Will Obamacare succeed where term limits failed?

[Xiahou]

Maybe he is trying to destroy private insurance. If he is, I regret my vote a lot less. Bring on universal healthcare!

Unlike many fellow conservatives, I've long applied Hanlon's Razor to my view of the insurance death spiral. But eventually, you do begin to wonder...

EDIT: Is Obama's new plan even feasible? Insurance companies purged those plans and created new ones that are Obamacare complaint. I imagine there was no small amount of administrative work in that transition. What's involved in bringing those plans back from the trash heap before year-end? Also, there are some pretty big financial dis-incentives for insurance companies to even do so.

Obama has set them up to fail whether or not they try to renew the cancelled plans. If the manage to renew them, they invite financial ruin. If they don't, they become scapegoats.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Unlike many fellow conservatives, I've long applied Hanlon's Razor to my view of the insurance death spiral. But eventually, you do begin to wonder...

EDIT: Is Obama's new plan even feasible? Insurance companies purged those plans and created new ones that are Obamacare complaint. I imagine there was no small amount of administrative work in that transition. What's involved in bringing those plans back from the trash heap before year-end? Also, there are some pretty big financial dis-incentives for insurance companies to even do so.

Obama has set them up to fail whether or not they try to renew the cancelled plans. If the manage to renew them, they invite financial ruin. If they don't, they become scapegoats.

Most of the policies have not been cancelled, they usually cycle with the calendar year as an automatic renewal and the companies are simply not renewing. Should be pretty seamless IF the appropriate legislation or executive order (not sure if such could be done Constitutionally, not that the current government always observes that old rag anyway) is promulgated before Christmas then the companies will not have dumped the policies -- but every day longer makes the process more annoying to the consumer because January payments often fall due in December.

[Ironside]

Standard Oil is a common example- but it's early market dominance came from it's control of the early oil fields at the birth of the industry. It's market share was substantially reduced due to competitors before its breakup.

It still controlled 64% and was divided into 33 companies, decades after the methods that created its rise was hampered or forbidden.

Many companies rise to market dominance, but when they stop innovating and turn their focus to protecting it's turf their fall typically follows.

One of the essential things for that to happen are that the monopoly companies can't simply eliminate their compeditors before they're a threat.

[Xiahou]

Most of the policies have not been cancelled, they usually cycle with the calendar year as an automatic renewal and the companies are simply not renewing. Should be pretty seamless IF the appropriate legislation or executive order (not sure if such could be done Constitutionally, not that the current government always observes that old rag anyway) is promulgated before Christmas then the companies will not have dumped the policies -- but every day longer makes the process more annoying to the consumer because January payments often fall due in December.

From the WaPo...

The White House’s Obamacare fix is about to create a big mess

Here's how Robert Laszewksi, an insurance consultant, put it in a note to clients earlier this morning:

This means that the insurance companies have 32 days to reprogram their computer systems for policies, rates, and eligibility, send notices to the policyholders via US Mail, send a very complex letter that describes just what the differences are between specific policies and Obamacare compliant plans, ask the consumer for their decision — and give them a reasonable time to make that decision — and then enter those decisions back into their systems without creating massive billing, claim payment, and provider eligibility list mistakes.


All by January 1.

I don't think it's going to be seamless at all.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

From the WaPo...

The White House’s Obamacare fix is about to create a big mess


I don't think it's going to be seamless at all.

You will note that I did capitalize the "if."

Just listening to the Reems show on NPR. Heard my first dem political/policy wonk analyst acknowledge the possibility of the word "implosion" being an outcome for the ACA.

[Xiahou]

Just listening to the Reems show on NPR. Heard my first dem political/policy wonk analyst acknowledge the possibility of the word "implosion" being an outcome for the ACA.

I've got to admit that even I'm surprised with how catastrophically the law is failing so far. I knew it was going to be bad.... but man.

Did anyone catch any of Obama's apology speech yesterday? This bit left me practically dumbfounded...

One thing that we’ve discovered, though, that I think is — is worth noting, a lot of focus has been on the website and the technology, and that’s partly because that’s how we initially identified it; you know, these are glitches. What we’re discovering is that part of the problem has been technology, hardware and software, and that’s being upgraded. But even if we get the — the hardware and software working exactly the way it’s supposed to with relatively minor glitches, what we’re also discovering is that insurance is complicated to buy. And another mistake that we made, I think, was underestimating the difficulties of people purchasing insurance online and shopping for a lot of options with a lot of costs and lot of different benefits and plans and — and somehow expecting that that would be very smooth, and then they’ve also got to try to apply for tax credits on the website.

He just figured that out? Seriously? These are the people that wrote the law and oversaw the creation of the website and exchanges..... and they've just now discovered that insurance is complicated????
Inexcusable. Resign. Now.

[Husar]

Thanks Xiahou, for not losing your humor in all this.

[Greyblades]

Inexcusable. Resign. Now.

