Affordable Care Act for dummies version (Page 6)

Originally posted by morey000

then you are misinformed.  you need to do some googling. 

funny thing about the internet these days is, that no matter what you believe, if you go searching for it, you'll find an article or an opinion that confirms your hypothesis.  the article you linked was pretty weak; claiming that it heritage's 1989 paper wasn't the same as the ACA.  Well, it wasn't exactly the same, but it operated off exactly the same principles (that the GOP is running away from today), and promoted the idea that all americans should be guaranteed access to affordable healthcare and that we should mandate households to purchase insurance.  

funny thing is, you don't need to go back to 1989. the mandate based healthcare system was the cornerstone of GOP policy not only through the 1990's, but as late as 2009 and into 2010.  There are plenty of videos and quotes from nearly all the GOP spokespeople and leadership during that period.

So chuckle all you want. And, be against a mandate based healthcare model all you want.  But to deny that it was the prior GOP plan is being willfully ignorant.  

Originally posted by tuwood

I actually agree with the idea of mandating a catastrophic insurance policy, so I'm not sure what the big controversy is there.  However, I'm still trying to understand why the supporters of the ACA are trying so hard to say Obamacare is actually just the Democrats implementing a Republican idea.  It's almost like things aren't going too well so they're desperately trying to find somebody else to blame.

Also, the individual mandate isn't the problem with the ACA, it's all of the mandatory coverages in addition to the mandate that are the problem.  If the ACA were simply an individual mandate that required everyone to get coverage (of some kind) and then provided subsidies for lower income individuals it would be considerably better than what it is from a financial standpoint.  Unfortunately, the administration went a lot further than just requiring a mandate.  They required a mandate in addition to massive new minimum coverages (right or wrong) which are driving the cost of the insurance policies up significantly.

Either way, good luck getting it to stick that the ACA was the Republicans fault when not a single one of them voted for it and they "shut down the government" trying to stop it.

Originally posted by kevin_trapp

My mistake, I thought you were denying that the individual mandate was a conservative idea.  To be fair, you did include a link to a Stuart Butler article claiming that America has it wrong and don't blame the Heritage Foundation.  So you can understand my confusion.

I think you're reading too much in to it.  Of course Obama supporters are going to point it out.  What else are they going to do, talk about how great the website is running?  They're clearly on the defensive, and pointing out the conservative origins of ACA deflects some of the heat for a moment.  No one is trying to give Republicans any credit/blame for the ACA.  

Both parties bet the farm on ACA.  If the ACA ultimately proves to be a successful program, the left is not going to give any Republican a single ounce of credit.  And if it fails miserably, there's no way the left can deflect even a little bit of it on to the right since Republicans so unanimously opposed it.  I don't know if it will all play out in time for the 2014 elections, but I would imagine one party is going to be destroyed in 2016.

Originally posted by tuwood

....  You're trying to say that the ACA is a Republican idea, which I think is a pretty accurate statement.  I'm just a little shocked that you want to give credit for Obama's greatest accomplishment to the Republicans.

Personally, I'm not trying to deny anything about what was or was not in the Heritage foundation proposal or even what Romney did in his state which is obviously a portion of .  The simple fact is that it's irrelevant because the Democrats created and wrote the ACA no matter where their influences came from.  There was not a single Republican who voted for it.  It's turning into a colossal political turd for them and the spinsters on the left wing blogs are doing everything in their power to point across the isle and say "they made us do it" even though not a single one of them voted for it.

So, yes indeed  I am chuckling at this line of attack.

Originally posted by morey000

OK.  that makes more sense.  Yes, the dems put forth the republican idea.  Obama wanted so desperately to have a bi-partisan bill, that after a year of negotiating, he acquiesced his desire to have single payer, and caved to the GOP demands.  At which point all the GOP people who said they'd support the mandate based plan, fled because they didn't want to be part of anything that would put a feather in Obama's cap.  It's politically more expedient to throw stones than to build a house.

It's a shame for the GOP, as if this fails, then they'll probably get re-elected, and then the only other option for them would be to go single payer.  They just might be left holding the bag of that they created.  At which point, 14 years from now, we'll be electing Cory Booker to clean up the mess. 

Originally posted by tuwood

I love your fervor.  I think it's quite a stretch to say that Obama caved to the GOP demands when there wasn't a single GOP vote that was needed nor cast.  So, what "demands" did he cave to in order to get their support?
I'm not sure what you're talking about with GOP members fleeing from supporting the individual mandate when this law was being proposed.  I seem to recall it coming in as a "here's the law, and we don't care what the GOP thinks about it because we're going to pass it". (and they did)

 

The notion of trying to pin the ACA failures on the Republicans has just popped up in the last few months and I'm seeing a lot of traction with it on the democratic underground.  I know I keep saying I chuckle at the attempt, but when it's so obvious what they're trying to do it genuinely is funny.  The Democrats are generally a lot smoother with their set up, but I think they've been caught off guard on the ACA being received so poorly that the spin is very forced and unnatural.

