HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » 10 Things You Would Miss ...

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 04:30 PM

10 Things You Would Miss About Obamacare

10 Things You Would Miss About Obamacare

By Igor Volsky

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act this week and could potentially strike down part or the whole of ‘Obamacare.’ Below are 10 things you will miss about the law if the justices invalidate it:

1) Access to health insurance for 30 million Americans and lower premiums. More than 30 million uninsured Americans will find coverage under the law. Middle-class families who buy health care coverage through the exchanges will be eligible for refundable and advanceable premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to ensure that the coverage they have is affordable.

2) The ability of businesses and individuals to purchase comprehensive coverage from a regulated marketplace.<...>

3) Insurers’ inability to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. Beginning in 2014, insurers can no longer deny insurance to families or individuals with pre-existing conditions. Insurers are also prohibited from placing lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage and rescinding insurers except in cases of fraud. Insurers are already prohibited from discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions.

4) Tax credits for small businesses that offer insurance. <...>

5) Assistance for businesses that provide health benefits to early retirees.<...>

6) Affordable health care for lower-income Americans. Obamacare extends Medicaid to individuals with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty line, guaranteeing that the nation’ most vulnerable population has access to affordable, comprehensive coverage.

7) Investments in women’s health. Obamacare prohibits insurers from charging women substantially more than men and requires insurers to offer preventive services — including contraception — at no additional cost.

8) Young adults’ ability to stay on their parents’ health care plans. <...>

9) Discounts for seniors on brand-name drugs. <...>

10) Temporary coverage for the sickest Americans. <...>

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/24/505179/10-things-you-would-miss-about-obamacare/


16 million: number of Americans who become eligible for Medicaid under the health care law
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002531684

NCPSSM: Healthcare Reform, Seniors and the Supreme Court
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002485990

46 replies, 7541 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply 10 Things You Would Miss About Obamacare (Original post)
ProSense Jun 2012 OP
dkf Jun 2012 #1
Drale Jun 2012 #2
ProSense Jun 2012 #3
JDPriestly Jun 2012 #6
pnwmom Jun 2012 #21
greatauntoftriplets Jun 2012 #4
indepat Jun 2012 #5
Bigredhunk Jun 2012 #7
BlueDemKev Jun 2012 #9
CottonBear Jun 2012 #8
Hoyt Jun 2012 #11
CottonBear Jun 2012 #19
pnwmom Jun 2012 #22
CottonBear Jun 2012 #24
bupkus Jun 2012 #10
ProSense Jun 2012 #12
bupkus Jun 2012 #14
ProSense Jun 2012 #15
bupkus Jun 2012 #16
ProSense Jun 2012 #18
SunSeeker Jun 2012 #28
SidDithers Jun 2012 #32
bupkus Jun 2012 #33
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #17
bupkus Jun 2012 #23
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #25
bupkus Jun 2012 #27
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #34
bupkus Jun 2012 #30
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #35
bupkus Jun 2012 #36
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #37
bupkus Jun 2012 #39
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #40
bupkus Jun 2012 #41
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #42
bupkus Jun 2012 #43
JoePhilly Jun 2012 #44
bupkus Jun 2012 #46
Post removed Jun 2012 #13
Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #20
Systematic Chaos Jun 2012 #26
SunSeeker Jun 2012 #29
SidDithers Jun 2012 #31
RebelOne Jun 2012 #38
Lydia Leftcoast Jun 2012 #45

Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 04:38 PM

1. Any of those 10 things already in operation?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 04:45 PM

2. Yes young adults can stay on their parents insurance

until they are 26.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 04:48 PM

3. Yes, see

"Any of those 10 things already in operation?

...items 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Full text at link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 06:29 PM

6. It's a great program (although as one who has had it, I know that single payer would be better)

but, in spite of the many portions of it that are in effect, few Americans have noticed the difference. We don't get sick very often. And medical costs have not decreased. That's the problem.

The entire program should have been put into effect right away. The most important parts -- the part that would reduce costs and insure that far more people have access to affordable medical care (the subsidies for low income people) are not yet noticed by anyone.

That's the problem with the bill -- too little, too late to be recognized for what it is.

Monday comes what rumor says is a 5-4 decision by the Court. I'm thinking about this every day.

