| Healthcare Bill Part III; Obamacare | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 3 2014, 02:20 PM (48,643 Views) | |
| kbp | Aug 27 2014, 09:15 AM Post #931 |
|
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/26/obamacare-contracts-soar-past-estimates-audit-find/print/ Obamacare contracts soaring beyond estimates ![]() Taxpayer! At least a third of the contracts the administration inked to help implement Obamacare are over budget, an inspector general's audit reported Tuesday, highlighting the health program's potential to inflate costs. Seven of the contracts already have cost twice as much as initially anticipated, the Health and Human Services Department's inspector general said. "There is a disturbing lack of accountability and responsibility with taxpayer funds that is highlighted by this report," Rep. Diane Black, Tennessee Republican, said. The inspector general's investigators looked at 60 contracts related to HealthCare.gov, the online portal for the federal health exchanges, which serve the three dozen states that declined to set up their own marketplaces under the Affordable Care Act. Investigators said the 20 contracts pinpointed as already over budget were estimated to cost about $345 million in total, but a review of committed funds so far shows they've exceeded projections by more than $283 million. The original value of the 60 contracts audited was predicted to be $1.7 billion, and about $1.4 billion has already been obligated, including $800 million specifically for HealthCare.gov. Auditors looked at contracts with varying payment structures and start dates between 2009 and 2014. Some may already have been terminated, while others may continue for years to come. HealthCare.gov and its associated systems launched last fall to great fanfare, but severe capacity issues and software glitches threatened to kill off the program in its infancy. A rescue team of tech gurus were able to stabilize the system by December. "stabilize" = small bandage on system that still does not work!] "The troubled launch of the federal marketplace on October 1, 2013, raised serious concerns about the department's management and oversight of the project, including the selection and oversight of the many contractors that played a role in the development and operation of the federal marketplace," the inspector general said of its review, which will be regularly updated. On Tuesday, the Obama administration said it was bringing on Kevin Counihan to run the federal health care exchange. Mr. Counihan oversaw Connecticut's relatively smooth implementation of the health care law. HHS Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell said Mr. Counihan brings "additional operational and technological expertise to the position and will be a clear, single point of contact for streamlined decision-making." Several of the contracts where obligations have outstripped initial estimates were traced back to CGI Federal, the initial lead contractor on the HealthCare.gov project. Company officials sparred with government representatives during congressional hearings last fall, when each side blamed the other for lapses in the project. CGI Federal was ousted as lead contractor early this year. The sole 2014 contract reviewed in the IG report is a deal with Accenture, the company that took over after the administration dropped CGI in January. The Obama administration said ousting CGI is part of the changes officials have made as they try to correct flaws. "[The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] takes its responsibility for contracting oversight seriously and has moved aggressively to implement extensive contracting reforms, including setting up a new task force to develop a program-wide view of the cost of the marketplace, bringing in new leadership to oversee marketplace operations, hiring a systems integrator, and ending our largest contract with CGI and moving to a new type of contract with Accenture that rewards performance," HHS spokesman Kevin Griffis said. [IOW: spend MORE taxpayer funds to determine why they spent too much of the taxpayer funds... reporting it back to a "single point of contact for streamlined decision-making."] The administration also said many of the seven contracts that were more than twice their initial estimates covered tasks beyond just the Obamacare exchanges. Other contracts that have ballooned beyond their initial cost estimates include a deal inked in 2011 — at $1.9 million, having risen to $2.8 million — to develop cloud computing systems used by agencies involved in verifying Obamacare customers, and a 2012 deal to conduct consumer research that started at $1.4 million that reached $4.2 million. No report on the cost overruns for manual operations "verifying Obamacare customers" until they fix the system? |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 29 2014, 10:05 AM Post #932 |
|
