

The "Hammer" chimes in.....................

 

 

 

Why liberals are panicked about Obamacare

 

by Charles Krauthammer.

 

FTA:

At stake, however, is more than the fate of one presidency or of the current Democratic majority in the Senate. At stake is the new, more ambitious, social-democratic brand of American liberalism introduced by Obama, of which Obamacare is both symbol and concrete embodiment.

 

Precisely when the GOP was returning to a more constitutionalist conservatism committed to reforming, restructuring and reining in the welfare state (see, for example, the Paul Ryan Medicare reform passed by House Republicans with near-unanimity), Obama offered a transformational liberalism designed to expand the role of government, enlarge the welfare state and create yet more new entitlements (see, for example, his call for universal preschool in his most recent State of the Union address).

 

The centerpiece of this vision is, of course, Obamacare, the most sweeping social reform in the past half-century, affecting one-sixth of the economy and directly touching the most vital area of life of every citizen.

 

As the only socially transformational legislation in modern American history to be enacted on a straight party-line vote, Obamacare is wholly owned by the Democrats. Its unraveling would catastrophically undermine their underlying ideology of ever-expansive central government providing cradle-to-grave care for an ever-grateful citizenry.

 

For four years, this debate has been theoretical. Now it’s real. And for Democrats, it’s a disaster.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.washingto...e6d4_story.html

[DC Tom]

Lost in all this schadenfreude is Nancy Pelosi's particular brand of crazy-stupid:

 

http://twitchy.com/2013/11/15/nancy-pelosi-i-didnt-make-a-like-it-keep-it-pledge-because-i-never-met-anyone-who-liked-his-plan/

[IDBillzFan]

Or Obamas answer in a town hall meeting where he says an elderly lady should just take pain pills instead of having surgery to pro long her life as part of his plan.....

 

Or Obama's concern that if you go in for a tonsillectomy, you could have your leg removed. Or something like that.

[DC Tom]

Or Obama's concern that if you go in for a tonsillectomy, you could have your leg removed. Or something like that.

 

Oh yeah...well...shut up! Republicans want to kill grandma!

[3rdnlng]

http://www.gopusa.co...t/?subscriber=1

 

 

 

 

 

A local expert on the Affordable Care Act said President Obama's promise that Americans can keep canceled health insurance policies for a year is virtually toothless.

"He can't order the insurance companies to do anything," said Chris Schrader of Schrader and Associates in Bloomington. "These policies have been canceled, and you can't turn on a time machine and restore everything to the way things were pre-Oct. 1. These canceled policies have been killed, and Obama cannot resuscitate them by putting the presidential paddles on them and saying 'Clear.'"

Schrader said in order for insurance companies to cover people whose policies have been canceled, they would have to create brand new insurance products and submit them to individual states for approval.

"Insurance is regulated on the state level, not the federal level," he said. "Every state has different laws, but in most states the average amount of time it takes to construct an insurance product and get it approved and ready to take to market is six months."

Schrader said even if the states and insurance companies fast-tracked the process and people bought the new policies right away, people would not be able to regain health insurance coverage until June or July.

"What this means is that even in a best-case scenario, people losing their health insurance on Jan. 1 would be exposed without coverage for six months," he said. "It's true that most of the people with individual plans are healthy, and for many of them the loss of coverage would not be the end of the world because they are less likely to need medical care. But many are not so healthy. Come Jan. 1 we will start hearing stories about cancer patients who've lost their insurance and can't get the chemo they need to survive."

He added that even if people are able to buy a plan on the marketplace by the middle of next year, they may be sorely disappointed.

"In New Hampshire, for example, there is only one insurance company in the marketplace, and that company's plans include only 10 of the 27 hospitals in the state," he said.

Schrader said there's another challenge Obama faces concerning his new pledge -- persuading insurance companies to write policies for less than a year in duration.

"Insurance companies are already screaming about the low number of enrollees (26,794 in the federally run marketplaces and 79,000 in the 14 state-run marketplaces)," he said. "They are not happy about those numbers, because they need lots of bodies, particularly healthy bodies, to maintain their risk pool. I would be stunned if any of them would write a policy and collect premiums for just 5 or 6 months before the policy is canceled. These companies work off actuarial tables and their policies are designed to keep people engaged for many years, with the hope that over the long haul their gains will exceed their losses and they'll make money."

Schrader said insurance companies are not only unhappy with the number of marketplace enrollees, but the demographics.

"Those who are enrolling are skewing old," he said. "Not many young people are enrolling and that is not good news for the insurance companies."

Schrader said the problem with the president's promise is that is seeks to provide a quick fix to a complex problem.

"The Affordable Care Act is not designed in a way that allows you to take a piece out of it and try to fix that piece in a vacuum," he said. "There are many factors that are interwoven and leveraged on everything happening in a certain way. Clearly the president and Congress have not read the bill or the regs, because what they're proposing can't be executed."

Edited November 15, 2013 by 3rdnlng

[Nanker]

 

This would be a good time to dig up Obama's "bad apples" speech.

 

If it's just a few "bad apples" cancelling bad insurance plans, then why is it a major political crisis that has to be addressed "administratively?"

