Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Healthcare Bill Part III; Obamacare
Topic Started: Mar 3 2014, 02:20 PM (48,641 Views)
Baldo
Member Avatar

I have been listening to a few pundits the last few days and what they are saying it is becoming clear that businesses are not adding to their staff not wanting to reach a 50 level of employees.

Thus they don't become subjected to Obama-care mandates for a while longer. They are also reducing employees hours to minus 30 hours.



Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/09/11/obamacare-participants-worse-off-but-dont-blame-washington-blame-states-paper-says/
Obamacare Participants Worse Off, But Don’t Blame Washington — Blame States, Paper Says

http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/papers/2014/early-impact-affordable-care-act-state-by-state
The Early Impact of the Affordable Care Act


Okay, it's a study by ...well, nobody ever heard of, but it is interesting!

It's like a scorecard across the nation and the winners are the states which helped organize the redistribution of federal FREE MONEY in a manner that gave their participants the biggest FREE MONEY boost.

Posted Image

1st PLACE in FREE MONEY
.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Baldo
Sep 16 2014, 08:37 AM
I have been listening to a few pundits the last few days and what they are saying it is becoming clear that businesses are not adding to their staff not wanting to reach a 50 level of employees.

Thus they don't become subjected to Obama-care mandates for a while longer. They are also reducing employees hours to minus 30 hours.



The easy way out for working on your profit margin in this economy

...the market focus is on cost cutting, not so much revenue growth!
.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp



Another topic for discussions & debates for the upcoming election...


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/15/smith-obamas-big-spending-on-abortion-on-demand/print/
Obamacare’s big spending on abortion on demand

Another ironclad presidential promise you can’t keep

By Chris Smith - - Monday, September 15, 2014

Five years ago — almost to the day — President Obama told lawmakers and the American public in a specially called joint session of Congress on health care reform that "under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion."

Then, in an 11th-hour ploy to garner a remnant of pro-life congressional Democrats absolutely needed for passage of Obamacare, the president issued an executive order on March 24, 2010, that said: "The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to newly created health insurance exchanges."

It turns out that those ironclad promises made by the president himself are absolutely untrue.

Agree or disagree with public funding of abortion — a significant majority of Americans oppose it — but no one likes to be misled or deceived.

At its core, the Hyde Amendment has two parts. It prohibits funding for abortion and funding for any insurance plan that includes abortion except in the case of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

A blockbuster Government Accountability Office report released Tuesday documents massive new public funding of abortion in the president's health care law.

Like so many of the president's broken promises that litter the political landscape, the GAO has found that in 2014, taxpayers are funding more than 1,000 Obamacare health plans that subsidize abortion on demand — even late-term abortion — decimating the Hyde Amendment, which the president said he would honor.

Among GAO's findings: Every Obamacare taxpayer-subsidized health insurance plan in New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, Rhode Island and Hawaii pays for abortion on demand. In New York, a whopping 405 out of 426 Obamacare plans subsidize abortion on demand; in California, it's 86 of 90; in Massachusetts, 109 of 111; in Oregon, 92 of 102; in Washington, D.C., 23 of 34.

According to a Congressional Budget Office estimate in April, between 2014 and 2024, taxpayer subsidies to buy Obamacare health plans will total $855 billion, making taxpayers unwittingly complicit in abortion.

The GAO also found that even an accounting trick embedded in Obamacare requiring premium payers to be assessed a separate monthly abortion surcharge is being completely ignored. This surcharge would have added some modicum of transparency so individuals would know whether they are purchasing a pro-life or pro-abortion health insurance plan if faithfully implemented. Then-Sen. Ben Nelson, Nebraska Democrat, summed up the plain meaning of the law: "You have to write two checks." According to the GAO, none of the 18 insurance companies it interviewed are billing the abortion surcharge separately. None. So much for the rule of law.

Last year, members of Congress and some staff were barred from any further participation in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan and compelled to go on to the Obamacare exchanges. After months of misinformation, obfuscation and delay, I finally learned that of the 112 health plans offered on the exchange for my family, 103 paid for abortion on demand — a clear violation of the Smith Amendment, a Hyde-like abortion funding ban I first sponsored in 1983.

