Althouse: "Obama Officials In 2010: 93 Million Americans Will Be Unable To Keep Their Health Plans Under Obamacare."

October 31, 2013

"Obama Officials In 2010: 93 Million Americans Will Be Unable To Keep Their Health Plans Under Obamacare."

Wow.

90 comments:

MadisonMan said...: What Republicans should do: Push Legislation that eliminates all exemptions to Obamacare, including Congress, and Unions, and everyone else who got one.

Hang Obamacare, like a millstone, around the neck of the Democratic Party.; 10/31/13, 12:28 PM
Pettifogger said...: I' with MadisonMan. As bad as Obamacare is, it's even worse that the nomenklatura is exempt.; 10/31/13, 12:33 PM
Rumpletweezer said...: Peasants!

We know what's best for you because we have degrees from Harvard.

Piss boy! Oh Piss boy!; 10/31/13, 12:34 PM
Michael said...: At one time, all those years ago, we were trying to solve the issue of 12 million uninsured people.; 10/31/13, 12:36 PM
Balfegor said...: Well, at least they're doing it on purpose. I guess.

That said, if that's the result they foresaw, it's hard to see how the end result of Obamacare would be anything but an increase in the number of uninsured people. Although the law's stupider or more mendacious boosters sometimes claimed it was "universal" health insurance, it wasn't and barely even pretended to be. But I did think it would actually result in a modest decrease in the number of uninsured, maybe from 50 million to 40 million or something.; 10/31/13, 12:37 PM
Sigivald said...: Hey, it's only about a third of the population (and therefore a higher proportion of the insured, since they were constantly harping about how many people were uninsured).

Naturally, this is still somehow all the Republicans' fault for not Going Along Nicely.; 10/31/13, 12:49 PM
MartyH said...: If Obamacare applied to the automotive market:

"if you like your car, you can keep your car."

Issues regulations so that ALL cars have to have side curtain airbags, ABS brakes, run flat tires, 100,000 miles of prepaid maintenance, digital radios, iPod docks, heated and cooled seats, automatic doors and windows, backup camera, keyless entry, and be electric, natural gas, or run on ethanol blends.

Then, when your car is impounded for not meeting these standards,they blame you for having a crappy car.

They direct you to the GM (Government Motors) web dealership to get a new car, since it is the only place where you can get the car subsidy. The staff put you through a lab rat maze with most of the paths leading to dead ends or back to the start.

So you check out other dealerships. Because of the new minimum requirements, there is no bottom end of the market-Chevy, Hyundai, Dodge, Toyota, Mazda, Subaru, VW, Fiat, Ferrari-all gone. What's left is Lexus, Cadillac, Infiniti, Audi, Benz, Range Rover, Jaguar, and the upper ends of the Ford and Chrysler lines. The sticker shock, of course, is enormous, and lots of people stop buying cars because they can;t afford them.; 10/31/13, 12:49 PM
test said...: Wow is right. If this fact pierces the veil of the apolitical public Democrats are toast in the next election, and so is Obamacare.; 10/31/13, 12:50 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: It's good for them to withhold information like this and lie about it. That's why we vote for democrats, because they know how to limit unnecessary communication with us peons.

(Call me Inga.); 10/31/13, 12:51 PM
Original Mike said...: Senator Ron Johnson (R., Wisc.) and Rep. Fred Upton (R., Mich.) have proposed the “If You Like Your Health Care Plan You Can Keep It Act,” with dozens of co-sponsors. The two-page bill simply states that “nothing in [the Affordable Care Act] shall be construed to require that an individual terminate coverage under a group health plan or health insurance coverage in which such individual was enrolled during any part of the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending on December 31, 2013.”

Two. Page. Bill. Something even Nancy Pelosi can read.; 10/31/13, 12:51 PM
Original Mike said...: People are arguing that Obama didn't know. "He didn't lie; he didn't know".

Didn't lie??? It was the plan for people to lose their health insurance.; 10/31/13, 1:01 PM
Larry J said...: MartyH said...
If Obamacare applied to the automotive market:

"if you like your car, you can keep your car."