 

And seriously, what magic transformation happened overnight that suddenly, he wakes up and wants to unilaterally change what took years to put into place? I mean, what's different now? If the plans were substandard and that was a huge issue for him - why is that less of an issue now, and why will it be less of an issue in 12 months? It will be an even larger issue next year once the employer mandate waiver expires. Right now it's just a "small percentage" (5% of the population - which is 2.5 times the gay and lesbian population of the country) that are being forced by the law out of their healthcare insurance. Next year it could be 80% of the population that could be given the heave-ho from their employer-sponsored plans.

 

Employee benefits is one of the satisfiers that employers provide as incentives to employees and potential employees to work for their company. Obama's !@#$ing with people's employee benefits and that is unprecedented. He and the rest of the Democrats that voted for this abortion and that continue to support him deserve to be the guinea pigs for this horse ****. Make them live with it and under its provisions and let them then sing its praises. So strip the unions and the government workers of their exemptions and let's get it on, B. O. We'll see who stinks more in the end - your signature abortislation or you with your aptly fitting initials.

[DC Tom]

And seriously, what magic transformation happened overnight that suddenly, he wakes up and wants to unilaterally change what took years to put into place?

 

I know this is a rhetorical question, but I feel compelled to answer nonetheless: he's campaigning.

 

http://www.gopusa.co...t/?subscriber=1

 

 

 

 

 

A local expert on the Affordable Care Act said President Obama's promise that Americans can keep canceled health insurance policies for a year is virtually toothless.

"He can't order the insurance companies to do anything," said Chris Schrader of Schrader and Associates in Bloomington. "These policies have been canceled, and you can't turn on a time machine and restore everything to the way things were pre-Oct. 1. These canceled policies have been killed, and Obama cannot resuscitate them by putting the presidential paddles on them and saying 'Clear.'"

Schrader said in order for insurance companies to cover people whose policies have been canceled, they would have to create brand new insurance products and submit them to individual states for approval.

"Insurance is regulated on the state level, not the federal level," he said. "Every state has different laws, but in most states the average amount of time it takes to construct an insurance product and get it approved and ready to take to market is six months."

Schrader said even if the states and insurance companies fast-tracked the process and people bought the new policies right away, people would not be able to regain health insurance coverage until June or July.

"What this means is that even in a best-case scenario, people losing their health insurance on Jan. 1 would be exposed without coverage for six months," he said. "It's true that most of the people with individual plans are healthy, and for many of them the loss of coverage would not be the end of the world because they are less likely to need medical care. But many are not so healthy. Come Jan. 1 we will start hearing stories about cancer patients who've lost their insurance and can't get the chemo they need to survive."

He added that even if people are able to buy a plan on the marketplace by the middle of next year, they may be sorely disappointed.

"In New Hampshire, for example, there is only one insurance company in the marketplace, and that company's plans include only 10 of the 27 hospitals in the state," he said.

Schrader said there's another challenge Obama faces concerning his new pledge -- persuading insurance companies to write policies for less than a year in duration.

"Insurance companies are already screaming about the low number of enrollees (26,794 in the federally run marketplaces and 79,000 in the 14 state-run marketplaces)," he said. "They are not happy about those numbers, because they need lots of bodies, particularly healthy bodies, to maintain their risk pool. I would be stunned if any of them would write a policy and collect premiums for just 5 or 6 months before the policy is canceled. These companies work off actuarial tables and their policies are designed to keep people engaged for many years, with the hope that over the long haul their gains will exceed their losses and they'll make money."

Schrader said insurance companies are not only unhappy with the number of marketplace enrollees, but the demographics.

"Those who are enrolling are skewing old," he said. "Not many young people are enrolling and that is not good news for the insurance companies."

Schrader said the problem with the president's promise is that is seeks to provide a quick fix to a complex problem.

"The Affordable Care Act is not designed in a way that allows you to take a piece out of it and try to fix that piece in a vacuum," he said. "There are many factors that are interwoven and leveraged on everything happening in a certain way. Clearly the president and Congress have not read the bill or the regs, because what they're proposing can't be executed."

No...it'll be a change to HHS regulations allowing policies already cancelled to be reissued on the same terms as when they were cancelled. Then when the insurance companies can't immediately reinstate everyone's policy (because in the real world you can't just flip a switch. **** takes time and effort), the administration can point to the insurers and say "See? It wasn't us! It was them all along!"

 

Told you so.

Edited November 15, 2013 by DC Tom

[Dante]

If Obama was an NFL quarterback he would have been cut in training camp. He's an incompetent, lying buffoon.

I was listening Carolla the other day and he was comparing the life of a NFL coach's to politicians. Imagine, for a moment, if Barry had the same work ethic as any NFL head coach? The level of commitment it takes to compete at that level and the low tolerance for failure. No way Sotero handles that pressure. No way he puts in their hours. And I guess, being honest, do I really want a marxist hack like him working hard destroying the country? Again no way. He's just fine going out and playing yet another round of golf.

 

Lost in all this schadenfreude is Nancy Pelosi's particular brand of crazy-stupid:

 

http://twitchy.com/2...liked-his-plan/

I went to Golden Gate Park a couple months ago and was caught off guard when I saw a "Nancy Pelosi Drive". I lol'd but quickly muzzled myself before anyone noticed realizing I was in the belly of the beast so to speak. Edited November 15, 2013 by Dante

[IDBillzFan]

nt to Golden Gate Park a couple months ago and was caught off guard when I saw a "Nancy Pelosi Drive".

 

Legend has it that the road is paved with the skin removed from Nancy's face by her plastic surgeon.