I wish Congress had just put in single payer and used its tax and spend authority to pay for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 03:43 PM

21. Yes. A big one is that they're prohibited from dropping people because they get sick.

This has been legal till now -- insurers have been dropping customers when they are diagnosed with cancer and other expensive conditions.

The law also eliminated annual and lifetime maximums.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 04:49 PM

4. What I would not miss....

The 26,100 Americans who die prematurely every year simply because they didn't have healthcare insurance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 06:06 PM

5. What is it about these ten things that a rational and reasoning person would

so vociferously object? It must be the insurers' inability to discriminate based on some pre-existing condition, something almost all have. Such absolute insanity is so maddening, it suggests tens of millions of Americans are mindless lemming-like ignoramuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to indepat (Reply #5)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 06:41 PM

7. Rational & Reasoning?

Those who believe the lies are irrational and they don't use reason. Add to that the fact that they're lied to by conservative news outlets. Throw in a corporate, lazy "mainstream" media who won't do their job and call the liars out (because that would be a liberal bias -&- because it's easier to report on Snooki's pregnancy).

The facts don't get into the bubble. The only thing that gets through the bubble are lies (death panels, long wait times, you'll be paying for a deadbeat who chooses not to work or buy coverage, etc....).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to indepat (Reply #5)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 07:07 PM

9. Yep.

And we're ALL suffering because of our other people's ignorance and hatred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 06:45 PM

8. I'm a single mom who hasn't had health insurance since May 2009.

I was unemployed for three years. I recently found part time, $7.50/hr, no benefits work. For 23 years, I had full time, professional, full benefits jobs in my career field.

I miss having any sort of health care much less health insurance.

I have no idea how or if I will ever have health care again.

At least my 3 year old child has Medicaid for now. I have major dental health issues and no way to pay for those costs.

I hope that the Health Care act will be upheld and that I will be eligible for some sort of subsidy because I have no money for health insurance premiums.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CottonBear (Reply #8)

Sun Jun 24, 2012, 07:12 PM

11. I'm pretty sure you will qualify for subsidies if it stands, as you should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 02:56 PM

19. I hope so. I am awaiting the decision.

Neither my child's father or me have health insurance through our employers. Even full-time employees have no benefits. We just hope not to get sick and avoid activities that could be dangerous. So, no skateboarding or kayaking even though we have all the equipment. It's just too risky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CottonBear (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 03:45 PM

22. Wouldn't you also qualify for Medicaid? This law will also expand that group, but if your child

qualifies, I thought you would, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #22)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 06:23 PM

24. No, I don't qualify for Medicaid, TANF or childcare assistance.

I do get SNAP benefits, however, I'll lose those when I (hopefully) get a second part time job and exceed $1,590 in income per month.

I'm thankful my child has Medicaid. If I lose Medicaid for him, I hope to be able to get him on Peachcare which will involve a sliding scale fee.

You have to have/be worth almost NOTHING in order to qualify for most aid here in GA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)


Response to bupkus (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 06:15 AM

12. Here:

State single payer waiver provisions in the Senate healthcare bill - legislative language and fact sheet from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders

Why the 1332 Waiver in the Senate Health Reform Bill is the Only Opportunity for State Single Payer Systems Under the Bill

The health care reform bill passed by the Senate requires that all states set up Exchanges through which private insurance companies could sell their plans. Because federal laws preempt state laws, the federal health care reform bill would supplant any state attempt to set up a single payer system in lieu of an Exchange, which by its nature calls for multiple payers to compete. If the Senate bill is enacted, the only opportunity for states to move toward a single payer system is found in Section 1332. This section would allow a state with a plan that meets certain coverage and affordability requirements to waive out of the requirement to set up an Exchange for private insurance companies. Only with such a waiver could a state move in the direction of a single payer system.

- more -

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2010/march/state-single-payer-waiver-provisions-in-the-senate-healthcare-bill-legislative-langu


Release: President Endorses State Waiver Proposal

Vermont Delegation and Gov. Shumlin Hail Obama Endorsement of State Health Reform Waiver Legislation

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 - The Vermont congressional delegation and Gov. Peter Shumlin today hailed President Obama's endorsement of legislation allowing states to provide better health care at a lower cost starting in 2014.

