ObamaCare Working <----- NOT

[skoda]

A nonprofit organization (NPO, also known as a non-business entity) is an organization that uses its surplus revenues to further achieve its purpose or mission, rather than distributing its surplus income to the organization's directors (or equivalents) as profit or dividends. I guess Denise Cesare's $1,000,000 salary doesn't apply........... nor/or/these??


Look at this list of people and are the organizations what...........directors



Gravy Train of Blue Cross (Another Non-Profit See above what a NP is )



What..... How much...


• Moses $194,800 (includes Highmark board compensation)

• Lamont, $118,100 (includes Highmark board compensation)

• Menapace, $117,600 (includes Highmark board compensation)

• Simms, $117,000 (includes Highmark board compensation) Owner many gas staions, pays workers $7.25 an hour!



• Apostolico, $53,000


• Canevari, $53,400


• Danchak, $52,300


• DeNaples, $52,300 Casino King Of Pa.


• Ecker, $52,300


• Graham, $52,300


• Hollander, $52,500


• Mangan, $52,700

• McCarthy Jr., $52,300

• Rooney, $53,300

• Williams, $$52,900


This is a news story you won't see on your local 6:00 news but will see a arrest for selling drugs, Gimme-a-break

BTW BC/BS next Health Insurance increase is because of, salaries of our Board of Directorsazzkick(&^


probably not as they will say for its purpose or mission

 

[superbeets]

[h=1]Obama insists 'there is no reason' to strike down Obamacare subsidies and claims 'the thing is working' as he slams the Supreme Court for taking up landmark case[/h]

• 'This should be an easy case,' the president said during a press conference in Germany following the G7 summit
• 'Frankly, it probably shouldn't have even been taken up' in the Supreme Court, he declared
• Obama said the law 'hasn't had an adverse effect on people who already had health insurance' and didn't produce 'horror stories'
• Millions of Americans lost their insurance plans in late 2013 and tens of millions are on high-deductible plans that they can't afford to use
• Affordable Care Act says the feds can only pay subsidies to Americans who bought their insurance through marketplaces 'established by the state' where they live
• An estimated 6.4 million Americans would lose that money if the high court rules that those four words mean what they appear to

.

The White House is still hoping against hope that the U.S. Supreme Court won't overturn a key provision of the Obamacare law that props up the system's financial position.
President Barack Obama said Monday in Germany that his signature medical insurance reform law 'is working' as advertised.
'There is no reason why the existing exchanges should be overturned through a court case,' Obama said. 'This should be an easy case. Frankly, it probably shouldn't have even been taken up.'
'What's more, the thing is working. I mean, part of what's bizarre about this whole thing is we haven't had a lot of conversation about the horrors of Obamacare, because none of them have come to pass.'
The law, he insisted, 'hasn't had an adverse effect on people who already had health insurance.'
That statement ignores the millions of Americans who lost their policies at the end of 2013 when insurers determined that their existing policies failed to comply with the law's broad minimum-coverage requirements.


.

+7


NO PLAN B: The White House doesn't have a plan to replace more than $1 billion in Obamacare subsidies if the Supreme Court rules they violated the Affordable Care Act, but President Barack Obama insists the case should never have been green-lighted in the first place

+7


THe president held a press conference in Germany at the conclusion of a G7 summit on Monday

The high court will announce soon whether Congress actually authorized the federal government to subsidize payments to insurance premium-payers even if they live in states that decided not to set up their own insurance marketplaces.
Millions would find themselves without insurance if the court ruled in favor of a group of businesses who sued the government.
Obama said it's undeniable that Congress never intended to bar subsidies to consumers whose states allowed Washington to serve as their insurance broker.
Speaking in Elmau, Germany at the end of a G7 summit, he claimed that 'it has been well documented that those who passed this legislation never intended for folks who were going through the federal exchange not to have their citizens get subsidies.'
Some Supreme Court justices seemed to be uncomfortable with that pooint of view when the court heard oral arguments. The Affordable Care Act provides for insurance subsidies to be paid to Americans who buy their policies through excahnges 'established by the state' in which they live.


