Yesterday on "Morning Joe," Zeke Emmanuel said that anyone who had an insurance policy in place before March 23rd, 2010 and has since not had any alterations to that plan, got to keep it. Is this true?
9 comments:
Anonymous
said...
That is true, until you examine what is meant by "not had any alterations to that plan". According to Kathleen Sibelius, a premium change of just $5 is all it takes to trigger cancellation.
That's like saying, "Don't move or I'll shoot you. Your chest just moved." Bang!
"But he was just breathing."
"Yes he was. That was movement."
That is why between 7 million and 16 million (depending on whose numbers you accept) individually purchased insurance plans are in the process of being cancelled. That's anywhere from 50% of a smaller market (which strikes me as an unreasonable estimate) to 85% of a larger market.
“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34552. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and get canceled. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013. … 51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.
When Obama repeatedly stated that "you can keep your health insurance. Period", it was a lie. Furthermore, he KNEW that it was a lie.
Remember: The promise of Obamacare: Insuring the uninsured. The reality of Obamacare: Uninsuring the insured.
The ACA did not make the costs of health insurance increase markedly faster than they have historically been increasing. Premiums have been going up much faster than the rate of inflation for decades (like college tuition). Provisions in the ACA will limit the size of those increases in the future, which is why some companies raised their rates recently (and got called out for gouging).
The individual health insurance market has always been a ripoff. If these policies provided real coverage they were more expensive than group policies (because each individual is a tiny risk pool), and if they were cheap they were worthless because of lifetime caps (which would bankrupt you if you came down with a catastrophic disease like cancer), or because companies could simply cancel your policy. Preexisting condition exceptions allowed companies to insure only healthy individuals who didn't need health insurance to begin with.
The ACA prevents people with preexisting conditions from being denied coverage and prevents companies from canceling your policy when you start costing them money. Which means they HAVE to charge more. You can't get something for nothing. There's nothing inherently wrong about this.
The ACA forces companies and individuals to insure themselves responsibly so that they don't become a drain on the rest of us. This logic comes straight out of right-wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation.
The low-cost sham policies that are now being canceled by the thousands were ripoffs, plain and simple. They were just stealing people's money and providing completely inadequate coverage.
Insurance companies are worthless middlemen and disgusting leeches that only drive up the cost of health care. But they hold too much power to be dislodged, so we're stuck with them. The ACA is forcing them to be more responsible, a tradeoff they were willing to accept for guaranteeing them a consistent customer base.
The ACA prevents people with preexisting conditions from being denied coverage and prevents companies from canceling your policy when you start costing them money. Which means they HAVE to charge more. You can't get something for nothing.
And…
The ACA did not make the costs of health insurance increase markedly faster than they have historically been increasing.
Look, I know thinking is hard, but c'mon! You could at least try!
So tell me, why is it "irresponsible" for a male to buy insurance which does not cover maternity care? Or birth control? Or a hysterectomy? Why is it "irresponsible" for a woman to buy insurance that doesn't cover prostate cancer or a vasectomy?
Is it "irresponsible" to choose to pay for routine medical expenses out of your own pocket (instead of paying the extra costs of adding insurance as a middleman to drive up costs) and prefer to buy insurance that covers only major medical events?
If providing insurance for "everyone" requires soaking the taxpayers to pay for it, how is that not "a drain on the rest of us"?
As I have said previously, NMN, I'm skipping this latest round of Obama hyperventilating by the "liberal" media. Once we get past all the gotchas and adolescent n'yah n'yahs, the long term picture for health care will begin to emerge and it's going to be better as a result of this law. That's why I laugh at all the fuss right now because the media can't seem to think more than a few seconds ahead and truly do enjoy to wring their hands incessantly. I've been sucked in too often by this but no longer.
Of course, I still have yet to see any serious and workable plan, on health care or any other issue, from people like you who continue to root for failure and are hands down the most unhelpful people in our country. The American people might be unhappy with the president's mistakes and his favorability may drop for awhile but they really don't like you guys. You don't have any solutions, just complaints.
It takes a lot of ass to bitch and moan about the ACA while having absolutely nothing in its stead.
As I have said previously, NMN, I'm skipping this latest round of Obama hyperventilating by the "liberal" media.
Amazing! It's a new twist on Mark's favorite Standard Response—#10—by showing up just long enough to proclaim that he's running away.
It's no surprise that you don't want to talk about it. It's probably the most blatant lie in political history. It was repeated ad nauseum for years. And now it has been exposed so thoroughly that even hard-core leftists in the media can't deny it. So where does that leave poor little Mark, who can never ever admit error? Reaching a hand outside the bubble and waving it around wildly to make sure every notices that he's pulling the bubble shut again.
Of course, I still have yet to see any serious and workable plan, on health care or any other issue, from people like you
I still have yet to see any serious and workable plan, on health care
Which really means - 'I have rejected out of hand all the causes you have put forth for the problems in health care, therefore any plan you would have based upon fixing those causes I consider to not be serious.'
Which also really means - 'Since I reject your plans out of hand I don't want to listen to your criticism of my favored plan.'
Which is all pretty much the attitude of childishness and dishonesty.
9 comments:
That is true, until you examine what is meant by "not had any alterations to that plan". According to Kathleen Sibelius, a premium change of just $5 is all it takes to trigger cancellation.
That's like saying, "Don't move or I'll shoot you. Your chest just moved." Bang!
"But he was just breathing."
"Yes he was. That was movement."