Oh give it a rest, if a president doesn't have to resign over getting tens of thousands of people killed pursuing the agendas of oil companies the next one isn't going to resign over an insurance website's teething troubles.

Seriously, you kicked out a guy for getting a blowjob despite being the best peace time president in the last 30 years yet you don't so much as blink when the next guy bankrupt's the country and plunges you into hellish wars, what the hell?

[Xiahou]

Seriously, you kicked out a guy for getting a blowjob despite being the best peace time president in the last 30 years yet you don't so much as blink when the next guy bankrupt's the country and plunges you into hellish wars, what the hell?

No, we didn't- but continue your uninformed ranting.
Yes, "teething problems"- that's the only problem with the law. I see you've taken my "Why follow the news?" thread to heart.

[Husar]

Uninformed ranting? I'd say the one calling for Obama's resignation is the one partaking in that activity...

You mean he wasn't joking the whole time?

[Lemur]

All I can say is that if Obama has lost the Pennsylvania Libertarian support that is his base ... it's all over. Resignation is inevitable.

Heh, I keed, I keed.

The problems with ACA would make me a lot less nervous if I saw any evidence that the Repubs had a realistic plan to improve and/or replace it. Who knows, maybe the congressional Repubs will actually get interested in governing. This would be a great moment for them to show interest in, you know, the well-being of the nation and their fellow citizens.

It could happen.

[Greyblades]

No, we didn't- but continue your uninformed ranting.

Yes, I am well aware it was all an excuse to fulfil partisan desires to get him out of power. I still wonder why the heck you pushed through such a pathetically irrelevant excuse to remove clinton (and are pushing this one against obama) while bush got off scott free.

[Crazed Rabbit]

All I can say is that if Obama has lost the Pennsylvania Libertarian support that is his base ... it's all over. Resignation is inevitable.

Heh, I keed, I keed.

The problems with ACA would make me a lot less nervous if I saw any evidence that the Repubs had a realistic plan to improve and/or replace it. Who knows, maybe the congressional Repubs will actually get interested in governing. This would be a great moment for them to show interest in, you know, the well-being of the nation and their fellow citizens.

It could happen.

Imagine if Ted Cruz and his merry band of shutdown morons had instead spent their time on a good alternative to Obamacare.

Instead of getting the focus on the shutdown, they could have sat on the sidelines while the ACA problems took center stage, and then offered up a viable alternative.

But as you say, they'd have to care about governing and not short term political points, or some stupid 'stand' against Obamacare. And some intelligence on their part in designing a good alternative.

He just figured that out? Seriously? These are the people that wrote the law and oversaw the creation of the website and exchanges..... and they've just now discovered that insurance is complicated????

Remember, we had to pass the bill to find out what's in it.

CR

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Imagine if Ted Cruz and his merry band of shutdown morons had instead spent their time on a good alternative to Obamacare.

Instead of getting the focus on the shutdown, they could have sat on the sidelines while the ACA problems took center stage, and then offered up a viable alternative.

But as you say, they'd have to care about governing and not short term political points, or some stupid 'stand' against Obamacare. And some intelligence on their part in designing a good alternative.



Remember, we had to pass the bill to find out what's in it.

CR

The problem is their preferred answer -- tax protected medical savings accounts and private insurance for all -- is unpalatable to the bulk of the electorate and would be excoriated in the media.

[ICantSpellDawg]

The problem is their preferred answer -- tax protected medical savings accounts and private insurance for all -- is unpalatable to the bulk of the electorate and would be excoriated in the media.

Why is it unpalatable? What are you talking about? Having a 401k that you could take and spend on medical services is something that people don't want?

Even morons understand how a basic traditional 401k works and that it is tax deferred. See? I'm a moron and I know that. This would assist people in buying monthly plans and give them an incentive to save it as it is additional real money that would otherwise be used in retirement. Force businesses to offer it as an investment vehicle (like they are forced to have workers comp and disability in most states - they wouldn't have to fund it and you could allow them to reduce payroll taxes to cover certain fees) and open up the criteria for plan usage.

People don't like the idea of trading "guaranteed" benefits into privatized retirement investment, but getting free money is usually pretty popular with the people who actually vote.

All I can say is that if Obama has lost the Pennsylvania Libertarian support that is his base ... it's all over. Resignation is inevitable.

Heh, I keed, I keed.

The problems with ACA would make me a lot less nervous if I saw any evidence that the Repubs had a realistic plan to improve and/or replace it. Who knows, maybe the congressional Repubs will actually get interested in governing. This would be a great moment for them to show interest in, you know, the well-being of the nation and their fellow citizens.

It could happen.

You jest, but yes - when facing an enemies weakness it is a good time to show strength. What little you show will pay dividends when compared with the abject failure of the opposition.
This bill is the right bill to push and it should be followed by others. Anything to look like the good guys and make the other guy look like an incompetent.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No politician in the US is actually capable of making the decisions necessary to fix America's healthcare system - those who understand the problem cannot get elected and those that get elected cannot understand the problem.

