Page 17 of 401 FirstFirst ... 712131415161718192021222767117 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 8004

Thread: ACA Running Thread

  1. #321
    Had to revisit the article to find that was a "claim" not a fact about halving spending. My apologies.

    Agreed that the exchanges' tech issues need serious attention to improve on what we will see in the next few weeks.
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  2. #322

  3. #323
    Quote Originally Posted by Liquid Karma View Post
    So is this when we get to formally start throwing around the R-word (regressive) for Obamacare and its namesake?

  4. #324
    Banhammer'd
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    78,116
    From the Governor of KY:

    http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/...obamacare.html

    "He said 640,000 Kentuckians—15 percent of the state—don’t have health insurance and “trust me, you know many of those 640,000 people. You’re friends with them. You’re probably related to them. Some may be your sons and daughters. You go to church with them. Shop with them. Help them harvest their fields. Sit in the stands with them as you watch your kids play football or basketball or ride a horse in competition. Heck, you may even be one of them.”

    “We’ve ranked that bad for a long, long time. The Affordable Care Act is our historic opportunity to address this weakness and to change the course of the future of the commonwealth. We’re going to make insurance available for the very first time in our history to every single citizen of the commonwealth of Kentucky.”

    About half the audience burst into applause at that point while the other half sat on their hands. But he wasn’t done. He cited a study that showed the law would inject about $15.6 billion into the Kentucky economy over eight years, create 17,000 new jobs, and generate $802 million for the state budget".

  5. #325
    Dem politician praises dem enacted law. Stop the presses.:tard::tard:

  6. #326
    According to the link below, my insurance will go up 243%.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013...edium=facebook

  7. #327
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    Quote Originally Posted by WFFaithful View Post
    According to the link below, my insurance will go up 243%.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013...edium=facebook
    According to that link my out if pocket max goes from 5k to 12.7k on the exchange for my family. That really sucks.

  8. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrangor View Post
    According to that link my out if pocket max goes from 5k to 12.7k on the exchange for my family. That really sucks.
    $12700 the max under the law. Your plan might have one lower.

    Ive seen rate increases of 800%...Some folks are on "true" catastrophic plans that are outlawed under the plan...

  9. #329
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    Quote Originally Posted by CHDeac View Post
    $12700 the max under the law. Your plan might have one lower.

    Ive seen rate increases of 800%...Some folks are on "true" catastrophic plans that are outlawed under the plan...
    That makes more sense.

  10. #330
    Banhammer'd
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    78,116
    Quote Originally Posted by WFFaithful View Post
    According to the link below, my insurance will go up 243%.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013...edium=facebook
    Does your employer provide insurance for you?

  11. #331
    Testing is still tough. I expect some headaches for the foreseeable future.

    And pelase, lets avoid the every big piece if legislation needs improvements/tweaks. Thats not the issue Im making here (I'll debate the long term viability of the ACA with anyone anytime).
    Last edited by CHDeac; 11-04-2013 at 07:28 PM.

  12. #332
    Banhammer'd
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    78,116
    There are some places where everything is in place and ready to go. The two biggest problems are governors who put hating Obama over what's best for their constituents and having middlemen who add nothing to healthcare results.

    Just like travel agents and car insurance agents have fallen by the wayside. It's time for the same thing to happen to health insurance middlemen.

  13. #333
    Quote Originally Posted by CHDeac View Post
    Ive worked straight for the last 75 days straight or so and I can tell you first hand the exchanges are a disaster in the making. I hope Im wrong.

    Testing is still horrendous with constant issues and unstable environments. I fully expect major issues, errors, problems and headaches for the foreseeable future.

    And pelase, lets avoid the every big piece if legislation needs improvements/tweaks. Thats not the issue Im making here (I'll debate the long term viability of the ACA with anyone anytime).

    What I'm talking here is an example of inept, arrogant gov't. We've had 3.5 years to implement this one thing, a marketplace, not really a cutting edge idea when you see private exchange likes e-health working just fine today. And they can't do it. A few days out and massive bugs. Any business would have delayed it months ago. Usually you freeze code several weeks before a major release. One of this size should have had a code freeze a month out. But here we are days out and very few, if any, successful enrollments have occurred. Yet millions could use it on 10.1. I get that the WH can't delay or they'd get killed. But they need to grow up and do whist right. Massive massive issues to date.

    Time to spin...
    I assume you are attributing this to both parties.

    And the WH would love to get the Republicans to delay the implementation for a year putting it past the 2014 elections essentially.
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  14. #334
    I certainly fully fault the Rs for their stupidity in their constant defunding rhetoric and silly votes. But, they have no impact on the setting up the federal exchanges.

    Now, states can complain...NC certainly acted poorly in not accepting set up funds. BUT, they defer to the feds for the FFE set up. The states issues are more on the support side and thus will send folks to DC for assistance. But again, little to do with the mechanics of the set up.

    Its certainly easy to say a lot of things have gone "well", the giveaways and rule changes. These were largely mandates to the insurers and employers and required the fed to do little other than set the rules (which they consistently do late, but thats a different story).
    Last edited by CHDeac; 11-04-2013 at 07:29 PM.

  15. #335
    Quote Originally Posted by CHDeac View Post
    Nope. Putting the exchange implementation issues squarely on the shoulders of the executive branch. HHS and CMS/CCIO have acted horribly, arrogantly and incompetently.

