Tag Archives: health care

So Far, Obamacare Has Taken Only a Modest Hit in Polls

Mother Jones

Yesterday I misread a poll question about Obamacare, initially thinking it was about whether people wanted to make changes to the law. Today, though, CBS has a poll question that really does ask this. Here it is:

This isn’t very different from Kaiser tracking polls in the past. In the most recent one, among people who expressed an opinion, 56 percent wanted the law kept as is or enhanced, while 44 percent wanted it repealed.

So far, Obamacare hasn’t really taken that big a hit in public opinion, and as the website problems continue to get fixed I expect that public opinion will improve. It’s still early days.

See more here – 

So Far, Obamacare Has Taken Only a Modest Hit in Polls

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on So Far, Obamacare Has Taken Only a Modest Hit in Polls

Here’s an Interesting Wrinkle in the Rate Shock Debate

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Here’s an email from a reader in California with an interesting wrinkle on the rate shock debate:

I’m self employed, with individual health insurance coverage, and my family is one of those whose current health insurance policy is being canceled and whose premium will rise once we purchase insurance on the CA exchange. But it’s not as simple as that. We signed up for our current policy in November 2011 (therefore no grandfathering) and the premium was substantially lower than the policy we had prior to that. In hindsight, I’m guessing that the premium for that newly introduced plan was so low because the insurance company knew it would have to be canceled in 2014. So, they weren’t going to incur a lot of losses or have to make provisions for a long claims tail.

The premium for our new insurance, purchased from the exchange, is going to be about what our original (pre-2011) policy premiums would have been now, allowing for the usual annual premium increases. So, yes, we’re having to move from cheaper to more expensive insurance. On the other hand, it’s very likely that the cheaper policy would never have been available in the first place without the ACA’s 2014 deadline for such plans. Of course, the insurance company didn’t clarify back in 2011 that this policy had a limited lifespan and would have to be replaced in 2014 with a new one.

I wonder if this is at all common?

Follow this link: 

Here’s an Interesting Wrinkle in the Rate Shock Debate

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s an Interesting Wrinkle in the Rate Shock Debate

Obama Dares Insurance Companies to Put Up or Shut Up

Mother Jones

Here’s the latest on Obamacare:

The White House on Thursday will announce a plan for allowing insurance companies to continue offering existing individual insurance policies even if they fall short of the coverage standards set by the 2010 health-care law, a Democratic official briefed on the plan said.

….The plan, which the official said could be implemented without passing legislation, would allow insurance companies to extend “substandard” plans in 2014 only if they are already in existence. Unlike the House bill, the administration plan wouldn’t allow insurance companies to offer such plans to new customers.

Here’s my guess: this is primarily a put-up-or-shut-up move from Obama, not a plan designed to really fix the problem of canceled policies. I base this on two things.

First, I think insurance companies are mostly allowed to do this already. Second, I think that most of the canceled policies have been canceled because insurance companies wanted to cancel them. They were designed in the first place to entice buyers away from their old grandfathered policies, and insurance companies did this explicitly so that they would be free to cancel them when 2014 rolled around. This allowed insurers to replace them with more expensive policies without taking any heat for it. They could just blame it on Obamacare.

This is just speculation on my part, so don’t take it to the bank. But I think Obama’s main goal here is to remove this handy excuse. He’s basically daring insurers to go ahead and reissue the old policies. If they don’t do it, it means that Obamacare was never really responsible for the cancellations in the first place. And if the insurers see that their bluff is being called and decide they don’t want to take the PR hit, then the old policies get reissued and everyone is happy. It’s a win-win for Obama.

There are more details to this, including its intersection with state laws and the size of the price increase insurers would attach to re-issued policies. But I suspect this is basically the shape of the river here.

This article:  

Obama Dares Insurance Companies to Put Up or Shut Up

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Dares Insurance Companies to Put Up or Shut Up

Obamacare Has a Few Months Left to Start Working, And It Probably Won’t Get an Extension

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I’ve been avoiding speculation about the Obamacare website for the past week or two because, really, there hasn’t been much concrete information to base anything on. The whole exercise feels like the ultimate in bloggish wankery. There’s no real news out there, and spending time either defending Obama or ripping him apart is kind of pointless. Why not just wait and see how things turn out?