Actually, if you wanted a car, they'd make you buy a motorhome. A motorhome is so much better than a car! It even has a kitchen sink and a bathroom. How can a car compete with that? So what is all you really need is a small car to take you too and from work. That's a crappy little car! You're too stupid to know what you really need. Once we get you to buy an overpriced motorhome, we'll be able to give subsidizies so others can have their motorhomes for little or no money. That would solve homelessness! Are you such a stingy bastard that you'd rather have people sleeping in the cold instead of inside a nice, warm taxpayer-subsidizied motorhome? One with the utilities and satellite TV also paid for by selfish bastards like you.

You should be grateful.; 10/31/13, 1:15 PM
Henry said...: Senator Ron Johnson (R., Wisc.) and Rep. Fred Upton (R., Mich.) have proposed the “If You Like Your Health Care Plan You Can Keep It Act,” with dozens of co-sponsors. The two-page bill simply states that “nothing in [the Affordable Care Act] shall be construed to require that an individual terminate coverage under a group health plan or health insurance coverage in which such individual was enrolled during any part of the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending on December 31, 2013.”

I saw this too. It's nonsense. Are you going to tell every private insurance company and every self-insured business that they need to keep offering grandfathered insurance policies that meet this new law, at the same time they offer new insurance policies based on the current law?

Like Obamacare it assumes a static situation.

It could slow the bleeding, but insurance companies will be under tremendous internal pressure to move individuals on those grandfathered plans to Obamacare plans as quickly as possible.; 10/31/13, 1:16 PM
RecChief said...: MAdisonMan, I said that many times before the shut down.

But it has become clear to me, if such legislation passed the House, and maybe even the Senate, the President would still have to sign it.

It's strange to me that Obama could just ignore parts of the law, or co-opt other parts of government into 'discovering' the means to grant waivers and exemptions, and no one calls him on it. I don't remember any other administration that acted as though it felt it wasn't bound by the law. And that made me laugh every time his cult followers said, "It's the law of the land!!"; 10/31/13, 1:16 PM
Jaq said...: "Hey, I never intended to pay the guy, but I had to tell him I would pay him or he never would have mowed my yard!"

I think the above captures the same legal principle.; 10/31/13, 1:16 PM
Larry J said...: Original Mike said...
People are arguing that Obama didn't know. "He didn't lie; he didn't know".

If only Obama knew! That sounds familiar somehow. I'm not ruling out that he's both stupid and a liar. He's certainly talented enough to be both.; 10/31/13, 1:17 PM
Paul said...: Now Obama has a 'shop if you are dropped' shtick.

So he lied to sell Obamacare and his staff knew it was a flat LIE.

But for liberals to lie to further their goals is no sin in their eyes.

And now he gives the old switcherroo!

Well I hope enough of congress has the guts to give him the old switcheroo back and pass legislation making EVERY CITIZEN libel to ALL LAWS.

Hope for change in 2014.; 10/31/13, 1:19 PM
cubanbob said...: If the Republicans were clever they would offer a bill making insurance premiums payments (which are a tax )
a tax credit for those who do not receive a public subsidy. I would think the Democrats at this point would agree.; 10/31/13, 1:19 PM
Jaq said...: Ann,
We told you he was a liar, but you assumed we were all nasty right wing nutcases. I hope the little frisson of self satisfaction and the short lived sense of superiority voting for Obama offered you was worth it.; 10/31/13, 1:19 PM
MadisonMan said...: if such legislation passed the House, and maybe even the Senate

Given the present climate, I can only assume that House and Senate Leaders are working furiously to prevent it being introduced onto the floor.; 10/31/13, 1:20 PM
rehajm said...: "Like Obamacare it assumes a static situation."

The insurers are saying a delay kills kills them because they need the premiums from the new expensive plans and they need it NOW. That means the grandfather clause fails them for the same reason.; 10/31/13, 1:21 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: At what point can we brand this law a bit of tyranny? Passed by the slimmest margins using every trick. Hugely unpopular. And now we find that the little support it had was mostly based on an outright lie..; 10/31/13, 1:23 PM
test said...: rehajm said...
The insurers are saying a delay kills kills them because they need the premiums from the new expensive plans and they need it NOW. That means the grandfather clause fails them for the same reason.