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2014/August/29/Beware-Of-Higher-Charges-If-You-Go-To-An-Out-Of-Network-Emergency-Room.aspx Beware Of Higher Charges If You Go To An Out-Of-Network Emergency Room When you need emergency care, chances are you aren’t going to pause to figure out whether the nearest hospital is in your health insurer’s network. Nor should you. That’s why the health law prohibits insurers from charging higher copayments or coinsurance for out-of-network emergency care. The law also prohibits plans from requiring pre-approval to visit an emergency department that is out of your provider network. (Plans that are grandfathered under the law don’t have to abide by these provisions.) That’s all well and good. But there are some potential trouble spots that could leave you on the hook for substantially higher charges than you might expect. Although the law protects patients from higher out-of-network cost sharing in the emergency room, if they’re admitted to the hospital, patients may owe out-of-network rates for the hospital stay, says Angela Gardner, an associate professor of emergency medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern in Dallas who is the former president of the American College of Emergency Physicians. “Even if the admission is warranted, you are subject to those charges,” she says. If you live in a state that permits balance billing by out-of-network providers, your financial exposure could be even greater. In a balance-billing situation, a hospital may try to collect from the patient the difference between what the hospital billed and what the health plan paid for care. Such practices aren’t generally allowed if a consumer visits an in-network provider. Consumers shouldn’t expect that the hospital will inform them of potential out-of-network coverage issues, so they need to inquire, says Gardner. “At least being informed and knowing what you’re getting into can set you up to handle it with your insurer,” she says. And while you’re at it check into being transferred to an in-network facility if it’s feasible. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 29 2014, 10:09 AM Post #933 |
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/29/us/pennsylvania-to-purchase-private-care-for-its-poor.html Pennsylvania To Purchase Private Care For Its Poor Pennsylvania will become the 27th state to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration announced Thursday, using federal funds to buy private health insurance for about 500,000 low-income residents starting next year. Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican, had proposed the plan as an alternative to expanding traditional Medicaid under the health care law, which he opposes. Now that federal officials have signed off, Pennsylvania will join Arkansas and Iowa in using Medicaid funds to buy private coverage for the poor.... I did not know they could do this. A new method for expanding the flow of FREE MONEY! |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 31 2014, 07:07 AM Post #934 |
|
The "isolated language" is clear in designating a State exchange to receive subsidies. The "reading of the whole statute," if you stretch the interpretation of multiple parts, only gives you ambiguity as a tool to rewrite the meaning. Even the WH attorneys MUST argue it is unclear to overcome what is clear. And "the chairpersons of the responsible Congressional committees and state legislators who would have known" left a clear record that their intent in the bills they copied from had ONLY State exchanges getting subsidies, so explaining their hidden mindset in court filings years later does nothing to change what they wrote in the law. . ADD: "...The two judges in the majority in Halbig focused on the literal terms of isolated language in the ACA and, in so doing, ignored the other provisions that conflict with that literal reading." Maybe she said it best herself!! Edited by kbp, Aug 31 2014, 07:13 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 31 2014, 09:21 AM Post #935 |
|
It looks like they're going to smooth out this year what will bite some in the azz in the non-election year ...timing ...delay! http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/08/28/The-Coming-Obamacare-Tax-Mess-and-Why-the-Administratin-Isn-t-Doing-Anything-to-Stop-It The Coming Obamacare Tax Mess and Why the Administration Isn't Doing Anything to Stop It There's a kind of time bomb built into the Obamacare exchanges. Next year an unknown but probably significant number of low income people are going to discover they owe the IRS money through no fault of their own. Those who fail to file a tax return acknowledging this unexpected liability will lose their access to health care subsidies. Those who do file will be subject to ordinary IRS collection efforts up to and including tax liens and levies. The problem was pointed out in June by Chris Jacobs and then in more detail this month by Sam Baker at National Journal. The value of ACA subsidies are tied to the cost of the 2nd cheapest Silver plan available on the exchange. This plan is called the benchmark. If you buy the benchmark plan then you only pay a fixed percent of your income in premiums and the government pays the rest. If your plan costs more than the benchmark, you pay the difference out of your own pocket. Here's where it gets tricky. The benchmark plan changes every year. As insurers compete to offer a slightly cheaper entry level plan the benchmark cost could go down. That means that what used to be the benchmark plan (i.e. the one you bought last year) may now be an above benchmark plan. And if so, you are responsible for the difference in cost. The real problem is that most people in this situation won't know it until they get a bill at the end of the year. That's because Obamacare has an auto-renew feature. If you auto-renew the plan you bought last year, as many people will undoubtedly do, the government will continue paying the same amount of subsidy it paid last year. From the perspective of the buyer, it