.

+7


FAMILY PORTRAIT: Chancellor Angela Merkel showed off her native country's town of Elmau as leaders of the world's economic powers met for a summit

+7


Demonstrators chant during a health care rally outside the Supreme Court in March. The Supreme Court could wipe away health insurance subsidies for millions of Americans when it resolves the latest legal fight over President Barack Obama's medical insurance overhaul

Obama called a strict reading of that text 'a twisted interpretation of four words in -- as we were reminded repeatedly -- a couple-thousand-page piece of legislation.'
Massachusetts Institutte of Technology economic Jonathan Gruber, acknowledged as the law's architect, has said publicly that lawmakers specifically wanted to give states an incentive to set up their own marketplaces – threatening them with the withdrawal of subsidies if they didn't.
Only 13 states plus the District of Columbia took the bait and established insurance exchanges.
Last week White House press secertary Josh Earnest admitted in a briefing that if the Supreme Court sides with the plaintiffs in the 'King v. Burwell' case, it could 'throw the health care system in this country into utter chaos.'
If the Obama administration loses the Supreme Court battle, 6.4 million Americans would lose their healthcare assistance, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates.
Florida would be hit the hardest, with 1.3 million residents losing out on government subsidies.
Current recipients of the federal monies are likely to shed their care plans and instead pay the fine to opt out of care if the government stops helping them pay for it, experts predict.
'People who are reasonably healthy would just drop coverage,' Sandy Praeger, the former insurance commissioner of Kansas told the Associated Press. 'Only the unhealthy would keep buying health care. It would really exacerbate the problem of the cost of health insurance.'
She said the national health care system would turn into 'a classic death spiral' in that scenario.


.
'This would be hard to fix,' Obama conceded Monday in Germany.
'Fortunately,' he added, 'there's no reason to have to do it. It doesn't need fixing.'
But Earnest said Friday that Congress would have to propose a solution unless the White House prevails.
Congress was in the hands of Democrats when the law was passed, but has since swung fully into Republican control. That makes cooperation with the White House a near impossibility.
'I think there's ample evidence that making a bet in favor of prompt, wise, and constructive congressional action when it comes to the healthcare is not a very good bet,' Earnest told reporters.
Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has proposed a bill that would extend the subsidies for current Obamacare recipients through September 2017 to buy time to come up with a solution.
That would push the problem off to the next president and the next Congress. If Republicans maintain their lead in the legislative branch and win the White House, too, they would then have the opportunity to replace the law entirely.
But the White House would most likely reject Johnson's bill because it would get rid of the law's individual mandate, which requires all Americans to have health care - even if their employer doesn't pay for it.
It would also let large companies who are required to provide insurance to their employees off the hook.

+7


The Supreme Court could 'throw the health care system in this country into utter chaos,' the White House says, if it rules against the administration's interpretation of the law



.


'The president is likely to veto whatever we would propose, because we don't have a willing partner,' Republican Senator John Barrasso, chairman of the Senate's Republican Policy Committee, said.

.

A doctor by trade, Barrasso has been helping to lead the GOP's charge to come up with an alternative to Obamacare.
Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse has also proposed legislation to allow subsidy beneficiaries to keep their coverage. His bill would cover up to 65 percent of the amount they were previously receiving and give them six months to find new coverage before the federal government began cutting them off.
The president isn't likely to sign Sasse's bill, either.
The White House today claimed that it hasn't 'seen much of an appetite from Republicans in Congress to working constructively to address this question,' signaling it's dissatisfaction with the options under consideration.
'The fact is we've seen many Republicans be very willing to try to play politics in a rather cynical way on this issue but not a lot of constructive engagement to try to solve problems,' Earnest asserted.

