News Count Me As Grateful For The Changes Coming In Us Health Care

[The Albatross]

As I was watching events this week a spouse of a disabled veteran was talking about it. She had a good point and a take that I could identify with but hadn't yet seen or read. "Do you want your health care to be run the way the Veterans Administration treats military service members and families the way they do at the VA?" Being a former service member, and having some direct experience with the care afforded myself, I thought immediately, "Hell NO."

 

[heidi]

Ad hominem comments do not make the arguement false, nor negate the facts.

But you didn't address the any of the facts I did mention. In fact did you even read it at all because I was talking about the "hours slashed" thing before you even mentioned it. I was making the point that when health care was mandated to be given to employees who worked 40 hours a week employers would play the same game and cut employee hours 38 or something cheeky like that. I was on the receiving end of that practice many times. And now when this happens to an individual and they have reduced hours they have an option to buy individual health care that they didn't have before. In the past if they were denied coverage there was really no way they could get it. Now they have an option where they can buy affordable health care if their employer refuses to cover it.

 

[heidi]

No harder than it is to argue that socialized medicine works. It doesn't. My husbands cousin is still waiting for a doctor to be assigned to her. All she did was move from New Brunswick to Nova Scotia. Three years is the "average wait". In the meantime she was told to go to the emergency room.

Is that working in the case of health care? A 3 year wait to be given a physician?

"Obamacare" is not socialized health care. It's not government run. It is private enterprise system with some government mandates.

Some of these mandates include:

• Insurers can’t deny or exclude coverage to any child under age 19 based on a pre-existing condition.
• Beginning in 2014, plans cannot deny or exclude anyone or charge more for a pre-existing condition, including a disability.
• Essential benefits required in new plans include vision and dental coverage for children and pregnancy and newborn care for women.
• Children who cannot receive coverage through work can remain on their parents’ plan until age 26. This age limit varies by state; in Ohio, for example, the age limit is 28. In 2014, all plans must allow coverage up to age 26 (even if the dependent has access to coverage through work).
• Insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime limits on the amount they will pay to cover required or essential health benefits.

We actually had to mandate that CHILDREN with preexisting conditions could not be denied coverage. That's how badly the system was in need of updating and reform. And those were people who were willing to pay the mindbogglingly high cost of individual health care insurance. Even paying those high rates for individual health care plans people could not be ensured coverage.

 

[heidi]

My spouses employer is expecting health care changes and will be notified the first week of October about changing benefits and rates. We are hoping they do not drop spousal coverage. The reason? Obamacare.

If you were dropped from your husbands insurance you would now have the option of buying an individual health insurance plan. People are no longer dependent on their spouses for insurance as they would have been in the past. And individual plans are not medicare or government run medical services. They are regular individual health insurance plans run by regular insurance companies with care that takes place at regular for profit hospitals and clinics.

And what about people without spouses or employer health care? Do you realize they had no good options in the past. Even if you did get dropped you would have options. People without spouses or employer health care in the past literally had zero options.

Or did you want those people to go on medicaid? Because that's a government program and I will tell you that in my state you can't even qualify for that if you are a single childless adult.

 

[The Albatross]

"Obamacare" is not socialized health care. It's not government run. It is private enterprise system with some government mandates..

Via Forbes:
"When I speak to conservatives about health care policy, I’m often asked the question: “Do you think that Obamacare is secretly a step toward single-payer health care?” I always explain that, while progressives may want single-payer, I don’t think that Obamacare is deliberately designed to bring about that outcome. Well, yesterday on PBS’ Nevada Week In Review, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) was asked whether his goal was to move Obamacare to a single-payer system. His answer? “Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes.”

In one sense, this isn’t shocking. Reid and many other Democrats, including President Obama, have often stated that their ideal health-care system is one in which the government abolishes the private insurance market." Source:
Sen. Harry Reid: Obamacare 'Absolutely' A Step Toward A Single-Payer System

 

[The Albatross]

But you didn't address the any of the facts I did mention.

Considering the way you prefaced your comment, *oh one of those*
government paranoids, I considered not answering it at all. I may come back later.

