So what good is ACA afterall, if it gets delayed years and years??

[darkangel218]

One of the many reasons I supported POTUS was health care reform. What fucking good does it do if it stays on the paper but never gets to take effect??

Just an honest question.

It would be great if PO would keep his word at least on this issue, wouldn't it

[allin99]

1. i think he'll try get it through, otherwise he'll have no legacy.

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. Tell that to all of the young adults who now are able to stay on their parents' insurance

[darkangel218]

4. There are alot more Anericans than the 21 to 26 crowd.

I'm not saying this isn't great, but what about everyone else??

That's not what President Obama promised us.

[Whisp]

6. jesus H. christ. n/t

[darkangel218]

10. lol, as a former nurse you should know lack of health insurence can destroy lives

Financially, or even kill.

But its ok, 21 to 26 stay on their parents insurence. Its all good

[Whisp]

12. you make no sense, whose the former nurse?

and what is so awful about kids being covered...

o never the fuck mind.

[darkangel218]

18. I thought you said you used to be a nurse?

and when the fuck did I say it was "awful for kids to be covered"??? I said young adults are only a part of the population.

Quit putting words in my mouth, its pathetic.

[Whisp]

21. you thought wrong.

[Hippo_Tron]

64. Those are pretty low expectations considering Democrats gave up the House for the ACA

If the ACA were simply a bill that said people can stay on their parents' plan until they're 26 and you can't be denied for a pre-existing condition, it would've passed with overwhelming popular support.

The meat and potatoes of the ACA are the health care exchanges that are supposed to provide affordable care to millions of Americans who could not get it otherwise. Dozens of Democrats took a career-ending vote to get us those exchanges and we're now suffering through an era of tea-bagger insanity because of it.

If the ACA succeeds and does what it was supposed to do, then I think it was all worth it. If it fails, then we've created a lot of unnecessary suffering for nothing.

[Atman]

3. "IT" didn't get delayed years and years.

What was delayed for one year was paperwork requirements. The large corporations affected already provide health insurance to over 90% of their employees, and they would face most of the paperwork burden.

[darkangel218]

8. Umm, actually it did.

There was no need to wait 2 years to begin with. Now another extra year.

I bet in 2015 will get delayed again. The corporations don't like to be forced to provide healthcare, and It seems they're the ones who are running the show right now.

[Atman]

14. Umm, actually it didn't.

Most of the provisions -- for those most in need -- are going through. As stated, the people affected by this "delay" already have insurance. It changes nothing for them. The uninsured, the Pre-conditions, etc....the ACA is moving forward.

[darkangel218]

19. Oh really, nothing changes??!

what about all businesses with over 60 employees being mandated to provide healthcare to their employees??

Of course it wont happen, it means they actually have to SPEND money on their people. So they pull the strings , and poof! delayed another year!

don't you just love that.

[Atman]

38. You seem to be short on facts.

First of all, the cut-off is 50 employees. You just seem to want to be outraged, without actually knowing exactly what you're outraged about. You should just watch the 24/7Trayvon Martin coverage instead.

[pnwmom]

25. It hasn't been delayed till 2015. The health exchanges will be available in Jan. 2014.

The only delay is in charging larger companies a penalty if they don't offer their own health insurance. But their employees will be able to use the exchanges to purchase individual insurance -- which in many cases could be a better option, since there will be a number of plans to choose from.

And health insurers will no longer be able to ban customers for pre-existing conditions, or drop them when they get sick. And they're already having to insure young adult children on their parents' policies up till the age of 26.

[darkangel218]

27. Individual plans will be hell of expensive, and probably unafordable for most.

when getting health insurance through your employer, one normally pays pennies to the dollar.

This delay is a HUGE set back for many , many people. I had friends crying the other day because their companies are now not obligated to provide health plans.

It may not affect everyone, but it affects many. And it only benefits the corporate jerks.

[pnwmom]

34. That's NOT true. There will be insurance subsidies paid for by the government

to keep the payments affordable to families with incomes up to $82K.

If you had friends crying, maybe you should have suggested they look at the state exchanges and figure out exactly what they'd owe. Since people will no longer be charged more for pre-existing conditions, and since most families will qualify for subsidies, they might be pleasantly surprised.

