Tired horses or no horses is sure a funny way of putting it when the facts show that not only are there no horses to do anything this system as it has been created (Obamacare) ends up pulling the horses along with everything else.

Lets not forget that this system was designed by the very system it was suppose to regulate and it represents a huge boon for insurance companies as well as more levels for the government to be directly involved in your life by way of law.

I guess the reason I chose this analogy was because of the expectation that your health care system would have evolved over time to something that is equitable, or something that is a reasonable approximation.It would also seem to me that the drastic measures being implemented at the moment are a direct result of inequality

edit.

My insurance premiums went down $23.92 for the year (about a buck a pay check).

My main OTC supplements are covered 100% instead of 0%, saving me around $60/month.

I now have the option to get rid of deductibles in exchange for 0% coverage out of network.

Seems Obamacare isn't hurting everyone. I find it funny that I just so happen to work for a rather liberal tech company whose CEO supported Barack.

Those of you getting hurt by your employer... Which way did your CEO/whatever vote in 2008?

removed comment

My insurance premiums went down $23.92 for the year (about a buck a pay check).

My main OTC supplements are covered 100% instead of 0%, saving me around $60/month.

I now have the option to get rid of deductibles in exchange for 0% coverage out of network.

Seems Obamacare isn't hurting everyone. I find it funny that I just so happen to work for a rather liberal tech company whose CEO supported Barack.

Those of you getting hurt by your employer... Which way did your CEO/whatever vote in 2008?

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth. So far from the truth.

Mine is changing, I have no details on the changes but my bet is it's not going to be good.

No, it's not going to be good. If yours is anything like mine your deductibles will increase, your premiums will increase and your coverage will decrease.

Hello J:

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth. So far from the truth.So, you don't think ANYBODY is saving money on the exchanges????

Well, of course they are. You shouldn't BELIEVE everything you hear from Hannity (http://www.salon.com/2013/10/18/inside_the_fox_news_lie_machine_i_fact_checked_sea n_hannity_on_obamacare/)...
As Hannity called on each of them, the guests recounted their “Obamacare” horror stories: canceled policies, premium hikes, restrictions on the freedom to see a doctor of their choice, financial burdens upon their small businesses and so on.

“These are the stories that the media refuses to cover,” Hannity interjected.

But none of it smelled right to me. Nothing these folks were saying jibed with the basic facts of the Affordable Care Act as I understand them. I understand them fairly well; I have worked as a senior adviser to a governor and helped him deal with the new federal rules.

I decided to hit the pavement. I tracked down Hannity’s guests, one by one, and did my own telephone interviews with them.

First I spoke with Paul Cox of Leicester, N.C. He and his wife Michelle had lamented to Hannity that because of Obamacare, they can’t grow their construction business and they have kept their employees below a certain number of hours, so that they are part-timers.

Obamacare has no effect on businesses with 49 employees or less. But in our brief conversation on the phone, Paul revealed that he has only four employees. Why the cutback on his workforce? “Well,” he said, “I haven’t been forced to do so, it’s just that I’ve chosen to do so. I have to deal with increased costs.” What costs? And how, I asked him, is any of it due to Obamacare? There was a long pause, after which he said he’d call me back. He never did.

There is only one Obamacare requirement that applies to a company of this size: workers must be notified of the existence of the “healthcare.gov” website, the insurance exchange. That’s all.

Next I called Allison Denijs. She’d told Hannity that she pays over $13,000 a year in premiums. Like the other guests, she said she had recently gotten a letter from Blue Cross saying that her policy was being terminated and a new, ACA-compliant policy would take its place. She says this shows that Obama lied when he promised Americans that we could keep our existing policies.

Allison’s husband left his job a few years ago, one with benefits at a big company, to start his own business. Since then they’ve been buying insurance on the open market, and are now paying around $1,100 a month for a policy with a $2,500 deductible per family member, with hefty annual premium hikes. One of their two children is not covered under the policy. She has a preexisting condition that would require purchasing additional coverage for $600 a month, which would bring the family’s grand total to around $20,000 a year.

I asked Allison if she’d shopped on the exchange, to see what a plan might cost under the new law. She said she hadn’t done so because she’d heard the website was not working. Would she try it out when it’s up and running? Perhaps, she said. She told me she has long opposed Obamacare, and that the president should have focused on tort reform as a solution to bringing down the price of healthcare.

I tried an experiment and shopped on the exchange for Allison and Kurt. Assuming they don’t smoke and have a household income too high to be eligible for subsidies, I found that they would be able to get a plan for around $7,600, which would include coverage for their uninsured daughter. This would be about a 60 percent reduction from what they would have to pay on the pre-Obamacare market.

excon

My insurance premiums went down $23.92 for the year (about a buck a pay check).

My main OTC supplements are covered 100% instead of 0%, saving me around $60/month.

I now have the option to get rid of deductibles in exchange for 0% coverage out of network.

Seems Obamacare isn't hurting everyone. I find it funny that I just so happen to work for a rather liberal tech company whose CEO supported Barack.

Those of you getting hurt by your employer... Which way did your CEO/whatever vote in 2008?

so in other words you work for a company that isn't affected because the employer mandate doesn't kick in this year .

No, it's not going to be good. If yours is anything like mine your deductibles will increase, your premiums will increase and your coverage will decrease.

But, but, it will be more "comprehensive." I'll get free contraceptives.

Exy, I'm sorry, but I don't read your rhetoric. I believe in what I see firsthand. Your quotes and links don't do it for me. I live the life, I don't read the news. I don't have to. I live it. I see it. I experience it.

I've given you some first hand knowledge, you can only give me what you see in the news. If you give me some first hand knowledge maybe you could change my mind.

The regime is getting ready to lie to us again (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/11/who-counts-as-an-obamacare-enrollee-the-obama-administration-settles-on-a-definition/), does anyone see a pattern here yet?


When the Obama administration releases health law enrollment figures later this week, though, it will use a more expansive definition. It will count people who have purchased a plan as well as those who have a plan sitting in their online shopping cart but have not yet paid.

I have a couple of things in my Amazon shopping cart. Do they count that as a sale?

It's a potential sale. And you know as well as I do that what's in your cart may get you discounts and free shipping as an inducement to buy. And that's a lousy analogy.

Here's mine. 30 days after a government shutdown that failed to repeal, or delay it, you have shifted the hollering to the rollout that's barely a month old. You holler about the rain that's coming instead helping get the clothes off the line. I tell you the same thing my mom would have told me, "Shut the hell up, and get them clothes inside before it rains".

If you spent as much time and energy helping and fixing as you do hollering, repealing, and delaying and spreading gloom, and doom until the next election, we could have gotten a comprehensive jobs bill, instead of 43 repeal votes and a shutdown. No good paying jobs is still the underlying problem to most of our issues as a nation.

Wow, there is no deception too blatant, no scandal too obvious, no disaster too disastrous for you to take on the regime. Admit it Tal, that's bullsh*t. A "potential sale" is not an enrollee, period. I guarantee they don't count "potential" humans as people but they should because the baby is in the cart.

Educate poor females as rich ones, and we take the baby out of the cart. Just seeing a doctor twice a year does that too. Too bad we need insurance to accomplish that goal.

That was a total dodge.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BY4DQ05IcAAZoEW.jpg

I got a notice alerting me that on January 1st, 2014 my dental benefits will go down 20%...not 'go down' as in cost to me, but 'go down' as in I will have less dental benefits available to me and my dependents...not a good thing..

Exactly.

The emperor doesn't have to run again. But all the Dems are beginning to panic. I think within the week there will be enough support for one of the Repubic 'keep your insurance acts '.
Dianne Feinstein joins push to keep health plans - Seung Min Kim - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/dianne-feinstein-joins-push-to-keep-health-plans-99758.html)

More Than 1M Californians Notified Health Insurance Will Be Cancelled « CBS Sacramento (http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/11/12/calif-insurance-commissioner-more-than-1m-californians-having-insurance-cancelled-due-to-obamacare/)

That doesn't make sense, why would Dems panic when everyone is getting much better insurance for a lot more money?

Boggles my mind that insurance companies would even offer the plans that they knew they would have to cancel in the first place. But a few red state dems is hardly a panic by the whole party.

Feinstein is a blue state Dem?

Boggles my mind that insurance companies would even offer the plans that they knew they would have to cancel in the first place. But a few red state dems is hardly a panic by the whole party.

Boggles my mind that you endorse the regime selling a lie.

4 out of 51? Yeah that's a huge consensus and to be fair may grow, but a fix may be in the works for those by my estimate will be about 4 million who may end up adversely affected and many of those already have had their policies extended and that extension could well go further voluntarily by the companies themselves.

So for some the changes in the new law will be delayed, just not to the extent republican will ever be happy with. But aren't you guys glad that its moving to be fixed? Naw, you still want to throw 30 million under the bus.

If perhaps you went about it in a way that would have helped the uninsured without hosing the rest of us and with a little bipartisan effort we wouldn't be so pi$$ed, but what you gave us is an unmitigated disaster based on lies.


Small Business and ObamaCare (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303460004579192102917020082)
A new survey shows that employers will drop coverage and cut hours.

Nov. 12, 2013 7:04 p.m. ET
One of President Obama's proudest boasts about the Affordable Care Act is that it helps small business. The White House website says the health law "makes it easier for businesses to find better coverage options" and "stops insurance companies from taking advantage of you, giving the consumer and business owner more control and making health-care coverage more affordable." Small businesses aren't buying it.

That's the finding of a Public Opinion Strategies survey of more than 400 business owners with between 40 and 500 employees conducted in September and October for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and International Franchise Association. Some 64% of small business franchise owners (such as owners of fast food and retail stores) believe the law will have a "negative impact" on their business, while only 5% expect a "positive impact." For non-franchise businesses the ratio was 53% negative and 12% positive. Only one in 12 agree with the President that the health-care law will "help" their business.

Even more problematic is how businesses are already responding to the new law. The White House continues to deny any relationship between hiring and ObamaCare. The poll finds 27% of franchise businesses and 12% of non-franchises have already replaced full-time with part-time employees in anticipation of the law's employer mandate. ObamaCare defines a full-time employee as someone who works 30 hours or more a week.

The survey also reveals that the "49er" effect is very real. These are businesses that will cap their full-time payroll workforce at 49 employees to avoid ObamaCare's insurance mandate for companies with more than 50 full-time equivalent workers. Of firms with between 40 and 70 employees, a little over half say they are likely to "make personnel decisions to keep" their "workforce below the threshold of 50 full-time employees and avoid the requirements and penalties associated with the new health care law."

More than one in four businesses (28%) say that in 2015, when the employer mandate is scheduled to take full effect, it is "likely" they will drop their insurance coverage and pay the penalty of $2,000 a year per employee. These are the plans employers and employees were promised they would be able to keep.

Opinion surveys are often unreliable predictors of how people will act in the future, but these findings do at least expose the widespread anxiety that businesses are feeling about ObamaCare's new costs. If the economy and business conditions improve and customer demand rises, employers may swallow these costs to expand their operations. But in an economy with nearly 20 million Americans out of work, discouraged from even looking for work or forced into part-time jobs, ObamaCare is making the search for employment all the more challenging.

One fix that might mitigate some of these negative employment effects would be to pass a law proposed by Senators Joe Donnelly (D., Ind.) and Susan Collins (R., Maine) to change ObamaCare's definition of a full-time job to 40 from 30 hours a week. Better still would be for Congress to repeal the law and pass a business and worker-friendly health-care reform.

Opinion surveys are often unreliable predictors of how people will act in the future, but these findings do at least expose the widespread anxiety that businesses are feeling about ObamaCare's new costs. If the economy and business conditions improve and customer demand rises, employers may swallow these costs to expand their operations. But in an economy with nearly 20 million Americans out of work, discouraged from even looking for work or forced into part-time jobs, ObamaCare is making the search for employment all the more challenging.

Business decisions based on feelings and not data are often severely flawed and as pointed out in your article, business is already skittish with the economy as it is. I don't believe downgrading the workers hours is the answer, and an upgrade would be better, and what's more telling is still the talk of repeal and never talk of upgrading to universal heath care for everyone no matter age or income, and would make all this hollering and fixing unnecessary.

Funny how you guys take that option off the table and fall back on repeal, with no reforms. I am just glad some are finally proposing ideas to fix the glitches that comes up. When you do repeal it, how do you tell your mom or other elders they have to go back to the donut hole?

