kbp

Jul 26 2014, 02:45 AM

LTC8K6

Jul 25 2014, 05:28 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/07/25/Another-Stunning-Admission-in-Gruber-s-Speech-The-Public-Option-Was-Single-Payer

Another Stunning Admission in Gruber's Speech: The Public Option Was Single Payer

It is stacks of lies changed with more lies and it only helps 10% of population at best in year$ to come

Quote:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/01/suddenly-obamacare-is-more-unpopular-than-ever/

Suddenly, Obamacare is more unpopular than ever

Even after survey after survey has recently shown a major drop in the nation's uninsured rate, Obamacare just had its worst month in a key health-care poll.

Kaiser Family Foundation, which has done arguably the best and most consistent polling on the health-care law in the past four-plus years, found that public opinion on the law sank to a record low in July. More people than ever (53 percent) last month said they viewed the law unfavorably, an increase of 8 percentage points since June — one of the biggest opinion swings ever.



[...]

"Normally, when negatives go up, you can tie it to an event," said foundation chief executive Drew Altman in an interview. Events like a broken enrollment Web site, or people losing their health plans.

That doesn't seem to be case here, though. The poll was conducted before a federal appeals courts split on the legality subsidies in the 36 states with federal exchanges, and before House Republicans formally advanced plans to sue President Obama over his failure to enforce the law's employer coverage mandate. Yet, the poll was conducted after a string of surveys showing that the nation's uninsured rate has dropped significantly since Obamacare's coverage expansion took effect this year.

[...]

• 
  
• “When the chief architect of the PPACA admits it withholds tax credits in uncooperative states, that establishes that the plaintiffs’ interpretation of the statute in Halbig was not only plausible but that it had currency among the law’s authors.
  
  And it is precisely because of Gruber’s intellect and profound familiarity with the PPACA that his attempts to explain away his past statements are not credible…
  
  Jonathan Gruber doesn’t “flake.” He knows this law in and out. He knew what his words meant, with all their implications, when he spoke them. He knew the feature he was describing essentially gave each state a veto over the PPACA’s exchange subsidies, employer mandate and to a large extent its individual mandate. He knew that could lead to adverse selection. To claim Gruber didn’t know what he was saying is as absurd as saying a conductor might fail to notice that the brass section suddenly stopped playing.
  
  Supporters of the Obama administration have downplayed Gruber’s comments because he is not a member of Congress. Nevertheless, he played a larger role in writing the PPACA, and knows more about it than most members of Congress. Gruber’s comments raise questions about whether this (correct) interpretation of the law was also understood by the members of Congress and administration officials Gruber advised.
  
  Gruber’s remarks, combined with other evidence the Obama administration knew it did not have legal authority to dispense these subsidies or impose the related taxes, call for further investigation into how the administration came to take these actions anyway.

• 
  
• “Defendants themselves relied on evidence from Professor Gruber in an attempt to show the supposed “implausibility” of Congress having made something as important as the subsidies hinge on the States’ willingness to establish exchanges. Plainly, this newly-discovered evidence squarely controverts Defendants’ evidence on this point, and establishes that it is far from “implausible” that the drafters or Section 36B intended to withhold tax credits and subsidies from states who declined to set up exchanges in order to place pressure on those states to set up exchanges. To the contrary, it is not only plausible, it now appears to be demonstrably true.

Concerned

Aug 4 2014, 11:44 PM

I received a letter last week from my GP that she is no longer taking insurance. If I want to keep her I will pay a membership fee of $99, then $69 a month.

I can keep my doctor - but at a price.

From Mason:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/04/doctors-begin-to-refuse-obamacare-patients/?fromt=yes
Doctors Begin To Refuse Obamacare Patients

Obamacare plans have shrunk payments to physicians so much that some doctors say they won’t be able to afford to accept Obamacare coverage, NPR reports.

Many of the eight million sign-ups in Obamacare exchanges nationwide already face more limited choices for physicians and hospitals than those in the private insurance market. But with low physician reimbursement rates, the problem could get even worse.
[I am sick of seeing all accepting the 8 million count as gospel!]

For a typical quick patient visit, Dr. Doug Gerard, a Connecticut internist, told NPR a private insurer would pay $100 while Medicare would pay around $80. But Obamacare plans are more likely to pay closer to $80, which Gerard says is unsustainable for his practice.
[The TWENTY PERCENT is a huge difference between profit and loss. While the taxpayers subsidize the care (redistribution), the doctors are also subsidizing care costs within their offices. Imagine walking in to McD's to order a $1 burger and the guy next to you only has tp pay $o.80 ...using food stamps!]

“I cannot accept a plan [in which] potentially commercial-type reimbursement rates were now going to be reimbursed at Medicare rates,” Dr. Gerard told NPR. ”You have to maintain a certain mix in private practice between the low reimbursers and the high reimbursers to be able to keep the lights on.”

Narrow networks have become a hallmark of many Obamacare exchange plans, as one of few options left to insurance companies that allows them to save money by lowering reimbursement rates and covering fewer providers. In the health-care law’s first year, 70 percent of all Obamacare plan networks were either narrow or ultra-narrow, according to an analysis from consulting firm McKinsey.

But doctors are feeling even more financial pressure due to the changes and many believe there’s a risk that Obamacare insurance will go the way of Medicaid, where patients still struggle to find a doctor after low reimbursement rates led many physicians to stop accepting it.

“I don’t think most physicians know what they’re being reimbursed,” Gerard said. “Only when they start seeing some of those rates come through will they realize how low the rates are they agreed to.”

If Obamacare coverage continues on its current track, exchange customers could face a lower level of care than those who buy coverage in the private market.

“I think it could lead potentially to this kind of distinction that there are these different tiers of quality of care,” Connecticut Obamacare chief Kevin Counihan told NPR. ”That’s been something, at least in our state, that we’re trying to work against. And the carriers are, as well.”

The problem is especially bad for private practices like Gerard’s, where physicians’ income is directly tied to reimbursements. But hospitals — especially top-tier ones that treat the most difficult diseases — are also increasingly rejecting the low reimbursement rates. The nation’s best cancer treatment centers are often covered by very few exchange plans in their states; if Obamacare customers end up with a difficult-to-treat cancer, they’re likely to face a lower quality of care right off the bat.

“You get what you pay for,” said Connecticut State Medical Society president-elect Bob Russo. “If you can’t convince [doctors] that they’re not losing money doing their job, then it’s a problem. And they haven’t been able to convince people of that.”