+7


A doctor by trade, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming has been helping to lead the GOP's charge to come up with an alternative to Obamacare. 'The president is likely to veto whatever we would propose, because we don't have a willing partner,' he said, speaking about the GOP's contingency plans

The West Wing spokesman said the administration continues to 'be very confident in the legal case' it presented before the Supreme Court.
Its solicitor general made 'absolutely clear that an 'impartial reading' of the law will result in the conclusion that Members of Congress did not intend to make their constituents ineligible for federal subsidies.
'The fact is that this policy, as it has been implemented over the last several years, has lowered health care costs for millions of people across the country,' Earnest said.
And in millions of cases, American can now buy healthcare plans that they would not have been able to afford before. Millions of people 'now no longer have to worry that they're one illness away from bankruptcy court,' he posited.
'There would be no easy solutions for solving that problem' if the Supreme Court rules against the administration's interpretation of the law, he explained 'principally because it would likely require an act of Congress to address that situation.'
'Hopefully that will not be an eventuality that we'll have to consider,' he said, reaffirming that the administration currently has no contingency plan of its own.


.

"We haven't had a lot of conversation about the horrors of Obamacare, because none of them have come to pass."
President Barack Obama, speaking in Germany after a G7 summit



.

 

[skoda]

If a bill passed Friday by the Florida House of Representatives becomes law, state employees, including multimillionaire Gov. Rick Scott, would continue paying prices as low as $8.34 per month for individual health insurance or $30 for their families. Although the House voted in favor of a proposal to continue these deeply discounted prices, the Senate does not appear poised to pass the bill, the Associated Press reported Friday.


In parallel, the Florida legislature in early June soundly rejected a proposal to expand Medicaid so that up to 800,000 low-income Floridians could gain access to health insurance. The Florida House and Senate have 160 members, 54 of whom are millionaires, the Miami Herald has reported. For health insurance, 145 are enrolled in the taxpayer-funded insurance plan State Group Health, where premiums cost $180 a month for a family or $50 a month for an individual.


This coverage, which includes physician care, hospital visits and care, prescription drugs and several other services, is valued at $22,000 a year per lawmaker. Or viewed another way, it costs taxpayers $1 million per month, the Miami Herald found. Although Gov. Scott has been proposing since 2011 that legislators pay more for their healthcare coverage, lawmakers never accepted these changes.


Yet the governor and his cohorts pay even less – the $8 or $30 a month previously mentioned. Lawmakers previously paid those rates as well, until their share of the premiums were raised in 2012. By contrast, the average monthly premium for a family in Florida costs $1,347, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Public Unions receive a Taxpayer Subsidy for their Health Insurance! :bitch:

 

[SheriffJoe]

Thanks to the commie POS...Health insurance rates going up again!

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/u...es-seek-big-rate-increases-for-2016.html?_r=0

Health insurance companies around the country are seeking rate increases of 20 percent to 40 percent or more, saying their new customers under the Affordable Care Act turned out to be sicker than expected. Federal officials say they are determined to see that the requests are scaled back.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans — market leaders in many states — are seeking rate increases that average 23 percent in Illinois, 25 percent in North Carolina, 31 percent in Oklahoma, 36 percent in Tennessee and 54 percent in Minnesota, according to documents posted online by the federal government and state insurance commissioners and interviews with insurance executives.

The Oregon insurance commissioner, Laura N. Cali, has just approved 2016 rate increases for companies that cover more than 220,000 people. Moda Health Plan, which has the largest enrollment in the state, received a 25 percent increase, and the second-largest plan, LifeWise, received a 33 percent increase.

 

[russ1945]

[h=1]More than two-thirds of Obamacare enrollees unsatisfied with coverage: survey[/h]

Enrollment counselor Vue Yang (left) goes over some of the health insurance plans available to Laura San Nicolas (center), accompanied by her daughter, Geena, 17, while enrolling for health insurance at Sacramento Covered in Sacramento, Calif., on Feb. 12, 2015. ... more >


By Tom Howell Jr. - The Washington Times - Monday, August 3, 2015
Obamacare has offered insurance to millions of people, but they’re unhappy with the coverage they’re getting and are particularly upset about the costs, according to a survey released Monday that suggests the health care law continues to struggle to win over Americans.
Just 30 percent of customers on Obamacare’s exchanges were satisfied with their coverage, the health care research arm of the Deloitte consulting firm said.
Only a quarter of Obamacare customers in the survey were confident that they could get care when they needed it, and just 16 percent felt “financially prepared” to handle future health care costs, Deloitte said.
“Those are not high numbers,” said Paul Lambdin, a director for Deloitte’s work on insurance exchanges and retail practices.
Analysts said it is hard to tell at this point whether dissatisfaction is the inevitable byproduct of a new customer base or whether the law itself has structural problems.
“I think you’d have to go a lot deeper to really discern that at this point. They’re muddied together,” Mr. Lambdin said in an interview.
The polling contradicts findings in other surveys that seemed to show higher levels of satisfaction, including a Kaiser Family Foundation poll, that found three-quarters of people on exchange plans rated their overall coverage as “excellent” or “good.”
The discrepancies could result from how the surveys measure satisfaction and how much weight is given to people who feel lukewarm about their plans.
Deloitte asked more than 3,800 adults, including 406 exchange enrollees, to rate their satisfaction from one to 10. More than half of exchange customers said they were in the “somewhat satisfied” range of four to seven.
Fourteen percent of exchange users said they were “not satisfied.” By comparison, those who have coverage through Medicare, Medicaid or plans through their employers had dissatisfaction rates in the single digits.
Obamacare customers were twice as likely as the uninsured to see a primary care doctor, suggesting that the coverage is paying off in trying to create a more healthy population.
Also, 35 percent had a high level of confidence that the exchanges are providing good information.
The Affordable Care Act, as Obamacare is officially known, set up marketplaces in each state where those who lack insurance but make too much money to qualify for Medicaid can purchase plans, usually with government subsidies in the form of tax credits.
The Supreme Court has upheld the broad outlines of the law as constitutional, and in June issued yet another ruling finding that the law allows tax credits to be paid nationwide, putting Obamacare on surer footing.
Still, the law has suffered from a number of self-imposed hiccups, including potential fraud, lax verification and potentially rising costs for customers as insurers figure out the economics.

 

[SheriffJoe]

but, but, but...Obamacare has saved thousands of lives!

 

[festeringZit]

but, but, but...Obamacare has saved thousands of lives!

but but but, if you want to keep your plan, you can keep your plan, period.

[ nasty fucking snake liar ]

 

[BleedingPurple]

I would say I'm not the happiest with my coverage and I do not have Obamacare..... my biggest knock on Obama were the lies about coverage and the way it was rushed in.

 

[Dave007inVegas]

I would say I'm not the happiest with my coverage and I do not have Obamacare..... my biggest knock on Obama were the lies about coverage and the way it was rushed in.

If you’re not happy with your current insurance why don’t you switch to ObamaCare. You can keep your doctors and save $2500 dollars.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

 

[BleedingPurple]

If you’re not happy with your current insurance why don’t you switch to ObamaCare. You can keep your doctors and save $2500 dollars.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

I can keep my same doctors as Obamacare covers pretty much all the main docs from the two main clinics. My coverage would be about the same through both but I do pay less because my employer picks up part of the premium.

 

[Dave007inVegas]

I can keep my same doctors as Obamacare covers pretty much all the main docs from the two main clinics. My coverage would be about the same through both but I do pay less because my employer picks up part of the premium.

I was being facetious.

 

[Dave007inVegas]

Gotcha suckers!

All Americans who bought health insurance policies this year – not just those enrolled in Obamacare – face a 41 percent increase in excise taxes because of hidden fees contained in an obscure section of the Affordable Care Act, according to an investigation by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Virtually everyone who pays for health care insurance this year will be affected by the tax. The little-known tax was imposed on all consumers regardless of whether they obtained their insurance through Obamacare or through their employer or as individuals in the private market.

This year the tax will cost individuals more than $500 in extra premiums according to one actuarial estimate. Families who purchased insurance will see their premiums go up by more than $700.