Because we’re all humans, that’s why. We don’t need to speculate endlessly about the big Denver-KC showdown on Sunday night either. We could just wait and see who actually wins. But speculation is fun.

That said, concrete information is finally starting to trickle out, and it’s grim. Healthcare.gov has signed up only about 40,000 people so far, compared to early estimates of several hundred thousand.1 That’s pretty effing bad. Still, we all know the website is a horror show, so this isn’t a huge surprise. It just confirms that the website is, indeed, a horror show.

Today, though, we learn that, contrary to President Obama’s promise a couple of weeks ago, the horror show isn’t likely to get fixed by the end of November:

Software problems with the federal online health insurance marketplace, especially in handling high volumes, are proving so stubborn that the system is unlikely to work fully by the end of the month as the White House has promised, according to an official with knowledge of the project.

The insurance exchange is balking when more than 20,000 to 30,000 people attempt to use it at the same time — about half its intended capacity, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose internal information. And CGI Federal, the main contractor that built the site, has succeeded in repairing only about six of every 10 of the defects it has addressed so far.

….This inside view of the halting nature of HealthCare.gov repairs is emerging as the insurance industry is working behind the scenes on contingency plans, in case the site continues to have problems….The need for what the official called a “divide-and-conquer strategy” for enrollment puts more emphasis on alternative methods for buying health plans. These methods include federal call centers and insurance companies that sell policies directly to customers — paths that are hobbled for now by some of the same technical problems affecting the federal Web site.

And this is all coming on top of screaming from middle-class individual insurance buyers—the kind of people Congress actually cares about—that their rates are going up considerably thanks to Obamacare. Senate Democrats might be able to stand fast against this pressure if the program was actually working smoothly, but the combination of voter anger and technical disaster is wearing them down. At this point, they might very well acquiesce to some kind of Republican “fix” that, we can be sure, will be very precisely calculated to do maximum damage to the goals of Obamacare. That would add disaster on top of disaster.

Sabotage works. But it works a lot better when the bridge is teetering in the first place. I still don’t know that I can think of anything very insightful to say about any of this, but it’s certainly a low point for Obama’s presidency—and the polls are finally catching up to that. I know it’s melodramatic to say this, but his presidency really does depend on the next few months. I sure hope everyone in the administration is taking this as seriously as they should.

1This sentence originally said the early estimate was 500,000 signups, but that was for both state and federal exchanges. There was no separate estimate just for the federal exchange. However, since the federal exchange covers more than half the population, it’s reasonable to figure that early hopes were for something on the order of 300,000 signups.

Read the article: 

Obamacare Has a Few Months Left to Start Working, And It Probably Won’t Get an Extension

Posted in Anker, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obamacare Has a Few Months Left to Start Working, And It Probably Won’t Get an Extension

Here Are Some of the People Being Helped by Obamacare

Mother Jones

Since I was just griping about the media not spending any time reporting about the people that Obamacare helps, I should offer some props to Abby Goodnough of the New York Times, who headed down to Kentucky to talk to some of the navigators who are responsible for assisting people who want to sign up for Obamacare. Here’s one story:

Samantha Davis, the clinic employee who helped David Elson apply, explained that based on his income of about $22,000 last year, he was not eligible for Medicaid but had qualified for a federal subsidy of $252 a month toward premium costs for a private plan. “It’s a pretty big one,” she said, reassuringly.

Through the exchange, Mr. Elson, 60, who has advanced diabetes and kidney disease, was offered a choice of 24 health plans, with premiums ranging from $92 to $501 a month after the subsidy. But if he felt elation or relief, he was too preoccupied to show it.

Bleeding at the back of his eyes, caused by a complication of diabetes, had blurred his vision. He had run out of insulin the previous week and had not refilled his prescriptions, which cost almost $500 a month, because a recent tax bill had depleted his bank account. He had an appointment with an eye specialist that afternoon, and the possibility of more debt was hanging heavily over him….“I’m hoping once I have insurance that I can sit down and figure out a budget and see if I have to bankrupt,” he said.

Plenty of people are being helped by Obamacare, and that number will grow dramatically as navigators reach more people; the website improves; and people start to make up their minds and sign up for a plan. For some people, it will mean the difference between getting treatment and going without. For others it will mean the difference between solvency and bankruptcy. And for still others it will be the first time they’ve ever had any health coverage at all.

Those are stories worth telling too.

