Althouse: "The federal health care exchange is incorrectly determining that some people are eligible for Medicaid when they clearly are not..."

December 8, 2013

"The federal health care exchange is incorrectly determining that some people are eligible for Medicaid when they clearly are not..."

"... leaving them with little chance to get the subsidized insurance they are entitled to as the Dec. 23 deadline for enrollment approaches."

40 comments:

madAsHell said...: I'm really confused.

The government is tying my health records to my income. I don't want the government to have any access to my health records. What happened to HIPA??; 12/8/13, 10:28 AM
Rae said...: We are the change we believe in.; 12/8/13, 10:29 AM
David said...: My favorite paragraph:

"If the Medicaid determination is wrong, consumers should file an appeal with the federal marketplace, says Department of Health and Human Services spokeswoman Joanne Peters, but she says she does not have an estimate on how long that would take."

Customer service, government style.; 12/8/13, 10:39 AM
Hagar said...: With Federal agencies, a promise to do something someday is just as good as actually doing it now.; 12/8/13, 10:42 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "If the Medicaid determination is wrong, consumers should file an appeal with the federal marketplace, says Department of Health and Human Services spokeswoman Joanne Peters, but she says she does not have an estimate on how long that would take."

So people who thought they'd get the subsidy -- which seemed sort of friendly like a low tax rate in a system of progressive taxation -- find themselves shunted into welfare, which has to feel insulting or at least surprising, and then if they realize they aren't supposed to be there, how do they get to the subsidy they actually deserve?

This is causing so many people to feel so much anguish. I can't imagine how upset I would be trying to get this straightened out or even trying to understand if something is wrong.

And that's with no health problems. What if you had to deal with this while hurting from a physical (or mental) problem and on top of the actual malady, you had to worry about losing the ability to pay for your treatments?

There is so much suffering here. I assume it's a huge snowballing mass of problems that we are only seeing the very beginning of.

I think the Republican message should be: How dare you create such an uncontrollable machinery of suffering? How could you be so arrogant and reckless? And how dare you hide the damage that you knew was coming? What are you still hiding?; 12/8/13, 10:51 AM
PB said...: "We're finding out buying insurance is hard."

I'm sure when you show up at the doctor's office or ER, they're going to be sympathetic, but you're still going to get a bill for charges at he maximum possible rate, and their ruthless debt collectors are going to be coming after you.

The country is in the very best of hands.; 12/8/13, 10:59 AM
pm317 said...: Shunting people to Medicaid works when there is no payment system built in the back-end yet. Give them somewhere to go and worry about it later.

Does this explain all the overwhelming medicaid enrollment in most of the states?; 12/8/13, 10:59 AM
Rusty said...: "If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance."

"We have to pass it to know what's in it."

" You fucked up. You trusted us."; 12/8/13, 11:02 AM
Wince said...: Income too high for Medicaid?

Wait a while.; 12/8/13, 11:04 AM
Wince said...: Income too high for Medicaid?

Wait a while.; 12/8/13, 11:04 AM
Michael K said...: I certainly hope these people voted for Obama.

I till think that by next election, the chaos will drive even Democrats to make Obamacare optional. Then you can go back to your high deductible policy and your health IRA. Let the Obama voters scramble for the crumbs.

Sorry but I have no sympathy for them.; 12/8/13, 11:06 AM
virgil xenophon said...: I think the Republican message should be: How dare you create such an uncontrollable machinery of suffering? How could you be so arrogant and reckless? How dare you hide the damage you knew was coming? What are you still hiding?

This^

For once Althouse is dead on target here. Althouses' above formulation should be the riposte to those Dems, attempting to forestall criticism, demanding of critical Elephants that they come up with a better alternative. Alternatives come LATER. NOW we are dealing with the unfolding disaster at hand and it is MORE than enough to DEMAND of Obamacare's authors a full accounting of the current state-of-play in order to gain a measure of the extent of the damage so as to understand the scope of the problem before offering any proffered solutions..; 12/8/13, 11:13 AM
jr565 said...: The only people who seem to be getting any benefit from this at all are the people enrolling in medicaid. Which was not the point of this and will not drive down healthcare costs or leave to better care.
But now it turns out that a lot of people who think they are getting medicaid arent even getting that.