Americans throughout the country have raised serious concerns that they find it nearly impossible to determine whether the plan they purchase finances the killing of unborn children. There is little or no transparency; hence, the request by several members of Congress, including House Speaker John A. Boehner, that the GAO investigate.

To end Mr. Obama's new massive funding of abortion on demand, last January the House of Representatives passed my bill — the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act, HR 7.

When Sen. Harry Reid was a member of the House, he was as pro-life as Henry Hyde. Now, as Senate majority leader, he has refused to even allow a vote on HR 7's Senate companion bill. On behalf of the weakest and most vulnerable, I respectfully ask that he reconsider.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp


Still hitting obstacles in the head counting process here!
Quote:
 
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/15/cms-affordable-care-act-announcement/15679611/

Feds give immigrants more time on health care

Consumers facing questions about their immigration status or income to qualify for health insurance plans have a few extra weeks to provide more information before losing coverage or subsidies, a Department of Health and Human Services official said Monday.

About 115,000 of 966,000 people who bought plans on HealthCare.gov and owed more information about their immigration status have unresolved issues, Andy Slavitt, principal deputy administrator at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said. These people were given a deadline of Sept. 5 to submit information — they now have until Sept. 30 to provide proof of their citizenship, or they will lose coverage.

After that date, those people can reapply if they can prove citizenship even though the open enrollment period is closed.

The other 851,000 people either have had their cases resolved, or the cases are in the process of being resolved. Slavitt would not comment on how the resolved cases were decided.

"The good news is they have been able to resolve one way or another most of the problem applications where federal databases could not verify income or legal status," says health care consultant Kip Piper, a former state and federal Medicare official. "Bad news is the CMS data remain opaque, raising more questions than answers on how the effort to resolve cases will impact those individuals and families."

Still unknown: How many people have lost their subsidized coverage or will have to pay back money to the Internal Revenue Service.

CMS says it is waiting to hear back from 279,000 people who need to provide more documentation about their income so it's clear federal subsidies were warranted. These people must submit outstanding documents by Sept. 30. Those who shouldn't have gotten the subsidies will face tax liability, Slavitt says.

Ronnell Nolan, CEO of the trade group Health Agents of America, says she thinks it would be "political suicide" for the government to cancel the insurance of people with immigration issues. Besides, she says, this was supposed to be taken care of.

"During the initial enrollment process, citizenship was supposed to be verified during the identify proofing, and income was always supposed to be verified at tax time," Nolan says. "I continue to question the reason the marketplace has spent so much time and money doing something that was supposedly already done."

Slavitt said the Affordable Care Act is "working for millions of Americans," but he acknowledged, "As we look to the future, we recognize that we still have work to do."

It's somewhat ironic in what this report shows. They're actions are an admission that the exchange enrollment system failed, which I guess they think is just old news now, in an effort to show they are controlling how that illegal immigrant thingy is $ucking funds out of taxpayers pockets.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-exchange-enroll-20140916-story.html

California health insurance exchange unveils ad campaign and outreach

Preparing for the second year of Obamacare enrollment, California unveiled new television ads and handed out $14.6 million to community groups for consumer outreach..

The state-run insurance exchange, Covered California, said the new grant funds are in addition to $33.4 million that has already been given to clinics, unions, schools and nonprofit groups helping with enrollment.

State officials said the new grant money will support more than 220 organizations statewide working on consumer education and enrollment assistance as part of the Affordable Care Act....


So we have a FREE MONEY system taking federal taxpayer funds to redistribute through Medicaid and insurance premium subsidies, and to give away YOUR dollars they have advertising and promotional staffs funded by federal taxpayers through grants administered by state taxpayer agencies that will benefit private insurance companies participating in the exchange. How could that fail?

Did I get that correctly?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LTC8K6
Member Avatar
Assistant to The Devil Himself
Lowest-Cost Insurer Drops From Minnesota Exchange

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/09/16/preferredone-pulls-out-of-mnsure-for-2015/
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

http://gotnews.com/whoops-hhs-screws-obamacare-collaboration/
Whoops! HHS Screws Up Obamacare Collaboration

http://gotnews.com/tax-mess-obamacare/
#Obamacare’s Tax Troubles Just Got Worse

Any following this mess has read about the Federal Exchange still not functioning correctly and most likely read that the problem is in the "BACK END" of the system. Recall that the present operations are for the federal government to just write whatever amounts the insurance companies demand for subsidies and they called it the "honor system."