Or 15 million people who are the working poor and cannot get coverage in their state, Texas being one example where one of every four people cannot get care even with the cut rate clinics you so proudly say is enough. Obviously they are NOT adequate enough, and neither is the efforts of charities which more and more have become for profit corporations.

How you ignore those things is beyond me but not unexpected. And I hear the TParty wants to give the Atlanta Braves 450 million bucks for a new stadium that's smaller than the one they have already and is less than a decade old. Right wingers holler broke only when it suits them. Go ahead keep hollering for the needs of the few while you deny and lie about the needs of the many.

Well that was totally predictable. Talk about ignoring the obvious...

and what's more telling is still the talk of repeal and never talk of upgrading to universal heath care for everyone
Yup I'll never talk about universal health care because that 's just a dog whistle for socialized ,top down ,state controlled ,and managed ,takeover of the health care industry .

I'm for universal wealth care. Make it happen, Tal.

Slowdown will ya! I am still trying to poke the rich guys in the a$$ with a sharp stick, and start circulating that money they STOLE back into the economy. Its not easy because you guys keep getting in the way. Its really hard to tell their a$$ from yours, the hollering sounds the same.

I know, it's hard to figure out to get enough of other people's money to make us all equally healthy and wealthy.

I know, it's hard to figure out to get enough of other people's money to make us all equally healthy and wealthy.
If you were poor and not healthy, what would your resources be? What would you do?

If you were poor and not healthy, what would your resources be? What would you do?

I fail to see the relevance to my post. In spite of the constant rhetoric it's well documented that I am all in favor of a safety net for those in need. The question is how does one reach this alleged goal of "equality?" There is nothing fair in hurting one person to help another and I think you'd be hard pressed to find me some examples of such experiments that haven't hurt the people while enriching the elite and creating shortages and chaos.

How's that working out in Sean Penn's hero's state?

As Venezuelans Rush To Appliance Stores, Maduro Urges Calm | Fox News Latino (http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/11/12/as-venezuelans-rush-to-appliance-stores-maduro-urges-calm/)

Its not other peoples money its OUR money pooled to help US all. That's what I hate about Ted Cruz, he enjoys his cadillac insurance from his wife, and tells poor people, working people, old people they don't deserve it, and tries to destroy any plan that helps them.

Its not other peoples money its OUR money pooled to help US all. That's what I hate about Ted Cruz, he enjoys his cadillac insurance from his wife, and tells poor people, working people, old people they don't deserve it, and tries to destroy any plan that helps them.

I would expect that response from you. Your side thinks our children don't belong to us, it's no surprise you don't think our money belongs to us - but we've known that for a long time. Sorry dude, I support paying a reasonable tax but stop EXPECTING us to be happy when you take more of our money or FORCE us to spend what's left how YOU choose.

FYI, another Democrat has experienced the reality of the crap sandwich Obama gave her (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/medias-obamacare-supporters-vent-about-their-cancelled-health-plans/). Kirsten Powers is not happy...


My blood pressure goes up every time they say that they’re protecting us from substandard health insurance plans,” Powers told Bret Baier. “There is nothing to support what they’re saying.”

“I have talked to about how I’m losing my health insurance,” she continued. “If I want to keep the same health insurance, it’s going to cost twice as much. There’s nothing substandard about my plan.”

“All of the things they say that are not in my plan are in my plan,” Powers lamented. “All of the things they have listed — there’s no explanation for doubling my premiums other than the fact that it’s subsidizing other people. They need to be honest about that.”

Don't hold your breath over the emperor being honest about anything, Kirsten. Which reminds me, what were the official numbers enrolled today? Any demographics on that? How many were just in the shopping cart?

I would expect that response from you. Your side thinks our children don't belong to us, it's no surprise you don't think our money belongs to us - but we've known that for a long time. Sorry dude, I support paying a reasonable tax but stop EXPECTING us to be happy when you take more of our money or FORCE us to spend what's left how YOU choose.

Does that include the 900,000 vets on food stamps? Well some of them will lose that access.

170,000 Veterans May Lose Access To Food Stamps | Food Rant | Food | KCET (http://www.kcet.org/living/food/food-rant/170000-veterans-may-lose-access-to-food-stamps.html)


The reasons that vets utilize SNAP is multi-dimensional and, sadly, somewhat predictable:

Veterans returning home from service have more trouble finding work than other folks, and rely more heavily on the food stamp program. The unemployment rate for recent veterans--those who have served in the past decade--is about 10 percent, almost 3 points above the national unemployment rate. War-related disabilities are one reason why. About a quarter of recent veterans reported service-related disabilities in 2011. Households that have a disabled veteran who is unable to work are twice as likely to lack access to sufficient food than households without a disabled service member.

Nearly 1 Million Vets Face Food Stamps Cut | Military.com (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/10/29/nearly-1-million-vets-face-food-stamps-cut.html)


About 900,000 veterans and 5,000 active duty troops face cuts in their food stamp benefits beginning Thursday as $5 billion is automatically trimmed from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program for low-income families.

"The coming benefit cut will reduce SNAP benefits, which are already modest, for all households by 7 percent on average, or about $10 per person per month," according to an analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.......The SNAP program received a boost under the 2009 Recovery Act, or stimulus bill aimed at lifting the nation out of recession, but that temporary increase will expire Thursday as Congress continues to debate a new farm bill which would separate farm subsidies from food stamp benefits.

Non action is not a good option.

Does that include the 900,000 vets on food stamps? Well some of them will lose that access.

170,000 Veterans May Lose Access To Food Stamps | Food Rant | Food | KCET (http://www.kcet.org/living/food/food-rant/170000-veterans-may-lose-access-to-food-stamps.html)

Nearly 1 Million Vets Face Food Stamps Cut | Military.com (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/10/29/nearly-1-million-vets-face-food-stamps-cut.html)

Non action is not a good option.

The problem with stimulus is it becomes an entitlement and cannot be withdrawn without hardship

yup it becomes new base line ....in this case we are now in the 53rd month of the worse recovery since the Great Depression. Now we are told that this week's whopping "higher-than-expected" 2.8% real GDP gain is a result of this massive stimulus spending .But the driver any GDP increase is the energy sector's fracking development on private lands .
Meanwhile this almost non-recovery recovery was purchased with the national debt jumping from $10 to $17 trillion dollars in the time since the emperor took office.

yup it becomes new base line ....in this case we are now in the 53rd month of the worse recovery since the Great Depression. Now we are told that this week's whopping "higher-than-expected" 2.8% real GDP gain is a result of this massive stimulus spending .But the driver any GDP increase is the energy sector's fracking development on private lands .
Meanwhile this almost non-recovery recovery was purchased with the national debt jumping from $10 to $17 trillion dollars in the time since the emperor took office.

Yes one day soon you will have to pay the piper, economics suggests that should be by a massive devaluation of your currency, but even if that happens it won't help your industries because they are already offshore and those businesses who thought to profit from Chinese cheap labour will feel the greatest pinch, so goodbye big executive salaries for doing nothing

I fail to see the relevance to my post. In spite of the constant rhetoric it's well documented that I am all in favor of a safety net for those in need. The question is how does one reach this alleged goal of "equality?" There is nothing fair in hurting one person to help another and I think you'd be hard pressed to find me some examples of such experiments that haven't hurt the people while enriching the elite and creating shortages and chaos.


Depends on the type of equity you are trying to promote. Regardless of the system you had and regardless of the system you will end up with in the future you probably will still have a system whereby a person's economic circumstances determines the level of health care they receive. This is actually a recipe for inequality. You end up hurting the poor into order to favour the wealthy.

The type of equity that should be promoted is the brand that attempt to afford all people( regardless of economic circumstances) the same access to medical care.

So if a wealthy person finds the need to visit a doctor once a week for a year, the same medical opportunity is afford to the person who has little money. It is this attempt at equity that diminishes inequality in medical terms. So less people suffer because the pain in shared around.


I don't think the example you posted is relevant. For some reason there seems to be an inability to understand that equity of health is not necessarily the same as economic equity

Tutt you know that is not attainable .It's utopian delusions of what's possible . Even in your system there is a so called "universal " basic care and then a 2nd coverage system for those with the means to buy in.

Tutt you know that is not attainable .It's utopian delusions of what's possible . Even in your system there is a so called "universal " basic care and then a 2nd coverage system for those with the means to buy in.

Yes, I think everyone knows that. This is why I used the words, "attempt at" and "promoted" So yes, it is an attempt at something that will never be actually realized. In terms of medical access this is not argument against the attempt.

Tutt you know that is not attainable .It's utopian delusions of what's possible . Even in your system there is a so called "universal " basic care and then a 2nd coverage system for those with the means to buy in.

Tom I would like to answer your supposition, the basic difference between our systems is the provision of basic care, this is not dependent upon circumstance, it is a right, a benefit of being a citizen. It is provided for by a levy on those who don't have health insurance, it wasn't always so, but outside ideas have permetated our nation. The second tier provides access to care in private hospitals. What this gives you is quicker access for elective procedures, not to life saving procedures.

I was in hospital a short time ago, all my extra cover would have provided in that instance is a free television, every thing else was covered.

What I would say to you is our utopian delusions have been realised and what stops you from doing the same is an ideological trap. Now I know we have had forty years experience in implementation you don't have, and we had the same misgivings in the beginning and it was not without the rebellion of the medical profession but in the end it has worked out for the benefit of everyone

I can tell you there is a co-payment in some instances but this is the perogative of the doctor, not the system and those who can't afford it don't use those doctors

and what is mandated as essential basic care ? Because here the emperor is dicatating that everything except the kitchen sink get covered.

And the elite will still get richer, more powerful and all the care they want.

In terms of medical access this is not argument against the attempt. Unless it destroys a system that worked well and served most of the nation more than sufficiently .

and what is mandated as essential basic care ? Because here the emperor is dicatating that everything except the kitchen sink get covered.

well Tom the way it works is you go to the GP, a large number of whom are in the system, if he thinks you need something extra he refers you, basic pathology is covered and what the specialist charges is up to him, but a basic benefit is paid. if you need a hospital procedure and you have health cover you go to a private hospital otherwise you wait for a public hospital bed to be available, that is in the case of elective procedures. There is a pharameutical benefits scheme which covers at least part of the cost and there is an annual threshold above which you pay nothing. Health insurance covers stuff like chiropractic, extra dental, drugs not in the scheme, private hospitals, ambulance. Basically public hospitals are free. we don't have state taxes so the federal goverment finances the state systems, at least in part. It works off an ID card, no card you pay.

Costs are covered by a levy on income, unless you have insurance so once you have a reasonable income level it is stupid not to have insurance. If you are on welfare, etc you don't have to pay anything. Lots of people don't have enough income to have insurance, basically a family would need an income of $50,000 before they could afford insurance (ie, the insurance becomes cheaper than the levy)

Now I know I have made it look simple but it is all backed up by good software which links it all together and soon they will be implementing a national medical records scheme so the doctors are connected everywhere

so there are many fewer defined and mandated benefits . Thought so .

If I understand Clete, they use financial incentives in place of mandates.


basically a family would need an income of $50,000 before they could afford insurance (ie, the insurance becomes cheaper than the levy)

Single payer is like prevailing wages, when we get it, you'll take it. And as the numbers grow on the enrollment, you will take that too. Personally, a couple of dems up for re election hollering like repubs, don't impress me.

Single payer is like prevailing wages, when we get it, you'll take it. And as the numbers grow on the enrollment, you will take that too. Personally, a couple of dems up for re election hollering like repubs, don't impress me.

it ought to when it comes from a leading Democrat Senator from the bluest state in the nation.

Single payer is like prevailing wages, when we get it, you'll take it. And as the numbers grow on the enrollment, you will take that too. Personally, a couple of dems up for re election hollering like repubs, don't impress me.

Tal, this is what irritates me the most about you libs, your arrogance in thinking you know what's best for us and what we want. Mind your own business, it's what you holler about with us when it comes to abortion, you want your paws in every area of our lives BUT that. Leave us alone.

it's what you holler about with us when it comes to abortion, you want your paws in every area of our lives BUT that. Leave us alone.
And the trans-vaginal ultrasound probe isn't someone's paw in MY (or my women friends') personal space? The closed women's health clinic "because it occasionally did an abortion" doesn't affect me (or my women friends)?

Hello again, Steve:

Tal, this is what irritates me the most about you libs, your arrogance in thinking you know what's best for us and what we want. Let's review, shall we?

Yes, when the Democrats have an IDEA, they write a bill, that if passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president, becomes LAW. That's how it WORKS here in the good ole US of A.
you want your paws in every area of our lives BUT that. Leave us alone.

Certainly WE don't want the restrictions on abortion that you right wingers are doing. Do you care??? LEAVE THOSE WOMEN ALONE!!!

excon

Thank you both for validating my point.

More whiners unhappy with losing the cheaper junk insurance they had, the City of Bel Aire, KS.


City Workers of Bel Aire, Kansas, Losing Health Care They Like (http://pompeo.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361251)

Today, Congressman Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, released communications he received from Ty Lasher, the city manager of Bel Aire, Kansas, describing the terrible impact of the Affordable Care Act on city workers. Contrary to President Obama’s promise that “if you like your health-care plan, you can keep it,” the city manager of Bel Aire, Kansas, revealed that city's 30+ employees have just received notice that because of the Affordable Care Act, their current insurance will no longer be available. The text of the email is below:

“Bel Aire is a small city of approximately 7,000 residents. We have about 30 full-time employees and a number of part-time staff that are all very attached and dedicated to our organization. We just received notice that the health-insurance coverage employees receive through Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) is no longer available. Everyone liked that plan which had very good benefits.

“Now, BCBS offers other plans that we can choose from based on the government’s standards. All offer higher deductibles and the two closest to our old plan each cost more than what we were paying. In addition, because we are under 50 employees, we no longer get a ‘group’ rate so everyone is being judged as a single.

“We have some long-term employees who are older and seeing their rates double. We are also seeing families paying more based on the number of children they have. We had a couple of employees who worked 20 hours a week and the city still allowed them on our health coverage plan.

“Now, BCBS said they will not cover anyone unless they work more than 30 hours per week. Therefore, those part-time employees will now lose their health coverage. To top it off, we were told if more than 25% of our ineligible employees choose to go elsewhere for their insurance, they will drop us, and all of our employees will have to go to the insurance exchange.

“As you are probably aware, governments typically pay a lower wage in exchange for better benefits. Now, our health insurance benefits are being eroded which may lead to a larger turnover in employees.”

Lasher continued: “I simply wanted you to know the pain this is causing me and my staff in losing the terrific health coverage we had through Blue Cross Blue Shield in exchange for worse coverage at a higher price. As you know, it is difficult to present dedicated employees with declining health coverage with a higher premium.”

Congressman Pompeo, who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee which oversees the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, has been an outspoken critic of the law and its execution. During a recent hearing, he clashed with former Kansas Governor and current HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius over the claim that some insurance that people had and liked was not “true insurance.”

The emperor just again unilaterally changed the law. Aren't you glad the constitution gives the Presidency such power ?
Now we can keep those 'substandard plans ' for a year . Of course now millions of cancellation notices have already been sent out . So now it's up to the insurance companies to reinstitute policies that the emperor forced them to discontinue ,so they can discontinue them again in a year . And they have a month to get this done.

He gave you what you have been screaming about, Still you scream.

You holler about the sky falling, and you holler about it not falling. If there were no sky to holler about, you would holler anyway.

A one year reprieve is not what I was "screaming " for . That's a joke ,a blame shift ,and a cya for his cronies in Congress who are screaming about their electoral prospects
(and not their constitutents prospects ) .

line of the speech ..... there is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate ... that's poli-speak for 'I lied ' .

My expectation was that for 98% of the American people, either it wouldn't change at all or they'd be pleasantly surprised. That's another the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate (lie) . Still that means he knowingly swindled 2% of the people (over 6 million) . Bernie Madoff step aside . There's a new champ in town.

Hello again, tom:

There's a new champ in town.DOWN goes Obama, but he springs up and lands a crushing blow to the temple. There's hope yet for Obamacare.

Don't measure the drapes yet, Mrs. Cruz.

excon

Hello again, tom:
DOWN goes Obama, but he springs up and lands a crushing blow to the temple. There's hope yet for Obamacare.

Don't measure the drapes yet, Mrs. Cruz.

excon

Until people figure out it doesn't work. You know, you've still pi$$ed off the rest of us with insurance we liked that had to be changed, got more expensive, gave us fewer choices in providers. Businesses have been switching plans already because they had to, it's not going to revert to last year's plan and you're still going to see the sick folks sign up while the healthy guys you need aren't going to. Nice going, champ..

I keep on finding gems .... I get how upsetting this could be especially after hearing assurances from me

I keep on finding gems .... I get how upsetting this could be especially after hearing assurances from me

The Obama-ized version of "I feel your pain."

Until people figure out it doesn't work. You know, you've still pi$$ed off the rest of us with insurance we liked that had to be changed, got more expensive, gave us fewer choices in providers. Businesses have been switching plans already because they had to, it's not going to revert to last year's plan and you're still going to see the sick folks sign up while the healthy guys you need aren't going to. Nice going, champ..


Changing the rules after health plans have already met the requirements of the law could destabilize the market and result in higher premiums for consumers. Premiums have already been set for next year based on an assumption of when consumers will be transitioning to the new marketplace. If due to these changes fewer younger and healthier people choose to purchase coverage in the exchange, premiums will increase in the marketplace and there will be fewer choices for consumers. Additional steps must be taken to stabilize the marketplace and mitigate the adverse impact on consumers - AHIP Statement on Consumers Keeping Their Current Coverage | AHIP Coverage (http://www.ahipcoverage.com/2013/11/14/ahip-statement-on-consumers-keeping-their-current-coverage/#sthash.EX3iw3xY.N7mVxWnv.dpuf)

AHIP Statement on Consumers Keeping Their Current Coverage | AHIP Coverage (http://www.ahipcoverage.com/2013/11/14/ahip-statement-on-consumers-keeping-their-current-coverage/#sthash.EX3iw3xY.N7mVxWnv.dpuf)

Yes sir, he's undermining his own plan.

And then there's this, The Liar is still considering giving unions preferred treatment (http://freebeacon.com/senators-urge-administration-to-hold-off-on-union-exemption/). I won't hold my breath waiting for any of The Liar's supporters to scream about the inequality in that.


Republican senators sent a letter on Wednesday urging the administration not to go ahead with a regulation that would exempt unions from an Obamacare fee that applies to employers, charities, and faith-based organizations.

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published a regulation that exempts union health plans from the reinsurance fee that comes along with Obamacare on Oct. 30.

Senior members of committees with key oversight roles concerning the health care system, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R. Tenn.), Sen. Orin Hatch (R., Utah), and Sen. John Thune (R. S.D.), along with eighteen other Republican senators wrote that the regulation makes no justification for why union members should receive special treatment.


“The [reinsurance] fee is undeniably expensive for unions, employers, charities and faith-based organizations whose health plans are not available in the new health insurance exchanges and will not see any of those dollars returned to them. For the year 2014, the fee is $63 per covered life—a multi-million dollar levy for larger organizations. […]

The regulation makes no justification as to why union members should be exempted from this fee while other similarly situated organizations (and, ultimately, their beneficiaries) must continue to pay it.

It has been widely reported that labor unions recently sought an exemption from the reinsurance fee through Congress but were rightly rebuffed. To think that the Obama Administration would consider such an action that benefits one group over another can only be characterized as cronyism at its worst.”

To think that the Obama Administration would consider such an action that benefits one group over another can only be characterized as cronyism at its worst.”
so much for that equity canard.

so much for that equity canard.

Strange isn't it? Less, strange is the fact that both sides do it. That is to say, politicians working to promote the interests of one group in society over another.

Equity will stop being a canard when a way is found to break that particular mindset. The mindset that says that, equity in economic terms is the same as all other types of equity.

Not strange at all, the left here has no shame in arguing for equity on one hand while carving out favors for their own special interests.

Hello J:

If I had my druthers, the insurance companies would NOT have been left in the loop to do these very things.

I've been prescribed a cream for rash. A month or so ago, my co-pay was about $6. A few weeks ago, my co-pay was $23. Last time I bought it, my co-pay was $46.

I'd LIKE to blame somebody, too. How about Ted Cruz?

excon

And just what does Ted Cruz have to do with it?

He's just scaremongering.

ex's state says no dice to The Liar's "fix."

State rebuts Obama plan to allow old health insurance policies (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/State-rebuts-Obama-plan-to-allow-old-health-insurance-policies-231949931.html)

But doesn't that blow your whole argument out of the water? Those poor people who like what they had, but can and will do better. Your noise and lies have been exposed. Even your noise about the website is bogus, since in blue states you can access their exchange very easily. Same in some red states but we can't tell that lie can we.

But doesn't that blow your whole argument out of the water? Those poor people who like what they had, but can and will do better. Your noise and lies have been exposed. Even your noise about the website is bogus, since in blue states you can access their exchange very easily. Same in some red states but we can't tell that lie can we.

You're very good at spinning whatever the situation, exactly what argument is blown out of the water?

But doesn't that blow your whole argument out of the water? Those poor people who like what they had, but can and will do better. Your noise and lies have been exposed. Even your noise about the website is bogus, since in blue states you can access their exchange very easily. Same in some red states but we can't tell that lie can we.

and yet very few have signed up ....and the ones that do are the Medicaid eligible....not the young invincibles who's participation is counted on to keep the whole flawed system afloat .

I'm wondering where the constitutional authority comes from that the emperor thinks he can change laws at will and force private businesses to comply to his decrees .

Tom,
Are conditions screwed up badly enough yet for Obama to implement Single Payer by fiat, as planned?
Just another day for CMS to add several million names to their list?

it's getting there . Create a crisis and exploit it seems to be his m.o.

Who said "never let a serious crisis go to waste?"

I'd also remind Congress that they are on shaky constitutional grounds making legislation that forces insurance companies to sell discontinued policies to their customers(especially the Landrieu bill). Through mandate they forced the insurance companies to discontinue them ;and now are demanding that they reinstate them . Insurance companies have planned, invested in, and launched major expensive changes to comply with Obamacare. Now they're going to be compelled to spin on a dime to protect Democrat @sses,without regard to private property rights, those of individuals and insurance companies. I think this smacks of violating the 5th amendment taking clause.
I think the only 'fix' to Obamacare is repeal .

Hello again, tom:

I think the only 'fix' to Obamacare is repeal .You won't mind, will you, if I point out that you really don't want to "fix" Obamacare?? Who do you think you're fooling?? ANY suggesting coming from your side with the word "fix" in it will be IMMEDIATELY discarded, and severely derided..

excon

A repeal is IMHO a "fix " to a bad law.

NY Slimes Andrew Rosenthal ; still trying to run cover for the emperor says he had a choice to be considered a liar or a fool.........and he chose fool. But wait .....it's still not his fault ......


I have seen no proof that Mr. Obama knew the details of the grandfather clause when he made his famous promise. But there had to be many, many people in his administration who did know the details. They could have, and should have, told the president that what he was saying was flat wrong – that the grandfather clause would not deliver on his broadly drawn promise.
In order to be covered, you had to have a policy that you bought before the law was signed in 2010 and was still in effect without significant changes at the end of 2013 — no major change in premiums, co-pays or coverage. How likely is that in the volatile world of individual health insurance, where policies last for a year and are subject to change at the whim of insurance companies?

On one level, it should surprise no one that a politician faced with either seeming like a liar or seeming like a fool would choose the fool. But that still leaves us with the disturbing impression — and not for the first time in this administration — that Mr. Obama sometimes shoots from the hip, that he is still struggling to handle the politics of the presidency after nearly five years in office, and that he is surrounded by people who are too incompetent or too weak to help him.
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/obamas-health-care-promise/?_r=0

Your opinion hasn't changed since the debate began years ago. Nor have the actions you have taken to repeal after the obstruct thing FAILED. Now we are seeing commissioners telling insurance companies OBEY the law. To hell with those blue dogs up for re election. Congress can move fast when it wants too can't they, but when they don't want too, its might not happen. I mean just look at what they can pass in one day, and look at what they can't pass in a year or two/three.

The fix is special personal care/counseling for affected policy holders. You can do that by phone, with a pen, and paper. Obama bought some time with his suggestion because we all know how slow congress can be. They will talk for 18 days and go home. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year. The turkeys will boycott Thanksgiving, but congress gets stuffed with dressing.

yup my opinion has not changed ,it's a bad and unconstitutional law (to hell with what John Roberts says ...... Congress did NOT add the "tax" language into the law's fine provisions .That he divined out of whole cloth .) The emperor's fix is to impose another unconstitutional executive decision in violation of the 5th Amendment "Taking clause " .

If you liked yesterday's nonsense you're gonna love the next one. And damn it AMHD, stop editing my spelling.

Your doctor doesn't work for free. He won't like you very much if he doesn't get paid.

Your doctor doesn't work for free. He won't like you very much if he doesn't get paid.

Wow, I believe that's our argument, you can't have it. But good to see you still support a lie.

And damn it AMHD, stop editing my spelling.
Go to your Settings -> Edit Options, then scroll down to this --

Correct My New Posts?
Do you want your new Q&As to be automatically corrected for spelling and punctuation? Yes No

Show Auto-corrected Posts?
Do you want to view the automatically corrected version of Q&As? Yes No

Well if you don't have money, OR insurance, how do you pay a doctor, or a pharmacy, or a grocer for that matter?

How do you even know what you have if it's NEVER been used?

Go to your Settings -> Edit Options, then scroll down to this --

Correct My New Posts?
Do you want your new Q&As to be automatically corrected for spelling and punctuation? Yes No

Show Auto-corrected Posts?
Do you want to view the automatically corrected version of Q&As? Yes No

Thanks, buddy. I even de-capitalized your name yesterday in protest.

If you like your Dr., you can keep your Dr. is gonna be a tougher one to get past. It will have to be modified to: if you like ... you can keep your Dr. if he/she stays in business, doesn't retire, doesn't quit accepting your insurance plan, the affiliated hospital doesn't close, he/she refuses to go to work for the hospital as the plan hopes to accomplish, doesn't stop accepting Medicare which will kill your secondary/backup policy, doesn't convert to requiring a retainer fee as many are, or probably 50 other reasons.
I have talked to at least 4 Dr's over the past 4 months. None have given me any assurance that I see them for my next appt.
All that is left of the law is the "buy insurance or get 'taxed' part" and that only applies now to certain folks, and to certain businesses. How would the supremes look at it now?

Nothing has changed, except we are closer to an election. You have to take a vote in the house to FIX stuff to justify what you did in a part time congress. As long as you talk about ACA, you don't talk about other stuff, like jobs, immigration, or the budget. Or... the truth.

17 working days left for the congress. They will holler, but very little if any of the people's work will get done.

That's ok ... When the gvt is on vacation I always feel a little bit better .

That's ok ... When the gvt is on vacation I always feel a little bit better .

well I can understand that if politicians arn't legislating you can feel relieved but government is never on vacation, out to lunch maybe, but never on vacation

well I can understand that if politicians arn't legislating you can feel relieved but government is never on vacation, out to lunch maybe, but never on vacation

Then what was all that indignant scaremongering Iover the shut down all about?

Then what was all that indignant scaremongering Iover the shut down all about?


Something about changing BO's mind, we all know shlt happens, particularly where politicians meet. Those good ole boys hellp a little protest of their own, didn't change much, but maybe it cleared the air

Something about changing BO's mind, we all know sh*t happens, particularly where politicians meet. Those good ole boys hellp a little protest of their own, didn't change much, but maybe it cleared the air
Nothing changes the emperor's mind. Even his humbling admission that he lied is couched in language that suggests he thinks the real problem is that the people are just too stupid to understand him.
there is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate .....I get how upsetting this could be especially after hearing assurances from me But of course it wasn't his fault . He didn't know the web site wouldn't work . He didn't know that the grandfather clause would result in all these folks losing their insurance after he told them otherwise.

Nothing changes the emperor's mind. Even his humbling admission that he lied is couched in language that suggests he thinks the real problem is that the people are just too stupid to understand him.
there is no doubt that the way I put that forward unequivocally ended up not being accurate .....I get how upsetting this could be especially after hearing assurances from me But of course it wasn't his fault . He didn't know the web site wouldn't work . He didn't know that the grandfather clause would result in all these folks losing their insurance after he told them otherwise.


Well Tom you can point the blame to all those useless politicians who were involved in framing the law and passing the law, obviously illerate, since they can't understand the written word, and if BO genuinely believed those conditions to be part of the legislation, who undermined his intention?..It maybe that his aides are the ones who are too stupid to understand him, or was it the fix was in, corruption triumphed over common sense and political will

even you carry water for him .......unbelievable !

And he didn't know (or his totally incompetent staff didn't have enough sense to tell him) that each state's insurance commissioner has the final say on whether or not those discontinued policies (if resurrected by the insurance companies) can be sold in that insurance commissioner's state. And that should have been known and clarified before that big PERIOD was put on the end of the promise.
The commissioners who want to do the most damage to obamacare will have a hard time deciding. Say no and not bail obama out of his predicament with the folks who were kicked off. Or say yes, and keep as many people as possible out of enrolling in the exchanges making the entire program less likely to succeed.
None of these politicians (from any party) have the citizens wellbeing in mind, just how can I make myself look good and embarrass the other side at the same time.
I get the feeling that everything Congress touches is just as screwed up as the obamacare boondoggle, and if that's the case--Goodnight and Good luck.

I get the feeling that everything Congress touches is just as screwed up as the obamacare boondoggle, and if that's the case--Goodnight and Good luck.

You are obviously right, and the problem is reliance on politicians to do something in the interests of the people. Congress is not a synominum for progress, but for regressive behaviour, an impediment to progress. How can it be expected that 500 people could agree on anything?

and not only that ..... unless Congress passes legislation ,and the emperor signs the bill saying those policies are legal ;then they are not ,and the insurance companies will be faced with the choice of offering illegal polices ,or face the fall out when the emperor blames them for not offering the illegal policies .

even you carry water for him .......unbelievable !

you think it is carrying water for BO to recognise that there is incompetence in government, unbelievable.

if you think that the emperor was insularly removed from the process as he'd like us to believe then yes ,you are carrying his water . He'd like us to believe that he remained in his cocoon in the White House while Madame Mimi ,Reid ,and all his staff wrote laws ,regulations keeping him outside ,while they constructed a Potamkin agenda for him . Well if you believe that then yes ,you have joined the ranks of the Obots.

if you think that the emperor was insularly removed from the process as he'd like us to believe then yes ,you are carrying his water . He'd like us to believe that he remained in his cocoon in the White House while Madame Mimi ,Reid ,and all his staff wrote laws ,regulations keeping him outside ,while they constructed a Potamkin agenda for him . Well if you believe that then yes ,you have joined the ranks of the Obots.

If I understand the operation of your democracy, the President is personally aloof from the detail of legislation, that role being delegated to the Legislature, who must remain responsible for the detail. I don't reject that the White House and the various departments of government have a role in drafting legislation and a certain responsibility for outcomes and implementation. In this case it was the reconciliation process which failed, principally because it wasn't implemented. Whether it would have removed undesirable characteristics is a moot point. However leadership sets the agenda and appears to have been abdicated in this instance. Someone wasn't listening and certainly that must go back to the legislature and an early unwillingness to compromise

All of this does nothing to advance the cause of a more inclusive health care system which appears to be at the centre of the intention

There is another factor working here that nobody recognizes and that's the health care industry and the team of lawyers and accountants they employ to pick any law or regulation apart and exploit any crack or weakness they can for profit.

As I said before the grandfather clause was put in place for a reason and insurance companies had based all their economic projections on getting rid of some of those cheap junk policies they had been issuing since the law had passed.

Another not so apparent fact is themselves who wasted no time and effort to rid themselves of these carriers, and I have provided many links bearing this out, and indeed many state insurance commissioners have come out rather quickly to oppose this so called 'if you like it", you can keep it fix.

And let me knockdown this notion of the reconciliation process that repubs and no nothings have decried, didn't work. The fact that dems coordinated this effort to prevent the repubs from stopping the law from passing was masterful, almost as masterful as the way Bush got his tax cuts, and believe just like the Bush tax cuts must be revisited in10 years.

By then I am sure repubs will still be trying to undermine the ACA much like they are still trying to undermine all the elements of the social safety net, from the New Deal, to Medicare. That's just what they do. That's what they have always done. No middle class, no unions, and no opposition to making mo' money. They call this robbery and extraction "market based solutions".

I call it "greedy bast@ds".

And let me knockdown this notion of the reconciliation process that repubs and no nothings have decried, didn't work. The fact that dems coordinated this effort to prevent the repubs from stopping the law from passing was masterful, almost as masterful as the way Bush got his tax cuts, and believe just like the Bush tax cuts must be revisited in10 years.
Except for the fact that taxing is part of the budgetary process and subject to reconciliation . Making societal changing legislation is not subject to budget trickery .And trickery it was. They passed a budget bill and then stripped it of all it's budgetary language ,and inserted in the language of OBamacare...... that then got passed in reconciliation with no debate .
Also unlike the Bush tax cuts ,Obamacare doesn't have an expiration date .If Obamacare was a budgetary law that allows reconciliation ,then like all budgets ,it should have an expiration date .

You will have to do more than say the budgetary language was stripped out, since it did in fact make changes that paid for the ACA. All fiscal budgetary matter affect people socially from the levying of taxes, to poor relief. Providing subsidies and tax breaks for poor people to have health insurance is certainly a budgetary matter.

Admit it, you never believed that poor people should have squat in the first place. And minimum wage workers surely don't deserve a raise because more expensive workers is bad for profits, which have been growing dramatically.

Like I said GREED!

Hello again, tom:

He'd like us to believe that he remained in his cocoon in the White House while Madame Mimi ,Reid ,and all his staff wrote laws ,regulations keeping him outside ,while they constructed a Potamkin agenda for him . Well if you believe that then yes ,you have joined the ranks of the Obots.I believe that.

It's the reason why I'm NO LONGER an Obot. THAT he remained in his cocoon is WHY his agenda is failing. You just can't give speeches.. You gotta schmooz. He AIN'T a schmoozer.

excon

At least they changed this being his Waterloo, to Katrina. I suppose that's progress. And Emperors don't have to schmooze.

Tal you can insult me all you want .I won't let you get away with your lie about how Obamacare was passed.
1. All spending bills must originate in the House .But there was not one passed . So the Senate found HR3590, a military housing bill ,and stripped all the language out of it and turned it into the' Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act'.
2 But then the Dems didn't have the Super Majority required to pass it after Kennedy died. The House would've had to rubber stamp that law because any changes the House made would've forced the Senate to get 60 votes to pass. But the Dems in the House wanted changes. So the Senate Dems made a deal with the Dems in the House with no input from any Republicans. The House would agree to pass the Senate bill without any changes, IF the Senate agreed to pass a separate bill by the House that made changes to the Senate version. This second bill was called the Reconciliation Act of 2010.
3 . But they still needed that 60 votes . They declared that they would use the Reconciliation Rule to pass the Reconciliation Act ( Reconciliation Act and Reconciliation Rule are 2 different things remember ).The Reconciliation rule had never been used nor was it ever intended to be used to pass legislation of the magnitude of Obamacare. It was meant only for budgetary bills with the restrictions I already mentioned (expiration date ) .
All this was done without a single Republican vote. A law that fundamentally alters the relationship between the people and their health care providers and their government was shoved down our throats through legislative trickery .Democrat Representative Alcee Hastings of the House Rules Committee said “We’re making up the rules as we go along”. Madame Mimi told us they'd have to pass the law so we could find out what was in it.
So you can make all the phony claims about this law passing through a democratic process. That would only be true if you were talking about a democracy found currently in Venezuela. That bill was not passed by anything recognizable in the American process.

Hello again, tom:

So you can make all the phony claims about this law passing through a democratic process. Nahhhh... Using Roberts Rules of Order to your ADVANTAGE is NOT a tactic they use in Venezuela. It's as American as apple pie. It IS democracy at work.

Now, of course, you don't like it. So?

excon

PS> By the way, how come your side never did, and STILL isn't challenging the law based on those UNDEMOCRATIC and clearly un-Constitutional shenanigans???

Never mind...

Glad you asked There is at least one lawsuit under the violation of the Origination Clause (Art 1 Sec 7 Clause 1).There are also hundreds of others that don't have standing until the law takes effect.
The one I'm watching is 'Sissel v. United States Department of Health & Human Services '.

Tal you can insult me all you want .I won't let you get away with your lie about how Obamacare was passed.


Tom, I wish you and Speech would stop taking my attacks on right wingers so personally. I mean all of YOU and never call either of you names. I try any way.

Speaking of calling names, I never heard a liberal refer to the president as an emperor or messiah. That's you guys.

Well I have called Bush a moron, but I documented the reasons. :D

Here are some other interesting cases making their way through the courts... 'Pruitt v. Sebelius ' ;and 'Halbig v. Sebelius' challenges the legality of subsidies to the Federal exchange. The law gives subsidies to the state exchanges and not the Federal exchanges. 'Liberty University v. Lew ' challenges the employer mandate . 'Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York v. Sebelius ' challenges the contraception mandate .

Reconciliation (United States Congress) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_(United_States_Congress)#Historical _use)


The Byrd Rule (as described below) was adopted in 1985 and amended in 1990. Its main effect has been to prohibit the use of reconciliation for provisions that would increase the deficit beyond 10 years after the reconciliation measure.

Tom, I wish you and Speech would stop taking my attacks on right wingers so personally. I mean all of YOU and never call either of you names. I try any way.

Speaking of calling names, I never heard a liberal refer to the president as an emperor or messiah. That's you guys.

Well I have called Bush a moron, but I documented the reasons. :D


Admit it, you never believed that poor people should have squat in the first place.
I have made my position clear on that many times.

Reconciliation (United States Congress) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_(United_States_Congress)#Historical _use)

'Clinton v. City of New York ' the court ruled that a bill containing the “exact text” must be approved by one house; the other house must approve “precisely the same text.”.

'Clinton v. City of New York ' the court ruled that a bill containing the “exact text” must be approved by one house; the other house must approve “precisely the same text.”.

That would appear to be a no-brainer, what is the point of reconciliation if there is some nonsense of having different versions of the Bill, in other words a lack of agreement? Sounds like a pack of egomaniacs running loose, but then.....................

This may explain it better Clete,

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act)


Unlike rules under regular order, as per the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, reconciliation cannot be subject to a filibuster. However, the process is limited to budget changes, which is why the procedure was never able to be used to pass a comprehensive reform bill like the ACA in the first place; such a bill would have inherently non-budgetary regulations.[113][114] Whereas the already passed Senate bill could not have been put through reconciliation, most of House Democrats' demands were budgetary: "these changes—higher subsidy levels, different kinds of taxes to pay for them, nixing the Nebraska Medicaid deal—mainly involve taxes and spending. In other words, they're exactly the kinds of policies that are well-suited for reconciliation."[111]

The remaining obstacle was a pivotal group of pro-life Democrats led by Bart Stupak who were initially reluctant to support the bill. The group found the possibility of federal funding for abortion substantive enough to warrant opposition. The Senate bill had not included language that satisfied their abortion concerns, but they could not include additional such language in the reconciliation bill as it would be outside the scope of the process with its budgetary limits. Instead, President Obama issued Executive Order 13535, reaffirming the principles in the Hyde Amendment.[115] This concession won the support of Stupak and members of his group and assured passage of the bill.[112][116] The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010, with 34 Democrats and all 178 Republicans voting against it.[117] The following day, Republicans introduced legislation to repeal the bill.[118] Obama signed the ACA into law on March 23, 2010.[119] The amendment bill, The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, was also passed by the House on March 21, by the Senate via reconciliation on March 25, and was signed by President Obama on March 30.

Thanks Tal so the issues are it is a badly constructed bill and statements made regarding it's content and impact may not have been accurate. has anyone heard of politics because this sounds exactly like politics, tell em' what they want to hear not what they need to know

Complex and intricate, would be a better term. If it wasn't they would have torn it apart, driving trucks through the loopholes, and that's ALL the votes Obama had for its passage in the first place. Implementation is slow and difficult because the opposition will NOT quit, or even aid not one bit. Any possible glitch or delay is an excuse to under mind the whole thing by the opposition will be used.

So, you tell me why they would exploit the adjustments a few (2 million well to do) must make to deny the many (47million) who will benefit. In the long run the few will benefit too. We do play hardball politics, so don't believe the opposition won't/isn't lying and deceiving either. After all they are the ones without the power of votes on their side, and were more than willing to shutdown the government to repeal, or delay the implementation of the ACA.

It's the law and they are desperate having so far been defeating in every effort. Clinton tried years ago the story straight and it was killed before it even got a vote. Obama learned well to keep the whole story close to his vest, and get it passed and fight on his own terms. He spent a lot of political capital to keep it going. If the results improve, so will his ratings. The opposition knows that. The battle continues.

The battle continues.

Tal I understand what you are saying, but reality says if you did it right, you could do it without costing the majority a lot of money. I don't understand why it would affect the rich, they had adequate resources to cover their medical costs anyway, unless it was a way of making the rich pay, a wealth transfer, in which case I could see why it would be objected to. This is a tax on everyone, a strangely organised tax because it is progessive over time and took a long time to implement. If you want to implement a welfare objective you simply do that, budget line item and if you want a tax you simply implement that, budget line item

Where do you get the idea that a majority of Americans are the rich guys? Not hardly, just 5%, which is FAR from a majority. Your facts are flawed. That seems to be the reality. Look it up for yourself.

Where do you get the idea that a majority of Americans are the rich guys? Not hardly, just 5%, which is FAR from a majority. Your facts are flawed.

I didn't say americans are rich, I said the rich could pay for their own costs anyway, but americans are generally rich anyway by the standards of the rest of the wolrd, so all this griping, well it says a lot about the people, they just don't know how well off they are.

what I said is that the ACA is a tax on everyone, that's rich and poor, and everyone in between, who are the majority, the much vaunted middle class, who never had it so good, or bad, depending upon your perspective.

there are people here who want to blame BO for this, and yes, he laid claim to the initiative, but those who are to blame are the insurers; who saw the opportunity to gouge the people, the politicians; who failed to prevent that, and the people themselves; because they failed to hold their politicians to account

What is needed to fix it is a clean sweep so everyone can get on the same page

What does being well off as compared to the rest of the world have to do with the American concept of equality and its definition and evolution here? We are a diverse society and getting everyone on the same page is a challenge.

When passions and opinions run high, its more of a challenge. But don't be fooled by the passions or the challenges as we move to fix and improve but there are no quick easy fixes. And there is always another election in two years.

Progress is slow but steady, so don't be distracted by the noise.

"Complex and intricate" is libspeak for "we didn't read the damn thing and you're too stupid to understand it anyway."

"Complex and intricate" is libspeak for "we didn't read the damn thing and you're too stupid to understand it anyway."

Did YOU read it?

Hello again, Steve:

"Complex and intricate" is libspeak for "we didn't read the damn thing and you're too stupid to understand it anyway."If I was a congressman, I'd read all the bills. Until recently, I thought ALL of them did. But, a surprising number don't. That's because, these days what a bill DOES, isn't as important as the political ramifications of voting for it are.

Excon

Here's a thought, how about we fix the overly massive, "complex and intricate" bureaucracy we have instead of making even more "complex and intricate?" You know, downsize. All those bills no one reads have real life implications for Americans and this one is monumental disaster. They deserve some political ramifications for foisting this BS on us.

Instead, we get crap like this for not getting on board with the game being played.

D.C. insurance commissioner fired a day after questioning Obamacare fix - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-insurance-commissioner-fired-a-day-after-questioning-obamacare-fix/2013/11/16/b88eaea0-4f17-11e3-9890-a1e0997fb0c0_story.html?hpid=z1)

Hello again, Steve:

You know, downsize.I'm on board. I'm a small government liberal. We could have written a health care law on one page, and left most of it blank: Medicare For All. Then, we'd hire a few more IT guys to run the computers that write the checks.

Done and done.

Excon

Medicare For All.
That works for me. I LOVE Medicare!

Hello again, Steve:
I'm on board. I'm a small government liberal. We coulda written a health care law on one page, and left most of it blank: Medicare For All. Then, we'd hire a few more IT guys to run the computers that write the checks.

Done and done.

excon

And how many pages of federal code and regulations are involved in Medicare?

P.S. And congratulations on Seattle electing their first Socialist city council member.

Not enough votes for such a radical socialist idea, because the radical socialist in chief wants to get in your life and make himself an emperor and stuff. He just ain't like the rest of us in America.

Now spread your legs and cheeks and let me stick this probe up your arse and female parts to see if you are pregnant or carrying drugs.

Stupid isn't covered under ACA, but crazy is.

P.S. And congratulations on Seattle electing their first Socialist city council member.You say it like it's a bad thing.

Not enough votes for such a radical socialist idea, because the radical socialist in chief wants to get in your life and make himself an emperor and stuff. He just ain't like the rest of us in America.

Now spread your legs and cheeks and let me stick this probe up your arse and female parts to see if you are pregnant or carrying drugs.

In other words, you reiterate your support regulating medical care except in abortion.


Stupid isn't covered under ACA, but crazy is.

And I can't wait to use our contraceptive and maternity coverage.

Not in other words, in my own words. The minimum standard has been established and if you don't use it, you will incur no costs. As to regulations concerning abortions the standard is less than 20 weeks or danger to the female and such decisions are up to the female and doctor, not Rick Perry, or Bob McDonnell. None are qualified physicians and neither are YOU.

Those are my words. If you were as concerned about the crazy people with guns as you are abortions then we could have a reasonable debate.

Not in other words, in my own words. The minimum standard has been established and if you don't use it, you will incur no costs. As to regulations concerning abortions the standard is less than 20 weeks or danger to the female and such decisions are up to the female and doctor, not Rick Perry, or Bob McDonnell. None are qualified physicians and neither are YOU.

Those are my words. If you were as concerned about the crazy people with guns as you are abortions then we could have a reasonable debate.

I've never supported crazy people with guns so there you go, you start.

I've never supported crazy people with guns so there you go, you start.

I have, trust but verify who gets a gun, and make sure the loony's never get them. What's YOUR idea?

I have, trust but verify who gets a gun, and make sure the loony's never get them. What's YOUR idea?

Make sure women facing an abortion have competent, qualified physicians and the same safeguards as other patients.

I somehow missed this little gem...


Obamacare too costly for rich Coloradans, Democrat congressman says (http://watchdog.org/112405/the-rich-obamacare/)

Rep. Jared Polis, D-Boulder, told a Colorado health policy think tank that Obamacare premiums will be too expensive for some of the wealthiest addresses in America – ski resorts like Breckenridge and Keystone. He says he’s asking the feds to let them sit out the president’s national health system.

“We will be encouraging a waiver,” Polis told Health Policy Solutions in a story that ran today. “It will be difficult for Summit County residents to become insured. For the vast majority, it’s too high a price to pay.”

The resorts are in Summit County and Aspen is in a neighboring county, which Polis also represents. He has consistently voted in favor of Obamacare.

Polis also wrote to Colorado’s insurance commissioner asking why an average 40-year-old mountaintop resident would have to fork over $427.80 a month while counterparts in Denver would pay $296.41 for the same plan.

All of this sounded a bit hypocritical to the Colorado Republican Party.


No kidding.


“Why not seek a waiver or delay for every Coloradoan or every American for that matter?” Colorado GOP Chairman Ryan Call told Watchdog. “Labor unions, big corporations, other politically connected friends of the Obama administration and Summit County are justified in seeking a waiver but what about others?”

Summit County has approximately 1,200 more registered Democrats than Republicans.

Funny how all these Dems that LOVED the "Affordable" Healthcare Act keep whining about how unaffordable it is, how dare Obama force rich Democrats to pay their share!

Agreeing to another ObamaCare concession, the White House said today it is helping insurers to bypass HealthCare.gov and directly enroll customers who qualify for tax credits, the Wall Street Journal reports. "It's the end here that matters, not necessarily the means," said White House spokesman Jay Carney. "We have to make sure that there are other means available for the American people, even as we make improvements to the website."

As it stands, customers can buy insurance directly from health care insurers, but people eligible for subsidies can only get them by purchasing insurance on HealthCare.gov. Now, if the Obama administration and insurers can untangle the technical issues, customers will be allowed to buy insurance directly with subsidies. Only downside: They won't be able to comparison shop between health insurers as they would online, meaning that smaller, less popular insurers may lose customers, the Journal notes.
White House to Help Health Insurers Bypass Website - Jay Carney: It's about the ends, not the means (http://www.newser.com/story/177776/white-house-to-help-health-insurers-bypass-website.html)

How did we shop for insurance before the ACA? Google still works in every state. Just Google "Health insurance in >insert state, or zip code< " Walahhhh! Comparisons.

For a fee, I will do it for you.

I don't have faith OB can put on the right underwear on every day. (meaning his own)...

He's not going to fix anything... he has no concept of how anything actually works to begin with.

He's not going to fix anything... he has no concept of how anything actually works to begin with.

You don't fix something that doesn't need to be fixed, oh wait a minute, is that before or after he fixed it?

you don't fix something that doesn't need to be fixed, oh wait a minute, is that before or after he fixed it?


Well its wasn't broke before Obamacare... and it most certainly is now. One of the many topics he knows absolutely nothing about... like Economics, Job Creation, civility, Foreign Affairs, etc.

He is real good at being a con man, a typical huckster.....who at one time in the not so distant past would have been hawking Snake oil to suckers out of a wagon...never spending the night in any town twice..

When asked whether Democrats were misled by President Obama about whether Americans would be able to keep their plans in the individual insurance market,Sen Gillibrand NY answered: “He should've just been specific. No, we all knew.”

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand: President Obama Should Have Been 'More Specific' With Healthcare Promise - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/11/sen-kirsten-gillibrand-president-obama-should-have-been-more-specific-with-healthcare-promise/)

Well its wasn't broke before Obamacare... and it most certainly is now. One of the many topics he knows absolutely nothing about... like Economics, Job Creation, civility, Foreign Affairs, etc.

He is real good at being a con man, a typical huckster.....who at one time in the not so distant past would have been hawking Snake oil to suckers out of a wagon...never spending the night in any town twice..

But he had help, you can't just blame him

But he had help, you can't just blame him

He might have had help ( I agree he wasn't alone in this)... but as the top guy... the buck stops with him... just like every other business or enterprise out there.

He might have had help ( I agree he wasn't alone in this)... but as the top guy... the buck stops with him... just like every other business or enterprise out there.

So fire him, give him a golden parachute

so fire him, give him a golden parachute

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi still have shrines in their offices and worship him.

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi still have shrines in their offices and worship him.

Yes but it is transient, they used to say that there was a shine to me once in my old office but we all move on, all those true believers are long gone and I suspect it is the same for BO. You can only do so much, and then what you have done is swept away by the tide

How did we shop for insurance before the ACA? Google still works in every state. Just Google "Health insurance in >insert state, or zip code< " Walahhhh! Comparisons.

For a fee, I will do it for you.

How generous of you.

Yes but it is transient, they used to say that there was a shine to me once in my old office but we all move on, all those true believers are long gone and I suspect it is the same for BO. you can only do so much, and then what you have done is swept away by the tide

True... given enough time all those details will be forgotten and he'll simply be remembered as "that incomptetant boob"... much like Jimmy Carter is remembered. Assuming they remember anything at all... and isn't simply forgotten like so many other ex presidents who never had any notible accomplishments to rememebr.

Top Ten Indicators Your Employer Has Changed To The Obamacare Health Care Plan.

(10) Your annual breast exam is done at Hooters.

(9) Directions to your doctor's office include
"Take a left when you enter the trailer park."

(8) The tongue depressors taste faintly of Fudgesicles.

(7) The only proctologist in the plan is "Gus"
From Roto-Rooter.

(6) The only item listed under Preventative Care Coverage is
"an apple a day."

(5) Your primary care physician is wearing the pants you
Gave to Goodwill last month.

(4) "The patient is responsible for 200% of out-of-network
charges," is not a typographical error.

(3) The only expense covered 100% is... "Embalming."

(2) Your Prozac comes in different colors with little
M's on them.

(1) You ask for Viagra and they give you a Popsicle stick
And duct tape.

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by
letting the government take care of him, better take a
closer look at the American Indian."- Henry Ford

Top Ten Indicators Your Employer Has Changed To The Obamacare Health Care Plan.

(10) Your annual breast exam is done at Hooters.

(9) Directions to your doctor's office include
"Take a left when you enter the trailer park."

(8) The tongue depressors taste faintly of Fudgesicles.

(7) The only proctologist in the plan is "Gus"
from Roto-Rooter.

(6) The only item listed under Preventative Care Coverage is
"an apple a day."

(5) Your primary care physician is wearing the pants you
gave to Goodwill last month.

(4) "The patient is responsible for 200% of out-of-network
charges," is not a typographical error.

(3) The only expense covered 100% is..."Embalming."

(2) Your Prozac comes in different colors with little
M's on them.

(1) You ask for Viagra and they give you a Popsicle stick
and duct tape.

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by
letting the government take care of him, better take a
closer look at the American Indian."- Henry Ford

Good one... got a good laugh out of reading that.

It just keeps getting better and better for the emperor...

Rude Awakening for Federal Way Woman Who Got Shout-Out From President - Can't Afford Obamacare Policy After All (http://washingtonstatewire.com/blog/rude-awakening-for-federal-way-woman-who-got-shout-out-from-president-cant-afford-obamacare-policy-after-all/)

After Jessica Sanford Sends Fan Letter to Obama for Making Insurance Affordable, State Says She Must Pay Full Ticket

Sen Marco Rubio explains in WSJ that HHS plans on bailing out the insurance companies by manipulating the so called “risk corridor” provisions of the law once the emperor's reversal of insurance cancelations starts to create big losses for insurers.
Marco Rubio: No Bailouts for ObamaCare - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303985504579205743008770218)
So now the taxpayer gets triple wacked . First by the Medicaid expansion ;Second by the exchange subsidies ,and now with the risk corridor bailout to the insurance companies .

While risk corridors can protect taxpayers when they are budget-neutral, ObamaCare's risk corridors are designed in such an open-ended manner that the president's action now exposes taxpayers to a bailout of the health-insurance industry if and when the law fails.

Subsequent regulatory rulings have made clear that the administration views this risk-corridor authority as a blank check, requiring no further consultation or approval by Congress. A final rule handed down in March by HHS and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services states: “Regardless of the balance of payments and receipts, HHS will remit payments as required under section 1342 of the Affordable Care Act.”

On Nov. 14, the American Academy of Actuaries issued a press release saying that President Obama's plan to reverse health-insurance cancellations “could lead to negative consequences for consumers, health insurers, and the federal government.” More specifically, the academy said, “Costs to the federal government could increase as higher-than-expected average medical claims are more likely to trigger risk corridor payments.”

It is a damning indictment of ObamaCare's viability when the president's only response to people losing their health insurance plans entails putting them on the hook for bailing out insurance companies.

So, how's that website coming along? According to CMS tech officer Henry Chao, 30-40% of the site still needs to be built. That would include the payment system. That much was never even developed prior to the launch date.


“It’s not that it’s not working,” Chao told lawmakers at an Energy and Commerce oversight subcommittee hearing. “It’s still being developed and tested.”

Read more: Tech chief: 40% Obamacare work left - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/tech-chief-didnt-see-march-obamacare-memo-100058.html#ixzz2l8AwqGR7)

Not exactly building confidence in their signature 'accomplishment' or regime competence. Maybe that's why the emperor and other Dems quit referring to it as Obamacare (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/barack-obama-obamacare-affordable-care-act-health-care-law-100034.html)?

Setting deadlines and meeting deadlines are two different things, in poli speak we have the imperative, borrowed from fiction, make it so. In most cases they won't be held to account for delays, but they had years to get this right and apparently no fall back position

Don't fall for the right wing gloom and doom Clete, they hate the pie in the oven before they taste it, because they hate the chef, and are content with serving up the crap sandwiches they have gotten use to.

The old system left 47million without, and they want to keep that system. Make any sense to you?

Setting deadlines and meeting deadlines are two different things,

Of course. One might wonder how you plan on taking payment for your purchase before launching the endeavor. So of those 50,000 who've managed to enroll on the exchange site how many do you suppose have actually bought their plan?

Don't fall for the right wing gloom and doom Clete, they hate the pie in the oven before they taste it, because they hate the chef, and are content with serving up the crap sandwiches they have gotten use to.

The old system left 47million without, and they want to keep that system. Make any sense to you?

Tal the problem could have been solved simply, but no, It had to have the grand gesture

Of course. One might wonder how you plan on taking payment for your purchase before launching the endeavor. So of those 50,000 who've managed to enroll on the exchange site how many do you suppose have actually bought their plan?


From the rhetoric I expect that a large number have a problem or several problems the least of which maybe whether they have cover or not

The opposition makes it a grand gesture, so they can kill it. The wingers here make you aware they hate everything, and criticize to no end what anyone does, and blames everybody else for things not being perfect.

Surely you have noticed that very pronounced pattern in every thread on this forum?

Surely you have noticed that very pronounced pattern in every thread on this forum?

What I have noted is a perspensity to rhetoric and exaggeration

This ACA has become a focal point for criticism. It is apparently poorly designed and poorly implemented.

Yeah that's what the wingers say. Truth is the data shows states that have been actually working it have shown increased success. The ones that fight and obstruct by doing nothing are having problems. Sure the website is not 100%, but that's only the window dressing as far as the law working is concerned.

In my own state which fights tooth and nail, to deny million any heath care, the legislature and the hospitals are going around the governor to get those federal dollars for the state.

I keep telling you about listening to the whiners. Can't you Google your own facts from Australia? I tell the wingers all the time get the whole story, and not just the hollering points from their favorite right wing rag.

Even the Washington comPost today, 11/19/2013 is claiming their poll (likely of registered Democrats) show 57 % of the people are opposed to Obamacare...

Other real polls show even more people are opposed to it.

I keep telling you about listening to the whiners. Can't you Google your own facts from Australia? I tell the wingers all the time get the whole story, and not just the hollering points from their favorite right wing rag.

Tal google works fine some of the time but who can be sure of the facts. It appears you have a problem and the size of the problem is the point of contention. Social change always leads to contention.

You have a very polarised electorate at the moment and therefore you have a lot of shoutin' and hollerin' and maybe it's much ado about nothin' and maybe not. The question as I see it is, whether, at the end of the day, you will have more uninsured of a different class than you started with, and whether you will have a lot of satisfied customers or a lot of disgruntled customers.

Why am I interested? because inevietably what you model over there finds its way here and serves to undermine what we have

Irony alert again, Tal talking down to others about facts over talking points.

Tal talking down to others about facts over talking points.Irony alert.

Irony alert.

No one cares what you think.

Remember that if you like your doctor promise we said would be broken? It begins...

White House Tries To Rewrite Obama's 'Keep Your Doctor' Promise | Washington Free Beacon (http://freebeacon.com/carney-tries-to-rewrite-obamas-keep-your-doctor-promise/)

Remember that if you like your doctor promise we said would be broken? It begins...No one cares what you think.

Poll: Obamacare support, Obama approval sink to new lows - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57613067/poll-obamacare-support-obama-approval-sink-to-new-lows/)

A drop of 12 points in the last month alone... and this is a left wing poll by a group VERY friendly to Obama and democrats.

"........A rocky beginning to the opening of the new health insurance exchanges has also taken its toll on how Americans perceive the Affordable Care Act. Now, approval of the law has dropped to 31 percent - the lowest number yet recorded in CBS News Polls, and a drop of 12 points since last month. Sixty-one percent disapprove (a high for this poll), including 46 percent who say they disapprove strongly. ...."

No one cares what you think.

I think people want to keep their doctor, prove me wrong.

You aren't wrong but do you have to throw 47 million people who WANT a doctor under the bus for 3 million who may have to get better insurance?

Changing insurance won't always mean changing a doctor. Your math is faulty. 47 million to maybe 3million??

You aren't wrong but do you have to throw 47 million people who WANT a doctor under the bus for 3 million who may have to get better insurance?

Changing insurance won't always mean changing a doctor. Your math is faulty. 47 million to maybe 3million??

Do you always have to return to the same false argument? No one wants people to go without health care, but why destroy it for everyone for an agenda?

Not everyone, maybe(?) 1.3% of the population will have to make adjustments. Many for the better when the dust clears.

What's your alternative? Mine is Medicare for EVERYONE. What's YOURS?

Not everyone, maybe(?) 1.3% of the population will have to make adjustments. Many for the better when the dust clears.

What's your alternative? Mine is Medicare for EVERYONE. What's YOURS?

Please, didn't I just say "do you always have to return to the same false argument?" Stop pretending we haven't offered alternatives, we have, but they won't satisfy you because the ONLY alternative you'll accept is single payer government run health care.

Meanwhile, The Liar's lies keep getting exposed.

Obama was briefed earlier in year on health website problems | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/20/us-usa-healthcare-idUSBRE9AI18920131120)

If you want something, don't sell it to us based on a web of lies. Makes it quite difficult to regain trust.

OK, you really must start questioning the regime's competence. Why would anyone go out and do an orchestrated media event and actually feature Healthcare.gov as part of it, knowing full well it's only 60% -70% built and it's likely going to crash (http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/11/19/hhs-secretary-sebelius-visits-south-florida-to-meet-with-healthcare-navigators/) on you?


Sebelius, wearing green, walked through the front doors of North Shore Hospital near Miami Shores where she shook hands with hospital staff and members of the Epilepsy Foundation who are staffing the Obamacare Navigation center housed off the hospital’s lobby. There she met with the team helping South Floridians to sign-up on line or on paper.

“So she is being helpful,” asked the secretary to a couple sitting at one table of a navigator. “Absolutely,” they responded.

At a second table, the secretary met Carmen Salero who was trying to sign up online. As the secretary and Salero made small talk, CBS4′s Brian Andrews noticed the site crash on the lap top in front of them.

“The screen says I’m sorry but the system is temporarily down,” Andrews pointed out. “Uh oh,” responded the secretary. “That happens every day,” said Salerno, “it must mean a lot of people are on there trying to get coverage.”

I guess the first such flop (http://triblive.com/business/headlines/4855077-74/website-sebelius-health#axzz2hPkERiqj) wasn't enough.

Please, didn't I just say "do you always have to return to the same false argument?" Stop pretending we haven't offered alternatives, we have, but they won't satisfy you because the ONLY alternative you'll accept is single payer government run health care.


The problem is the alternative you offer isn't really alternative. It's piecemeal tinkering. It still will be a system that will still have winners and losers. Why? Because of the inability to address the problem of equity of health care. Until your 'alternative' addresses this problem then you don't really have a solution.

"Equity" is unworkable Utopian nonsense. There will always be winners and losers no matter what anyone does. Obamacare is a perfect example of that, millions will be punished with higher premiums and fewer choices in providers to provide "equity" in health care for the few while the elite will sit in their high places and snub their noses while they get whatever they want. At least our alternatives don't make things WORSE.

"Equity" is unworkable Utopian nonsense. There will always be winners and losers no matter what anyone does. Obamacare is a perfect example of that, millions will be punished with higher premiums and fewer choices in providers to provide "equity" in health care for the few while the elite will sit in their high places and snub their noses while they get whatever they want. At least our alternatives don't make things WORSE.


I have been through this already and it was conveniently ignored. Yes, it's unachievable and utopian when taken as a vision for the whole of society. That doesn't prevent an attempt at moving towards equity in specific areas such as health care.

Of course Obamacare is an example of fewer choices, winners and losers. You are paying the price for a long history for thinking that equity means treating individuals who are unequal in economic terms in the same way as you treat individual in terms of health care. In other words, individuals should receive healthcare according to what is perceived as their needs, not according to their actual needs.

You will never achieve anything unless you address the historical problem.

The historical problem is that some humans have less value than others though the words all men were created equal is the premise. So who lied?

The historical problem is that some humans have less value than others though the words all men were created equal is the premise. So who lied?

Who Lied? Obama lied... over and over.

So did George, and Thomas. The nation was built on lies.

The historical problem is that some humans have less value than others though the words all men were created equal is the premise. So who lied?

Perhaps a kinder way of saying it would be that some individual contribute more to society than others. Wrong headed type of thinking is to believe that life is a level playing field whereby everyone can be achieve success. There are different types of equity available for a society to prioritize.

The differnce is Obama has never uttered a truthful statement in his adult life yet.

The historical problem is that some humans have less value than others though the words all men were created equal is the premise. So who lied?

Equality of opportunity is what I believe is fair. Creating winners and losers to shape society in your image is not fair.

I was watching the exchange between Chao and Rep Gardner and I got the same impression that this Forbes article describes. He was asked how much more work was needed and he replied 60% to 70%, which Gardner couldn't believe he had just heard, and gave Chao several opportunities to clarify. Don't assume it is 60 to 70% done. It may actually be 30- 40% done, or less.
Medicare Deputy CIO: Somewhere Between '30-40%' Of Obamacare's Exchange Software Has Not Yet Been Built - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/11/19/medicare-deputy-cio-somewhere-between-30-40-of-obamacares-exchange-software-remains-to-be-built/)

I was watching the exchange between Chao and Rep Gardner and I got the same impression that this Forbes article describes. He was asked how much more work was needed and he replied 60% to 70%, which Gardner couldn't believe he had just heard, and gave Chao several opportunities to clarify. Don't assume it is 60 to 70% done. It may actually be 30- 40% done, or less.
Medicare Deputy CIO: Somewhere Between '30-40%' Of Obamacare's Exchange Software Has Not Yet Been Built - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/11/19/medicare-deputy-cio-somewhere-between-30-40-of-obamacares-exchange-software-remains-to-be-built/)


Did you read the article, lots of misintrepretation there



Chao: “It’s not really about healthcare.gov; it’s the federally-faciliated marketplace…the on-line application, verification, determination, plan [comparison shopping], getting enrolled, generating the enrollment transaction—that’s 100 percent there.”


While he created the impression the site was incomplete, he was talking about back office systems, the interfaces with accounting, payment, since we haven't seen the specs we don't know what is envisaged

As I indicated, I watched it live (on cspan I meant to include). he was asked how much work remained. He said 60 to 70% which I assumed was his misunderstanding of the question-- as did the questioner, who tried to get him to correct himself. But, he never did.

As I indicated, I watched it live (on cspan I meant to include). he was asked how much work remained. He said 60 to 70% which I assumed was his misunderstanding of the question-- as did the questioner, who tried to get him to correct himself. But, he never did.

Yes lots of oriential inscrutiability and staying on message rather than allowing himself to be interrupted but right at the end of the transcript did he turn it around?

Did you read the article, lots of misintrepretation there



While he created the impression the site was incomplete, he was talking about back office systems, the interfaces with accounting, payment, since we haven't seen the specs we don't know what is envisaged

You can't buy insurance if you can't pay for it.

You can't buy insurance if you can't pay for it.

Yes, you need more than a registration system, although there are many ways of paying for it, even very traditional ways that web interfaces are intended to replace.

I expect that because of the size of the system they have some difficulties. perhaps they didn't have expertise in very large billing systems. I would have thought something like this was available "öff-the-rack" and could have been quickly adapted, afterall it isn't as though there aren't a myriad of insurance companies doing the same thing. But, it appears, someone decided to work it up from scratch.

How many times do I have to say that there is a plan B. The old fashion way, call or go to the insurance office, or get a quote from them from their website. I get them all the time in my email. Have for YEARS. No computer? Use the phone.

Instead of those old long forms for medical history, it's a simple financial form.

How many times do I have to say that there is a plan B. The old fashion way, call or go to the insurance office, or get a quote from them from their website. I get them all the time in my email. Have for YEARS. No computer? Use the phone.

Instead of those old long forms for medical history, it's a simple financial form.

And it wasnt until recently that there may be a possibility of s subsidy for the insurance. But going to a single provider isnt going to be like comparison shopping. The website was suppose to do all of that and then some. So now that it is a broken pos you want people to do all the legwork. Maybe they might need an ID god forbid. Then they really can't get insurance.

How many times do I have to say that there is a plan B. The old fashion way, call or go to the insurance office, or get a quote from them from their website. I get them all the time in my email. Have for YEARS. No computer? Use the phone.

Instead of those old long forms for medical history, it's a simple financial form.

Tal, there might be a Plan B or even C or D but that isn't the option been offered in the electronic, connected age where if you can't play with your telephone, forgive me, I-Pad, you are blind, deaf, dumb and stupid. We have given up knowing and doing for looking at a tiny screen

tal why don't you admit it that your emperor is a screw up. (and that's the kind version of this episode giving him all the benefit of the doubt )

You guys vowed to make him a one term president from day one. You Failed. You tried to stop his laws, and you FAILED! You tried to repeal his laws, and you Failed! You tried to force him to delay, You FAILED.

Admit it, you guys are failures because of Obama. All you can do now is drink and do drugs and drown in your own FAILURE! Why should we even believe failures such a yourself?

You guys vowed to make him a one term president from day one. You Failed. You tried to stop his laws, and you FAILED! You tried to repeal his laws, and you Failed! You tried to force him to delay, You FAILED.

Admit it, you guys are failures because of Obama. All you can do now is drink and do drugs and drown in your own FAILURE! Why should we even believe failures such a yourself?

Maybe its time to pass on that Koolaid you been drinking and come back to the real world.

Maybe its time to pass on that Koolaid you been drinking and come back to the real world.

Hey dad would you like to tell us where to find that real world, because what I'm seeing ain't it

You guys vowed to make him a one term president from day one. You Failed. You tried to stop his laws, and you FAILED! You tried to repeal his laws, and you Failed! You tried to force him to delay, You FAILED.

Admit it, you guys are failures because of Obama. All you can do now is drink and do drugs and drown in your own FAILURE! Why should we even believe failures such a yourself?

Geez, if I'd said that I'd be getting "infractions."

Geez, if I'd said that I'd be getting "infractions."

is that infractions or Intractions

P.S. In light of the current fiasco called Obamacare and his plummeting ratings I think I'd refrain from calling others a drugged and drunken failure.

Really? For 5 years you have failed to even effect a credible plan that helps America, and have taken the luxury position of cherry picking the targets for your rock throwing and name calling. Like residents of the peanut gallery who heckle the home team constantly. Prez is down, but you haven't made him quit! LOL, you have gotten him down before.

Enjoy your beer and peanuts, and make all the noise you can, while you can.

You guys are giving us much lower fruit to pick than even Bush. Heck, Oregon's exchange still hasn't signed up anyone and won't be ready until the day after the due date to have insurance coverage on Jan 1.

and Oregon was one of those blue state models that the rest of the country was supposed to model their plan after .

All you can do now is drink and do drugs and drown in your own FAILURE! Why should we even believe failures such a yourself?
Must be one of those attacks I'm not supposed to take personally .

and Oregon was one of those blue state models that the rest of the country was supposed to model their plan after .

But they have a really catchy jingle.


Must be one of those attacks I'm not supposed to take personally .

I shall refrain from any more snark lest I get another red mark.

Equality of opportunity is what I believe is fair. Creating winners and losers to shape society in your image is not fair.

As opposed to shaping society in the image of a football match perhaps?

As opposed to shaping society in the image of a football match perhaps?

What is your definition of equity and how is it achieved?

If you like your hospital ...you can't keep it.


As of this week, not one of the plans for sale on New York's health benefit exchange would cover treatment at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, one of the world's largest and most respected cancer hospitals.

That could mean that the 615,000 individuals and 450,000 small business employees expected to eventually get their insurance through the exchange would have to go someplace else for treatment, or pay the bill out of their own pockets.

Other premier city hospitals are in the networks of just a few of the new plans.

NYU Langone Medical Center has signed agreements with four of the 19 insurers doing business on the exchange.

NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, which oversees the city's biggest hospital system, has signed agreements with six insurers.
New health plans sold through exchanges not accepted at some prestigious NYC hospitals - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/new-health-plans-sold-through-exchanges-not-accepted-at-some-prestigious-nyc-hospitals/2013/11/20/7538dbb4-5235-11e3-9ee6-2580086d8254_story.html)

The death panel will decide your fate .

If you like your hospital ...you can't keep it.

New health plans sold through exchanges not accepted at some prestigious NYC hospitals - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/new-health-plans-sold-through-exchanges-not-accepted-at-some-prestigious-nyc-hospitals/2013/11/20/7538dbb4-5235-11e3-9ee6-2580086d8254_story.html)

The death panel will decide your fate .

Well, healthcare.gov certainly can't tell you your fate so someone has to decide.

Healthcare.gov can't tell consumers whether they can keep their doctors | Mobile Washington Examiner (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/healthcare.gov-cant-tell-consumers-whether-they-can-keep-their-doctors/article/2539463)

What is your definition of equity and how is it achieved?

There are many types of equities, none of which can ever be realized in total. The type of equity you guys promote is the type where social, political and economic equity is a complete package. It only has to be realized in its totality to create a better society.

On the other side of the ideological coin no one should ever suggest that economic equity should be attempted. However, everyone should want to promote the idea that equity in health care is something worth aiming for.

Health care should be doled out according to needs, not the perceived needs of a society that believes in a level playing field best determines health outcomes for everyone.

Does Obamacare achieve that? Is it equitable?

Economics expert Steve Rattner explained (http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/who-will-pay-more-under-obamacare-66837571894) yesterday how 80 percent of us are "unaffected" by Obamacare, the current talking point myth designed to make us feel better about getting screwed. He even had a nice little chart.

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/WhoPayMore.jpg

My question would be what is the definition of "unaffected" seeing as how most of us had to change plans and many of those plans cost significantly more, raise deductibles, copays and out-of-pockets and no, won't let us keep our doctors (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/insurers-restricting-choice-of-doctors-and-hospitals-to-keep-costs-down/2013/11/20/98c84e20-4bb4-11e3-ac54-aa84301ced81_story.html).

So what part of "unaffected" am I missing here?

You had to change doctors, got higher premiums? Who is this "us" you keep referring too? How many is "US"?

Just asking.

You had to change doctors, got higher premiums? Who is this "us" you keep referring too? How many is "US"?
I've still got my doctor. My private pay son still has his doctor and no change in cost or coverage. My other son who has health insurance through his job has experienced no change in cost or coverage. We are in Illinois.

You had to change doctors, got higher premiums? Who is this "us" you keep referring too? How many is "US"?

Just asking.

How many got to keep their plans they liked?

How many got to keep their plans they liked?
At our house, all four of us. I haven't done an Illinois survey yet.

So you were "unaffected" by Obamacare, that makes four. Here's one woman's choice, and she's not happy about it (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303531204579207724152219590).


My mother is not one to seek attention by complaining, so her recent woeful Facebook post caught my eye: "The poor get poorer." It diverged from the more customary stream of inspirational quotes, recipes and snapshots from her tiny cottage in Pierce County, Wash.

The post continued: "I just received a notice: 'In order to comply with the new healthcare law, your current health plan will be discontinued on December 31, 2013.' Currently my premium is $276 and it is a stretch for me to cover. The new plan . . . are you ready . . . projected new rate $415.20. Now I can't afford health insurance."

The unaffordable ObamaCare-compliant plan that her insurer offered in a Sept. 26 letter is not what makes my mother's story noteworthy. Countless individually insured Americans have received such letters; many are seeing more radical increases in premiums and deductibles.

But most of these people are still being offered the chance to choose what health-care insurance they will receive, or to opt out before they are automatically enrolled in a state program. Not so my mother, Charlene Hopkins, as I soon discovered when I called after seeing her Facebook post.

Since she couldn't afford the new plan offered by her insurer, she told me she was eager to explore her new choices under the Affordable Care Act. Washington Healthplanfinder is one of the better health-exchange sites, and she was actually able to log on. She entered her personal and financial data. With efficiency uncommon to the ObamaCare process, the site quickly presented her with a health-care option.

That is not a typo: There was just one option—at the very affordable monthly rate of zero. The exchange had determined that my mother was not eligible to choose to pay for a plan, and so she was slated immediately for Medicaid. She couldn't believe it was true and held off completing the application.

...

Instead, almost mockingly, her "Eligibility Results" came back: "Congratulations, we received and reviewed your application and determined [you] will receive the health care coverage listed below: Washington Apple Health. You will receive a letter telling you which managed care plan you are enrolled with." Washington Apple Health is the mawkish rebranding of Medicaid in Washington state.

The page lacked a cancel button or any way to opt out of Medicaid. It was done; she was enrolled, and there was nothing to do but click "Next" and then to sign out.

Of course, Medicaid is not a new option for my mother; she knew that she was poor enough to qualify for cost-free health care. It was a deliberate choice on her part to pay that monthly $276 out of her own pocket. Clearly she had judged that she received a personal benefit from not being on Medicaid.

"I just don't expect anything positive out of getting free health care," she said. "I don't see why other people should have to pay for my care, whether it be through taxes or otherwise." In paying for health insurance herself—she won't accept help from her family, either—she was safeguarding her dignity and independence and her sense of being a fully functioning member of society.

Before ObamaCare, Medicaid was one option. Not the option. Before this, she had never been, in effect, ordered to take a handout. Now she has been forced to join the government-reliant poor, though she would prefer to contribute her two mites. The authorities behind "affordable care" had erased her right to calculate what she was willing to spend to preserve her dignity—to determine what she thinks is affordable.

That little contribution can mean the difference between dignity and despair.

Forced into a government handout she didn't want robbing her of her dignity. Good work Mr. President.

How many got to keep their plans they liked?

98% of the population for sure. Now tell me the effects on YOU, please, and not an anecdote with no data.

So you were "unaffected" by Obamacare, that makes four. Here's one woman's choice, and she's not happy about it (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303531204579207724152219590).



Forced into a government handout she didn't want robbing her of her dignity. Good work Mr. President.

But she gets her abortion pills . What more can she ask for ?

98% of the population for sure. Now tell me the effects on YOU, please, and not an anecdote with no data.

Won't know for sure until next year when the employer mandate kicks in. My premiums went up ,and many of my staff is now considering dropping to the lower tier option in our plan. I will suck it up and pay the increase .....but again.... the employer mandate will affect millions more .

I read through your anecdote again and saving 276 bucks a month where she struggled to pay her premiums before may take family to explain she did pay the right to free health care.

Took a year for my own mom to realize NOT driving anymore was in her best interest. Don't you agree that your elderly lady in your anecdote benefits from the new law, even if she doesn't realize she EARNED her benefits?

Her family should help her see that because it's NOT a handout in the first place.It's a benefit she EARNED from her years of being a responsible person! Bet she puts that $276 a month she save to good use.

Don't you agree?

Medicaid is sh*t care .Before she had a choice .. Now the emperor deems she must go on state managed care .... Won't be long before someone tells her take the red pill instead of the operation.

98% of the population for sure. Now tell me the effects on YOU, please, and not an anecdote with no data.

I'm not the one making claims of 80% and like you, 98% being "unaffected" The onus is entirely on you to back that up with data and not statistics pulled out of your backside. And yes, my plan has had to change, my wife's has changed and increased in price but I have yet to see the details on mine.

I read through your anecdote again and saving 276 bucks a month where she struggled to pay her premiums before may take family to explain she did pay the right to free health care.

Took a year for my own mom to realize NOT driving anymore was in her best interest. Don't you agree that your elderly lady in your anecdote benefits from the new law, even if she doesn't realize she EARNED her benefits?

Her family should help her see that because it's NOT a handout in the first place.It's a benefit she EARNED from her years of being a responsible person! Bet she puts that $276 a month she save to good use.

Don't you agree?

Obviously you know better than she what's best for her. That's takes a lot of chutzpah.

Won't know for sure until next year when the employer mandate kicks in. My premiums went up ,and many of my staff is now considering dropping to the lower tier option in our plan. I will suck it up and pay the increase .....but again.... the employer mandate will affect millions more .

How many employees are we talking about Tom? The employer mandate was delayed because of reporting dysfunctions by employers.

Something to do with verification of hours for the employees.

How many employees are we talking about Tom? The employer mandate was delayed because of reporting dysfunctions by employers.

Something to do with verification of hours for the employees.

"Dysfunction" was an interesting choice, "burden" is the proper word and why is obvious, it won't be enforced until after the election. The "dysfunction" was caused by the regime putting a burden on emploeyers in trying to figure out how to comply.


The delay in the employer mandate addresses complaints from business groups to President Barack Obama's administration about the burden of the law's reporting requirements (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/health-law-employer-mandate-said-to-be-delayed-to-2015.html).

“The administration has finally recognized the obvious -- employers need more time and clarification of the rules of the road before implementing the employer mandate,” Randy Johnson, a senior vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business lobby, said in an e-mail.

Translation Tom, is how big of a loop hole can they exploit. They buy time until the lawyers get a strategy. EXPLOIT is the goal.

You know, delay, obstruct, repeal. They are at the delay part, more to come.

What about the employers who had already expended the time and resources to comply ? I'm wondering where the emperor thought he had the authority to delay the implimenting of the employer mandate in the 1st place ? It certainly doesn't come from the Origination Clause. It certainly doesn't come from the Administrative Procedure Act which is the current law which forbids “agency action” that exceeds an agency's statutory authority, is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Obamacare-Lawsuit2.pdf

More of the 98% of people "unaffected" by Obamacare (via conservative blog CNN):


Many Americans browsing the Obamacare exchanges are finding the Affordable Care Act isn't living up to its name (http://money.cnn.com/2013/11/21/news/economy/obamacare-affordable/index.html).

It's not just premiums that are bringing up the costs. Consumers are finding high deductibles, co-payments and other expenses that make the Obamacare policies seem more like catastrophic plans than comprehensive insurance.

Those picking a bronze plan, which carry the lowest monthly rates, may have to spend $5,000 or more before the insurance kicks in. The next highest level of coverage, the silver tier, can carry $2,000 deductibles. And once they hit their deductibles, policy holders still have to pay for doctor visits, lab tests and medication.

"All we ever heard about Obamacare is that it would lower our deductibles and premiums," said Jennifer Slafter, 40 of Mabel, Minn. "That's just not what's happened."

Slafter and her husband, Steve, are scrambling to find affordable care for themselves and their two children. The exchange's Blue Cross Blue Shield plan was $1,087 a month with a $6,000 deductible, while a Medica plan was $877 a month with a $12,700 deductible. Both are steeper than their current plan.

"Everything got higher," said Slafter, who is still waiting to hear whether they qualify for a premium subsidy. But even if they do, she said she'd still find it very tough to meet the deductibles.

Let's review, the BCBS = $13,044 per year with a $6000 deductible

The Medica plan = $10,524 per year with a $12,700 deductible.

Why would anyone trying to make ends meet want to even try and do that? I'd take my chances and save the $13 grand. What is affordable about that?

Finally waking up to the gouging that we have been taking from insurance companies? Your employer based insurance is the same way. Haven't used it lately? No major illness or injury?

But I guess you never dealt with part D before Obama Care either. That too was your free market solution at work. Prices fluctuate, but seldom go down. Insurance company stock is about to skyrocket more than it has, and all you know is the government is taking over your life.

This is so sad Speech.

Finally waking up to the gouging that we have been taking from insurance companies? Your employer based insurance is the same way. Haven't used it lately? No major illness or injury?

What part of Obamacare made it even more expensive are you missing?

What part of Obamacare made it even more expensive are you missing?
I don't think the point is missed Speech, the debate centres around what to do about it, thing is you can't go back unless you force the insurance companies

The market sets the price. Economics 101. Ask any capitalist.

The market sets the price. Economics 101. Ask any capitalist.

The market is being dumped on with bad investments. It is hard for any market to adjust to that.

The market sets the price. Economics 101. Ask any capitalist.

And you apparently still don't understand that when you require more coverage and add more risk it will necessarily cost more. All your dodging aside the fact is the whole thing was sold on lies, you ignored our warnings and now you have no sympathy for those adversely affected. Excuses don't pay the bills.

Hello again,

People LOOSING their insurance under Obamacare, must be considered in the context of 5 million people who WON'T have access to health care at all under Republican governors who refuse to expand their medicaid roles. The latter group FAR outnumbers the first.

So, spare me the crocodile tears...

excon

Does Obamacare achieve that? Is it equitable?

No, but when we starting talking about winners and losers then you know for certain that the term doesn't apply to healthcare.

The words that are spoken are equity, coverage and cost

Again with the myth that people are refused health care. Is that all you have, lies? Sold on lies, built on lies, defended on lies.

people can get health coverage but at what cost?

The cost was dependent on income. Most States had some form or another of expanded medicare so it allows those that couldn't get insurance for whatever reason in the open market to get it through those programs.

I said no one is refused care. It may not be ideal but neither is this crap sandwich we've been sold, and while the left moans on about states not expanding Medicaid with numbers pulled out of who knows where they expect us to believe employers aren't going to start dumping employees on the exchanges by the millions. They will, because the fiasco has pushed rates up to where it's far cheaper to pay the fine.

The point being, this 80 percent of Americans are "unaffected" by Obamacare meme is BS. Stop lying to us, we're not idiots.

Hello again, Steve:

Again with the myth that people are refused health care. Lemme see.

SOME state governors ARE accepting federal money to expand their medicaid roles, and SOME aren't.. According to YOU, there's NO difference in the care one would receive in a state that TOOK the money, as he would in one that didn't..

That makes no sense on its face. So, if you wanna complain about people who are getting HURT by bureaucrats, START with the ones in your own state.

excon