And it gets worse…

http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/09/everybody-has-to-pay-this-new-obamacare-tax/

#toldyouso!

 

[skoda]

Only a xtra $42 a month remember, "if you like your plan"........

Only Government workers are keeping their plan that they receive a Subsidy which is your tax dollar...... Their premium goes up our tax also will.......

I'll predict a minimum of 4 posters posting in Poly are now or have worked with Uncle Sam popcorn-eatinggif

 

[Dave007inVegas]

Nevada's health insurance exchange is losing its only locally based carrier.

Nevada Health CO-OP, a nonprofit insurer created by the Affordable Care Act and federally funded to offer health coverage through the Nevada Health Link marketplace, said Wednesday that it cannot make enough money to stay in business after Jan. 1.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/millions-the-red-nevada-obamacare-insurer-has-failed

#thanksobama

 

[festeringZit]

[h=1]Cancer Patients Will Be Left Out of Next Year’s Obamacare Plans[/h] If you’re a cancer patient at a cutting-edge center like MD Anderson in Houston, you’re not going to be covered.

The healthcare marketplace is open once again, but if you look closely at the offered insurance plans you might find something lacking: coverage for specialized treatments.
Preferred Provider Plans, or PPOs, often do cover specialized treatment like care for cancer patients.The loss of individual-market plan PPOs will affect tens of thousands of people who buy their insurance privately rather than through an employer. Before the Affordable Care Act, it was the way most people who did not have employer insurance got coverage.
Jenny Deam, with the Houston Chronicle, investigates the disappearance of these plans. She says there will no longer be any plans, by any carrier on the federal exchange for the Houston area, that cover treatment at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. How the marketplace got that way, she says, is a little unclear.
“The PPOs had started disappearing a couple of years ago,” she says. “The last one in Houston was Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas and they announced in the summer that they were getting rid of them, that they were no longer sustainable. PPOs with their wider range of network and hospitals… are very expensive.”
What insurers have done instead is shift people in the individual market and on the healthcare exchange to HMOs, which are usually less expensive. The downside, Deam says, is that patients with specialized and complex medical needs will have limited coverage.
In her investigation, Deam profiled one cancer patient, Martha Gardenier, who was told by a doctor that she needed to start making end-of-life preparations. She sought a second opinion from MD Anderson, and began to see her situation improve from Stage 3 to Stage 1 cancer. This experience showed Gardenier that not all doctors who treat cancer are created equal – that she was getting better care at MD Anderson.
Now, it’s as if that carpet is being pulled out from under her. Gardenier will no longer will have a PPO that will cover the costs as it once did. She’s going to have to pay out-of-pocket for care that could reach $10,000 a month.
“Since that article appeared, I’ve had just dozen of emails, many from other patients who tell the same story,” Deam says. “They specifically got an insurance plan that covered MD Anderson…. [Gardenier is] a pretty stark example of somebody who had been pretty much told ‘There’s nothing more we can do for you,’ and she entered a clinical trial, highly experimental, at MD Anderson. And it worked. People like that don’t want to hear that cancer treatment is interchangeable.”


http://www.texasstandard.org/stories/cancer-patients-will-be-left-out-of-next-years-obamacare-plans/

 

[Dave007inVegas]

^^^


I see Obama’s death panel is alive and well.

 

[roadreeler57]

