WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Trump administration may no longer enforce a rule requiring individual Americans to carry health insurance or pay a penalty if they do not, a senior White House official said on Sunday
Speaking on ABC’s “This Week” program, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, said President Donald Trump “may stop enforcing the individual mandate.”
Separately, on CBS’ “Face the Nation” show, she reiterated Republican promises that no one would lose their health insurance under Obamacare while a replacement is being developed.
“For the 20 million who rely upon the Affordable Care Act in some form, they will not be without coverage during this transition time,” she said.
On Friday Trump signed an executive order concerning the 2010 healthcare law, urging U.S. agencies to “waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation” of provisions deemed to impose fiscal burdens on states, companies or individuals.
Healthcare experts had speculated that Trump could expand exemptions from the individual mandate.
As Republicans contemplate repealing the Affordable Care Act (ACA or “ObamaCare”)—seriously, not just as a political gesture—alarms are sounding about millions of individuals losing coverage.
So soon we have forgotten about the millions who lost coverage they had had for years because ObamaCare outlawed it.
ObamaCare resulted in perhaps five times as many losers as winners—even counting just those who ended up with more expensive or less desirable coverage. If you count the taxpayers, the tally of losers is much higher. But with government largesse, the losers—the ones who have their earnings taken away—are “forgotten men.”
Anyone who has government-funded benefits taken away, on the other hand, becomes a victim.
The best poster children are cancer victims. They face a premature, particularly nasty death. Who would deny someone’s mother or 4-year-old daughter the chance of a cure, even if the chemotherapy costs more than $100,000?
ObamaCare would. Exchange plans have excluded the best cancer hospitals from their narrow networks. Medicaid would. It might call the treatment “experimental” or “not cost-effective.” Medicare would, possibly just because the patient is “too old” or “too young.” Unless the particular victim can be featured in a PR campaign to “save ObamaCare,” she might be “better off with the pain pill,” as President Obama put it.
And let’s not forget how the FDA has driven the costs of drug approval sky-high, suppresses therapies that have no prospect of turning billion-dollar profits, and protects manufacturers against competition when the drug is about to go off patent. The anti-leukemia drug Gleevec, for example, cost $26,000 per year in 2001, a price called “high but fair,” considering the cost of research and the need for profits. It is $146,000 a year today, but the introduction of cheaper generics in the U.S. is being delayed.
(CNN)President-elect Donald Trump is putting the finishing touches on an Obamacare replacement plan that aims to provide “insurance for all,” he told The Washington Post.
Also, he will demand that drug companies negotiate directly with Medicare and Medicaid and lower their prices, saying they will no longer be “politically protected.”
Trump did not reveal any details of how he’d accomplish this daunting task, noting that he is waiting for his health secretary nominee, Tom Price, to be confirmed. Price is appearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee on Wednesday, but his hearing before the crucial Senate Finance Committee has yet to be scheduled.
Trump’s weekend interview with The Washington Post comes just after Congress took its first steps to dismantle President Barack Obama’s landmark health care reform law. The House on Friday followed the Senate in approving a budget resolution that would repeal major portions of the Affordable Care Act. Committees in both chambers will now work out the details of repealing and replacing the law.
In less than three weeks’ time, when Donald Trump becomes our next president, he will take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
It is fitting, then, that Trump has committed to repealing and replacing one of his predecessor’s most infamous unconstitutional policies, the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. But he won’t be able to do it alone. Repealing Obamacare requires Congress to write legislation for the president to sign into law.
Congress can and should do this in January, before Inauguration Day. There is no excuse not to.
A lot has happened in the last eight years, since Nancy Pelosi first claimed “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber reveled in the “stupidity of the American voter” and “lack of transparency” that helped pass the bill, and President Barack Obama told PolitiFact’s Lie of the Year in 2013: “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it.”
The so-called Affordable Care Act was a mandate when Congress needed to shove it through, and it was a tax when the Supreme Court decided to look the other way.
Many thousands of Americans have lost their insurance plans or their doctors, or seen their premiums hiked up to unbelievable levels. Seventeen of the original 23 Obamacare insurance co-ops have collapsed. The massive centralization of health insurance has hurt patients and providers alike. And, of course, there has always been the rotten, unconstitutional core of Obamacare: the federal government forcing citizens to buy a product.
