0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
Health Law's Impact Has Only BegunInsurers Seek Healthy Enrollees, Doctors Educate New Patients, Employers Wrestle With Added CostsBy ANNA WILDE MATHEWS CONNECTUpdated Feb. 18, 2014 9:49 p.m. ETOn Jan. 1, the key provisions of the Affordable Care Act took effect. Americans gained access to new health plans subsidized by federal dollars. Insurers no longer can turn away people with existing conditions. Millions are now eligible for new Medicaid benefits.But the federal law also upended existing health-insurance arrangements for millions of people. Companies worry about the expense of providing new policies, some hospitals aren't seeing the influx of new patients they expected to balance new costs and entrepreneurs say they may hire more part-time workers to avoid offering more coverage.The law's true impact will play out over years. It will depend in part on whether backers overcome serious early setbacks, including crippling glitches in the new online insurance marketplaces and many states' rejection of the Medicaid expansion. But another obstacle the law faces is pushback from some consumers and industry over the higher costs, complex rules and mandatory requirements it imposes. (Watch doctors, business owners and patients share their stories about the health law, and tell us your own.)So far, 3.3 million have signed up for plans through the new government marketplaces, federal officials said Feb. 12. About 6.3 million were determined eligible for Medicaid through the exchanges over the final three months of 2013, including people who might have been able to enroll without the law.The law's potential for change can be seen in the lives of people like Jaime Hood, a 37-year-old in Belton, Mo. She suffers from hemophilia and had been rejected for coverage until this year. Now, she will have access to drugs and other treatments she sometimes skipped.But the other side of the law is felt by customers such as John Lavey, 60, of Southern California's Orange County. His insurer sent him a letter in October saying his family's plan didn't comply with the law, and the closest thing he could get would cost nearly twice as much, or about $1,117 a month. "It doesn't seem fair to our situation," he said. To him, the law feels like "the redistribution of wealth theory."
There's an existing thread, oc. Moving this there.
Quote from: Pandora on February 20, 2014, 02:35:14 PMThere's an existing thread, oc. Moving this there.I couldn't find it. I'm old and stupic, so cut me some slack!
Quote from: oldcoastie6468 on February 20, 2014, 02:39:14 PMQuote from: Pandora on February 20, 2014, 02:35:14 PMThere's an existing thread, oc. Moving this there.I couldn't find it. I'm old and stupic, so cut me some slack! Did I imply you were either old or stupic? Newp. It's better to put a comment in the thread about moving stuff, instead of PMing you every time, so everybody else knows what's going on too.You peckin' a fight?
Here we go...IRS Issues Warning about “Shared Responsibility Payment” How can there possibly be equal treatment under the law with this enforcement mecahnism? How will the IRS track down those who do not file income taxes? How will it track down the indigent street people? Will it target only those it can reach? Those with accounts and other assets to seize?
Quote from: Libertas on February 26, 2014, 07:28:02 AMHere we go...IRS Issues Warning about “Shared Responsibility Payment” How can there possibly be equal treatment under the law with this enforcement mecahnism? How will the IRS track down those who do not file income taxes? How will it track down the indigent street people? Will it target only those it can reach? Those with accounts and other assets to seize?You don't get it. those people you are describing are irresponsible people. This is the shared responsibility tax -- is a tax on PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE for being responsible. They want to share the consequences of your responsibility with the the irresponsible. Want out of the tax? Be irresponsible. Stop making money and love on the dole and they will leave you alone.
Troubling Things You May Not Know About IPABPresident Obama’s Secret Rationing Board Given Enormous Power, No AccountabilityWashington, Mar 5, 2012 | 0 commentsBuried in Section 3403 of ObamaCare is a powerful board of unelected bureaucrats, the so-called “Independent Payment Advisory Board” (IPAB), whose sole job will be to save money by restricting access to health care for Medicare beneficiaries. IPAB is required to achieve specified savings in years where Medicare spending is deemed “too high,” according to the Democrats’ health care overhaul. While few Americans are aware that this ObamaCare rationing board even exists, it embodies the very thing Americans feared most about the law – unaccountable Washington bureaucrats meeting behind closed doors to make unilateral decisions that should be made by patients and their doctors. A review of IPAB’s powers make clear that the American people have every reason to be concerned. Tomorrow, the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health will convene to hear from stakeholders about the impact this ill-conceived rationing board will have on Medicare beneficiaries and their health care providers. These are just a few of the items that may come up for discussion:The Democrats did not prevent IPAB from rationing health care. The Democrats claim they “prevent” IPAB from including recommendations to ration health care. However, the Democrats chose not to define what they meant by “ration,” and such a definition does not appear anywhere in the Medicare statute. So, rationing is in the eye of the IPAB beholder. IPAB would be free to cut reimbursement rates for procedures and services that IPAB deems “unnecessary” to levels so low that no physician would provide the care. The Democrats’ rationing board will threaten seniors’ access to care. Medicare is already known for its low reimbursement rates (e.g., Medicare physician payment rates are 20 percent lower than what they receive from private health plans), which have forced many physicians to stop accepting new Medicare patients. IPAB is specifically tasked with cutting provider rates even further. Countless physician groups have warned these cuts will force many to stop seeing Medicare patients. Because TRICARE reimbursement rates are directly tied to Medicare, health care for military personnel will be impacted by these cuts as well. Democrats require seniors and Americans with disabilities to pay for IPAB to cut their Medicare benefits. IPAB’s annual operating budget is raided from the Medicare trust funds. This means that IPAB’s generous member salaries ($165,300 for members and $179,700 for IPAB’s chairperson in 2012) will be paid directly out of the trust funds used to pay Medicare beneficiaries’ health care claims. IPAB staff will also be paid out of the Medicare trust funds (up to $145,700 per employee in 2012). So will all travel expenses and stipends. What a deal!