The basic difference in function in how subsidies work here is:

FRONT END - Customer connects, enters enrollment data including income, system determines eligibility to calculate tax credit and display plan options

BACK END - System receives eligibility data from exchange, verifies eligibility, sets up prepaid premium services to company of plan applicant selected.

That BACK END is the federal government function that does not work.

What these articles do is show how HHS set up guidelines for States to instruct them to construct their system to work so that the BACK END could function (how to transmit data to the fed after determining ELIGIBILITY), while at the same time HHS did NOT require its own contractor building the Federal Exchange system to make its FRONT END do that. That eligibility thingy seems rather important.

The FRONT END of the federal system left out subsidies for applicants using the Federal Exchange.

Now, as far as the court cases are concerned, I'm not sure this makes much difference. It may show that every person involved knew that ONLY the State Exchange systems were to get subsidies from the BACK END, but the question for the courts is what the law says and if the IRS had the right to reinterpret what Congress meant for it to do.

Edited by kbp, Sep 17 2014, 07:27 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Quote:
 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/16/obama-admin-pushes-back-at-report-on-abortion-and-/print/

Obama admin. pushes back at report on abortion and Obamacare as GOP outcry rises
By Tom Howell Jr. - The Washington Times - Tuesday, September 16, 2014

The Obama administration said Tuesday it will make sure states and insurers understand the ban on using federal funds for abortion, but pushed back at Republican claims that a government audit report proves pro-life advocates' worst fears about Obamacare.

No funds are permitted to cover abortions or administer plans that cover the service, as the Affordable Care Act requires issuers to collect a separate payment for coverage of the services, according to an official at the Health and Human Services Department.

A report from the Government Accountability Office late Monday found inconsistencies in how that payment is itemized, if at all, on invoices for people in plans that insure abortion, leading Republicans to conclude that President Obama misled them and that subsidized abortion has become inevitable under the health care law.

The administration said it will make sure administrators are up to speed on the rules.

"[The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] will work with stakeholders, including states and issuers, so they fully understand and comply with the federal law prohibiting the use of federal funds for abortions," agency spokesman Ben Wakana said.

The agency is expected to issue further guidance on compliance in the coming days. Officials stressed the role of state regulators in making sure issuers comply with the rules and noted the GAO did not make judgments about CMS's oversight of the federal requirements.

But the outcry among conservatives and Catholic groups intensified Tuesday.

"The Act's alleged requirements regulating abortion coverage do not exist or are widely ignored," said Cardinal Seán O'Malley of Boston, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities of the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "Many health plans do not inform enrollees about their inclusion of abortion coverage; they do not tell them how much they are being charged for such coverage; and they do not charge a 'separate payment' for abortions that is distinct from the premium payment eligible for federal tax subsidies."

Altogether, more than 1,000 Obamacare plans offer abortion coverage in 28 states that don't prohibit it, the GAO said, including 95 percent of the plans in California and all of the plans in Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Hawaii and New Jersey.

Under the Affordable Care Act, the government is supposed to ensure at least two multistate plans that don't include abortion coverage are available in those states. There is a four-year transitional period for the administration to implement multistate plans, so it is not yet a violation of the law at this juncture, according to a congressional aide.

Rep. Christopher H. Smith, a New Jersey Republican who opposes taxpayer funding for abortions, said the sheer number of exchange plans that cover abortion, with taxpayer-subsidized premiums, shows government money is going to pay for the procedure despite Mr. Obama's insistence that wouldn't happen.

The president made the pledge so he could secure key votes for his signature health care law.
Who needs the BACK END of the HHS Obamacare system when they can just work with the FRONT END and HONOR SYSTEM?

Jokes aside, I thought there was supposed to be some type of policy requiring procedural controls on Exchange plan approvals. Oh well, it's just money from others ....YOU!

ADD: I'm waiting for the "pill excuse" we heard ...it's free, paid for by the insurance companies because they save money preventing costly birth procedures!
Edited by kbp, Sep 17 2014, 10:14 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

Panel Urges Overhauling Health Care at End of Life

The country’s system for handling end-of-life care is largely broken and should be overhauled at almost every level, a national panel concluded in a report released on Wednesday.

The 21-member nonpartisan committee, appointed by the Institute of Medicine, the independent research arm of the National Academy of Sciences, called for sweeping change.

“The bottom line is the health care system is poorly designed to meet the needs of patients near the end of life,” said David M. Walker, a Republican and a former United States comptroller general, who was a chairman of the panel. “The current system is geared towards doing more, more, more, and that system by definition is not necessarily consistent with what patients want, and is also more costly.”.

Many of the report’s recommendations could be accomplished without legislation. For example, the panel urged insurers to reimburse health care providers for conversations with patients on advance care planning. Medicare, which covers 50 million Americans and whose members account for about 80 percent of deaths each year, is considering doing just that, prompted by a recent request from the American Medical Association. Some private insurers are already covering such conversations, and many more would if Medicare did...snipped

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/science/end-of-life-care-needs-sweeping-overhaul-panel-says.html


Those darn Seniors who live too long.

Abort babies, abort those Seniors, of course Obama & his staff will get gold-plated care for life
Edited by Baldo, Sep 18 2014, 06:39 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

Baldo
Sep 18 2014, 06:37 AM
Panel Urges Overhauling Health Care at End of Life

The country’s system for handling end-of-life care is largely broken and should be overhauled at almost every level, a national panel concluded in a report released on Wednesday.

The 21-member nonpartisan committee, appointed by the Institute of Medicine, the independent research arm of the National Academy of Sciences, called for sweeping change.

“The bottom line is the health care system is poorly designed to meet the needs of patients near the end of life,” said David M. Walker, a Republican and a former United States comptroller general, who was a chairman of the panel. “The current system is geared towards doing more, more, more, and that system by definition is not necessarily consistent with what patients want, and is also more costly.”.

Many of the report’s recommendations could be accomplished without legislation. For example, the panel urged insurers to reimburse health care providers for conversations with patients on advance care planning. Medicare, which covers 50 million Americans and whose members account for about 80 percent of deaths each year, is considering doing just that, prompted by a recent request from the American Medical Association. Some private insurers are already covering such conversations, and many more would if Medicare did...snipped

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/science/end-of-life-care-needs-sweeping-overhaul-panel-says.html


Those darn Seniors who live too long.

Abort babies, abort those Seniors, of course Obama & his staff will get gold-plated care for life
Death Panels. Sarah Palin told us this stuff years ago.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
wingedwheel
Member Avatar
Not Pictured Above
abb
Sep 18 2014, 06:42 AM
Death Panels. Sarah Palin told us this stuff years ago.
And they still mock her.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

46 percent of doctors give Obamacare a 'D' or 'F'

Forty-six percent of doctors give President Obama's healthcare law a "D" or an "F," according to a new survey from the Physicians Foundation. In contrast, just 25 percent of those surveyed gave the law an "A" or a "B."

The findings come from a survey that was emailed to "virtually every physician in the United States with an email address on record with the American Medical Association" this March through June as the law's major provisions were taking effect, and received more than 20,000 responses from doctors.

In their comments that were included (but kept anonymous) in the report, a number of doctors complained about the vast amount of bureaucracy that has been added to the medical profession.

"Get government OUT of healthcare," one doctor wrote....snipped

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2553569


Watch the video clip at the site. Policies were better before Obama-care
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Putting a value on life! Should the "Death Panel" types put a set value on time for life, I can't wait to see the factors used for devaluation through age.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LTC8K6
Member Avatar
Assistant to The Devil Himself
This stuff is infuriating...

http://twitchy.com/2014/09/19/its-inexcusable-fed-up-citizen-details-her-obamacare-nightmare/

Quote:
 
‘It’s inexcusable’! Fed-up citizen details her ‘Obamacare nightmare’
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic »
Add Reply