OBAMACARE Disaster

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2001
OBAMACARE Disaster
16
Thu, 09-23-2010 - 3:20pm












Examiner Editorial: Obamacare is even worse than critics thought

Examiner Editorial
September 22, 2010




















Much more has been revealed about Obamacare since President Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pushed the bill on Americans six months ago. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP file)


Six months ago, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rammed Obamacare down the throats of an unwilling American public. Half a year removed from the unprecedented legislative chicanery and backroom dealing that characterized the bill's passage, we know much more about the bill than we did then. A few of the revelations:



» Obamacare won't decrease health care costs for the government. According to Medicare's actuary, it will increase costs. The same is likely to happen for privately funded health care.



» As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama's promise that it wouldn't. This means that tax dollars will be used to pay for a procedure millions of Americans across the political spectrum view as immoral. Supposedly, the Department of Health and Human Services will bar abortion coverage with new regulations but these will likely be tied up for years in litigation, and in the end may not survive the court challenge.



» Obamacare won't allow employees or most small businesses to keep the coverage they have and like. By Obama's estimates, as many as 69 percent of employees, 80 percent of small businesses, and 64 percent of large businesses will be forced to change coverage, probably to more expensive plans.



» Obamacare will increase insurance premiums -- in some places, it already has. Insurers, suddenly forced to cover clients' children until age 26, have little choice but to raise premiums, and they attribute to Obamacare's mandates a 1 to 9 percent increase. Obama's only method of preventing massive rate increases so far has been to threaten insurers.



» Obamacare will force seasonal employers -- especially the ski and amusement park industries -- to pay huge fines, cut hours, or lay off employees.



» Obamacare forces states to guarantee not only payment but also treatment for indigent Medicaid patients. With many doctors now refusing to take Medicaid (because they lose money doing so), cash-strapped states could be sued and ordered to increase reimbursement rates beyond their means.



» Obamacare imposes a huge nonmedical tax compliance burden on small business. It will require them to mail IRS 1099 tax forms to every vendor from whom they make purchases of more than $600 in a year, with duplicate forms going to the Internal Revenue Service. Like so much else in the 2,500-page bill, our senators and representatives were apparently unaware of this when they passed the measure.



» Obamacare allows the IRS to confiscate part or all of your tax refund if you do not purchase a qualified insurance plan. The bill funds 16,000 new IRS agents to make sure Americans stay in line.



If you wonder why so many American voters are angry, and no longer give Obama the benefit of the doubt on a variety of issues, you need look no further than Obamacare, whose birthday gift to America might just be a GOP congressional majority.



Follow the Washington Examiner on Facebook



http://www.facebook.com/washingtonexaminer

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2001
Wed, 09-29-2010 - 3:44pm
Insurers ordered to defend halting new "child-only" coverage



By Patrick Howington • phowington@courier-journal.com • September 28, 2010



Kentucky’s insurance commissioner has ordered health insurers to appear in Frankfort next month to explain their decisions to stop offering new child-only policies.

















Several major insurers — including Louisville-based Humana and Anthem, the state’s largest health insurer — said they decided to stop selling child-only policies partly because the new health reform law. The law requires them to accept children with pre-existing medical conditions starting last Thursday.



Insurers said many parents might have waited until children were very sick before buying coverage. The addition of many chronically ill children could have driven up premiums for other customers.



Some insurers said they stopped selling child-only plans after competitors took the same action. That created an unlevel field of competition, they said.



Kentucky Insurance Commissioner Sharon Clark said in a statement that she was concerned about the effect of the insurers’ stance on children with health problems.



She also said the insurers’ decisions could force children needing coverage to turn to Kentucky Access, the state’s high-risk insurance pool.



That “could prove disastrous” to the program, Clark said in a statement. “The current budget of Kentucky Access could not sustain the entry of several hundred children per month.”



Clark notified health insurers who sell individual coverage in Kentucky to appear at a fact-finding hearing Oct. 13 at the Kentucky Department of Insurance’s office in Frankfort.



While insurers have stopped offering new child-only policies, they will continue to cover children who already have such policies. They also will accept children with pre-existing condition under new family policies.



It’s unclear how many children could be affected by the insurers’ stance. Nationwide, child-only plans represent a small share of the individual market, with between 100,000 and 700,000 children covered, according to Obama administration officials.



Humana’s 1 million members in Kentucky and Indiana include 1,200 with child-only policies, the company has said.



Reporter Patrick Howington can be reached at (502) 582-4229.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-04-2001
Tue, 09-28-2010 - 3:49pm
Harvard Pilgrim cancels Medicare Advantage plan

By Robert Weisman

Globe Staff / September 28, 2010









iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sat, 09-25-2010 - 9:23pm

So sorry, but nice try.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-28-2009
Sat, 09-25-2010 - 8:14pm

<>

Yes, I agree. The Republicans really were immoral by blatantly lying about what was in the health care bill (death panels and the like) in order to scare people.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sat, 09-25-2010 - 7:37pm

Well, after looking at all the data posted in this thread, I'm going to have to say that it is well established that the democrats, did shove this bill down our throats, that that was their intention and agenda, and that they were well aware that this was contrary to what America wanted.



In addition, they may or may not have broken laws, they did attempt to have the bill "deemed as passed" in the House, even though that is a violation of the Constitution, and they only backed off after it was clear that it would go to court and they would lose, and look terribly bad as a result.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Sat, 09-25-2010 - 10:48am

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sat, 09-25-2010 - 10:18am

Take a look at this...



Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely U.S. Voters now at least somewhat favor repeal of the new national health care law, including 50% who Strongly Favor it.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-01-2004
Sat, 09-25-2010 - 4:14am

Not angry but extremely puzzled as

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Fri, 09-24-2010 - 9:29pm

Thanks for that post, it clearly shows the under handed tactics the democrats had to use in order to jamb that bill down our throats.



It should also be noted that when Massachusetts elected a republican that ran on a platform that included no to Obamacare, a clear message was sent to Washington that they didn't want it.



Of course, Obama ignored that and said that the message was about jobs (another thing they suck at), and they would focus on jobs. And they promptly went back to a bill that was passed before the election, because they could not pass one now, and shoved that one through.



Way to "get the message", Obama.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2007
Fri, 09-24-2010 - 6:12pm

Pages