LTC8K6

May 9 2014, 08:44 AM

BCBSNC just said that individual plans in NC will have a rate increase...

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=9532315

Baldo

May 9 2014, 09:01 AM

I have no idea why a company would continue to provide full healthcare coverage for an employee eligible for medicare. All they have to do is buy a supplemental policy for about $120/month and provide full coverage.

Baldo

May 10 2014, 12:33 PM

New McKinsey Survey:

74% Of Obamacare Sign-Ups Were Previously Insured

...snipped

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/05/10/new-mckinsey-survey-74-of-obamacare-sign-ups-were-previously-insured/?partner=yahootix

So in looking at this from another viewpoint. Obama & the Dems spent all of this political capital and wasted two years of their super-majority while the country stalled.

For what?

An extra 1-2 million previously uninsured people.

The price to tens of millions Americans will be higher premiums & higher deductible.

What did anybody expect when Govt get involved?

Quote:

 

...Bottom line: Exchanges are having modest impact on the uninsured

Obamacare is beginning to expand coverage to the uninsured; however, it’s far from clear that the exchanges specifically are a primary engine. About 1 million people have gained coverage from Obamacare’s under-26 “slacker mandate” (not 3 million, as is commonly suggested); another 3 million or so have gained coverage from the law’s expansion of Medicaid. Of the 8 million sign-ups on the exchange, we can only be confident that around a quarter—2 million—were previously uninsured.

What the exchanges appear to be doing is mainly helping people who were previously insured. If you’re 62 years old, say, and your income is $30,000, and you were paying for your own coverage before, you’re now eligible for plans that are much cheaper for you, thanks to taxpayer-funded subsidies and higher premiums for young people.

Of course that means that other people are paying more. “My old plan was canceled under Obamacare,” an exasperated Californian told me last week. “The new Obamacare plan costs twice as much, and the deductibles are higher. And yet Obama is counting me as one of his 8 million people!” But hey—at least he has maternity coverage.

kbp

May 11 2014, 12:29 PM

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/05/study-obamacare-employer-mandate-will-disproportionately-hurt-low-wage-workers/

Study: Obamacare Employer Mandate Will Disproportionately Hurt Low-Wage Workers

Obamacare’s twice-delayed employer mandate will hit low-wage workers the hardest, according to a study released Friday.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute released a report examining the effects of repealing the employer mandate or moving ahead. The employer mandate peg of the health care law will barely affect the uninsured rate, researchers found.

“Employers with 50 or more workers not offering coverage pre-ACA are the same employers that are highly likely to not offer in the future, therefore incurring the ACA’s penalties. Because the non-offering firms are much more likely to be firms dominated by low-wage workers, low-wage employees will bear the greatest brunt of the penalties imposed,” the study found.

The study acknowledges an argument often advanced by both conservatives and businesses that hiring will likely be stunted by the arbitrary cut-offs in the mandate, imposing different requirements and starting dates for companies employing with below 50, 50-99, and 100-plus workers.

But the federal government expects to gain billions in penalty payments from companies that choose not to obey the mandate in the end. These costs “are likely to be passed back to the workers in the form of reduced wages,” particularly low-wage employees.
[This "reduced wage" must be a long-term prediction. It's hard to believe it would hit the low wage crowd immediately. They do not have much to work with in the way of reductions.]

Few workers would lose health coverage in the absence of the mandate. Were it entirely eliminated, employer coverage would fall by just 500,000, according to the study; nongroup coverage would correspondingly rise by 300,000 and Medicaid would grow by 100,000 people. The net increase in the uninsured would be just 200,000 — a relative hike of just 0.6 percent.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) is a supporter of the health care law. It donated $13 million to Enroll America, a White House-connected nonprofit promoting Obamacare enrollment, after outgoing Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius requested the funding from top executives, according to a recent federal report.

They’re not the first pro-Affordable Care Act contingency to advocate trashing the employer mandate, once considered a key component of the health care law. After the Obama administration’s initial delay of the mandate last July, notorious Obamacare supporter Ezra Klein advocated at the Washington Post for the mandate’s repeal.

“Frankly, eliminating it — or at least utterly overhauling it — is probably the right thing to do,” Klein wrote. “It’s a bad bit of policy.”

It’s one of the few areas of Obamacare policy where both sides of the aisle can agree. Since the Clinton administration, conservative organizations have vehemently opposed the prospect of an employer mandate — and after two delays of Obamacare’s, former supporters are rethinking it as well.

“Eliminating the employer responsibility requirements should substantially diminish employer opposition to the ACA,” the study concluded.

While businesses and much of the public would likely welcome dumping the mandate, it would require raising another $46 billion in taxes over the next decade to even things out. The federal government expects to raise serious cash from businesses that don’t comply through penalty payments. In the absence of the mandate, Medicaid and Obamacare enrollments (likely with subsidy payments) will probably rise slightly.
[I'm lost on where they got the $46 billion. The most recent prediction I have seen was $140 billion over 10 years (2023) for the "Penalty Payments by Employers." See Page 2 of the 2nd link in my signature below.]

Quote:

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/11/CNN-Poll-Only-12-Call-Obamacare-a-Success

CNN POLL: ONLY 12% CALL OBAMACARE A SUCCESS

A new CNN poll finds that just 12% of Americans consider the Obamacare program a "success."

President Barack Obama has pressed fellow Democrats to laud and run on his signature legislative achievement.

However, other polls confirm that the law, which has been in effect for over four years now, remains deeply unpopular. The latest Pew/USA Today poll finds just 41% of Americans now support Obamacare. A record 55% disapprove of the law.

The CNN poll found less support for repealing Obamacare; 49% want Congress to make changes to the law, and 12% said to keep Obamacare as is. Of those surveyed, 38% backed a full repeal.

Political analysts say the Obamacare debacle will play a major role in the Nov. 4 midterm elections. Indeed, Democrats are now in a weaker position than they were this time before the historic 2010 Republican victory that resulted in the largest defeat for a first-term president since 1922.

Voters head to the polls in 177 days.