Being forced to live under Obamacare has motivated millions of hardworking people across our country to get involved in politics.
That’s why conservatives have been fighting against Obamacare for years. That’s why, since they swept the elections in 2010, Congress has voted over 60 times to repeal all or part of it.
They just need to do it one more time.
To avoid a predictable Senate filibuster from the left, Congress can employ the “reconciliation process”—a parliamentary procedure used to help the House and Senate pass budget bills. Obamacare repeal can be easily included in this legislation. We know, because Congress did just that to get a repeal of Obamacare on the president’s desk in 2015.
Then, Obama used a veto to protect his signature law. But in a few short weeks, Congress will be sending bills to a different president entirely.
Of course, this doesn’t mean we won’t see foot-dragging from some in Congress. When I was in the Senate, they would use every excuse to avoid fighting for conservative priorities. “Wait until we get the House.” Done. “Wait until we get the Senate.” Done. “Wait until we get the White House.” Done and done. There are simply no alternatives left but to repeal Obamacare and win the fight (a shocking prospect for some!)
Fortunately, Republicans can’t afford to throw conservatives under the bus on Obamacare repeal. Republicans have consistently campaigned on repealing Obamacare and won. It’s a promise that must be kept.
Many Americans care deeply about getting the government out of their health care decisions and finances. Being forced to live under Obamacare has motivated millions of hardworking people across our country to get involved in politics—abandoning them now would cause an electoral backlash to rival the one which put Trump in the White House.
Obama signed his namesake legislation seven years ago, and soon his successor will sign a bill to repeal it. But just as Congress made the original mistake of passing Obamacare, it must start working—now—to have that bill on Trump’s desk on Inauguration Day.
Once repeal legislation establishes a certain date when Obamacare will expire, Congress can begin a step-by-step approach to make health insurance more affordable and available for every American.
LONDON (Reuters) – Britain’s health service is engulfed in a “humanitarian crisis” that requires the support of the Red Cross to use Land Rovers to transport patients, the charity said on Saturday.
Founded in 1948, the National Health Service (NHS) is a source of huge pride for many Britons who are able to access free care from the cradle to the grave.
But tight budgets, an aging population, and increasingly complex medical needs have left many hospitals struggling during the winter season in recent years, prompting headlines about patients being left to wait on trolleys for hours or even days.
The NHS rejected the Red Cross’ description and the Department of Health said it had injected an additional 400 million pounds ($490 million) to help with the demand, but the opposition Labour Party called on Prime Minister Theresa May to do more to tackle the overcrowding.
The second edition of FREOPP’s health reform plan, Transcending Obamacare, is 102 pages cover-to-cover. If you want to read the whole thing, or if you’re interested in the plan’s take on the broad range of health reform topics, click here. The article you’re reading now is for those who specifically want a quick read on Transcending Obamacare’s approach to replacing the Affordable Care Act.
The text below is divided into four sections:
First: things that both Obamacare and Transcending Obamacare do;
Second: things that Obamacare does but Transcending Obamacare doesn’t;
Third: things that Transcending Obamacare does but Obamacare doesn’t;
Fourth: things that distinguish Transcending Obamacare from plans that congressional Republicans have proposed.
Things that both Obamacare and Transcending Obamacare do
Expand the number of people with health insurance. The principal objective of the Affordable Care Act is to expand the number of Americans with health insurance. The ACA has fallen well short of expectations at meeting that goal, and has often done so with high-cost plans with poor access to physicians. Transcending Obamacare’s Universal Tax Credit Plan also covers the uninsured; indeed, we estimate that Transcending Obamacarewill cover 12 million more people than the ACA by 2025.
Cover those with pre-existing conditions. Advocates of the ACA repeatedly point to the fact that it covers people with pre-existing conditions, because this feature of the law is politically popular, even though the problem of people being denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition is exceedingly rare. Transcending Obamacare also includes “guaranteed issue,” the same tool the ACA uses to cover those with pre-existing conditions.
Things that Obamacare does that Transcending Obamacare doesn’t
Induce rate shock. The ACA introduces an entirely new layer of federal regulations into the individual health insurance market: tens of thousands of pages of onerous requirements that drive up the cost of health coverage. Transcending Obamacare is carefully designed to cover the uninsured without drastic premium hikes.