[darkangel218]

35. I know for a fact my friend wont be able to afford it on her own.

they told everyone at her work place they will be getting on a health plan , and now its not happening.

too much burden for the millionaires.

Nevermind, I will tell her what you said.

[Atman]

39. Once again, UNTRUE, darkangel. Simply untrue.

Are the one Fox-Watching DUer?

[darkangel218]

40. Caps and petsonal attacks.

Umm yah.. you haven't changed much.

And as far as faux news, I have no idea, I don't watch it. Were you talking about yourself?

[Atman]

41. I haven't changed much? What?

You're right...I just keep telling the truth. And I use all-caps to emphasize certain words when people keep posting bullshit. DAMN! I must just love Obamacare ripping me off!

[darkangel218]

42. Take it easy and enjoy your evening.

[Whisp]

5. wtf are you talking about, this 'never' thing.

bullshit, there have been parts of ACA that are positively affecting many people right now and has been for a while now.

wtf.

[darkangel218]

9. Such as?

Corporations don't want to provide their workers with healthcare , and guess what, its not happening!!

[Atman]

15. Yet, they already ARE providing health care to 90% of their employees.

I smell an agenda. Or a very misinformed DUer.

[darkangel218]

17. Ohh i have an "agenda"!

allow me to puke.

[area51]

68. I'm not sure I understand your 90% figure.

Are you saying 90% of employers offer insurance? That would be more in the 50-60% range and dropping.

[Atman]

69. 90% of the companies affected by the delay.

Sorry, not 90% of all employers. The delay which spells gloom and doom for all of Obamacare according to darkangel, actually is just the paperwork requirement for large employers, 90% of which already insure their employees. IOW, the horrible terrible delay has very little impact on the actual implementation of Obamacare, no matter how freaked out darkangel wants us all to be.

[darkangel218]

20. Many but not all. Why are you okay with ACA being delayed??

Do all these people without coverage don't matter??

[Whisp]

23. yeh, that's it exactly.

gawd.

[darkangel218]

24. It must be, since you resort on putting words in another poster's mouth just to make your point.

[pnwmom]

26. Everyone will be able to get coverage as of January 2014,

either from their employer or on a state exchange. That has NOT been delayed.

And people with family incomes up to more than $80K will receive subsidies.

You need to get your facts straight.

[darkangel218]

28. And how many employers offer health insurence to their employees willingly??

NOT that many. ACA would have mandated all ( with 60 or more employees) to offer health plans.

[pnwmom]

31. If they don't, employees will be able to choose from a range of policies

on their state exchanges. Personally, I'd rather have that choice than just take whatever plan an employer was offering.

Right now, if your employer doesn't offer insurance and you're older or have any pre-existing condition, then you're screwed. Nobody else will insure you. But insurers won't be able to ban people starting in January.

So we are already better off.

[Atman]

46. Which planet did you just fly in from?

Home many employees offer insurance WILLINGLY?

MOST OF THEM! The stats don't lie, my friend. If you want to keep quality employees, you give them some decent benefits. If you want sweat-shop labor at minimum wage, you offer them a 30-hour week and fire them if they call in sick.

The ACA changes that. No discussion, my friend. You are either a paid shill, or just supremely ignorant about the current state of the ACA. Your arguments have been disproved by several other posters, not just by my annoying ass. You are just WRONG. And I must assume that either you don't want to learn the truth, or someone is paying you to deliberately post scare tactics and lies.

[Le Taz Hot]

44. This is ABSOLUTELY incorrect.

Do this: plug in 2 adults, one aged 58, one age 50, making $63,000 a year to the Covered California site and tell me what you get.

Here's the link:

http://www.coveredca.com/calculating_the_cost.html


As you can see, it is nowhere NEAR $80,000 before the subsidies drop off and I don't know a whole lot of people who could afford almost $1,000 per month WITH A $12,000 PER YEAR PER PERSON DEDUCTIBLE. Do you?

[pnwmom]

48. I know that my 26 year old grad student son is having to pay $500 per month

for COBRA since he is now too old to be on our plan. (And the exchanges aren't yet open.)

So the same payment for fifty year olds, who are far more likely to require care, doesn't seem that outrageous to me. But for those who cannot afford it, there is also the option of choosing a "bronze" plan, which would cost less per month. Though it would entail higher out of pocket costs, it would be better than nothing - especially since providers charge their very highest rates to people without insurance.