 

[The Albatross]

Transcript from PBS's McLaughlin Group. The host John McLaughlin is speaking with Mort Zuckerman and the video presented was a clip of Senator Cruz:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATOR TED CRUZ (R-TEXAS): When you have a law that is killing jobs, when you have law that is hammering small businesses, when you have a law that is forcing people into part-time work, into working 29 hours a week, when you have a law that is causing skyrocketing insurance premiums, when you have a law that is causing more and more people to lose their health insurance, you have a law that’s not working. You have a train wreck.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCLAUGHLIN: Question Mort Zuckerman, is Cruz right?

MORT ZUCKERMAN, US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT: Well, ILink Removed. A large part of the reason for that number of part-time jobs which is unprecedented in American history is because people are apprehensive about the impact of ObamaCare on and the costs of ObamaCare on full-time jobs. If they’re part-time jobs they don’t qualify under ObamaCare.

Now, I happen to support national medical service, national medical care, but we have to do something about its effect on the job market because this is a disaster for the average American family.

 

[The Albatross]

The fundamental difference, between me and some of you... is that I do not personally elevate my individual needs over my national identity. I was not born in a nanny state, nor do I want to see one in my lifetime particularly one that risks solvency to dole out subsidies and entitlements that it can't afford. Should the debt situation and economic forecast improve... then by all means, go ahead. Uncle Sugar Daddy mentality, the erosion of our nation's financial security, and the corrosive rise of artificial "rights" (the entitlement mentality of the generally low information voter) are combining to form a historic threat to America.

Wake up and smell the coffee people, your nation's economic future is at stake.

"National healthcare spending will increase to approximately 22 percent of the gross domestic product by 2038 under current law, driven by various factors such as an aging population, new medical technologies and expanding health insurance coverage, according to the Congressional Budget Office's 2013 long-term budget outlook report.

Thee CBO projects spending on federal healthcare programs including Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program will grow much faster than the economy, increasing from their current level of 5 percent of GDP to 8 percent by 2038.

[snip]

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will also contribute to spending growth because of its Medicaid expansion provision and federal subsidies to help people with incomes between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level purchase health plans through the new health insurance exchanges. The CBO estimates increased Medicaid enrollment and additional federal spending on subsidies will account for 26 percent of the spending increase for major healthcare programs through 2038." (Source: [DLMURL="http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/racs-/-icd-9-/-icd-10/cbo-national-healthcare-spending-to-increase-to-22-of-gdp-by-2038.html"] CBO: National Healthcare Spending to Increase to 22% of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) by 2038[/DLMURL] )

The shortcut to the Congressional Budget Office 2013 outlook is broken on the source link but page 1 (the chart) of the pdf version pretty much sums it up. Pay particular attention to the Federal debt. Spikes are not unusual... particular after wars or after the depression. But this is no spike. It is an unsustainable debt crisis in the making.

From page three of the report, "Federal spending for the major health care programs and Social Security would increase to a total of 14 percent of GDP by 2038, twice the 7 percent average of the past 40 years.

In contrast, total spending on everything other than the major health care programs, Social Security, and net interest payments would decline to 7 percent of GDP, well below the 11 percent average of the past 40 years and a smaller share of the economy than at any time since the late 1930s.

The federal government’s net interest payments would grow to 5 percent of GDP, compared with an average of 2 percent over the past 40 years, mainly because federal debt would be much larger."
federal debt would be much larger."

 

[The Albatross]

If you were dropped from your husbands insurance you would now have the option of buying an individual health insurance plan..

If I am dropped I will curtail the not for profit job I do and I will get one that provides a benefit. I will not, under any circumstances consider participating in this program. I would be a hypocrite if I did. I would rather pay the penalty annually for the rest of my lifetime.

 

[The Albatross]

No one can look at page 1 of the Congressional Budget Office 2013 report and tell me Obamacare is "for the children". No one. It is crony capitalism and for insurance companies.

 

[BloomInWinter]

Yes, the GOP fear-mongering and disinformation game has cost us all greatly. Employers who want workers to work as many hours as they can bleed out of them without providing for their health and ability to take care of their families are selfish, cruel, and morally reprehensible. No profit happens without the labor of a corporation's employees.