Read this article – 

Here Are Some of the People Being Helped by Obamacare

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Here Are Some of the People Being Helped by Obamacare

“Rate Shock” is a Middle-Class Problem, So It Gets Lots of Attention

Mother Jones

The media has entered a feeding frenzy of coverage about people who are facing “rate shock” from Obamacare. It’s a real story, even if a lot of the reporting has been sloppy and credulous, but the level of media attention has nonetheless been pretty stunning. Jon Chait says this is partly because the press has a natural attraction to bad news over good. But that’s not all:

There’s also an economic bias at work. Victims of rate shock are middle-class, and their travails, in general, tend to attract far more lavish coverage than the problems of the poor. (Did you know that on November 1, millions of Americans suffered painful cuts to nutritional assistance? Not a single Sunday-morning talk-show mentioned it.)

Yep. It’s the same reason that air traffic controllers got funded so quickly during the sequester while food aid didn’t. In addition, I can only assume that writing about the people who are benefiting from Obamacare would strike DC reporters as a little too much like shilling for the Obama administration. Can’t have that, can we?

In addition to the obvious agenda-setting power of Fox and Drudge, I suspect there’s also one other factor at work here: a news drought. Just as the debt ceiling crisis helped Obama in early October by sucking up all the media oxygen and taking attention away from the disastrous rollout of the website, Obama has been hurt by a news cycle that’s been unusually slow lately. There’s just not much to talk about aside from Obamacare. I suspect that the White House must be wishing for a huge hurricane or something right about now to provide the cable nets with something else to obsess over.

See the original article here: 

“Rate Shock” is a Middle-Class Problem, So It Gets Lots of Attention

Posted in ATTRA, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on “Rate Shock” is a Middle-Class Problem, So It Gets Lots of Attention

The Lesson of Obamacare: Sabotage Works

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Amy Goldstein and Juliet Eilperin have a big piece in the Washington Post today about the disastrous implementation and rollout of Obamacare following the euphoria of its passage in 2010. Goldstein and Eilperin document plenty of bad decisions along the way, and lots of them reflect poorly on Team Obama. Still, I have to say that my big takeaway from the article was the same as Andrew Sprung’s: sabotage works.

The primary example of this comes early in the story, when the team responsible for building the marketplaces—and the website—was moved under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Partly this was for operational reasons, but:

The move had a political rationale, as well. Tucked within a large bureaucracy, some administration officials believed, the new Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight would be better insulated from the efforts of House Republicans, who were looking for ways to undermine the law. But the most basic reason was financial: Although the statute provided plenty of money to help states build their own insurance exchanges, it included no money for the development of a federal exchange — and Republicans would block any funding attempts. According to one former administration official, Sebelius simply could not scrounge together enough money to keep a group of people developing the exchanges working directly under her.

Now, one obvious question is why the law failed to finance the federal exchanges. That was pretty clearly a mistake. Still, under normal circumstances, even an opposition party would end up cutting a deal eventually to shore up the missing funding. Not this time, though. As one White House official told the Post, “You’re basically trying to build a complicated building in a war zone, because the Republicans are lobbing bombs at us.”

There are plenty of other examples of this, and Sprung outlines them in his post today. No federal program that I can remember faced quite the implacable hostility during its implementation that Obamacare has faced. This excuses neither the Obama administration’s poor decisions nor its timidity in the face of Republican attacks, but it certainly puts them in the proper perspective.

Link:  

The Lesson of Obamacare: Sabotage Works

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The Lesson of Obamacare: Sabotage Works

Small Businesses Plan to Add Health Coverage For First Time in a Decade

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Sean Vitka directs my attention to page 26 of a new survey from NFIB, the National Federation of Independent Business. They asked their members if they planned to add health insurance next year, and it turns out that there’s going to be a net increase. Of those who currently offer insurance, 7 percent plan to drop it. Of those who don’t currently offer insurance, 13 percent plan to add it. That’s good news, and the report notes that “If small employers follow those plans, the net proportion of them offering would rise, breaking a decade-old trend.” Thanks, Obamacare!

