Posts

Showing posts with the label Obamacare

Democrats and Affordability Part 2

 Previously we talked about how Democrats drive up costs, but what do they do to make things affordable?  Simple, they give away your tax dollars. Obamacare is a classic example.  Democrats rammed through a boondoggle of a program that has lived up to none of its promises, a key one of which was to reduce the cost of health insurance.  As insurance costs rose and rose, Democrats during the Biden Administration passed a law "temporarily" removing any cap on income levels for subsidies.  This meant that people making as much as $600,000 or more could get federal tax dollars to help pay for their Health Insurance purchased through the marketplace.* The temporary law ended this past December.  Democrats are seeking to extend the removal of the cap on subsidies for 10 more years at a cost to taxpayers of billions of dollars over that time.   That doesn't make health insurance more affordable, it just covers up the rising costs with taxpayer dollars....

Repealing Obamacare = loss of coverage for sick people? Not true

I don't care whether you like or hate the Affordable Care Act also known as Obamacare.  Let's dispel some misinformation. Will repealing Obamacare will cause all people with pre-existing conditions to lose coverage or being barred from coverage by insurers?  NO.  It's flat out not true.  Anyone who says it will result in loss of coverage due to a pre-existing condition is either ill informed or a liar.  I'll let you decide how to categorize the Democrat United States Senators making such statements at the hearings to consider the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Why do I say that?  Answer: HIPAA  HIPAA means the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.  It was sponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy and Senator Nancy Kassebaum and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996.  HIPAA is mostly known today because TV cop shows constantly show police thwarted from getting key evidence because HIPAA prevents doctors from releasing...

Obamacare repeal means return of pre-existing condition exclusions? WRONG!

I've been reading how the repeal of Obamacare will result in millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions being denied health insurance. Horse manure.  Obamacare* is not the very first law passed in the United States to address this problem.  Those other laws remain in effect when Obamacare is repealed and under those laws people with pre-existing conditions can get coverage and do not face higher rates.  Opinion writers, news stories, and the studies they cite, notwithstanding. For an example of what is being said - go to HuffingtonPost.com and search Obamacare and you'll see story after story about the possibility of a Federal Appeals Court overturning the law.  The big concern expressed - the possibility of millions of Americans being denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions.  Here is one such quote: "More than 50 million Americans have something in their medical histories that could disqualify them from health insurance absent t...

Repealing ObamaCare equals no pre-existing condition coverage? Wrong!

Charges that a vote to repeal Obamacare is a vote to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions are completely wrong.  This is the latest campaign tactic by Democrats.  Unfortunately Republican's don't understand health insurance law well enough to point out why the Democrats are completely wrong. Between 2011 and 2016, Republicans voted 40 times to repeal ObamaCare.  The House voted again to repeal the law but the Senate did not, leaving ObamaCare in place.  Democrats charge that Republicans will allow "big insurance to go back to denying coverage for pre-existing conditions." (1) That allegation ignores many facts but it's surprising Republicans have done such a poor job responding.  Why is it not true? a) in 2017, the Republican bill to repeal ObamaCare included pre-existing condition protections. b) even if Congress just repealed ObamaCare and did not pass any new law, federal law would revert to what existed before.  That includes a law passed i...

Intellectual Dishonesty on display

It really grits my buns when people are intellectually dishonest when arguing an issue.  Take for example the Opinion piece in the NY Times titled "Trump Takes Away Fundamental Health Care for Women" written by the Chief Medical Officer for Planned Parenthood, Raegan McDonald-Mosley.  Ms. McDonald-Mosley* starts her article with an insult, saying the "Trump Administration revealed its disdain for women," with the Administration's decision to modify the rules adopted to implement the Affordable Care Act's provision to cover birth control.  Really?  So that is the only possible reason for what the Trump Administration did?  The fact that the original rule was overturned by the Supreme Court and further Court cases are pending has nothing to do with it? Next we move to the real whopper - Ms. McDonald-Mosley claims "Birth control is not controversial."  Really?  Are you kidding me?  Contraceptives are highly controversial in many respects.  M...