BEST OF POLITICS“Weeks after leaving office, Obama discovers a leak under his sink so he calls a plumber to fix it…” Share on Facebook Tweet Email PrintAdvertisement - story continues belowThe Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, is a socialist scheme that does nothing more than funnel money away from the successful and into the hands of the not-so-successful.While it might sound charitable at first glance, be very wary, for socialism in any form always produces the most horrific of results, as this example demonstrates:Only weeks after leaving office on Jan. 20, 2017, former President Barack Obama discovers a leak under his sink, so he calls Troy the Plumber to come out and fix it.Advertisement - story continues belowRELATED STORIESObama’s “BLM 2.0” Has Been Killed by CongressExperts: Our Nuclear Program Is DECADES BehindSessions Is Now Open to Appointing An Outside Counsel to Investigate Obama ScandalsTroy drives to Obama’s new house, which is located in a very exclusive, gated community near Chicago where all the residents have a net income of way more than $250,000 per year.Troy arrives and takes his tools into the house. He is led to the guest bathroom that contains the leaky pipe under the sink. Troy assesses the problem and tells Obama that it’s an easy repair that will take less than 10 minutes. Obama asks Troy how much it will cost. Troy checks his rate chart and says, “$9,500.”“What?! $9,500?!” Obama asks, stunned, “But you said it’s an easy repair. Michelle will whip me if I pay a plumber that much!”Advertisement - story continues belowOur Prayers Go Out to Megyn's Family. Sad Day for NBCHollywoodinfocus[14x Lotto Winner] Do This Before Buying Lotto Tickets (Win 1/12 Times)DIY Life Help3 Signs You May Have a Fatty Liver [watch]Live Cell ResearchAds by RevcontentTroy says, “Yes, but what I do is charge those who make more than $250,000 per year a much higher amount so I can fix the plumbing of poorer people for free. This has always been my philosophy. As a matter of fact, I lobbied the Democrat Congress, who passed this philosophy into law. Now all plumbers must do business this way. It’s known as the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act of 2014’. I’m surprised you haven’t heard of it.”In spite of that, Obama tells Troy there’s no way he’s paying that much for a small plumbing repair, so Troy leaves. Obama spends the next hour flipping through the phone book calling for another plumber, but he finds that all other plumbing businesses in the area have gone out of business. Not wanting to pay Troy’s price, Obama does nothing and the leak goes un-repaired for several more days. A week later the leak is so bad Obama has had to put a bucket under the sink.Michelle is not happy as she has Oprah and guests arriving the next morning. The bucket fills up quickly and has to be emptied every hour, and there’s a risk the room will flood, so Obama calls Troy and pleads with him to return.Troy goes back to Obama’s house, looks at the leaky pipe, checks his new rate chart and says, “Let’s see, this will now cost you $21,000.”Advertisement - story continues belowTRENDING STORIESDEVELOPING: Trump Considers Sending B-52 Nuclear Bombers to Korean PeninsulaAfter Being Deported 5 Times, Illegal Crosses Back into U.S. and Kills in Drunk Driving AccidentCNN Hires Former Trump Spokesman Jason Miller As a ContributorObama quickly fires back, “What? A few days ago you told me it would cost $9,500!”Troy explains, “Well, because of the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ a lot of wealthier people are learning how to maintain and take care of their own plumbing, so there are fewer payers in the plumbing exchanges. As a result, the price I have to charge wealthy people like you keeps rising. Not only that, but for some reason the demand for plumbing work by those who get it for free has skyrocketed! There’s a long waiting list of those who need repairs, but the amount we get doesn’t cover our costs, especially paperwork and record-keeping. This unfortunately has put a lot of my fellow plumbers out of business, they’re not being replaced, and nobody is going into the plumbing business because they know they can’t make any money at it. I’m hurting too, all thanks to greedy rich people like you who won’t pay their ‘fair share’. On the other hand, why didn’t you buy plumbing insurance last December? If you had bought plumbing insurance available under the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act,’ all this would have been covered by your policy.”“You mean I wouldn’t have to pay anything to have you fix my plumbing problem?” asks Obama.“Well, not exactly,” replies Troy. “You would have had to buy the insurance before the deadline, which has passed now. And, because you’re rich, you would have had to pay $34,000 in premiums, which would have given you a ‘silver’ plan, and then, since this would have been your first repair, you would have to pay up to the $21,000 deductible, and anything over that would have a $7,500 co-pay, and then there’s the mandatory maintenance program, which is covered up to 17.5%, so there are some costs involved. Nothing is for free.”“WHAT?!” exclaims Obama. “Why so much for a puny sink leak?!”With a bland look, Troy replies, “Well, paperwork, mostly, like I said. And the internal cost of the program itself. You don’t think a program of this complexity and scope can run itself, do you? Besides, there are millions of folks with lower incomes than you, even many in the ‘middle class’, who qualify for subsidies that people like you must support. That’s why they call it the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’! Only people who don’t make much money can afford it. If you want affordable plumbing, you’ll have to give away most of what you have accumulated and cut your and Michelle’s income by about 90%. Then you can qualify to get your ‘Fair Share’ instead of giving it.”“But who would pass a crazy act like the ‘Affordable Plumbing Act’?!” exclaims the exasperated Obama.After a sigh, Troy replies, “Congress… because they didn’t read it.”This anecdote, while amusing, is also extraordinarily truthful, in that Obamacare functions just like the fictional “Affordable Plumbing Act.”It inflates the costs of health care, drives providers out of business and reduces the incentive for hard work — because why should one work hard when he or she can get healthcare (or plumbing) for absolutely free?Socialism basically does to the country the same thing it did to it in Ayn Rand’s classic novel, “Atlas Shrugged” — it turns it upside down.It also does nothing to fix the real problem, much like the “Affordable Plumbing Act” did nothing whatsoever to help poor Barry with that awful leak in the bathroom! http://conservativetribune.com/obama-call-a-plumber/