At a meeting of the National Governors Association Monday morning, Obama announced his support for amending the Affordable Care Act to allow states like Vermont to seek a federal waiver to the new law three years earlier than currently allowed. States would be required to design plans that are at least as comprehensive and affordable as the federal model and cover at least as many people

Last month Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced in the Senate and Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) introduced in the House legislation that would advance the date waivers would be accepted from 2017 to 2014. The three joined Gov. Shumlin at a Montpelier press conference to announce the legislation, which would provide Vermont the flexibility it needs to adopt reforms Shumlin is pursuing.

Leahy said, "This is a wise decision that keeps in focus the goal of continually improving health care in America. I applaud President Obama and Secretary Sebelius for supporting efforts by Vermont and other states to go above and beyond what the Affordable Care Act requires. They know that the federal government does not have a monopoly on good ideas, and innovations by the states will prove - and improve --- the benefits of health insurance reform, on the ground, and in practice. While some in Washington want to turn the clock back and repeal the new health reform law, Vermont and other states want to move ahead. Vermont has already been working hard to improve the state's system of health care, and passage of the delegation's waiver bill will move our state one step closer to that goal."

Sanders said, "At a time when 50 million Americans lack health insurance and when the cost of health care continues to soar, it is my strong hope that Vermont will lead the nation in a new direction through a Medicare-for-all, single-payer approach. I am delighted that President Obama announced today that he will, in fact, support allowing states to innovate with health coverage models sooner rather than later. I worked hard to draft and secure the waiver provision in the health reform law and I am very pleased the president now agrees that we should make it available in 2014 as originally intended. While there is a lot of work to be done, I look forward to working with Sens. Leahy, Wyden, Inouye, Brown and others in the Senate and Rep. Welch and others in the House to get this done as soon as possible."

Welch said, "President Obama's support for allowing states to innovate sooner is a good news for Vermont and all states looking to tailor health care reform to individual states' circumstances. This legislation will give Vermont a green light to lead the nation in providing quality health care at a lower cost. I'm hopeful that Democrats and Republicans alike will support this practical step to give states flexibility to achieve progress their own way."

Shumlin said, "I was excited to learn about this today during a visit to the White House. All along officials from Health and Human Services have expressed a willingness to work with us, as long as we don't compromise standards under the law. I think this is an excellent example of how we can work together to control skyrocketing health care costs and implement meaningful health care reform as soon as possible."

A fact sheet on the delegation's "State Leadership in Healthcare Act" is available here.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=44a664de-8e92-43f4-a871-d26e0b5a252d


FACT SHEET

"State Leadership in Healthcare Act‟

Section 1332 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – the “Waiver for State Innovation” – allows states to waiver out of some of the requirement of federal health reform if they meet certain standards. The provision in the new law was authored by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and strongly supported by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.).

The Sanders-Leahy-Welch “State Leadership in Healthcare Act” moves the availability of state waivers from 2017 to 2014. This would allow a state to avoid the expense of setting up an exchange – which is otherwise required in every state in 2014 – only to dismantle it later.

The federal waiver would allow a state to:

a) Collect all the federal funding and use for financing coverage for individuals through a plan designed by and for that state.
b) Coordinates this waiver process with Medicare, Medicaid and CHIP waiver processes that may be required depending on the design of the system. The state

The federal waiver would not allow a state to:
a) Offer lower quality or less affordable care to their residents than would be available in the exchange.
b) Obtain waivers from the health insurance market reforms implemented under the law such as those benefiting ending the use of pre-existing conditions to exclude individuals from coverage or those allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ plans longer.


How does the waiver provision of the law work?
Step 1: The state passes a law to provide health insurance to its citizens.
Step 2: The Secretary of Health and Human Services and Secretary of the Treasury review the state law and determine that the plan is:

a) At least as comprehensive as its residents would receive in the exchange;
b) At least as affordable;
c) Deficit neutral to the federal government; and,
d) Covers at least as many people.


Step 3: If the federal government finds that the alternative state system meets these requirements without certain federal rules, states can get a waiver. The state plan could receive waivers from:

a) The section requiring establishment of the exchange
b) The designs for how federal subsidies would have to reduce premiums and co-pays.
c) The employer penalty for providing coverage
d) The individual mandate.


http://www.sanders.senate.gov/graphics/011411state_waiver_fact_sheet.pdf


The Affordable Care Act: Supporting State Innovation
http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2012/02/state-innovation02222012a.html


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #12)


Response to bupkus (Reply #14)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 08:38 AM

15. Yeah

"You call that single payer?"

...what do you call Vermont's plan?

I mean, ever heard of Canada?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #15)


Response to bupkus (Reply #16)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 01:45 PM

18. You misunderstood

"Canada is a nation. Vermont is a state using maneuvers that Patton would be proud of to implement what should have been the hallmark of 'health care reform.'"

The reference to Canada was about how single payer came to that nation, province by province. It's likely how single payer will come to this nation, state by state.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #18)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 11:40 PM

28. Thank you again, ProSense, for your patient explanations.

Please keep it up. I find all of your posts very informative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bupkus (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 26, 2012, 08:15 AM

32. Single Payer in Canada started in one province...

And expanded to other provinces, in steps and stages, over a period of decades.

The ACA is the foot in the door that will eventually lead to single payer.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #32)


Response to bupkus (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 01:37 PM

17. Was never going to pass ... never.

Time to focus on reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #17)


Response to bupkus (Reply #23)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 10:38 PM

25. All it takes is about 5-7 blue dogs.

Try this ... go back to 1999 and look up Graham-Leech-Bliely Act (the one that ended Glass-Stegell) and then look up the names of the Dems in the Senate who voted for it.

Then look up every nasty piece of GOP driven legislation that took place while Bush was President, and again, check to see which Senate Dems voted for it.

What you will find is it is basically the same 5-7 or so red state Dems who were NEVER, NEVER, NEVER ... going to support a public option.

And that's how the GOP was able to get the votes. It had nothing to do with "refusing to take no as an answer" ... all they needed were those 5-7 YES votes from red state dems.

SO again, a public option was never going to pass, because the SAME redtstate dems who went along with Bush, helped to block Obama. It really is that simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #25)


Response to bupkus (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 26, 2012, 02:53 PM

34. You are correct that we need to get rid of the blue dogs.

You are incorrect to think that Obama could get rid of them.

The reason is that Obama needs to get some things done. The GOP wants absolutely nothing to happen.

And you do realize that Nelson and Lieberman are not running again, right? There was no leverage to force or "ruin" them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #17)


Response to bupkus (Reply #30)

Tue Jun 26, 2012, 02:54 PM

35. So you think Obama can just replace some Senators?

Can you tell me exactly HOW he pulls that off?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #35)


Response to bupkus (Reply #36)

Tue Jun 26, 2012, 10:04 PM

37. Let's try this ... You are now the President ...

You want single payer.

I will spot you ALL of the blue dogs, except one ... Joe Lieberman.

Now, as President, please explain how YOU get Lieberman to vote YES for single payer or even a public option on Health care. You need that 60th vote.

When you respond, please try to address these three facts about Joe Lieberman.

1) Lieberman campaigned for McCain and against Obama in the 2008 election.
2) Lieberman's nickname is Joe "Senator from Aetna" Lieberman
3) Lieberman is not running again in the future

Now ... please explain what pressure YOU AS PRESIDENT will apply to Joe to get this ONE VOTE. I'm spotting you all of the others.

Well?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #37)


Response to bupkus (Reply #39)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:02 PM

40. So you don't have any leverage ... thanks for demonstrating that reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #40)


Response to bupkus (Reply #41)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:06 PM

42. And yet you can't say specifically what the offer actually is.

Why not just be honest and admit that you have nothing?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #42)


Response to bupkus (Reply #43)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:17 PM

44. So, as President, you would threaten the life of a Senator.

... but do so privately.

Great plan you have there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #44)


Response to ProSense (Original post)


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 03:03 PM

20. Calling it Obamacare never helped

I hope we would call it by it's correct nomenclature, the Affordable Care Act, or ACA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 10:40 PM

26. Ten. Hmmm, that's tough....

1) It's not Single Payer.
2) It's not Single Payer.
3) It's not Single Payer.
4) It's not Single Payer.
5) It's not Single Payer.
6) It's not Single Payer.
7) It's not Single Payer.
8) It's not Single Payer.
9) It's not Single Payer.
10) It's not Single Payer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 25, 2012, 11:52 PM

29. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Jun 26, 2012, 08:09 AM

31. DU Rec...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Jun 26, 2012, 10:09 PM

38. Maybe No. 9 even though I have never taken advantage of it.

I have been buying my drugs online from Canadian pharmacies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:13 PM

45. Small businesses can already deduct the cost of employee health insurance

from taxable income. That's been the case for years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread