Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OBAMACARE DEBACLE - Update 1/23/2014

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OBAMACARE DEBACLE - Update 1/23/2014

    Really Understanding Obamacare

    FrontPage Magazine

    Discover The Networks
    1/23/2014

    Excerpt:

    You undoubtedly have heard countless commentators—on both sides of the Obamacare debate—speak about how the new healthcare law will affect you. But if you’re like most people, there are many aspects of this immensely long and complex piece of legislation that you don’t know anything about. Moreover, you may wish that you felt better-equipped to answer the claims of devoted leftists who confidently assert that Obamacare is a benefit for the American people.

    To address these concerns, Discover The Networks today announces the publication of one of the most important special features it has ever produced: Obamacare: Before and After. This new addition to our website: (a) examines the state of healthcare in America prior to Obamacare’s passage; (b) lays out free-market solutions that could have effectively addressed the problems that Obamacare was ostensibly created to solve; (c) explains all the major provisions contained in the Obamacare legislation itself; and (d) examines the politics of Obamacare—laying bare the unspoken yet transformative political agendas that sit at the very heart of this law.

    Everything in Obamacare: Before and After is arranged in a reader-friendly, bullet-point format designed to make the complex simple, and to let you easily zero in on the topics that most concern or interest you. You will not get lost in dense and interminable text. Rather, you’ll get plain talk and clear, succinct information. Just a few of the vital facts that you will learn in this feature include the following:

    * Politicians have commonly sought to win public favor by passing laws requiring insurance companies to include an ever-expanding range of mandatory benefits in all their healthcare plans, regardless of whether the insured even wanted them. As of 2009, there were 2,133 of these mandates which were, in some places, increasing the price of basic insurance by as much as 50%. Mandates like these are antithetical to a free marketplace.

    * Consumers have long been barred from purchasing healthcare policies from insurers located in other states. This has dramatically reduced competition among insurers, and has kept the cost of premiums much higher than they would have been in a truly free marketplace.

    * Government healthcare programs like Medicare and Medicaid egregiously shortchange doctors and hospitals when reimbursing them. Thus, healthcare professionals who accept Medicare and Medicaid patients are forced to charge their privately insured patients higher rates than would otherwise be necessary. This causes families with private insurance to pay an extra $1,500 to $1,800 for their premiums each year.

    * From the moment President Obama and the Democrats began pushing for healthcare reform, they repeatedly emphasized the notion that 46 million Americans lacked insurance. This bogus figure included (with some overlap) 10 million who earned over $75,000 annually; another 8 million who earned between $50,000 and $75,000; 14 million low-income Americans who were fully eligible for government insurance programs but simply had never taken the time to enroll; 6 million who were eligible for employer-sponsored insurance but chose not to take advantage of it; more than 10 million (including many illegal immigrants) who were not U.S. citizens; and millions of young “invincibles” who chose not to purchase insurance because low-cost, bare-bones plans without a litany of mandates were not available in their states.

    * Obamacare’s employer mandate stipulates that every business with 50 or more full-time workers must provide insurance coverage for all of them. Thus, business owners now have an incentive to limit their full-time work forces to 49 people or fewer, and to rely more on independent contractors.

    * The Obamacare employer mandate adds, on average, $1.79 per hour to the cost of keeping a single person on the payroll full-time, and $5.51 per hour to the cost of employing a full-time worker with dependents.

    * President Obama consistently promised that his health reform plan would “bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.” But the premiums for insurance plans available on the Obamacare exchanges are higher than pre-Obamacare rates in at least 45 of the 50 U.S. states. For middle-aged policy holders in 32 states, the premium increases range from 26% to more than 100%. In 27 states, the Obamacare premiums for young adults are between 51% and 252.5% higher than pre-Obamacare levels.

    * When Obamacare was being debated, the President repeatedly pledged that “no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.” But Obamacare imposes at least 18 new taxes, tax hikes, or official policies designed to collect hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues. Many of these will affect people at all income levels.