Democrats will respond with a taxpayer bailout if it gets to that point.; 10/31/13, 1:25 PM
rehajm said...: Democrats will respond with a taxpayer bailout if it gets to that point.

Yes, you've called the endgame, I believe. Though I think it's directed towards the care providers before the insurers.; 10/31/13, 1:30 PM
Original Mike said...: @Henry - Largely agree with you. It's not clear that this train wreck can be saved at this late date.; 10/31/13, 1:31 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: My sister, a widow not old enough for Medicare, has paid the premiums for an individual plan with good coverage [with Blue Cross] for many years and her policy was terminated due to the ACA effective 12/31/13.

Now, she has to go and find a replacement policies. Blue Cross must have thousands like her because they are conducting meetings where people like my sister can learn about the replacement options.

The important thing to recognize is that the people with individual policies are the Americans who have taken some responsibility for themselves and purchased health insurance. And now Obamacare is f-ing with them in an effort to cover many many people who could not be bothered getting their own coverage even if they could afford it.; 10/31/13, 1:32 PM
Larry J said...: Marshal said...

Democrats will respond with a taxpayer bailout if it gets to that point.

Precisely. Obamacare is one of the biggest government programs ever. When have they ever let any major government fail, even when it was obvious that the program was a failure? They'll spend whatever it takes to make it appear a success and then use it as a rational for even bigger government.; 10/31/13, 1:33 PM
Original Mike said...: OTOH - While the health insurance will certainly be changed when we emerge from all of this, lying back and taking it seems like a bad strategy.; 10/31/13, 1:33 PM
Original Mike said...: "people with individual policies are the Americans who have taken some responsibility for themselves and purchased health insurance. And now Obamacare is f-ing with them ...

No kidding.; 10/31/13, 1:38 PM
Tank said...: Luckily this is the most transparentist administration ever, otherwise, whooo boy would we be in the dark.; 10/31/13, 1:40 PM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: There are now four categories of Americans.

Category one is people getting cancellation notices and having to sign up for higher-prices plans on malfunctioning websites.

Category two is people who didn't have health insurance or had super-expensive insurance before and want to sign up for Obamacare, but are stuck trying to do so on the malfunctioning websites.

Category three is people who didn't have health insurance before and don't really want to sign up for Obamacare, and will likely avoid the malfunctioning websites until the last possible moment, which has now been moved to March.

Category four is people who do get to keep their existing insurance and so only have to hear about the higher premiums and malfunctioning websites.

Spin, one way or the other, is only going to work on category four. The other three categories are going to vote with their individual personal experiences.; 10/31/13, 1:40 PM
Levi Starks said...: Most of my co-workers who self identify as Democrats pay little or no attention to what the president, and Democratic party are doing. They can't be forced to engage in meaningful discussions about what is happening to our country. They've learned 1 or 2 talking points from listening to NPR, and that about it.
In order for there to be any substantive change in our current direction things will have to deteriorate to a pretty bad state. And even then it's likely that the republicans will get the blame. and it will continue in the same direction.; 10/31/13, 1:44 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Left Bank, I'm inCategory $ and my plan also went up. You see, even group policies had to change a bit, although much of what we have was "grandfathered" under Obamacare. Our costs have gone up 20% (10% this year and 9.2% next) and my employer's costs have gone up an equal amount. I have yet to hear of someone NOT affected by this clusterfarg of a law.; 10/31/13, 1:53 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Aargh! "Category 4" I meant...; 10/31/13, 1:53 PM
Oso Negro said...: Left Bank of the Charles - Let me propose Category Five - Americans who get to keep their insurance until next year when the employer mandate portion kicks in.; 10/31/13, 1:53 PM
Oso Negro said...: Levi Starks, you have my sympathy. These folks are the real extremists - extremely uninformed and unthoughtful.; 10/31/13, 1:56 PM
MadisonMan said...: Nice Freudian slip Mike. It should be Category $$$$$$$$$$$$$ because that's what it will cost.; 10/31/13, 2:00 PM
alan markus said...: Category four is people who do get to keep their existing insurance and so only have to hear about the higher premiums and malfunctioning websites.

Category four A: Public sector employees who get forced into ObamaCare because 1) conservative local government units figure that it might be cheaper to do that or 2) liberal local governments are convinced that putting their employees into ObamaCare will help the program achieve the mass that it needs to be successful.

Unfortunately for Public Service Employees (especially Wisconsin - Democrats can throw them under the bus because the unions are no longer a cash cow to be milked), this option is something both sides have a motivation to pursue.

My spouse is a PSE at a local unit of government and is involved in the preliminary budget discussions - at this point all options are on the table, and one is ObamaCare. Milwaukee County has identified 4,400 positions that could be converted to ObamaCare.

Chris Abele considers dropping health coverage in favor of exchanges

So,if you are a Public Sector Employee in Category A, don't be too smug about it. If you are a State of WI employee, put your faith in Walker's future political aspirations - as long as he has those aspirations, he would hesitate to dump you all into ObamaCare, but once he is no longer politically viable, all bets are off.; 10/31/13, 2:01 PM
alan markus said...: In my comment above, meant to say Category Four, not A; 10/31/13, 2:03 PM
Shouting Thomas said...: healthcare.graft; 10/31/13, 2:05 PM
Larry J said...: So,if you are a Public Sector Employee in Category A, don't be too smug about it. If you are a State of WI employee, put your faith in Walker's future political aspirations - as long as he has those aspirations, he would hesitate to dump you all into ObamaCare, but once he is no longer politically viable, all bets are off.

If Obamacare was such a great program, public employees would be demanding to be put into it. The fact that they aren't is telling.; 10/31/13, 2:08 PM
MadisonMan said...: I think *not* having to deal with ObamaCare is something that, say, Professors, would enjoy, and that will therefore become a bargaining tool. A perk, you might say, of being a Professor.

We will hire you, and you won't have to deal with Exchanges.; 10/31/13, 2:10 PM
damikesc said...: But, the people are too dumb to know better.

I'd disagree with the Obama officials on this, but then I remember that the clown WAS re-elected, so they might have a point...

At what point can we brand this law a bit of tyranny? Passed by the slimmest margins using every trick. Hugely unpopular. And now we find that the little support it had was mostly based on an outright lie..

You forgot that opposing it was terrorism as well.; 10/31/13, 2:10 PM
alan markus said...: they'd make you buy a motorhome. A motorhome is so much better than a car!

And you might notice that your gas costs go up substantially. But when everyone has a motorhome, your annual gas costs will go down $2500.; 10/31/13, 2:11 PM
Delayna said...: Proposal: Legislation that removes all waivers, favors, exemptions, and makes everybody stuck with this excrement sandwich.

2nd proposal for when the Usual Suspects start screaming: Leave the ACA up and running EXCEPT remove all mandates.

People are free to make contracts with one another as they see fit.

Those who are frightened by this can sign on to the ACA exchanges.; 10/31/13, 2:13 PM
George M. Spencer said...: Vice President Biden is quoted saying “Neither [the President nor] I are technology geeks, and we assumed that it was up and ready to run,” Biden told HLN’s Christi Paul in an interview.

imagine FDR saying, "I'm not a soldier. I assumed Ike had a good plan at Normandy. It failed. We'll try again."

Or Nixon saying, "I'm not an aeronautical engineer. I thought Apollo 11 would land on the Moon. The astronauts are dead. We'll try harder next time."

The Buck stops nowhere with these guys.; 10/31/13, 2:13 PM
n.n said...: Human life, from planning to death panel, is merely a commodity, to be sacrificed for an immediate return.; 10/31/13, 2:14 PM
Henry said...: @St. George:

You don't have to consider what Eisenhower would have done. Before D-Day kicked off he drafted a statement to use in case it failed.

If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.

Typically he did not draft a message taking credit to himself.; 10/31/13, 2:18 PM
Delayna said...: Category Four will all but disappear by the end of next year; employer-based insurance will either be canceled by force majeur because it is too good, or not good enough, or good enough but not in the right ways...

...or because the employer can't afford to provide insurance with all the mandated coverages added...

...or they can't afford the time/money to figure out the rules and walk that narrow line of legality, and just pay the penalties. Small employers especially can't afford full-time specialists in every field of how the government exists to screw them over.

So, yeah, 90 million uninsured would be the best case scenario; 10/31/13, 2:19 PM
alan markus said...: think *not* having to deal with ObamaCare is something that, say, Professors, would enjoy, and that will therefore become a bargaining tool. A perk, you might say, of being a Professor.

How's That Health Care Website working?

What Ann said:

Myself, I'm tired of the drama.

What commenter Rick said:

What a snarky comment. Why wouldn't you be tired of the drama? You're insulated from its consequences and isolated in academia. Those of us faced with real-world choices and real-world costs don't feel as sanguine.; 10/31/13, 2:21 PM
richlb said...: The problem with any new bill being passed to let people keep their existing plans is ill conceived on two fronts: first, much like incandescent light bulb ban, companies have already made decisions based on the existing law and no amount of Monday morning quarterbacking can change that. The plans are cancelled, and trying to reinstate them will prove an even bigger headache. Second, it's another DUMB GOP MOVE to try and mitigate the damage that the ACA has already laid. I say let this thing obliterate the Dems and maybe, just maybe, in 2014 enough of the LIV's will sit home stewing to interfere with the midterms.; 10/31/13, 2:24 PM
TosaGuy said...: "Second, it's another DUMB GOP MOVE to try and mitigate the damage that the ACA has already laid."

My prediction is that the Dems (Reid and Obama) will double down on disaster and not take up any GOP bills that change Obamacare.; 10/31/13, 2:31 PM
Wince said...: Barack Obama (D-Manchuria)

As Rumsfeld would say....

This shows Obama's lie was about a "known known".; 10/31/13, 2:34 PM
Deirdre Mundy said...: They're probably all part of the 47% who would never vote for Obama anyway. Or the 47% who will vote for him no matter what. All politics is now about that 6% on the fence. If you're part of that 6%, you can keep your insurance and your doctor!; 10/31/13, 2:38 PM
Carl Pham said...: When the university reconsiders its plans, and your taxes go up and up to feed the Obamacare monster -- plus the green jobs payoffs, the Obamaphones, the whole nine yards -- and your retirement continues melting down like the Wicked Witch in a steady stream of ZIRP, I am guessing your one-word response will be stronger than "wow," Althouse.

So far the storm is at a distance, and for most of us our anger or alarm is through empathy alone.

It won't stay that way. Sooner than most expect, it will be up close and personal. What will happen then is anyone's guess. People can make drastic decisions when they're really, really angry in large numbers. Let's hope it works out.; 10/31/13, 2:39 PM
Delayna said...: Question for all the LoFos and Nofos out there (i.e., all libs):

If Obamacare is so great, why did they put in mandates?; 10/31/13, 2:42 PM
n.n said...: TosaGuy:

As with the recent "shutdown", Obama and Reid demonstrated their intransigence with universal effect. They are noble representatives of the party of Asses. Politics is not a sport for the meek or capricious.; 10/31/13, 2:50 PM
wildswan said...: Some Random Thought

I like the idea of removing all waiversand then all mandates as Delayna said above.

I wonder why Zientz can fix in six weeks what Sebelius couldn't make work in three years? I think Zientz means you will be able make it to the last screen, not that info will be secure, accurate and transferred accurately. I think he'll say those were someone else's problems ... Who? ... Not the Stezzy of the Prezzy, anyhow.

I talked with some who works on medical records and it sounds as if this is an irretrievable disaster. Getting formats to match is a major problem and this has not been done - that's why people have three spouses. Besides, there is the possibility that some of those attempts to apply might not have failed and sort of zombie accounts will be moving through cyber-space attaching themselves to valid final accounts and sucking them dry of power to work.

But most important I think Megan McArdle got it right when she said that people in "Expertopia" might have known that this wasn't going to work but that most people aren't in Expertopia. Most believed the President - "If you like your plan you can keep it. Period." Now they won't believe him. Period. That will take awhile to work through but it will alter all Dem calculations.
What the Dems don't get is what it is not to have a lot of money. You can't just go to another doctor - you don't have a car. You can't just reluctantly pay up - you don't have any spare money. You have to go to the library to get on a computer. You find out what to do by asking friends ... and those "Navigators" who are neighborhood-based are going to be held personally responsible for every unexpected event down the road, starting with unexpected premium hikes. (They work for Dem organizations HAHAHA).

This isn't 1945 or 1917 - there were healthcare options in place for 85% of the people when the Dems began to fool with the system. Now it's broken - and they think the breakers will be put in charge of everyone? They'll be lucky to be dogcatchers.; 10/31/13, 2:56 PM
n.n said...: If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.

Accepting responsibility is a desirable quality in a leader.

Typically he did not draft a message taking credit to himself.

Modesty is another desirable quality in a leader.

This Eisenhower fellow has the character of a true leader.; 10/31/13, 2:58 PM
MadisonMan said...: My prediction is that the Dems (Reid and Obama) will double down on disaster and not take up any GOP bills that change Obamacare.

Maybe.

But given the current anti-Congress mood, that would give even more ammo to people who are running against incumbents (If our Congresscritter thinks Obamacare is so great, why isn't he or she participating in it!). Given that there will be many voters who have been pissed off and negatively impacted by Obamacare...; 10/31/13, 2:58 PM
ALP said...: How long before the "i" word is trotted out?; 10/31/13, 3:06 PM
Steve said...: The only people I know that are affected by this are small business owners. They didn't vote for Obama anyway,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsW9MlYu31g; 10/31/13, 3:13 PM
Alexander said...: Well hang on a tick,

It seem a bit unfair that you grandpas can grandfather in your old, desirable insurance plans... but those looking to buy insurance for the first time get saddled with the lot of it.

This new law needs to include language to allow any first time buyer to have access to a comparable plan to those currently held by any policyholder.; 10/31/13, 3:18 PM
grackle said...: If the Republicans were clever they would offer a bill making insurance premiums payments (which are a tax ) a tax credit for those who do not receive a public subsidy. I would think the Democrats at this point would agree.

A good way to ease Obamacare into perpetuity is to apply palliatives that are not really remedies to Obamacare. Then the Progressives can claim that Obamacare's flaws have been "corrected." Later, of course, the "flaws" can be reintroduced. Or more simply: The "remedies" would simply not be enforced by the Justice Dept. Obama ignores laws he doesn't like.; 10/31/13, 3:23 PM
traditionalguy said...: What's it matter now?

The latest Media created delusion will be all the low information voters see.; 10/31/13, 3:23 PM
Delayna said...: Steve,

Small business owners have employees, who are already getting hurt. (Losing jobs as well as insurance.)

Soon (next year, when the employer mandates take effect), almost the entire population will be hurting. Except the parasite class.

...just a question: if the lint in your dryer hose caught on fire, would you ignore it because it was only a small part of your house? Would it "suddenly" become a big deal once it spreads to the roof?

And, Alexander has a good point. If only young people were smart, they'd be mobbing the streets.; 10/31/13, 3:26 PM
Hagar said...: Richard Nixon: "I am not a crook!"

"Poppy" Bush: "Read my lips; no new taxes!'

Bill Clinton: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky!"

Barack Obama: "If you like your health plan, you can keep it - period!"

It is the kind of one-line statement that is apt to stick with a president.

It is going to be interesting to see how it works out. We won't know the answer until next November, and perhaps not until November 2016, but I suspect that that single line will remain visible through all the smoke and mirrors the left can generate for the next generation or so.
It pertains directly to people's paychecks which is a lot more immediate than an arcane question of economics or foreign policy.; 10/31/13, 3:35 PM
Tina Trent said...: Lawyers: can't this become the largest class action suit of all time?

My BC/BS agent told me yesterday people are weeping when she tells them what this is going to do to their plans.

Our premium will apparently rise by between 297% - 375% once the grandfathered period ends, which I thought was January 1, 2015 but may be any time before that if anything in the plan changes.

They think. The agent wasn't sure. What she was sure of was that she was so mad she didn't care who knew it.

Also, who here knew that different prices apply to different zip codes, based, I suppose, on subjective determinations doubtlessly not affected in the very least by political clout . . . anti-Agenda 21 arguments about the real agenda of regionalism are sounding more sound every day.