appears as if nothing has changed. It's not until the end of the year, when the IRS performs a "reconciliation," that the government overpayment is recognized. If the government overpaid by $50 a month, you now owe the IRS $600 in taxes. There's actually another wrinkle which limits the amount someone could owe as a result of a subsidy overpayment. People below 200% of the Federal Poverty Line can only owe $300. People between 200% and 300% of FPL can owe $750. Finally, those between 300% and 400% can owe $1250. That's the max for individuals, the figures double for a family. In any case, the result is that a lot of relatively low income people will suddenly discover they owe the government a chunk of money thanks to Obamacare. From this point a few things could happen. According to the IRS, if the individual fails to file a tax return reconciling the overpayment, they lose their eligibility for future subsidies. That's the worst case scenario because now the person owes the IRS money and loses their insurance going forward. For those that do file a return, they need to come up with some way to pay off the debt. However, the amount owed is not deducted from any ongoing subsidies. In other words, the government will continue to buy a person healthcare even if they currently owe the government money for last year's insurance. Assuming the person in this position can write a check to cover the overpayment, the problem is solved. If not, the IRS will treat the outstanding amount as it would any tax liability. Normally the IRS would expect you to apply for a payment agreement allowing the individual to pay the debt off over a period of months. Those who don't make such arrangements could find themselves on the wrong end of a federal tax lien. And if they still don't work out a deal to pay the debt the IRS could conceivably proceed to a levy, i.e. taking money directly from the person's paycheck until the debt is gone. We're still more than a year out from all this happening, but Obamacare auto-renewals begin in just a few more months. Once those happen, the design of the exchanges makes some number of overpayment cases (depending on changes in the benchmark plans) inevitable. The time bomb will be set but won't be noticed by most people until next year when a lot of unhappy campers discover they owe the IRS money. Of course there is a way the Obama administration could help people avoid all of this. It could loudly and repeatedly recommend that people who want the maximum subsidy pick out a new plan every year, i.e. buy the latest benchmark plan so subsidies remain steady. So far the administration doesn't seem to be doing anything like that. On the contrary, they rolled out the auto-renew feature this summer making it easier to keep the same plan. Politically, the Obama administration has already been stung by the President's broken promise about keeping insurance plans. Telling people they need to buy a new plan every year would undoubtedly restart that criticism. So instead the administration has apparently opted for a smooth renewal process even if that guarantees a big tax mess down the line. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 31 2014, 09:23 AM Post #936 |
|
Linked to from previous article... http://www.nationaljournal.com/health-care/if-you-like-your-obamacare-plan-it-ll-cost-you-20140805 If You Like Your Obamacare Plan, It'll Cost You Consumers could be hit with major price increases, without even knowing it, if they don’t switch their health care plans. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Aug 31 2014, 09:41 AM Post #937 |
|
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/30/obamacare-tax-healthcare-taxpayers-eight-billion/14861405/ Who's paying the new Obamacare tax? You . They identify where taxes that are set to be collected from "health insurers, hospitals, device makers and pharmaceutical companies" is being paid by taxpayers indirectly ...almost directly! |
![]() |
|
| foxglove | Aug 31 2014, 07:15 PM Post #938 |
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/health/end-of-life-talks-may-finally-overcome-politics.html?_r=1 End-of-life planning remains controversial. After Sarah Palin’s “death panel” label killed efforts to include it in the Affordable Care Act in 2009, Medicare added it to a 2010 regulation, allowing the federal program to cover “voluntary advance care planning” in annual wellness visits. But bowing to political pressure, the Obama administration had Medicare rescind that portion of the regulation. In doing so, Medicare wrote that it had not considered the viewpoints of members of Congress and others who opposed it. Politically, the issue was dead. But private insurers, often encouraged by doctors, began taking steps. “We are seeing more insurers who are reimbursing for these important conversations,” said Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade association. The industry, which usually uses Medicare billing codes, had created its own code under a system that allows that if Medicare does not have one, and more insurance companies are using it or covering the discussions in other ways. This year, for example, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan began paying an average of $35 per conversation, face to face or by phone, conducted by doctors, nurses, social workers and others. And Cambia Health Solutions, which covers 2.2 million patients in Idaho, Oregon, Utah and Washington, started a program including end-of-life conversations and training in conducting them. |