Here's one of the biggest tells;  Wiki revisions have all been kicking in over the last few months to point out that it was the Republican's idea.  Here's an example of the original "Affordable Health Care for America Act" which was the original legislation proposed by the house that was later replaced by the Senate version during reconciliation.
Now, if the ACA were created back in 2009 in the image of the Heritage Foundation's suggestion then why is it that only in the last 4 days the Wiki page gets mysteriously updated with this information?  It's almost like somebodies trying to revise the history a little bit now that things aren't going well...

Current Wiki Page describing the History

History
The bill was introduced on October 29, 2009 and passed on November 7, during the 1st Session of the 111th Congress. Its primary sponsor was the Dean of the House, John Dingell of Michigan. The bill is a revised version of an earlier measure, the proposed America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (HR 3200 [18][19]). The revisions included refinements designed to meet the goals outlined in the President's address to a joint session of Congress in September, 2009 concerning health care reform. In 1989 the idea for the "individual madate" that every household obtain adequate health care was proposed by a consertive think tank known as the Heritage Foundation [20] and supported in congress by high profile republicans Newt Gingrich, Orin Hatch and Charles Grassley in 1993.[21]

30 October 2013 (just 5 days ago and not one mention of Heritage...  Hmmm)

History
The bill was introduced on October 29, 2009 and passed on November 7, during the 1st Session of the 111th Congress. Its primary sponsor was the Dean of the House, John Dingell of Michigan. The bill is a revised version of an earlier measure, the proposed America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (HR 3200 [18][19]). The revisions included refinements designed to meet the goals outlined in the President's address to a joint session of Congress in September, 2009 concerning health care reform.

 

Originally posted by buck1400 I think both of you are forgetting the real reason we have the system we have, as mentioned earlier in this thread, is the insurance company lobby. They are the big winners. A product people are required to purchase. The only things they gave up were; a little competition in the the form of the exchanges (but not really that much competition, since they are not required to participate), and the 80%/20% requirement, which doesn't seem to be a big deal because it was in place last year and I don't think lots of people got big refund checks.

Originally posted by tuwood

In first month, the vast majority of Obamacare sign-ups are in Medicaid

I thought this was an interesting article.  Obviously it's still very early and the ultimate ratio of who signs up isn't going to be known until probably early next year.  However, the statement from the Medicaid dude doesn't suggest that this is a good sign.

“When we first saw the numbers, everyone’s eyes kind of bugged out,” said Matt Salo, who runs the National Association of Medicaid Directors. “Of the people walking through the door, 90 percent are on Medicaid. We’re thinking, what planet is this happening on?”

Originally posted by buck1400 Is that because they didn't know they were eligible before, or because of the changes in the eligibility? I know in Ohio, the Medicaid eligibility was not adjusted as in was in a lot of other states.

Originally posted by jeffnboise

Thought this was a fairly impartial breakdown of the ACA's major impacts. 

http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-the-five-big-reasons-obamacare-changes-insurance-premiums-2013-11

Happy Friday!

 

Originally posted by tuwood

I don't know the answer, but I suspect they're new people because of the Medicaid expansion.

I just did some googling and found this website: http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacares-medicaid-expansion.php

 ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion expands Medicaid to our nations poorest in order cover nearly half of uninsured Americans.

• Medicaid is a joint federal and state funded program that provides health care for over 60 million low income Americans
• In 2014 State's that expand Medicaid will increase eligibility levels to 138% of the Federal Poverty Line ($23,550 for a family of four).

I've mostly been focusing on the exchange based insurance, but it looks like half the people being covered are going under the guise of Medicaid.  So, that would make sense as to the volume of people signing up.  The people getting free medical are certainly going to sign up in droves, but the ones having to pay for the Exchange plans not so much.

 

Originally posted by tuwood

I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine this morning.  In the last several weeks he had a staph infection in his elbow and went through several procedures that of course cost a lot of money.  He received a bill for $18,000 and was talking about how it sucks because he doesn't have any insurance.

I said something to the effect of it sucks that it wasn't a few months later because he could have gotten on Obamacare and not had to worry about any pre-existing conditions for the coverage.

What he told me was interesting.  He said he had a high risk catastrophic plan through BCBS before, but the premiums and deductibles were too high for him and he couldn't afford it so he let it lapse earlier this year.  He said he's looked into Obamacare and even with the subsidies his monthly fee is higher than it was on the old BCBS catastrophic plan and the deductibles are higher as well so he won't be getting that insurance either.

I know this is yet another anecdote to add to the pile, but I think my friend is a perfect example of somebody who the law was intended to help and it doesn't appear to be doing anything for him.