    * The architects of Obamacare knew that if the economics of the law failed to work out as projected, insurers could lose a great deal of money. To address this possibility, Obamacare explicitly contains a provision designed to bail out insurers whose costs prove to be higher than originally anticipated.

    * Obamacare was passed, without a single Republican vote, by means of a stunning series of sleazy backroom deals and procedural maneuvers.

    * As early as February 2010, the President demonstrably knew quite well that Obamacare’s “grandfather” provision for the preservation of existing plans was toothless, and that millions of Americans were likely to lose their insurance. The Obama administration’s own officials explicitly predicted that as a direct result of Obamacare, some 93 million people would in fact lose their existing insurance plans and would be forced to purchase new ones.

    * It is a matter of public record that President Obama and many other leading Democrats view Obamacare not as a final solution to the nation’s healthcare problems, but rather as a stepping stone toward the ultimate goal of a single-payer system administered entirely by the federal government. Obama has acknowledged this numerous times over the years, as have Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Kathleen Sebelius.

    * One of the leading objectives of Obamacare is the redistribution of wealth, mostly from middle- and high-income households to: (a) tens of millions of low-income people who will be funneled, en masse, into Medicaid, and (b) moderate-income households that will be newly eligible for federal (taxpayer-funded) subsidies. This redistribution will have the effect of promoting an entitlement mentality and a greater dependence on government.

    * Another Obamacare objective is political payback. The law has designated some $67 million in taxpayer funds for nearly 50,000 so-called “navigators” to help people enroll in Obamacare plans. These navigators, who are mostly affiliated with more than 100 leftist organizations that have strongly supported President Obama over the years, will each be paid up to $48 per hour.

    * Obamacare is also designed to serve as a vehicle for Democratic voter-registration. The online application form that individuals must complete when seeking an insurance policy via the Obamacare exchanges, asks applicants if they would like to register to vote. If they answer “yes,” the website facilitates that process. The Washington Post observes that Democrats “stand to benefit the most from a surge in voter registration among those who currently lack insurance,” because “by more than a 2 to 1 ratio, uninsured Americans supported Barack Obama over Republican Mitt Romney” in 2012.

    * Obamacare is designed to increase the size and power of the federal government. The IRS, for instance, will hire more than 16,000 new agents to monitor and enforce compliance with Obamacare’s financial mandates. Moreover, Obamacare will be administered by at least 159 newly created boards, commissions, and agencies—with the assistance of dozens of existing federal bureaus.


    View the complete article, including important links, at:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dis...g-obamacare-2/
    B. Steadman

  • #2
    Target Joins Home Depot, Walmart, Others In Cutting Health Care For Part-Timers, Citing Obamacare

    Forbes

    Clare O'Connor
    1/22/2014

    Excerpt:

    Target has become the latest high-profile retailer to cut health benefits for part-time workers, citing both low employee participation and “health care reform” in a letter posted on its website.

    The Minnesota-based discount chain joins Home Depot HD -0.69%, Trader Joe’s, Forever 21 and other large retailers in ending health insurance coverage for part-time staff as the Affordable Care Act, commonly dubbed Obamacare, comes into effect.

    Other companies like Walmart started cutting health care benefits for part-timers long before Obamacare’s January 1st start date; the Bentonville, Ark. low-price giant stopped health coverage for those working fewer than 24 hours a week in 2011*. (Walmart surprised critics by announcing 35,000 part-time staff would be elevated to full-time status last fall, making them eligible for benefits.)

    Target’s head of HR Jodee Kozlak explained on Tuesday that fewer than 10 per cent of the chain’s workers are currently enrolled in the company’s part-time health plan, which is available for employees putting in under 30 hours weekly.

    “The launch of Health Insurance Marketplaces provides new options for health care coverage that we believe our part-time team members may prefer,” Kozlak wrote, adding that each part-timer will be eligible for a $500 cash payment from Target.

    “In fact, by offering them insurance, we could actually disqualify many of them from being eligible for newly available subsidies that could reduce their overall health insurance expense.”

    Workers’ rights advocates are taking issue with Target’s framing of its healthcare changes as an altruistic act. “Major employers like Target should not be looking to taxpayers to subsidize an employee benefit they can more than afford to pay,” said Carrie Gleason, executive director of the Retail Action Project, an activist group that has protested labor practices at Walmart among other companies.

    “Moreover, Target’s plan is part of an ongoing trend in the retail industry of capping workers’ hours to avoid the employer mandate for insurance,” she said. “The real issue at play here is that employers consistently don’t offer part-time employees health insurance.”

    Target’s Kozlak assured employees there is no plan to cap workers’ hours, writing: “At any time, our team members can talk to their manager about their interest and availability to work more hours. In fact, during the holiday season we offered our year-round part time and full time team members the opportunity to take on additional hours or cross-train to work in other areas — at their request.”

    *Update: A Walmart spokesperson wished to add the following clarification: “We do have associates working 24 hours a week that receive health care benefits. It’s new associates hired after Feb. 1, 2012 that receive benefits after one year of service and if they work an average of 30 hours per week. This change was made to conform to the ACA. Walmart has more than 300,000 associates that have been with the company for 10 years or more. Part-time associates hired prior to Feb. 1, 2012, were grandfathered under the old requirements, meaning they had to average 24 hours of work a week, and associates hired before Jan. 15, 2011, were grandfathered under the old requirements.”


    View the complete article, including photos, at:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoco...ing-obamacare/
    B. Steadman

    Comment


    • #3
      Obamacare creates a new class of free riders

      The Daily Caller

      Rituparna Basu and Yaron Brook
      1/23/2014

      Excerpt:

      Welcome to Obamacare, land of skyrocketing premiums, cancelled insurance policies, and a website that is exhibit A of government incompetence. If Republicans are serious about stopping this destructive law, they must criticize more than its rollout troubles, which are fixable. They must expose the law’s fundamental problems, which its supporters are determined to hide.

      For example, Obamacare creates a new class of free riders in America. This is the purpose of the individual mandate, the law’s central provision, which requires most Americans, starting this year, to carry health insurance coverage or else pay a fine to the government.

      Supporters portray the mandate’s function as the opposite. “We’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you,” said the president in 2009. “If you don’t have insurance and you need to go to the emergency room or unexpectedly get diagnosed with cancer, you are free-riding on others,” said Ezekiel Emanuel, a former Obama administration adviser, last year; “Insured Americans will have to pay more to hospitals and doctors to make up for your nonpayment.”

      Now, not everyone without coverage has the intention to free ride — government distortion of insurance has priced people out of the market for decades. But even so, who are Obamacare supporters kidding with their feigned aversion to pawning off one’s medical expenses onto others? Free riding is the name of the game in American health care.

      Why, for example, can someone walk into an ER expecting to free ride on the insured? Because federal law requires these facilities to treat him even if he has no intention of paying. Medicare (its mythical “trust fund” notwithstanding) and Medicaid similarly entitle more than 100 million seniors and lower-income Americans to free ride on younger generations and those of higher income. Employer-based coverage has also long been rigged by government so that older, less healthy workers free ride on younger, healthier employees, who are charged higher premiums to lower the costs of the former.

      If Obamacare supporters were really offended by free riding, they’d call not for a law forcing people to buy coverage, but for the phasing out and eventual repeal of the government programs that allow it in the first place.

      ............................................

      View the complete article at:

      http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/23/ob...f-free-riders/
      B. Steadman

      Comment


      • #4
        The Broken State of American Health Insurance Prior to the Affordable Care Act

        A Market Rife with Government Distortion

        Ayn Rand Institute

        Rituparna Basu

        Reprinted with permission from the Ayn Rand Institute by Pacific Research Institute

        View the complete article at:

        http://www.pacificresearch.org/filea...015/BasuF2.pdf
        B. Steadman

        Comment

        Working...
        X