Medicaid is doomed as more and more doctors will not accept it. The reimbersal rate for doctors who accept medicaid patients is beyond atrocious. meaning, it costs doctors to see medicaid patients.
If govt really cared about the poor they would stop trying to get free services on the back of doctors and reimburse them at a reasonable rate. Stop trying to do medicine on the cheap.; 12/8/13, 11:24 AM
jr565 said...: " think the Republican message should be: How dare you create such an uncontrollable machinery of suffering? How could you be so arrogant and reckless? And how dare you hide the damage that you knew was coming? What are you still hiding?"

And just remember, the employer mandate hasn't kicked in yet.; 12/8/13, 11:25 AM
Oso Negro said...: The anguish will apparently get worse. Evidence is appearing that a lot of doctors in California aren't going to play along. Then there will be the employer mandate kicking in next year. It is times like these when we really suffer from having an ineffectual opposition party.; 12/8/13, 11:28 AM
YoungHegelian said...: In 2014 or 2015, I'm expecting some major lawsuits against some insurance companies, states & the federal government by folks who thought they were insured, showed up in dire straits at a hospital, and found out they had no insurance.

I can't imagine that once the plaintiff's lawyers spell out in gross, gory detail the massive screw ups by the Feds & the State exchanges it won't be hard to find sympathetic judges & juries. It'll cost a fortune & we, the taxpayers, will be coughing up every dime.; 12/8/13, 11:28 AM
Temujin said...: Tar…and feathers.; 12/8/13, 11:35 AM
Temujin said...: Tar…and feathers.; 12/8/13, 11:37 AM
PB said...: How can incompetence and malfeasance on the scale we've seen in this administration not lead to multiple people in jail? Obama would already have impeachment hearings underway if he were not the first black president. The tyranny of low expectations...; 12/8/13, 11:42 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I have an issue with a payroll report we made to a blue state - they misapplied a payment we made and threatened to levy our acct for the $300 error they made. We supplied them with copies of the payments we made two times now yet their system still shows the balance as if we did not pay it. This week I spoke to the employee we have been dealing with and she told me we should call their HQ in the state capital! WTF- it's been six months we have been waiting for them to credit ou acct correctly.

So Joanne Peter's advice to "appeal" to Obama's bureaucracy is ridiculous. No one wants to have to deal with an incompetent replica of the Soviet apparatchik overseen by the utmost of incompetents named Obama.; 12/8/13, 11:43 AM
Rusty said...: But Al. Obama care is gonna work! Everyone will be happy!
Just you wait and see!; 12/8/13, 11:56 AM
gk1 said...: I can't wait to let these govt. retards in charge of "single payer". Yes, there will be clamoring from all across the land to let the govt. take over single payer because something this important can only be handled by an ultra competent bureaucracy. Forward!; 12/8/13, 12:14 PM
Deirdre Mundy said...: I'm not even sure how they can declare that you're eligible for Medicaid based on income alone...

A lot of states have an assets test as WELL as an income test for Medicaid.

So... if you have too much in savings/IRA/home equity/cars, you're not eligible.

Though... Medicaid for all might solve this mess. That way, anyone who showed up at the ER would have 'coverage.' (Of course, in states like IL, Medicaid payments are years behind schedule, but... whatever.)

But if you wanted to see most doctors or to see a specialist in a timely manner, you'd either have to buy secondary insurance or pay cash.

Most people would avoid using the 'free' insurance because of the hassle involved and because they'd like better care. But we'd have 'universal coverage.'; 12/8/13, 12:18 PM
rehajm said...: Don't worry- the president just hasn't done a good enough job explaining how the new system works!

Let the Obama voters scramble for the crumbs.
Sorry but I have no sympathy for them.

It's hard not to agree with this with all the apologists still defending this catastrophe. And we're still in the early innings...; 12/8/13, 12:23 PM
hawkeyedjb said...: "There is so much suffering here. I assume it's a huge snowballing mass of problems that we are only seeing the very beginning of."

If you like your misery, you can keep your misery. Period.; 12/8/13, 12:56 PM
Drago said...: Eggs, breaking, omelettes.

Some assembly required.; 12/8/13, 1:00 PM
Michelle Dulak Thomson said...: Ann,

So people who thought they'd get the subsidy -- which seemed sort of friendly like a low tax rate in a system of progressive taxation -- find themselves shunted into welfare, which has to feel insulting or at least surprising, and then if they realize they aren't supposed to be there, how do they get to the subsidy they actually deserve?

Except that that last isn't true, either; the Federal exchange was designed without subsidies on purpose, to coax states into creating their own exchanges. When this mostly didn't work, the Administration directed the IRS to interpret the law as providing subsidies to the Federal exchange as well as to the extant state ones.

This was initially reported as a scrivener's error, but it wasn't; quotes from the congressional record make this clear.; 12/8/13, 1:02 PM
pm317 said...: There was only one face to face meeting between Sibelius and Obama since the roll out of Obamacare. They are protecting him from us who will ask how much did he know and when did he know. Clusterfuck does not begin to describe it.; 12/8/13, 1:03 PM
pm317 said...: oh not since rollout -- since Obamacare was passed:

"A new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) analysis finds that from July 12, 2010, to Nov. 30, 2013, the president’s public schedule records zero one-on-one meetings between Obama and Sebelius."; 12/8/13, 1:06 PM
Michael K said...: "Though... Medicaid for all might solve this mess. That way, anyone who showed up at the ER would have 'coverage.' (Of course, in states like IL, Medicaid payments are years behind schedule, but... whatever.)

But if you wanted to see most doctors or to see a specialist in a timely manner, you'd either have to buy secondary insurance or pay cash."

I think this will be the end game. Obamacare is really "Medicaid for all," but they haven't admitted it yet.

By the way, moderation delays help me to get done revising the manuscript for my new book. Thanks for the incentive to do something else.

I also thank Huffington Post for allowing me to do other things than read and respond to their left wing readers.; 12/8/13, 1:49 PM
Hagar said...: I think the fun may really begin when they start docking the tax refund checks of all those people who paid no attention to any of this because they did not think it had anything to do with them or they never heard of it in the first place.
And there are a lot of them out there!; 12/8/13, 1:54 PM
Illuninati said...: The sad part is that the Democrats rushed this thing through because they knew that once the details of the bill became public they would not have broad support. They believe that government medicine is a civil rights issue equivalent to the abolition of slavery. Because they have transformed the issue into moral obligation they believe they are empowered to force their ideas on the American people whether they want it or not.; 12/8/13, 2:20 PM
cubanbob said...: Another surprise for the young shoved in to Medicaid is that if they ever make any real money Medicaid has to be paid back.; 12/8/13, 4:24 PM
wildswan said...: The ER will treat everyone who comes and do a good job. So if you can't get a doctor because you are on Medicare/Medicaid or ended up uninsured thanks to Obamacare, go to the ER. Don't die.

Then the hospital sends the bill which Medicare and Medicaid will not pay in full. You will have a big bill. The Democrats are simply ignoring this. Obama never met with Sebelius and that tells us that the Democrats will try to dodge all the problems, not fix them. It is just unbelievable. This is below Third World.; 12/8/13, 4:25 PM
avwh said...: "This is below Third World."

Probably exactly what he meant when he said he would "fundamentally transform America" -- into a Third World country, where there is no rule of law, and if you're a crony, the rules are waived or you're exempted.; 12/8/13, 5:01 PM
Deirdre Mundy said...: Cubanbob-- do you have a citation for the paying back medicaid thing? I can only find references to it for cases of fraud or when people are over 55 and their estate has to pay it back.; 12/8/13, 6:27 PM
Anthony said...: I'm sure the doctors-not-taking-medicaid problem will work itself out. . . .when President Stompy Foot issues an executive order requiring them to do so or lose their licenses.

That'll l'arn 'em.; 12/8/13, 9:02 PM
bbkingfish said...: Weak sauce.; 12/8/13, 11:17 PM
test said...: wildswan said...
Then the hospital sends the bill which Medicare and Medicaid will not pay in full. You will have a big bill.

To accept a Medicaid patient a HC provider must agree to accept only the Medicare fee schedule reimbursement. It is against the law to solicit or accept anything else.

I tried to find discussion of the Obamacare related Medicaid expansion to see if the rules are different but I could not find anything. Since I presume I would if the rules changed I think the old rules still apply.

If true this also means (a) eligibles can enroll retroactively, and (b) the concept of a "subsidy" is misleading since they aren't paying any premium, the government is paying their healthcare providers directly. So the deadlines don't mean as much for the Medicaid group.; 12/9/13, 8:52 AM
Andy Freeman said...: > Eggs, breaking, omelettes.

While someone must break eggs to make omlettes, there's a lot more to making an omelet than breaking eggs.

More to the point, these folks are only interested in breaking eggs. They're not trying to make omelets.; 12/9/13, 10:47 AM