[a completely inoffensive name]

No politician in the US is actually capable of making the decisions necessary to fix America's healthcare system - those who understand the problem cannot get elected and those that get elected cannot understand the problem.

Until someone finally comes along and suggests a proper universal government health care plan, you are correct. But I have a feeling the time is coming when a major politician will campaign for just that, and nothing less.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Until someone finally comes along and suggests a proper universal government health care plan, you are correct. But I have a feeling the time is coming when a major politician will campaign for just that, and nothing less.

Unlikely.

In order to understand why the US lacks a 1st World Healthcare system, you first need to understand why the First World Countries have these systems.

The impetus was the overwhelming number of lives ruined by two successive world wars - with so many dead, so many absent fathers, the European States were forced to develop welfare systems to support their wives and children. Likewise, the surviving veterans of these wars constituted the majority of the male adult population, and the majority of them needed a doctor for something. In the UK you also had numerous Civilians who had been wounded in the bombing campaigns.

Everybody needed a doctor, or they needed someone to pay for food - rationing remained in effect in the UK for years.

Those governments that were even functioning immediately after the War were simply forced to pay for the care their populations needed - the impetus was both moral and political - the ousting of the Conservatives in the UK demonstrated that the British people would not support Winston Churchill, despite his heroic stature - they wanted Clement Atlee and the Welfare State.

In the US, you have a tradition of exceptionalism, for groups and individuals. You looked at the returning soldiers, and you decided that Veterans needed support and healthcare, then you decided the very poor did.

Even today - few Americans can conceive of a general need for services. This extends beyond healthcare, it encompasses other services, like law enforcement and provision of other emergency services. In the rest of the Anglo-sphere these services started in large cities, but were then extended to counties and regions by the end of the 19th Century. In the US the majority of Counties still rely on elected politicians to provide Law Enforcement and a Judiciary, rather than professionals appointed by the State.

Bottom line - the US can't bare the weight of the concepts required for universal healthcare provision - if it could the "Public Option" would not have been dropped, and would now be driving the majority of Private Providers out of business.

[HoreTore]

It is ironic that our money enabled the creation of modern Europe, yet conservatives claim we don't have the money to modernize ourselves.

"If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people." - Tony Benn

[Tellos Athenaios]

It is ironic that our money enabled the creation of modern Europe, yet conservatives claim we don't have the money to modernize ourselves.

Well you spent it all on tax breaks...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It is ironic that our money enabled the creation of modern Europe, yet conservatives claim we don't have the money to modernize ourselves.

Here's another thought - just to hammer home how stupid they are.

Private insurance goes against what might happen, but you will get sick, which means the normal function of insurance does not apply. In essence, medical insurance is deferred payment of expenses - which is why it costs so much.

[rvg]

Obamacare at this point is a deliciously epic fail. Odumbo has less than a year to fix this mess before the Dems take a well deserved pounding at the polls. Chances are high though, that nothing will get fixed. Nada. Partly because Barry is stubborn as a mule when it comes to touching his precious Obamacare, and partly because the GOP has a lot to gain from keeping this wound fresh and regularly salting it instead of offering any viable alternative.

In the meantime, my insurance premiums have jumped by $150 per month. Thanks, Obama.

[Husar]

It just means hundreds of people died every month before because you paid 150$ too little. Or they used the ER and couldn't pay the bill so someone else paid it, like the government using 150$ of your taxes to pay it. Think of all the military stuff they can buy now from the money they save.

[Pannonian]

It just means hundreds of people died every month before because you paid 150$ too little. Or they used the ER and couldn't pay the bill so someone else paid it, like the government using 150$ of your taxes to pay it. Think of all the military stuff they can buy now from the money they save.

You'll see kidney machines replaced by rockets and guns
And the public wants what the public gets
But I don't get what this society wants

[rvg]

...like the government using 150$ of your taxes to pay it...

Exactly. They used my money before and now they're using more of my money. It's extra taxation disguised as insurance.

[drone]

Exactly. They used my money before and now they're using more of my money. It's extra taxation disguised as insurance.

In all fairness, this is exactly what the Supreme Court said it was.

[rvg]

In all fairness, this is exactly what the Supreme Court said it was.

Yeah, I remember that ruling. Then again, I'm not really arguing about the legality of Obamacare, just stating that it's crap. Utter crap.

[Greyblades]

Do you mean the right wing sabotaging obamacare or itself?

Either way yes it was surprising seeing them go off the deep end.

[HoreTore]

Eagerly looking forward to 2016, so a Republican can campaign on repealing it and lose to Hilary. In retrospect she's probably the tougher reform candidate.

Who could have predicted this level of right-wing sabotage?

I have always had the impression that Obama is more of a moderate* than Hillary. Would that be correct?

*Speaking of social policies only, I must admit to not knowing the difference in fields like foreign policy

[rvg]

I have always had the impression that Obama is more of a moderate* than Hillary. Would that be correct?

I would disagree with that. Hillary is very much a centrist.