![]() |
|
| Mason | Aug 31 2014, 08:29 PM Post #939 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. Some in the News Media are making out like they just figured out that Employer-based insurance will be killed by Obama. This is not new, they knew it, Obama knew it - and that was part of the stealth plan. . |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Sep 1 2014, 08:50 PM Post #940 |
|
They can only put that out for consideration if they can somehow sneak in a single-payer system. The exchange plans do not work without funding approvals to replace the taxes that are projected to come about from the 50+ employee firms that do not offer healthcare coverage. Employer based coverage gone would force employees into an increased cost for their coverage. Employers presently providing coverage would NOT increase wages to offset the employees increased costs while at the same time paying tax penalties for not providing coverage. I just can't see how that could happen with the present law.... but Barry has surprised me quite a few times! |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Sep 4 2014, 08:20 AM Post #941 |
|
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-healthcare-spending-20140903-story.html Nation's healthcare changes may rein in costs in long run, report says ...The acceleration in spending will push the country’s total healthcare tab to more than $5 trillion in 2023, or about 19.3% of the economy. That is up from 17.6% this year, already far more than that of any other industrialized nation. Loads of headlines... It is just amazing how many MSM outlets are searching for a silver lining in the CBO's latest report. The average annual rate of 5.7% growth for the next 10 years is not good news. There are no "savings" from Obamacare ...period. Healthcare is a part of the cost of living that dictates a part of the cost of production. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Sep 4 2014, 08:37 AM Post #942 |
|
The economy is projected to grow just over 1% this year, a number that hides cost from the government's debt and printing press spending that exceeds the gain. Meanwhile, CBO says healthcare spending is projected to increase to 5.6% this year, as they play fuzzy numbers to project ONLY a 5.7% average annual increase over the next decade. That said, the MSM is broadcasting the news as if we should all be happy and celebrate Barry signing the Obamacare law. NYTimes: Government experts on Wednesday predicted a rebound in national health care spending... LATimes: Nation's Healthcare Changes May Rein In Costs In Long Run WSJ: Health Spending [only] Grew 3.6% In 2013, Projections Show Kaiser Health News: Health Care Spending Forecast To Increase Modestly In Next Decade [That means the economy must be growing less than "modestly"!!!] USA Today: Health Care Spending Growth Is Slow But Rising Politico: Health Care Spending Growth Remains Modest "modest" How can they tell us that a rate of increase greater than the economy, which translates to making health care LESS AFFORDABLE, is simply "modest"???? |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Sep 4 2014, 11:00 AM Post #943 |
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/387084/obama-appointees-vacate-major-anti-obamacare-ruling-joel-gehrke Obama Appointees Vacate Major Anti-Obamacare Ruling The battle just grew ...to Barry's advantage. . |
![]() |
|
| Baldo | Sep 4 2014, 09:07 PM Post #944 |
|
Foreigners hacked Obamacare website on July 8 – but HHS only discovered it 10 days ago Malicious code was inserted into an Obamacare server and lay dormant, waiting for a command to attack other computers Obama administration claims there's no evidence attack was sponsored by an unfriendly country or exposed Americans' personal information Vulnerable server was left with its default password and wasn't supposed to be accessible from the Internet House Republicans have subpoenaed the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services chief for a September 18 grilling A computer server hosting information for Healthcare.gov, the flagship Obamacare website that millions of Americans have trusted with their social security numbers, income totals and other sensitive personal information, was the subject of a hacker attack earlier this summer, officials said Thursday. The federal government wasn't aware it had been hacked on July 8 until just ten days ago. The admission is fueling fires on Capitol Hill. The powerful House Oversight and Government Reform Committee announced Thursday afternoon that it has ordered Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) chief Marilyn Tavenner to testify in a September 18 hearing about the Obamacare website's security lapses....snipped http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2744241/Foreigners-hacked-Obamacare-website-July-HHS-just-discovered-10-days-ago-claims-no-consumer-data-stolen.html The most incompetent administration ever! |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Sep 5 2014, 08:21 AM Post #945 |
|
Don't you feel terrible??? We let legal immigrants in to subsidize their living costs and it's obvious we did not put forth enough efforts to print notices in every language they might speak will suckin' the teet in our nation. ![]() We need to figure out why we're paying to have them here. Edited by kbp, Sep 5 2014, 08:22 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic » |







11:54 AM Jul 13