[Le Taz Hot]

49. Well,

I'm happy for you that almost $1,000 a month for you is "affordable." Not so for the rest of us.

[pnwmom]

50. I said that if $500 per month per middle age adult wasn't affordable,

then consideration should be given to the bronze plans, which are less expensive.

[Le Taz Hot]

52. Actually,

you originally said that the government subsidies didn't cut off until $80,000 and I showed you a scenario in which that was not true.

Btw, there is no "bronze plan" calculator as of yet so we don't really know the numbers. I do know that it doesn't cover shit and that your out-of-pocket for any major illness would bankrupt you, which is exactly the same thing that would happen if there was a major illness without insurance except I'm not paying out premiums I can't afford.

Look, I'm happy that you and your son got yours, but you have to understand, Obamacare leaves a LOT of us out.

[pnwmom]

53. You have to understand -- I support Medicare for all. But I don't see why anyone

blames the Dems for not getting it past the Rethugs in Congress.

[Le Taz Hot]

54. I don't recall "blaming" anyone.

I merely corrected a claim that you made.

[pnwmom]

57. What claim of mine did you correct?

http://101.communitycatalyst.org/aca_provisions/subsidies

Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), individuals who purchase insurance after January 1, 2014 through an Exchange will be eligible for subsidies for health insurance premiums and cost-sharing if their income is less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) -- $89,000 for a family of four in 2011. FPL amounts are updated annually to reflect inflation. Individuals who get insurance through their employer can get subsidized coverage in an Exchange if their premiums are unaffordable (more than 9.5 percent of their household income) or the plan is inadequate (pays less than 60 percent of the cost of covered benefits).

The ACA provides two forms of subsidies to help pay for health insurance. First, a monthly premium assistance tax credit will lower the premium amount an individual or family must pay. Second, cost-sharing assistance will limit a person's maximum out-of-pocket costs, and for some it will also reduce other cost-sharing requirements (i.e., deductibles, coinsurance, co-payments).

Premium Assistance Subsidies
The premium assistance subsidy reduces the amount that an individual or family pays for health insurance coverage by providing a tax credit. These subsidies are only available through the Exchange. Subsidies are determined on a sliding scale, based on income, so that individuals at the lower end of the income scale get the most help. The subsidy is based on the premium for a benchmark plan (the second lowest cost silver plan available in an Exchange). An individual or family who wants a more expensive or higher tier plan (i.e., gold or platinum) must pay the difference.
Premium Limits for Consumers Based on Income
Income Premium Limit
Up to 133% FPL 2% of income
133 - 150% FPL 3 - 4% of income
150 - 200% FPL 4 - 6.3% of income
200 - 250% FPL 6.3 - 8.05% of income
250 - 300% FPL 8.05 - 9.5% of income
350 - 400% FPL 9.5% of income

[Le Taz Hot]

59. I provided the link upthread

that proves my point. Look, I've no interest in "debating" with a blind partisan. It wastes both of our time.

[pnwmom]

60. Right. You didn't correct anything I said, because I didn't make a factual error. n/t

[Humanist_Activist]

56. The bronze plans are more expensive to use though, because they cover less...

basically you get free(at service) preventative care, or health screenings, but if anything remotely serious comes up, you might as well contact a bankruptcy lawyer.

[pnwmom]

58. They also reduce the costs because providers charge more to people

without insurers to negotiate lower prices for them.

[Humanist_Activist]

63. The point is that, even after insurance is calculated in, the out of pocket costs will still be...

too damned high, thankfully there's a yearly cap on total out of pocket costs on some plans, but all that is is a figure of how much you get to claim in bankruptcy court that you can't pay back when you use the health insurance. Oh, and don't own cars or houses when doing this, or you may lose them.