Force people to buy health insurance. Infamously, the ACA contains an individual mandate, imposing financial penalties on those who would prefer not to buy Obamacare’s costly coverage. Transcending Obamacare has no such mandate, and uses other well-validated tools, like longer insurance contracts, waiting periods, late enrollment fees, and auto-enrollment, to ensure that enrollees don’t game the system.
Expand low-quality, government-run health insurance. The ACA covers the uninsured mostly by dramatically expanding Medicaid, a dysfunctional 1960s-era program that delivers no better health outcomes than its enrollees would have with no insurance at all. Transcending Obamacare replaces the ACA Medicaid expansion by offering the same population refundable tax credits that they can deposit in health savings accounts and use to purchase high-quality private coverage.
Expand the federal role in the health care system. The ACA substantially increases the already large role of the federal government in the U.S. health care system. Transcending Obamacare puts patients in charge of the health care dollars that are now spent on their behalf by the government. Over three decades, it reduces federal spending by $10.5 trillion and federal taxes by $2.5 trillion, while making the Medicare Trust Fund permanently solvent and covering more people than Obamacare.
Things that Transcending Obamacare does that Obamacare doesn’t do
Expand choice for health coverage and care. Obamacare’s plethora of federal regulations have dramatically restricted the kinds of coverage that individuals who shop for coverage on their own can buy. Transcending Obamacare goes in the other direction, restoring states’ traditional role in regulating the insurance markets in their jurisdictions, and expanding access to health savings accounts that can be used to obtain care from any health care provider.
Reduce premiums relative to current law. The ACA has doubled individual-market premiums relative to where they were before Obamacare went into effect. Transcending Obamacare reduces premiums by restoring choice and competition to the health insurance market, and by tackling other drivers of high-cost health care, such as hospital consolidation.
Improve health outcomes for the poor. By replacing the ACA’s Medicaid expansion with high-quality private coverage and health savings accounts, Transcending Obamacare gives lower-income Americans significantly greater access to physician care than they have under Obamacare. We estimate that Transcending Obamacare’s Universal Tax Credit Plan would nearly double access to physicians and hospitals for the Medicaid population, and would achieve for Medicaid enrollees a 159 percent improvement in the Medical Productivity Index, a proxy for health outcomes developed by the University of Minnesota.
Actual (2014–2016) and estimated (2017–2019) coverage in the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion and insurance exchanges, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Differences between Transcending Obamacare and GOP replace plans
Designed to attract 60 votes in the Senate. While bipartisan health reform is far easier said than done, Transcending Obamacare was designed from the ground up to overcome a filibuster and attract bipartisan support, by appealing to traditional Democratic priorities (coverage expansion and improved health care for the poor) and traditional Republican priorities (limited government in the form of less spending, lower taxes, and fewer regulations). Most plans proposed by congressional Republicans, particularly those from the House of Representatives, are significantly less likely to attract support from Democrats, because they will be scored by the Congressional Budget Office as covering significantly fewer people than Obamacare.
Replaces Obamacare without disrupting coverage for the newly insured. If you want to cover people with pre-existing conditions, without an individual mandate forcing others to buy coverage, your reforms of the individual insurance market have to be crafted with care. As of 2016, the most widely discussed GOP plans don’t do enough to ensure people stay in the market without an individual mandate. Private health insurers, who will be tasked with offering coverage to the uninsured under Republican reform, are very concerned about this problem. Popular Republican proposals, like high risk pools, cause as many problems as they solve. All of the GOP plans proposed thus far are likely to be scored by the Congressional Budget Office as covering far fewer people than the ACA.
Deploys means-tested tax credits. Nearly all Republican plans offer refundable tax credits to the uninsured to purchase health coverage, as does Transcending Obamacare and the ACA itself. Where Republicans are split is on the subject of means-testing. House Speaker Paul Ryan’s plan, for example, offers a uniform tax credit that doesn’t vary by income. The problem with that approach is that in order to give every American a tax credit, the tax credit has to be much lower than the ACA’s, making it hard for the poor to afford coverage. The ACA and Transcending Obamacare both use a means-tested tax credit to avoid this problem. The most prominent Senate GOP replace plan, co-authored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah), Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.), former Sen. Tom Coburn (Okla.), and retiring Rep. Fred Upton (Mich.), also deploys means-tested tax credits, for the same reasons. Rep. Tom Price (Ga.), Donald Trump’s pick for HHS Secretary, proposed a means-tested tax credit in his original replace plan, but moved to a flat credit in the latest version.
December 8, 201612:02 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition
One of the fundamental ways scientists measure the well-being of a nation is tracking the rate at which its citizens die and how long they can be expected to live.
So the news out of the federal government Thursday is disturbing: The overall U.S. death rate has increased for the first time in a decade, according to an analysis of the latest data. And that led to a drop in overall life expectancy for the first time since 1993, particularly among people younger than 65.
“This is a big deal,” says Philip Morgan, a demographer at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill who was not involved in the new analysis.
“There’s not a better indicator of well-being than life expectancy,” he says. “The fact that it’s leveling off in the U.S. is a striking finding.”
Now, there’s a chance that the latest data, from 2015, could be just a one-time blip. In fact, a preliminary analysis from the first two quarters of 2016 suggests that may be the case, says Robert Anderson, chief of the mortality statistics branch at the National Center for Health Statistics, which released the new report.
Lindy Washburn , Staff Writer, @LindyWa5:59 p.m. EST December 5, 2016
About 224,000 New Jersey consumers can get tax credits for plans through the Affordable Care Act in 2017.
The federal government drew attention Monday to the millions of Americans, including nearly 224,000 in New Jersey, who are eligible for subsidies to buy health coverage but apparently don’t know it.
By Anjalee Khemlani, November 23, 2016 at 10:53 AM
Rutgers University’s Certified Health Care Manager program starts in February. – (NJBIZ FILE PHOTO)
Though the future of the Affordable Care Act is currently unknown following the presidential election, Rutgers University is staying the course in the rollout of a Certified Health Care Manager program — which the university is touting as the first of its kind in the country.
The 30-module course, which will only span three semesters for those interested, is geared to train health care managers to understand the ACA, as well as other changing trends in health care administration.
Some users of Obamacare are finding the medical care they need to be too expensive to use due to high deductibles and high out-of-pocket costs.
Michelle Harris is one of those people. Harris, a 61-year-old retired waitress in northwest Montana, has arthritis in both shoulders but is doing everything she can to avoid seeing a doctor due to the $4,500 deductible and $338 a month in premiums under her Blue Cross Blue Shield plan.
“It hurts, but we don’t have that kind of money,” Harris said to Bloomberg Politics. “So I deal with it.”
Some insurance plans under Obamacare are designed not to kick in until patients have spent thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs, which put many healthcare services out of reach for patients.
Even though the uninsured rate in America is at a record low, a study from the Commonwealth Fund found that four out of 10 adults in Obamacare plans aren’t confident that they can pay their medical bills if they got sick, Bloomberg Politics reported.
“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever,” Jonathan Gruber, a professor at MIT and an architect of Obamacare
Rep.Scott Garrett :Time find solutions that will increase actually make health care more affordable and accessible for everyone.
“While we were promised affordable prices and increased competition with ObamaCare, we’ve only seen premium prices spike and insurance companies exit the unworkable exchanges. You’ve probably heard a number of news reports this week about the increased healthcare costs many people are facing as a result of this disastrous law. Unfortunately, New Jersey is no exception.
If you are one of the thousands of residents here in the Garden State expected to participate in ObamaCare open enrollment that starts this week, chances are you’ve been hit by massive sticker shock. You’ve probably also noticed that you’ve had less choice than you had in the past as only two insurance companies remain in New Jersey’s exchanges. It’s obvious that ObamaCare isn’t working for New Jersey’s families.
Supporters of ObamaCare told us that it would save the average family $2,500 a year on premiums. Instead, we are finding out that premiums will increase by an average of 25 percent. We were also told, “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” Instead, at least 76,000 New Jerseyans are now forced to switch insurance providers. And these families are quickly finding out that switching insurance providers is difficult. New plans may mean leaving the family doctor you’ve seen for years and interrupting ongoing medical treatment.