"The frantic crusade to screw up the launch of the Affordable Care Act is a sad tale in American politics. If conservatives are successful, even with a short-term government shutdown Cruz and his House GOP allies might achieve, patients will suffer. If young people fail to sign up for health insurance—the stated goal of one Koch-backed front group now airing television advertisements—more will drown under crushing debt if they find themselves in need of serious medical care. But Washington, DC, has a bizarre way of incentivizing harmful behavior, and the sabotage Obamacare campaign is not without its winners.

A set of campaign consultants and insurance agents stand to profit from confusing Americans on the eve of the healthcare reform enrollment date."

Source: http://www.thenation.com/blog/17633...-lucrative-endeavor-some#sthash.gvluBNv7.dpuf

"The canny bit of marketing is part of a reported $750,000 campaign by Generation Opportunity, an anti-Obamacare group backed by the billionaire conservative donors Charles and David Koch, to convince young adults that their best option is to remain uninsured once the health care law kicks in next year.

What’s most notable about the ads – besides the unfortunately positioned patriotic symbol – is who they target. Young adults are crucial to the ACA’s success. The law’s state-based health insurance marketplaces, called exchanges, will keep premiums affordable only if enough young, healthy people sign up for coverage to offset the cost of insuring older and sicker enrollees. The White House has said the exchanges will need to enroll 2.7 million healthy 18-25-year-olds to remain solvent." Source : http://nation.time.com/2013/09/19/spread-your-legs-for-uncle-sam/#ixzz2gIAuWB00

This list from the Pulitzer-prize winning Politifact -

"Top 16 myths about the health care law
By Angie Drobnic Holan
Published on Tuesday, September 24th, 2013 at 2:25 p.m.

There's a lot of misinformation out there about the new health care law.

PolitiFact has been fact-checking claims about the federal health care law since lawmakers started drafting the legislation in 2009. Long controversial, the law has been no stranger to attacks by detractors. Here are 16 of the biggest falsehoods PolitiFact has rated.

( Fact-checks are listed in no particular order. The links will take you to a full report and a source list for each fact-check.)

1. The health care law rations care, like systems in Canada and Great Britain. False.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott, July 2, 2012, in an interview on Fox News

The health care law is not socialized medicine. Instead, it leaves in place the private health care system that follows free market principles. The law does put more regulations on health insurance companies. It also fines most large employers who fail to provide insurance for their employees, and it requires all individuals to have health insurance. This is unlike the systems in either Britain or Canada. In Britain, doctors are employees of the government, while in Canada, the government pays most medical bills as part of a single-payer system. The U.S. health care law has neither of those features. PolitiFact has rated this claim and others like it False.

2. The health care law has "death panels." Pants on Fire.

Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor, Aug. 7, 2009, in a message posted on Facebook

Back in 2009, it was a popular talking point to claim that the health care law had "death panels" to determine if individuals are worthy of receiving health care coverage. The claim was widely debunked and named PolitiFact’s Lie of the Year. The talking point started in reaction to an idea for Medicare, that the Medicare program for seniors should specifically cover doctor appointments for seniors who wanted to discuss do-not-resuscitate orders, end-of-life directives and living wills. The visits would have been completely optional and only for people who wanted the appointments. After controversy, the provision was dropped from the final legislation. We rated the "death panels" claim Pants on Fire.

3. Muslims are exempt from the health care law. Pants on Fire.

Chain email, May 29, 2013

A widely circulated chain email claims that the word "dhimmitude" is on page 107 of the health care law, and it means Muslims will be exempt. Actually, the health care law does not include the word "dhimmitude" (a recently coined word that seems to refer to non-Muslims under Muslim rule). Also, the health care law doesn’t exempt Muslims. There is a "religious conscience exemption,'' but it applies to groups that disavow all forms of insurance, including Social Security. Muslim groups have supported the Affordable Care Act. We rated the chain email’s claim Pants on Fire.

4. The IRS is going to be "in charge" of "a huge national database" on health care that will include Americans’ "personal, intimate, most close-to-the-vest-secrets." Pants on Fire.

U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., May 15, 2013, in an interview on Fox News

The Internal Revenue Service does have a role to play as part of the health care law, but it’s not the role suggested here. If you buy insurance on the marketplace and you get a subsidy, officials will check tax records to make sure you qualify. That communication with the IRS happens via a data hub that’s also connected to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It’s important to note, though, that the hub isn’t a database. The IRS isn’t running it. And it doesn’t include "intimate" health data. The hub is for signing up for health insurance, not for storing medical records. We rated the claim Pants on Fire.

5. Congress is exempt from Obamacare. False.

Chain email, Jan. 6, 2013

Even a few sitting lawmakers have repeated this claim, but it’s not true. Congress is not exempt from Obamacare. Like everyone else, lawmakers are required to have health insurance. They’re also required to buy insurance through the marketplaces. The idea is to have lawmakers and their staff buy insurance the same way their uninsured constituents would so they understand what their constituents have to deal with. Most Americans who already get insurance through work are left alone under the law; members of Congress have insurance through work but are treated differently in this regard. Recently, a rule was added so that lawmakers’ could keep the traditional employer contribution to their coverage. But they weren’t exempt from requirements that other Americans face. We rated this claim False.

6. Under Obamacare, people who "have a doctor they’ve been seeing for the last 15 or 20 years, they won’t be able to keep going to that doctor." Mostly False.

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., July 31, 2013 in a Fox News interview

Some have suggested that Obamacare would interfere with doctor-patient relationships. Actually, there’s no more interference than what existed before Obamacare. Right now, patients can lose access to their doctors when their insurance policies change. This typically happens when employers switch plans or when workers switch (or lose) jobs. Under Obamacare, some patients who buy health insurance through the marketplace could lose access to their current doctor, but it’s difficult to predict how many. And it would be because they have a new insurance plan. We rated this claim Mostly False.

7. The health care law is a "government takeover" of health care. Pants on Fire.

U.S. Rep. C.W. Bill Young, R-Indian Shores, Feb. 20, 2010, in a speech to Pinellas County Republicans.

"Government takeover" conjures a European approach where the government owns the hospitals and the doctors are public employees. But the law Congress passed relies largely on the free market. It's true that the law significantly increases government regulation of health insurers. But it is, at its heart, a system that relies on private companies and the free market. The majority of Americans will continue to get coverage from private insurers. We rated the claim Pants on Fire."

Source: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/24/top-16-myths-about-health-care-law/

Yes, people are confused, and it's largely due to the efforts of Republicans and the corporations deliberately sabotaging it. Shame on them!

Now, they've added on a provision to allow employers to discriminate against female employees by denying them coverage for reproductive health. Immoral and disgusting, in my opinion. Many women use contraception for health issues other than preventing pregnancy. But they'll have to just suck it up if the GOP gets their way. Unbelievable, but shows how little they care about women's health...or women, for that matter.

 

[The Albatross]

Yes, the GOP fear-mongering and disinformation game has cost us all greatly.

The GOP doesn't have a damn thing to do with the Congressional Budget Offices 2013 report. It was completed by an independent economist. I watched the meeting on Thursday and it's on again right now. (CSPAN)

Honestly, how you all can ignore the facts for short term benefit is beyond me.

For the record, in our household, like my parents... we have one registered Democrat and one registered Republican. We actually take turns and it is soon to be my turn to take the Democrat spot (not that I'm looking forward to it at all). We are actually libertarians or more aptly constitutional/conservative libertarians. But if we don't register with a party we don't get to cast votes in the primaries. Neither party actually does a very good job representing us. We debate issues, clarify viewpoints and our positions and when we vote... we vote in unison so that his vote doesn't cancel mine and visa versa.

Though why I felt compelled to say that when the real problem with Obamacare is fiscal... and we didn't even know what was in it when it was passed... and it's still being rewritten, unconstitutionally I might add by our current president, and the 20 plus thousand pages of legislation have only come to light in the past two years quantitatively ... is stupid.

The fact of the matter is this law was misrepresented, passed by questionable political procedural maneuvering, obfuscated the truth, and we can't f'king afford it.