 

[festeringZit]

[ When are the DemoScum going to admit that ObamaCare was one of the worst disasters and scams to
be foisted on the American people? ]

Aetna completely exits Obamacare exchanges, cites massive losses

[COLOR=#636C72 !important]by Kimberly Leonard | May 10, 2017, 5:29 PM Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Email this article Share on LinkedIn

The health insurance giant will be withdrawing from Delaware and Nebraska, leaving no state participation. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)



Health insurance giant Aetna said Wednesday that it will not be participating in any Obamacare exchanges in 2018.
"Our individual commercial products lost nearly $700 million between 2014 and 2016, and are projected to lose more than $200 million in 2017 despite a significant reduction in membership," T.J. Crawford, Aetna spokesman, said in an email.
The reason for the losses, he said, came from structural issues within the exchanges "that have led to co-op failures and carrier exits, and subsequent risk pool deterioration." He did not cite uncertainty over the future of Obamacare, as the company had done when it announced last week that it would be exiting the exchange in Virginia.
Aetna also announced in early April that it would be pulling out of the exchange in Iowa, and the latest announcement adds Delaware and Nebraska to that list, both on and off the exchange.

• 
  [*=left]
  • 
    [*=left]Insurers have lost money in the exchanges for a variety of reasons, including that not enough young and healthy people enrolled in the federally-subsidized plans to offset the cost of covering older and sicker individuals with higher medical spending.

Aetna had participated in several Obamacare exchanges, but dramatically reduced its participation for 2017 soon after the Obama administration's Department of Justice challenged the company's planned merger with Humana. The federal judge who decided the antitrust case, effectively blocking and terminating the merger, wrote in his opinion that Aetna appeared to reduce its exchange participation as backlash against the Obama administration's attempt to block the merger. Aetna has maintained its decision to leave the exchanges was based on $450 million in losses it suffered in 2015 on account its exchange participation.
[/COLOR]

 

[bilbal]

[ When are the DemoScum going to admit that ObamaCare was one of the worst disasters and scams to
be foisted on the American people? ]

Aetna completely exits Obamacare exchanges, cites massive losses

[COLOR=#636C72 !important]by Kimberly Leonard | May 10, 2017, 5:29 PM Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Email this article Share on LinkedIn

The health insurance giant will be withdrawing from Delaware and Nebraska, leaving no state participation. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)



Health insurance giant Aetna said Wednesday that it will not be participating in any Obamacare exchanges in 2018.
"Our individual commercial products lost nearly $700 million between 2014 and 2016, and are projected to lose more than $200 million in 2017 despite a significant reduction in membership," T.J. Crawford, Aetna spokesman, said in an email.
The reason for the losses, he said, came from structural issues within the exchanges "that have led to co-op failures and carrier exits, and subsequent risk pool deterioration." He did not cite uncertainty over the future of Obamacare, as the company had done when it announced last week that it would be exiting the exchange in Virginia.
Aetna also announced in early April that it would be pulling out of the exchange in Iowa, and the latest announcement adds Delaware and Nebraska to that list, both on and off the exchange.