[bornskeptic]

66. Apparently you forgot to look at the benefits page.

The deductible for the silver plan shown is $2000 per person, not $12,000. The maximum out-of-pocket cost is $6350 per person. Deductible and out-of-pocket maximum are very different things. In the silver plan shown here, you'd need to accumulate about a hundred copays to get to the $6000 region.
http://www.coveredca.com/PDFs/English/CoveredCA-HealthPlanBenefitsComparisonChart.pdf

[Le Taz Hot]

67. Apparently, I didn't

but I did misunderstand the $12,000+ deductible is per my household of 2 so I'll easily cop to that. But get a load of this from your "benefits page:"

This limit never includes your premium, balance-billed charges or health care your health insurance or plan doesn’t cover. Some health insurance or plans don’t count all of your co-payments, deductibles, co-insurance payments, out-of-network payments or other expenses toward this limit.

You didn't address that the original claim was one had to make $80,000 per year or more in order for the government not to provide subsidies. I provided a link and had the poster plug in some numbers to prove that it's far less than $80,000 per annum.

You also didn't address the fact that almost $1,000 a month is not going to be possible for us. Perhaps you, like the other poster, thinks $1,000 a month for health insurance is pocket change but we're not in that sort of financial situation (anymore).

[cali]

70. actually, that's debatable

The president of the Wisconsin Hospital Association released a strongly worded criticism of the Obama administration’s decision to delay by one year the Affordable Care Act requirement that employers with more than 50 employees provide health plan coverage or face financial penalties.

Steve Brenton, in the hospital association’s July 12 newsletter, said the delay is “a very big deal” and gave five reasons:

<snip>

• The delay “raises obvious questions” about the possibility of delaying other provisions, including the individual mandate, which Brenton said seems likely to be another casualty in the coming months;

• The delay will cost the federal treasury $10 billion in fines and penalties according to Congressional Budget Office projections;

• What he called a “meltdown of mandates” lessens the probability that new coverage will climb to anywhere near the numbers the Obama administration predicted in 2009 when touting the law and;

<snip>

The ACA says eligibility for exchange subsidies depends on an individual’s coverage status. If employers are not required to report on their insurance offerings next year, Brenton wonders how the government will determine eligibility.

“The answer to that question was answered this week by (Obama) administration officials calling for self-attestation,” Brenton said. “But ignoring proof of eligibility for generous benefits will encourage fraud, be expensive and potentially destabilize the larger insurance marketplace. It is quite the ‘dog’s breakfast.’”

<snip>

http://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/blog/2013/07/wisconsin-hospital-association.html

[ieoeja]

37. Similar reason the Stamp Act of 1765 should have been delayed.

All the Stamp Act of 1765 did was extend the requirement for use of Stamped paper on all legal documents, the equivalent of requiring a Notary Public today, to the colonies. This was already a requirement in the British Isles. And it was perfectly reasonable extending this to the colonies. People would have grumbled as they always do at a new cost and requirement. But it wouldn't have been that big a deal.

However, a single manufacturer (and large contributor to British politicians, natch) was allowed to produce this paper. The extension meant doubling production while setting up a distribution system over an area 10,000 times larger than the British Isles. They couldn't get it done in time.

The only sensible thing to do would have been to delay implementation. King George III's administration, of course, did no such thing. The results were a disaster.


Republicans spent the last two years assuring businesses that Obamacare would never be implemented. They firmly believed that it was unconstitutional. They were equally firmly convinced they would win back the White House and both bodies of congress by overwhelming margins.

You do remember their complete meltdown at losing, and losing big, this last election, yes?

The original two year delay was crafted because the administration knew perfectly well it would take business time to prepare. But most businesses listened to the GOP. So now they are playing catchup with the clock running out.

The only sensible thing to do would be to delay implementation. Republicans, of course, have launched attempts to block that delay. Even though they do not want it implemented. But they know that implementation on schedule would probably be a disaster which they hope to then blame on Obama.


Wanting to do harm by punishing businesses who were stupid enough to believe GOP lies is no better than Republicans wanting to do harm because they believe it will hurt Obama. Both decisions would hurt people for purely political gain.

More likely you just want it implemented to help people rather than punish others. Well, it ain't going to happen. We are just not in a position to implement it.

Even the Federal exchange is running late because everybody assumed the "states rights" party would, when push came to shove, choose to implement their own exchanges rather than letting the Feds do it. Not only because they hate federal government, but also because it would let them create an entity under their control which they could staff their cronies/supporters. Let the corruption roll!

But as they have demonstrated before, opposing Obama is so important they will do so even they have to hurt themselves in the bargain.

