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.
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
Half the amount of spending? No.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...amily-of-four/
So is this when we get to formally start throwing around the R-word (regressive) for Obamacare and its namesake?Originally Posted by Liquid Karma
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".
Dem politician praises dem enacted law. Stop the presses.:tard::tard:
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.
$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.
Does your employer provide insurance for you?
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.
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.
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
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.
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
"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?
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.
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.
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
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
Reply With Quote