• 
  [*=left]
  • 
    [*=left]Insurers have lost money in the exchanges for a variety of reasons, including that not enough young and healthy people enrolled in the federally-subsidized plans to offset the cost of covering older and sicker individuals with higher medical spending.

Aetna had participated in several Obamacare exchanges, but dramatically reduced its participation for 2017 soon after the Obama administration's Department of Justice challenged the company's planned merger with Humana. The federal judge who decided the antitrust case, effectively blocking and terminating the merger, wrote in his opinion that Aetna appeared to reduce its exchange participation as backlash against the Obama administration's attempt to block the merger. Aetna has maintained its decision to leave the exchanges was based on $450 million in losses it suffered in 2015 on account its exchange participation.
[/COLOR]

Their CEO's pay went from $9 million before Obamacare to $28 million afterwards, so at least it's working for him.

 

[festeringZit]

[ DemoScum maggots don't care for a second that ObamaCare was a complete sham from the beginning. ]

[h=1]Obamacare Architect: Yeah, We Lied to The "Stupid" American People to Get It Passed[/h]
Katie Pavlich
|
Posted: Nov 10, 2014 12:05 PM
Share (2K) Tweet

Meet Jonathan Gruber, a professor at MIT and an architect of Obamacare. During a panel event last year about how the legislation passed, turning over a sixth of the U.S. economy to the government, Gruber admitted that the Obama administration went through "tortuous" measures to keep the facts about the legislation from the American people, including covering up the redistribution of wealth from the healthy to the sick in the legislation that Obamacare is in fact a tax. The video of his comments just recently surfaced ahead of the second open enrollment period for Obamacare at Healthcare.gov.
"You can't do it political, you just literally cannot do it. Transparent financing and also transparent spending. I mean, this bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes the bill dies. Okay? So it’s written to do that," Gruber said. "In terms of risk rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in, you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed. Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical to get for the thing to pass. Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not."
A few points. 1. Notice how lying to the American people is completely justified by Obama administration standards so long as the ends justify the means. Gruber would "rather have this law than not," and therefore purposely lying about what the law actually is in order to get it passed is completely acceptable. regardless of the negative effects it has on the lives of Americans. 2. Lack of transparency might be a huge political advantage in the short term, but long term there are consequences from voters, which is exactly what we saw last week during the Democrat blood bath at every level of government across the country. 3. Insulting Americans as stupid and deceiving them is a really good way to lose your power on Capitol Hill, which is again exactly what we saw last week in the 2014 midterms. Twenty-eight Senators who voted for Obamacare are now out of the Senate for one reason or another. 4. Obamacare in its entirely was "sold" on lies. From the promise to keep your doctor to claims insurance rates would go down, not up -- to hiding that the legislation was in fact a tax until of course it was necessary to argue it was a tax to save the legislation at the Supreme Court. Government bureaucrats promising an expansion of care knowing care under Obamacare would be limited, etc. Hell, even the official name for Obamacare, "The Affordable Care Act," is a lie. Obamacare isn't affordable. 5. The process through which Obamacare was shoved through and down the throats of the American people happened as a result of Harry Reid changing Senate rules and without the support of voters. The legislation didn't receive a single Republican vote in the House or the Senate. Also, remember this?
Or this?

"Absolutely not a tax increase."​

Obamacare is a sham and the American people have been lied to and deceived every step of the way. Further, Obamacare has never been popular with the American people. Not when it passed and not now. It should also be noted that since before Obamacare was passed conservatives have been rightly screaming about its true contents and impact on American families and the economy. They've been right all along and were called racists for sounding the alarm.

Overall, a lack of transparency has been key to the Obama administration's existence on a whole range of topics, which is why it is one of the least transparent administrations in history despite President Obama's promises.