    I certainly fully fault the Rs for their stupidity in their constant defunding rhetoric and silly votes. But, they have no impact on the setting up the federal exchanges. They (HHS) are in complete control of the implementation and need little to no legislative action to set up the marketplace or the federal hub.

    Now, states can complain...NC certainly acted poorly in not accepting set up funds. BUT, they defer to the feds for the FFE set up. Its all on them. And its a mess. The states issues are more on the support side and thus will send folks to DC for assistance. But again, little to do with the mechanics of the set up.

    Its certainly easy to say a lot of things have gone "well", the giveaways and rule changes. These were largely mandates to the insurers and employers and required the fed to do little other than set the rules (which they consistently do late, but thats a different story).. But anything the feds have had control over has been full of issues (Long term care, employer mandate reporting, SHOP, the individual marketplace to name a few).


    I deal with the exchange each and every day. My life would be much easier (and more profitable) if it worked well. And its a total mess. All smoke and mirrors. And it didn't have to be.
    Because they choose not to participate, or they were cut out of federal and state committees and subcommittees and had no opportunity to present their ideas and input? Honest question.
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  16. #336
    Banhammer'd
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    78,116
    "Now, states can complain...NC certainly acted poorly in not accepting set up funds. BUT, they defer to the feds for the FFE set up. Its all on them. And its a mess. The states issues are more on the support side and thus will send folks to DC for assistance. But again, little to do with the mechanics of the set up"

    And every state who acted like this made it more difficult to set things up. how come it's going to work in some places?

  17. #337
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    Quote Originally Posted by ONW View Post
    I assume you are attributing this to both parties.

    And the WH would love to get the Republicans to delay the implementation for a year putting it past the 2014 elections essentially.
    I think it is a tough call on implementation. In one sense the WH can't look like it wants to delay its own bill, but on the other hand this could become the only issue that matters in 2014 if it blows up in his face. If it is a success, I don't think we will see the results very quickly. It is somewhat of a tightrope for the WH. I agree with you that they would like to postpone this implementation, but need to fight the delays on the surface possibly to avoid looking soft on its own policies.

    Looks like it is going to hit on Tuesday unless something crazy happens, so here goes nothing. I guess we will see what will happen.

  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by RJKarl View Post
    "Now, states can complain...NC certainly acted poorly in not accepting set up funds. BUT, they defer to the feds for the FFE set up. Its all on them. And its a mess. The states issues are more on the support side and thus will send folks to DC for assistance. But again, little to do with the mechanics of the set up"

    And every state who acted like this made it more difficult to set things up. how come it's going to work in some places?



    Just not the case. The states that opted out didn't make a key provision of the law any more difficult to implement to this point. The feds were REQUIRED under law to build an exchange and the hub for all state exchanges. What a specific state did or didn't do had no impact on their ability to implement.

    To ONW's questions, the Rs in Congress have no accountability on the implementation of the law as passed. The law isn't being implemented by Congress. Its being implemented by HHS. Nothing they did really had any impact on how they handled this. They passed a complicated law, made it more complicated with tens of thousands of pages of regs (written by HHS as instructed by the law), often late (and contradictory).
    Last edited by CHDeac; 11-04-2013 at 07:30 PM.

  19. #339
    Quote Originally Posted by CHDeac View Post
    [/B]

    Just not the case. The states that opted out didn't make a key provision of the law any more difficult to implement to this point. The feds were REQUIRED under law to build an exchange and the hub for all state exchanges. What a specific state did or didn't do had no impact on their ability to implement. If anything, a stat completely opting out and deferring authority to the feds makes it easier.

    We see wrong rates, wrong plans, no ability to collect payment, horrible performance, incorrect APTCs and CSRs being applied. Enrollments (using std file formats) have huge errors. Its a total cluster behind the scenes. SHOP is being delayed.

    It should be delayed for the consumer's sake but it won't for political reasons. And thats a shame.

    To ONW's questions, the Rs in Congress have no accountability on the implementation of the law as passed. The law isn't being implemented by Congress. Its being implemented by a cabinet level role (Secretary of HHS). Nothing they did really had any impact on how she handled this. They passed a complicated law, made it more complicated with tens of thousands of pages of regs (written by HHS as instructed by the law), often late (and contradictory) and then perhaps won't deliver basic functionality, even though they have had close to 4 years to implement.
    So Republicans at the state and federal level have had zero responsibility, zero impact, and zero influence on the ACA's implementation? Really?
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  20. #340
    Historically Competitive
    Wrangor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mississippi Delta
    Posts
    12,429
    Quote Originally Posted by ONW View Post
    So Republicans at the state and federal level have had zero responsibility, zero impact, and zero influence on the ACA's implementation? Really?
    I think that was the R plan all along. Once it was voted in without them they distanced themselves and voted to repeal it whenever possible. When the ship sinks they want to be able to stand on the shore and tell everyone they told you so. They have no interest in trying to fix it because it goes against the tenants of limited government. Sometimes the best thing for a party that is reeling is for the other party to gain total control, and therefore have total ownership. Republicans took their licks during the W administration. I feel this will be a similar turnabout. It is never a good thing for a singular party to have control, because this is what happens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •