Quote:

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/08/Gallup-Number-of-Democrats-Who-Say-Obamacare-Hurt-Them-More-than-Doubles

Gallup: Number of Democrats Who Say Obamacare Hurt Them More Than Doubles

A Gallup poll released Wednesday finds that the number of Democrats who say Obamacare has hurt them more than doubled in the last five months.

In May, just 6% of Democrats said Obamacare hurt them. Now, 15% of Democrats polled said Obamacare hurt them.

Equally troubling for Democrats, the poll found that only 27% of Democrats say Obamacare has helped them, a slight 4% increase since May. Overall, more than one in five Democrats (21%) said in the long run Obamacare will "make things worse."

Nationally, Americans remain sour on Obamacare. When Gallup asked, "In the long run, how do you think the healthcare law will affect the healthcare situation in the U.S.?" 46% of Americans said Obamacare would "make things worse" versus 36% who said it would "make things better."

Gallup concluded: "Americans' views toward the law overall and its effect on the U.S. healthcare situation in the long run continue to be more negative than positive."

Quote:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/09/more-than-dozen-states-plan-to-cancel-health-care-policies-not-in-compliance/

More than a dozen states plan to cancel health care policies not in compliance with ObamaCare

More than a dozen states plan to cancel health care policies not in compliance with ObamaCare in the coming weeks, affecting thousands of people just before the midterm elections.

"It looks like several hundred thousand people across the country will receive notices in the coming days and weeks," said Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

The policies are being canceled because states that initially granted a reprieve at the request of President Obama are no longer willing to do so.

In coming weeks, 13 states and the District of Columbia plan to cancel such policies, which generally fall out of compliance with the Affordable Care Act because they don’t offer the level of coverage the law requires.

Virginia will be hardest hit, with 250,000 policies expected to be canceled.

And because federal law requires a 60-day notice of any plan changes, voters will be notified no later than November 1, right before the Nov. 4 midterms.

Many of those forced out of their current plans and into ObamaCare may not be able to keep their doctors. They also could face higher deductibles and out-of-pocket expenses, making ObamaCare an election issue on the eve of voting.

Obama had originally unequivocally promised that under his health care plan, everyone could keep their doctors and plans.
[...]

borrowed from Mason in another thread...

 

http://www.americanlegislator.org/aca-to-shrink-labor-market-more-than-previously-thought/

Study: ACA to shrink labor market more than previously thought

In a new working paper from the Mercatus Center, University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan projects that the Affordable Care Act will reduce weekly employment per person by 3 percent, or roughly 4 million full-time-equivalent workers. These new estimates are significantly higher than the 2.5 million reduction in labor supply estimated by the Congressional Budget Office earlier this year.

To be clear, a reduction in labor supply differs from a reduction in labor demand—a distinction many failed to recognize when the CBO first released estimates. It is not the case that the ACA will necessarily forces employees out; rather, the ACA’s disincentives to work will cause some employees to voluntarily reduce hours, and in aggregate, will reduce employment by 4 million full-time-equivalent workers. As Mulligan puts it:

• 
  
• Before the ACA, people found health insurance to be less expensive when employed than it was when not working, and health insurance expenses were one reason why unemployed people have been eager to get back to working in a position with coverage. But the ACA reverses the calculus by giving people who do not work more opportunities for subsidized coverage than employed people will have.

As has been noted previously, proponents of the ACA have defended similar findings from the CBO by arguing that more Americans would be able to pursue their dreams. Mulligan, whose work the CBO relied on, dismissed such claims—“I don’t know what their intentions are, but it looks like they’re trying to leverage the lack of economic education in the audience by making these sort of points.” CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf has acknowledged in testimony that the ACA’s disincentives to work are harmful to economic growth and will reduce GDP.

A summary of key findings from Mulligan’s latest paper can be found below

• 
  
• The ACA’s employment taxes create strong incentives to work less. The health subsidies’ structure will put millions in a position in which working part time (29 hours or fewer, as defined by the ACA) will yield more disposable income than working their normal full-time schedule.
  
• The reduction in weekly employment due to these ACA disincentives is estimated to be about 3 percent, or about 4 million fewer full-time-equivalent workers. This is the aggregate result of the law’s employment disincentives, and is nearly double the impact most recently estimated by the Congressional Budget Office.
  
• Nearly half of American workers will be affected by at least one of the ACA’s employment taxes—and this does not account for the indirect effect on others as the labor market adjusts.
  
• The ACA will push more women than men into part-time work. Because a greater percentage of women work just above 30 hours per week, it is women who will be more likely to drop to part-time work as defined by the ACA

To read the full report, visit http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/Mulligan-ACA-Part-TimeWork.pdf

LTC8K6

Oct 10 2014, 12:13 PM

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/10/obamacare-premiums-rise-steeply-in-louisiana-and-iowa.php

Obamacare premiums rise steeply in Louisiana and Iowa

Quote:

 

State regulators approved significant premium hikes on the Louisiana and Iowa Obamacare exchanges this week. Sarah Hurtubise of the Daily Caller reports that premiums will rise by double-digits in both states. This is bad news, I assume, for Mary Landrieu and Bruce Braley, the struggling Democratic Senate candidates in the two states.

In Louisiana, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana, the exchange’s largest insurer, is hiking prices between 18.3 percent and 19.7 percent for three different plans that cover more than 52,000 people. Humana will increase its exchange premium rates by 9.9 percent and Vantage Health Plan by 15.9 percent.

In Iowa, CoOportunity the biggest insurer on the exchange, raised its premium by 19 percent on average. The other major exchange insurer will increase rates by 8.7 percent.

In Colorado, which also has a hotly contested Senate race, the news is better for Democrats. It recently announced that exchange premiums will rise by only 1.18 percent. However, several Colorado towns already had the highest premiums in the nation during the first open enrollment period and they will not be adjusted.

Quote:

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/12/hispanics-want-obamacare-for-illegal-immigrant-dre/print/

Hispanics want Obamacare for illegal immigrant ‘dreamers’
White House vows executive action on immigration reform after election

Top Hispanic leaders asked President Obama last week to grant some illegal immigrants access to Obamacare, saying the "dreamers" to whom the White House has given tentative work permits are already paying taxes, so they deserve government benefits.

The request is yet another complication stemming from the legal limbo Mr. Obama created for the dreamers, hundreds of thousands of young adults to whom the president gave a tentative legal status in 2012, but who were brought to the U.S. illegally by their parents as minors and thus remain illegal immigrants.

Under government policy, illegal immigrants are barred from buying insurance on Obamacare's exchanges, and about half the states also prohibit them from getting Medicaid benefits. But the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda said those whom Mr. Obama has freed from the danger of deportation should be considered "lawfully present for all purposes, including eligibility for public benefits and affordable health care."

"NHLA asks that you apply the fairness and equality that your Administration has shown in various other areas in the health care context and ensure that no one — regardless of their immigration status — lacks access to critical health care services," Hispanic leaders said in their letter.
No No No... they lack access to taxpayer subsidies, AKA redistribution.

Nearly 600,000 illegal immigrants had been approved for tentative legal status under what the administration labeled Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Their status means they cannot be deported for two years from the time of their approval, and they can apply to renew that status every two years.
DACA = Administration directive for prosecutorial discretion to completely ignore law.

They have also been given work permits. Most states have also decided to allow them driver's licenses.

Immigrant rights activists have asked Mr. Obama to expand his deferred action program to include illegal immigrants who are parents of U.S. citizen children and parents of dreamers. If Mr. Obama were to follow through on that as part of his promised executive action after this year's elections, it could mean potentially millions more people eligible for Obamacare.
...after Barry's next EO????

Rosemary Jenks, government relations manager for NumbersUSA, which fights for a crackdown on immigration, said there is a bright dividing line that determines who should be eligible for taxpayer-funded health care benefits.

"As soon as Congress votes to change the law and allow illegal aliens to become legal, then those aliens will have access to U.S. benefits. But it's very clear taxpayers are not in favor of that, which is why Congress has not passed it," she said.

A Rasmussen Reports poll released earlier this month shows just how deep that opposition runs.

The poll found 71 percent of voters opposed giving services to the illegal immigrant children who surged across the border this summer, and 63 percent of the voters surveyed said that a generous social welfare system in the U.S. draws illegal immigrants here.

During the 2009 and 2010 debates over Obamacare, immigrant rights advocates fought for access for illegal immigrants but ran into opposition from both the White House and Democrats in Congress, who didn't want the issue sinking the entire health care law.
Maybe the IRS could reinterpret it!

Immigrant rights advocates, though, say the legal situation for those illegal immigrants who have been granted forms of tentative legal status is different. Indeed, they said the law actually would allow dreamers to get health care, but the Obama administration changed its own policies to stop it.

Before Mr. Obama's June 2012 policy for dreamers, others who had been granted deferred action on their deportations had been eligible for publicly funded health care benefits, according to the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice.

But in August 2012 the administration issued new guidance saying dreamers wouldn't be eligible — in essence creating yet another category of tentative legal status that was eligible for just a subset of rights to which other immigrants are entitled.

Mr. Obama had planned to take action extending his nondeportation policies this summer but backed off, fearing a backlash from voters. Now the White House has said he will act after Election Day, when voters can no longer punish him or his party.

• 
  
• Access limited to lawful residents. If an individual is not, or is not reasonably expected to be for the entire period for which enrollment is sought, a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully present in the United States, the individual shall not be treated as a qualified individual and may not be covered under a qualified health plan in the individual market that is offered through an Exchange.

Quote:

 

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/41df6bca84b8454cb059ffe9bef9e222/poll-many-insured-struggle-medical-bills

Poll: Many insured struggle with medical bills



They have health insurance, but still no peace of mind. Overall, 1 in 4 privately insured adults say they doubt they could pay for a major unexpected illness or injury.

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research may help explain why President Barack Obama faces such strong headwinds in trying to persuade the public that his health care law is holding down costs.

The survey found the biggest financial worries among people with so-called high-deductible plans that require patients to pay a big chunk of their medical bills each year before insurance kicks in.

Such plans already represented a growing share of employer-sponsored coverage. Now, they're also the mainstay of the new health insurance exchanges created by Obama's law.

Edward Frank of Reynoldsville, Pennsylvania, said he bought a plan with a $6,000 deductible last year through HealthCare.gov. That's in the high range, since deductibles for popular silver plans on the insurance exchanges average about $3,100 — still a lot.

"Unless you get desperately ill and in the hospital for weeks, it's going to cost you more to have this plan and pay the premiums than to pay the bill just outright," said Frank, who ended up paying $4,000 of his own money for treatment of shoulder pain.

"The deductibles are so high, you don't get much of anything out of it," said Frank, who is in 50s and looking for a new job.

The poll found that people respond to the hit on their wallets in ways that may not help their health:

— Nineteen percent of all privately insured adults said they did not go to the doctor when they were sick or injured, because of costs. Among those with high-deductible plans, the figure was 29 percent.

— Seventeen percent skipped a recommended test or treatment; it was 23 percent among those with high-deductible plans.

— Eighteen percent of all adults went without a physical exam or other preventive care, 24 percent among those with high-deductible plans.

[...]

Indeed, the poll showed that a majority of those with private insurance, 52 percent, would rather pay a higher premium and limit out-of-pocket costs than lower their premiums and potentially face higher out-of-pocket charges.

Many consumers also said they made financial trade-offs to pay medical bills:

—Overall, 33 percent said they cut back on entertainment; it was 43 percent among those with high-deductible plans.

—18 percent said they used up all or most of their savings, 24 percent among those with high-deductible plans.

—19 percent said they dialed down their contributions for retirement savings, 28 percent for people with high-deductible plans.

One government definition sets the threshold for a high-deductible plan at $1,300 for individual coverage, but actually annual deductibles of $2,000 and even much higher are common.

Some people pair a high-deductible plan with a tax-sheltered savings account to pay their out-of-pocket costs — the poll found 40 percent who say they have high-deductible plans also have such an account. On the insurance exchanges, low-income people can receive additional help from the government for their cost-sharing expenses.

In another potentially troublesome finding for the White House, the poll found signs of dissatisfaction among people who changed plans in the last year, as the president's health overhaul went into full effect.
[...]