Health Insurance - what to do next

First step, Repeal Obamacare.  As discussed in the previous article, it has accomplished two things - get more people covered and eliminate pre-existing condition exclusions but it failed in just about every other goal. Why did Obamacare fail?  It is too complicated.  The law tries to micromanage every part of the industry.  Need more competition, we'll artificially create it.  Benefits?  The law says what will be covered.  Pricing - the Federal Government adds multiple layers of bureaucracy to the State layers that already existed.  Selling insurance - we'll "supplement" the current sales methods with an Exchange.  And on and on... The Three Stooges had a bit where they were plumbers and Curly goes into the bathroom to fix a leaky pipe.  At the end of it, he's surrounded by a maze of pipes from floor to ceiling and the leak is still there.  Obamacare reminded me of that.  Everything that someone thought was wrong they adde...

Obamacare - what went right and what went wrong

Part 1 of a multi-article post.  This is looking back.  The next will look at alternatives for the future. What went right 1. About 20 Million more people have coverage thanks to Obamacare 2. No more preexisting exclusions What is debatable or uncertain 3. More young people have coverage on their parents policy President Obama touted this during his re-election The counter-argument is that proponents of the law were counting on young people buying individual coverage to offset the cost of older or sicker people entering the market.  How do you reconcile that goal with giving young people coverage for free under their parents' policy?  Is it any surprise that people are complaining now that rates are going up because not enough healthy people bought coverage?  And who are the healthiest people you know?  Those aged 18 to 26 who can now stay on their parents' coverage. 4. Obamacare will make people healthier - on this point the NY Times s...

The Case FOR Trump (Updated)

After posting the case against Hillary, folks challenged me to be positive and make the Case FOR Trump.  Challenge accepted. Let me start by saying I'm not a Trump Fan.  Of the 17 people who ran for the Republican nomination, Trump was about #13 on the list.  That said, we have four candidates for President and we have to vote for one.  So here goes, the case for Trump. 0. Repealing Obamacare - forgot this on the original list and it's way to important to put at the bottom and I'm too lazy to renumber.  Donald Trump will work to repeal Obamacare.  The program is starting to crater.  Premiums are growing at rates of almost 20%.  Less people are enrolling.  Unexpecting citizens are getting hit with surprise tax penalties even if they do have coverage. Hillary Clinton will not repeal Obamacare. Advantage Trump. 1. He'll get things done - Everyone complains that Washington is broken.  Nothing can get done. Who better to change th...

The Case FOR Trump (Updated)

After posting the case against Hillary, folks challenged me to be positive and make the Case FOR Trump.  Challenge accepted. Let me start by saying I'm not a Trump Fan.  Of the 17 people who ran for the Republican nomination, Trump was about #13 on the list.  That said, we have four candidates for President and we have to vote for one.  So here goes, the case for Trump. 0. Repealing Obamacare - forgot this on the original list and it's way to important to put at the bottom and I'm too lazy to renumber.  Donald Trump will work to repeal Obamacare.  The program is starting to crater.  Premiums are growing at rates of almost 20%.  Less people are enrolling.  Unexpecting citizens are getting hit with surprise tax penalties even if they do have coverage. Hillary Clinton will not repeal Obamacare. Advantage Trump. 1. He'll get things done - Everyone complains that Washington is broken.  Nothing can get done. Who better to change th...

Stossel on Health Insurance and my reply

Friend of mine sent me an article written by John Stossel about the health care or health insurance system in the US.   http://humanevents.com/2016/05/11/free-market-medicine/?utm_source=hedaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl In response to Mr. Stossel's article, I shall suggest that he's both right and wrong.  He's right on the subject of single payer not being such a good idea: - How is that working for people who rely on the Veteran's Administration? - If traditional Medicare was so good, why do so many people buy Medicare Advantage HMO coverage? - Most State Medicaid agencies contract with private HMOs because the States did such a crappy job managing the system themselves, doctors were leaving the networks in droves, people were turning to the ER for primary care services - UK has state run health and everyone who has money buys private insurance - Australia has state run health and everyone who has money buys private i...