The first Black president must fail. Any other result destroys centuries of claims to racial superiority.

[geek tragedy]

7. The vast majority of it is going forward. Derp. nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

11. Gee, if only someone had pointed out this inevitability before...

[Scuba]

13. The ACA allows the PTB and their shills to say "see, government healthcare doesn't work".

We shouldn't gotten Medicare for All, if only the People had any voice in government.

[leftstreet]

32. Also prevents Docs and Hospitals from finding solutions

And shuts single payer advocates up for a few more years

[Egalitarian Thug]

55. Another good, yet usually ignored point. Jamming everybody into the one size fits none

pseudo-solution hamstrings any innovation that might come from non-corporate sources. As the final arbiters and sole beneficiaries of it, the health insurance corporations are free to exclude them.

[LWolf]

16. Neither of my grown sons have health insurance.

I discussed this with my older son a few days ago; he has an old sports injury that causes him pain and limits some movement in one arm.

He voted for Obama. Twice.

He explained his insurance problem like this:

"Yes, under the ACA I can get insurance for less than you can. When it's fully implemented, I'll HAVE to, because of the mandate, or pay penalties. Just because it's less than you pay, though, doesn't mean I can afford to shell out that much every month. It's still not 'affordable.'"

So he goes without insurance.

He pointed out to me, repeatedly, that one of the differences between Obama and HRC, when he was choosing between the two, was their health plans. The mandate, he says, was HRC's; he didn't vote for her, but he got stuck with it anyway.

[pnwmom]

29. It sounds like your son hasn't gone onto the site and figured out how much

he would actually have to pay. There are subsidies for families with incomes under $82K. Does he know exactly what he would owe?

What will he do if he gets into a car accident and ends up in the E.R.? Or even breaks a finger? (My daughter's hospital bill for breaking a finger was almost $7000, but her insurance paid it.)

For those for whom cost is the issue, they should buy the cheapest bronze policy available. Then, at least, if they have a major expense, the price will be negotiated down by the insurer. People without any insurance get charged much more than everyone else. With the cheapest bronze policy, they will have to pay a higher amount out of pocket than people with better policies -- but much less than if they came to the ER with no insurance.

[Humanist_Activist]

62. I have an issue with the subsidies, I don't know if I can apply, or if I even qualify...

see, my employer does provide crappy health insurance, at about 75 dollars a pay period(2 pay periods in a month, sometimes 3), anyways, let's assume 2, so thats 150 dollars a month. I make, gross, anywhere from 1500 to 1600 a month, gross, but take home approximately 1200 to 1300 a month, after taxes. Now, the question is, do I qualify for the exchanges, because with gross income, maybe not, with take home pay I definitely qualify, but I don't know what is used, I'm assuming gross, in which case, is it calculated yearly for hourly employees, or just based on per hour rate?

What I really don't understand is that, according to the Kaiser website I checked, everything else being the same, if my employer provides health insurance, I would have to pay 9.5% of my income to it, but if they don't, after subsidies, I would only have to pay 4.7% of my income. Why am I being penalized for working for a company that provides health insurance?

[pnwmom]

65. You're asking a good question. There are lots of quirks in the law that under normal circumstances

in the past would have been fixed as we went along.

But the Rethugs in Congress have zero interest in tinkering with the law to make it better. All they want to do is repeal it completely. So there's almost no chance these problems will be fixed, at least in the short term.

[LWolf]

71. No, he quoted me exactly what he'd have to pay.

He also quoted me what it would cost him for emergency room visits. His SO works in the emergency room.

[pnwmom]

72. So he told you the price for each of the three levels of premiums? n/t

[LWolf]

73. He quoted me the price for the

lowest premium he could get.

[pnwmom]

74. Subsidies will go down as income goes up, but they apply to incomes

as high as $89,000 for a family of 4.

http://101.communitycatalyst.org/aca_provisions/subsidies

Premium Assistance Subsidies

The premium assistance subsidy reduces the amount that an individual or family pays for health insurance coverage by providing a tax credit. These subsidies are only available through the Exchange. Subsidies are determined on a sliding scale, based on income, so that individuals at the lower end of the income scale get the most help. The subsidy is based on the premium for a benchmark plan (the second lowest cost silver plan available in an Exchange). An individual or family who wants a more expensive or higher tier plan (i.e., gold or platinum) must pay the difference.