Continue at source: 

Small Businesses Plan to Add Health Coverage For First Time in a Decade

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Small Businesses Plan to Add Health Coverage For First Time in a Decade

Despite Problems, Obamacare Remains Fairly Well Liked

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Kaiser Family Foundation has released yet another Obamacare tracking poll, and they find that huge majorities think the rollout has gone badly. No surprise there. But they also find that this hasn’t really changed opinions much. As usual, people who want to keep or expand Obamacare outnumbered those who want to repeal it, 47 percent to 37 percent:

Always keep these results in mind when you hear that Obamacare isn’t a popular law. Obviously Obamacare is an extremely polarizing law, but polls that ask simple approve/disapprove questions fail to capture the number of people who disapprove of Obamacare only because it doesn’t go far enough. When you break down the answers further, it turns out that, although Obamacare isn’t going to win any awards for most popular law ever, it’s still reasonably well regarded. Despite the rocky rollout, only about a third of the country wants it repealed.

Read more: 

Despite Problems, Obamacare Remains Fairly Well Liked

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Despite Problems, Obamacare Remains Fairly Well Liked

Taking a Second Look at Rate Shock

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Rate shock is the subject of the day, and I have to confess to a growing unease about it. Here’s why. I think a lot of us expected that young people in good health might see higher premiums under Obamacare. This is largely because Obamacare mandates a maximum 3:1 ratio between premiums for the young and premiums for the old. Roughly speaking, this means that insurers are being forced to charge older buyers artificially low prices, and that in turn forces them to charge younger buyers more. Instead of, say, charging $100 and $500, the 3:1 ratio means they have to charge $150 and $450. In essence, the young are subsidizing the old. Add in the fact that Obamacare forces insurers to provide better coverage, and prices are going to go up even more.

But this means that older buyers shouldn’t see all that much rate shock. After all, they’re getting the benefit of that 3:1 ratio. And yet, they are. A couple of days ago I wrote about the case of Deborah Cavallaro, a 60-year-old woman in Los Angeles who had been profiled on the NBC Nightly News. She currently pays $293 for her coverage, but got a letter saying her plan had been canceled and a replacement would cost $478. I wondered whether her insurance company was simply trying to steer her into a high-cost plan, even though they knew she could do better on the exchange.

In a word, no. I headed over to the California exchange, entered the appropriate numbers, and found a bronze plan from Anthem Blue Cross for $479. Her insurance company wasn’t playing any games.

But maybe this new insurance is better than her existing policy? Michael Hiltzik talked to Cavallaro, who told him that her current policy has a deductible of $5,000 a year, an out-of-pocket max of $8,500 a year, and two doctor visits per year with a copay of $40. (She pays full price for subsequent visits.)

And the Obamacare bronze policy? It has a deductible of $5,000 a year, an out-of-pocket max of $6,350 a year, and three doctor visits per year with a copay of $60. (Subsequent visits are full cost until the deductible is met.)

Now, when you dig into the details, this is indeed slightly better coverage. Lifetime caps are no longer allowed, for example. And Anthem probably would have increased the price of Cavallaro’s policy for 2014 even if Obamacare didn’t exist. On the other hand, the new plan might have a more limited choice of doctors than Cavallaro is getting now. This stuff is probably a bit of a wash, which means that, roughly speaking, the bronze policy costs $2,200 more per year in return for an out-of-pocket max that’s $2,200 lower. Any year in which Cavallaro goes over this max, the Obamacare bronze policy will pay off. Any year in which she stays under it, she’s on the losing end of the deal.

So….I’m not sure what to think about this. The lower out-of-pocket max is a good thing, but basically Cavallaro is now paying for it every year instead of only in the years where she goes over $6,350. It’s hard to spin that as a good deal.

Generally speaking, I’m trying to steer a path between denial and panic on this stuff. As Justin Wolfers illustrates on the right, there are still way more winners than losers under Obamacare. Right now, most of what we’re hearing is anecdotal, and we simply don’t know how everything is going to work out in the end or how many people are going to end up with higher rates. In Cavallaro’s case, as in many others, that will depend a lot on the subsidies she gets. But there’s not much question that any year in which her income is high enough to put her over the subsidy cap, she’ll end up paying quite a bit more for coverage that’s only marginally better. It’s no surprise that she’s unhappy about it.

And the fact that this is happening to 60-year-olds, not just 20-somethings, is a bit of a surprise to me. I’m not going to panic over these stories yet, but the more of them I hear, the less that denial seems like a reasonable response either.

Taken from:

Taking a Second Look at Rate Shock

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Taking a Second Look at Rate Shock