The Affordable Care Act is not affordable and it is forcing American families to make unwanted compromises about their healthcare.
New Jerseyans shouldn’t have to pay the price for ObamaCare’s broken promises. That is why I will continue to fight to repeal ObamaCare and work in a bipartisan manner to find solutions that will increase actually make health care more affordable and accessible for everyone.”
He’s back ….Obama’s lying Obamacare “stupid Americans” creep/expert, Jonathan Gruber raises his ugly head once again so he can add insult to injury because he says that 2500 dollars a year mandate penalty is not enough for people who are struggling, that cannot afford Obamacare, do not have health coverage and literally have nothing left to pay the government for doing NOTHING! Joe Killian
POSTED AT 5:31 PM ON OCTOBER 26, 2016 BY JOHN SEXTON
Jonathan Gruber is making the rounds on television again to tell us Obamacare is “working as designed.” Today he appeared on CNN to argue that, despite the 25% rate hikes for states using the national exchange, there wasn’t a problem with the law.
“Is Obamacare imploding?” CNN’s host asked Gruber. “No, Obamacare’s not imploding,” Gruber replied. Asked about the coming premium hikes for 2017 Gruber said, “First of all, the 22% increase, let’s remember who that applies to. That applies to a very small fraction of people who have to buy insurance without the subsidies that are available.” He continued, “Eight-five percent of people who are buying insurance on the exchanges get subsidies and for those people this premium increase doesn’t affect them.”
Here again is the Obamacare proponent’s favorite statistic. Normally, I would give someone the benefit of the doubt on something like this but not Gruber. He demonstrated a long time ago that he’s not an honest broker. “Call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever but basically that was really critical to getting the thing to pass,” Gruber once said when defending the tortured way in which the law was written. Gruber applauds deception in the selling of Obamacare:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That’s sure to stoke another “Obamacare” controversy days before a presidential election.
Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.
Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.
“Consumers will be faced this year with not only big premium increases but also with a declining number of insurers participating, and that will lead to a tumultuous open enrollment period,” said Larry Levitt, who tracks the health care law for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.
Republicans pounced on the numbers as a warning that insurance markets created by the 2010 health overhaul are teetering toward a “death spiral.” Sign-up season starts Nov. 1, about a week before national elections in which the GOP remains committed to a full repeal.
“It’s over for Obamacare,” Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said at a campaign rally Monday evening in Tampa, Florida.
New law’s success or failure will ‘profoundly influence the future of the U.S. health care system’
by John S. O’Shea, M.D. | Updated 21 Oct 2016 at 9:22 AM
In what may be the most significant modification to Medicare since the program began in 1966, on Oct. 15, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released the final rule for implementing the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA). It dramatically changes how Medicare pays doctors for their services.
Does it really matter how doctors get paid? Yes — the success or failure of the new payment system will profoundly influence the future of the U.S. health care system. And while the goals of MACRA are laudable, its implementation carries a number of unknowns and the potential for unintended consequences — for patients and doctors alike.
A growing number of people in Obamacare are finding out their health insurance plans will disappear from the program next year, forcing them to find new coverage even as options shrink and prices rise.
At least 1.4 million people in 32 states will lose the Obamacare plan they have now, according to state officials contacted by Bloomberg. That’s largely caused by Aetna Inc., UnitedHealth Group Inc. and some state or regional insurers quitting the law’s marketsfor individual coverage.
Sign-ups for Obamacare coverage begin next month. Fallout from the quitting insurers has emerged as the latest threat to the law, which is also a major focal point in the U.S. presidential election. While it’s not clear what all the consequences of the departing insurers will be, interviews with regulators and insurance customers suggest that plans will be fewer and more expensive, and may not include the same doctors and hospitals.
It may also mean that instead of growing in 2017, Obamacare could shrink. As of March 31, the law covered 11.1 million people; an Oct. 13 S&P Global Ratings report predicted that enrollment next year will range from an 8 percent decline to a 4 percent gain.
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_riaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 165
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_inhaIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 166
Warning: Undefined array key "sfsi_mastodonIcon_order" in /home/eagle1522/public_html/theridgewoodblog.net/wp-content/plugins/ultimate-social-media-icons/libs/controllers/sfsi_frontpopUp.php on line 177