And, after generally reviewing the changes to be made to my insurance, I found the high deductible curiously retained while the "better insurance" aspects all involve things I don't need but that were lobbied for by powerful Democratic activist groups.; 10/31/13, 3:39 PM
Paul said...: Fermi's paradox will soon come into play for I am beginning to think it is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itself.

For surely, as Obamacare and Obamanomics show, we can destroy ourselves with our own laws.

This must be how Rome fell.; 10/31/13, 4:07 PM
cubanbob said...: grackle said...
If the Republicans were clever they would offer a bill making insurance premiums payments (which are a tax ) a tax credit for those who do not receive a public subsidy. I would think the Democrats at this point would agree.

A good way to ease Obamacare into perpetuity is to apply palliatives that are not really remedies to Obamacare. Then the Progressives can claim that Obamacare's flaws have been "corrected." Later, of course, the "flaws" can be reintroduced. Or more simply: The "remedies" would simply not be enforced by the Justice Dept. Obama ignores laws he doesn't like.

10/31/13, 3:23 PM

Lets get a reality check here. Unless real fiscal conservatives sweep out the deadwood and the socialist out of Congress this scheme of mine is the best amelioration possible. So unless you have a crystal ball that shows such a sweep in the next election cycle or two you have a better idea?; 10/31/13, 4:08 PM
grackle said...: Unless real fiscal conservatives sweep out the deadwood and the socialist out of Congress this scheme of mine is the best amelioration possible. So unless you have a crystal ball that shows such a sweep in the next election cycle or two you have a better idea?

Applying what would inevitably be a temporary fix to just one bad aspect of Obamacare would be wasted energy and even counterproductive.

Obama has ignored or failed to enforce some aspects of Obamacare already and the law is still hot off the griddle. What makes the commentor think his "amelioration" wouldn't also be ignored after a year or two – or even sooner?

The only way to turn the tide is to defeat the red state Democrat Senators. That is made more difficult if they are allowed to hide their true allegiance and to claim, however implausibly, that Obamacare has been fixed.; 10/31/13, 5:35 PM
JackWayne said...: Yeah, WOW, who knew Obama is a lying sack of shit Marxist!; 10/31/13, 6:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Do the phrase "lying sack" strike a familiar note?; 10/31/13, 6:21 PM
Christy said...: What are the demographics of the 5%? As noted earlier, they are those who take responsibility for themselves. But I wonder if they are of the professional class, educated, and in overwhelmingly numbers opinion leaders in their communities?; 10/31/13, 6:26 PM
Kirk Parker said...: Mike,

"Aargh! "Category 4" I meant...

Yeah, they'r ALL Category $, aren't they?

Wildswan,

Please, please, PLEASE don't adopt the distorting terminology of the left! "there were healthcare options in place for 85% of the people when the Dems began to fool with the system." No no no--there were health insurance options for 85%.

n.n.,

"This Eisenhower fellow has the character of a true leader. "

Maybe the R's ought to see if they can run him for President next time.; 10/31/13, 6:47 PM
n.n said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/31/13, 6:58 PM
n.n said...: Kirk Parker:

I am unaware that humans possess the required technology. We cannot travel through time with any appreciable velocity. We cannot reconstitute a disassembled life. What are your proposing?; 10/31/13, 7:04 PM
Clyde said...: Those of us who were informed and were paying attention have been telling you this for years. This was the only possible way that Obama's mendacious policies could play out: A lot of people were going to get screwed, and the only question was just exactly how many that number would be. Answer: Pretty damn high.; 10/31/13, 7:21 PM
Kirk Parker said...: OMike,

"Two. Page. Bill. Something even Nancy Pelosi can read."

Objection, Your Honor! Asserting facts not in evidence...; 10/31/13, 7:58 PM
RecChief said...: the Republicans should do nothing that would attach them to this steaming bucket of suckitude in any way shape or form.; 10/31/13, 8:31 PM
Jupiter said...: "People can make drastic decisions when they're really, really angry in large numbers. Let's hope it works out."

You mean, that there are enough lampposts?; 10/31/13, 9:11 PM
pm317 said...: Bigwigs from Google, Oracle, Redhat are on loan to fix Obamacare implementation. Can they can fix the substance of the law?; 10/31/13, 9:55 PM
Fred Drinkwater said...: Called my insurance company (a Very Large Company in CA) today, about me moving to another county. (I am an individual buyer of a family plan.) They happily informed me that I would get a premium reduction of about 15% because (I suppose) it's a healthier county. Whatever.
But then, I asked about ACA, and was informed that my new, "comparable" policy, would cost about 2.5 X in premiums, and carry about 2 X in deductibles, and 2 X in co-pays. Great. Twice the cost for half the coverage.
If I accept this, I will be paying substantially more for this so-called insurance than I am paying for my mortgage.
On the bright side, my 50+year-old wife will have maternity insurance, so it's not all bad.
Another bright spot is that I, at least, was not actually surprised to hear this. I knew this would happen the moment I heard the president say "If you like your policy you will be able to keep it."; 10/31/13, 11:57 PM
ilvuszq said...: How do you spell impeach?; 11/1/13, 7:20 AM
Unknown said...: From a certain perspective, fighting crime seriously hurts people: criminals. But criminals usually do not have a political voice. That's an extreme analogy, but it gets to the heart of the point I want to make. It appears that the class of people negatively affected by the ACA will be very small. See this article and the comments of Johathan Gruber, an MIT economist who worked for Mitt Romney: ( http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/10/obamacares-three-per-cent.html )

Even if the % is DOUBLE his estimate (3%), it appears over 90% of the population will pay no more, or very little more for very similar or better coverage. Of course that 3% is mostly affluent, young, and loud. And some people do not care to put things in perspective, I understand, because they are political hacks or afflicted with ODS ...; 11/1/13, 7:22 AM
Tina Trent said...: Unknown -- your number comes from where?

Affluent in this case is being defined as people self-employed and self-insured who earn more than 78k. My home is right there, but once we get done paying all of our SS/medicaid and other taxes, being at the bottom of the top rates, we are deeply screwed and cannot afford a 300% hike in insurace rates.

And contrary to your smug and apparently subjective assessment, the insurace we'll pay triple for is little different from what we buy now.

And then there the fact that the reason why most people aren't being affected the way we are is because their political connections bought them waivers.

Address that, pal.; 11/1/13, 9:06 AM
Fred Drinkwater said...: In response to "Unknowns" remarks, let me add some numbers.
I was paying $850 / month for Anthem Blue Cross 3300 plan (3300 annual deductible for individual, 6600 for family. Nominal co-pays, decent network.) This covered me, my wife (both age 56 and healthy), my college-age son and 24-year old daughter, also both healthy. The move to the adjacent county would have cut that premium to $ 630 / mo.

The advisor at Blue Cross told me the equivalent ACA-compliant "roll-over" plan (which I have not seen the details of yet) would have $5500 ind. / $ 11,200 fam. annual deductibles, $ 1506 / mo. premium, and $ 50 co-pays. I have not yet checked on drug cover, and of course dental is extra.
So each year I could be be out of pocket a minimum of $ 5500 + 12x1506 = $23,572 before serious cover begins.
I don't know about you, but that looks like a big chunk of change to me.; 11/1/13, 9:11 AM
gerry said...: Are those who voted for Obama as morally vacant as he apparently is?; 11/1/13, 9:37 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: Fred Drinkwater

But my dear Drinkwater! Didn't you hear the President? Your cheaper, more generous pre-Obamacare plan was substandard.

That's the new talking point from the Politburo, right? That anything getting cancelled was substandard so you should feel ashamed for liking it in the first place? You kulak wrecker.; 11/1/13, 10:09 AM
Fred Drinkwater said...: Balfegor:
I'm sure that's all true. After all, how could I, a mere physicist / programmer / carpenter / father / husband / handyman / citizen possibly be able to understand the insurance contract I signed?

And of course, I never really *liked* my insurance. I regarded it as a necessary evil, sort of like I regard most of government. (Except Sacramento. That's definitely UNnecessary evil.)So the administration and president and congressional Democrats were not actually *lying* about my being able to keep it.; 11/1/13, 11:42 AM