Premium Limits for Consumers Based on Income

Income

Premium Limit

Up to 133% FPL 2% of income

133 - 150% FPL 3 - 4% of income

150 - 200% FPL 4 - 6.3% of income

200 - 250% FPL 6.3 - 8.05% of income

250 - 300% FPL 8.05 - 9.5% of income

350 - 400% FPL 9.5% of income

Cost-sharing Assistance Subsidies

All people who buy coverage through an Exchange will have a cap on their total out-of-pocket spending, including deductibles, co-pays and co-insurance. These limits are based on the out-of-pocket limits that apply to high-deductible plans used with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). People with incomes under 400 percent FPL will get subsidies to lower those caps based on their income.

[LWolf]

75. Yes.

Which doesn't mean everyone can afford to buy insurance.

My son can't. Not if he wants to pay his rent.

[darkangel218]

22. ACA delay = Corporate will/win.

just to show you how much power Wall Street and puppet masters have.

[Riftaxe]

30. After larger corporations and labor unions

rushed to be first to get in line to get waivers, you are just now realizing that this fish stinks a hell of a lot more then single payer would?

It was designed to be unsustainable for the younger people who generally do not vote or contribute to campaigns in as large numbers as their seniors, this in hindsight is probably why we are getting such rollbacks on implementation....apparently no one figured out that the youngest generation will eventually vote or contribute at the same level.

[Jamastiene]

33. Also, what good does it do to expand Medicaid if states can opt out?

The state I live in decided to opt out. I would have qualified for the expanded Medicaid, but cannot get it because the governor in control of my state is a psychopath teabagger asshole and decided to opt out.

If ACA is voluntary on one end(state and local governments), but not on the other(citizens), as it stands now, I will forced to pay more for health care each month than my house payment...all because the Medicaid expansion is optional. It's a crock of shit how gutted it has become so soon. It could have helped so many people.

[pnwmom]

36. Congress did not know that would happen. Unfortunately, there was a lawsuit

and the good guys lost.

You're right that this is a terrible thing for people who live in states run by psychopathic teabagger assholes. I'd be screaming my head off, too, if I lived in a state that had voluntarily chosen to not accept Medicaid for millions of citizens, even though my federal tax dollars were supporting the expanded program in other states.

But you know who you should be screaming at: the idiots in your state, not the Dems in Congress who did their best getting any kind of health care bill passed at all, in the face of massive Rethug opposition to any plan.

[Egalitarian Thug]

45. Pure BS. Everything that has happened and much more that is still to come

was laid out over and over by qualified people and organizations for months. But now that it's all happening, "nobody could've predicted"...

Even in the rosiest, most heavily spun reports of this massive corporate welfare program, it was predicted to leave at least 10 million people with no access to health care. Medical bankruptcies will continue to rise, people will continue to die needlessly, and its victims that do survive will be subject to punitive penalties.

But, why would anyone be interested in listening to the people whose only qualification is knowing the system and and being right when millionaires and billionaires stand to make more money?

[pnwmom]

47. Your post is pure BS. You're pretending that Medicare for all or the equivalent

had a chance of passing. It did not. And no one knew that the Courts would approve the law EXCEPT for allowing states to opt out of Medicaid expansion.

This was the best plan that could be pushed through Congress once Ted Kennedy died and was replaced by a Rethug. Don't blame the Dems for that.

[Egalitarian Thug]

51. Blah, blah, blah. Nothing but the same lies you unwavering proponents of blue uber alles

have been saying over and over again for years now.

You should probably notice that the only people buying your bullshit these days are your teammates. Left, right, center, northern, southern, straight, gay, and undecided are tipping to the fact that the insignificant percentage of people that are indeed helped by this corporate welfare program is dwarfed by tens of millions for whom it doesn't.

You have no way of knowing what would pass because, not only was no effort was made to pass anything else, every proposal to try was blocked from even being discussed.

So once again, we are all going to reap what you've sown...

[Safetykitten]

43. Everything is ok! No problems. Don't worry....

other people have insurance. The chicken little types without insurance are the only ones that worry, and frankly they are losers according to many here.

[forestpath]

61. K&R Hey, at least he's consistent when it comes to keeping his word on things!