That is why between 7 million and 16 million (depending on whose numbers you accept) individually purchased insurance plans are in the process of being cancelled. That's anywhere from 50% of a smaller market (which strikes me as an unreasonable estimate) to 85% of a larger market.
Even worse, the Obama Administration itself estimated in 2010 that 93 million employees would lose their insurance BECAUSE OF OBAMACARE!!!
“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34552. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and get canceled. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.
…
51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.
When Obama repeatedly stated that "you can keep your health insurance. Period", it was a lie. Furthermore, he KNEW that it was a lie.
Remember: The promise of Obamacare: Insuring the uninsured. The reality of Obamacare: Uninsuring the insured.
Oh, and Obama also promised that it would reduce costs. That is also untrue. Costs are going UP.
The ACA did not make the costs of health insurance increase markedly faster than they have historically been increasing. Premiums have been going up much faster than the rate of inflation for decades (like college tuition). Provisions in the ACA will limit the size of those increases in the future, which is why some companies raised their rates recently (and got called out for gouging).
The individual health insurance market has always been a ripoff. If these policies provided real coverage they were more expensive than group policies (because each individual is a tiny risk pool), and if they were cheap they were worthless because of lifetime caps (which would bankrupt you if you came down with a catastrophic disease like cancer), or because companies could simply cancel your policy. Preexisting condition exceptions allowed companies to insure only healthy individuals who didn't need health insurance to begin with.
The ACA prevents people with preexisting conditions from being denied coverage and prevents companies from canceling your policy when you start costing them money. Which means they HAVE to charge more. You can't get something for nothing. There's nothing inherently wrong about this.
The ACA forces companies and individuals to insure themselves responsibly so that they don't become a drain on the rest of us. This logic comes straight out of right-wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation.
The low-cost sham policies that are now being canceled by the thousands were ripoffs, plain and simple. They were just stealing people's money and providing completely inadequate coverage.
Insurance companies are worthless middlemen and disgusting leeches that only drive up the cost of health care. But they hold too much power to be dislodged, so we're stuck with them. The ACA is forcing them to be more responsible, a tradeoff they were willing to accept for guaranteeing them a consistent customer base.
The ACA prevents people with preexisting conditions from being denied coverage and prevents companies from canceling your policy when you start costing them money. Which means they HAVE to charge more. You can't get something for nothing.
And…
The ACA did not make the costs of health insurance increase markedly faster than they have historically been increasing.
Look, I know thinking is hard, but c'mon! You could at least try!
So tell me, why is it "irresponsible" for a male to buy insurance which does not cover maternity care? Or birth control? Or a hysterectomy? Why is it "irresponsible" for a woman to buy insurance that doesn't cover prostate cancer or a vasectomy?
Is it "irresponsible" to choose to pay for routine medical expenses out of your own pocket (instead of paying the extra costs of adding insurance as a middleman to drive up costs) and prefer to buy insurance that covers only major medical events?
If providing insurance for "everyone" requires soaking the taxpayers to pay for it, how is that not "a drain on the rest of us"?
Just wondering, are you hitting yourself in the face yet?
Best Tweet Ever!
One time I was in AFG, and the Pres was all, "if you like your legs, you can keep them"... Now I'm like, wtf?
As I have said previously, NMN, I'm skipping this latest round of Obama hyperventilating by the "liberal" media. Once we get past all the gotchas and adolescent n'yah n'yahs, the long term picture for health care will begin to emerge and it's going to be better as a result of this law. That's why I laugh at all the fuss right now because the media can't seem to think more than a few seconds ahead and truly do enjoy to wring their hands incessantly. I've been sucked in too often by this but no longer.
Of course, I still have yet to see any serious and workable plan, on health care or any other issue, from people like you who continue to root for failure and are hands down the most unhelpful people in our country. The American people might be unhappy with the president's mistakes and his favorability may drop for awhile but they really don't like you guys. You don't have any solutions, just complaints.
It takes a lot of ass to bitch and moan about the ACA while having absolutely nothing in its stead.
As I have said previously, NMN, I'm skipping this latest round of Obama hyperventilating by the "liberal" media.
Amazing! It's a new twist on Mark's favorite Standard Response—#10—by showing up just long enough to proclaim that he's running away.
It's no surprise that you don't want to talk about it. It's probably the most blatant lie in political history. It was repeated ad nauseum for years. And now it has been exposed so thoroughly that even hard-core leftists in the media can't deny it. So where does that leave poor little Mark, who can never ever admit error? Reaching a hand outside the bubble and waving it around wildly to make sure every notices that he's pulling the bubble shut again.
Of course, I still have yet to see any serious and workable plan, on health care or any other issue, from people like you
::: yyyyaaaawwwnnn :::
Yet another boring and predicatable LIE from Markadelphia. Jamming your fingers in your ears and yelling "Nya, nya, nya, I can't hear you!" at the top of your lungs does not mean that we have not discussed solutions or even what has been proven successful in the past.
Does anybody believe you any more?
It takes a major cajones to deny reality when it's a high speed freight train mere inches from crushing you.
I'm skipping this latest round of Obama hyperventilating
Yeah, why get upset about him being a liar now. As Hillary says "what difference does it make at this point".
I still have yet to see any serious and workable plan, on health care
Which really means - 'I have rejected out of hand all the causes you have put forth for the problems in health care, therefore any plan you would have based upon fixing those causes I consider to not be serious.'
Which also really means - 'Since I reject your plans out of hand I don't want to listen to your criticism of my favored plan.'
Which is all pretty much the attitude of childishness and dishonesty.
Post a Comment