Excellent post Pirate Pride. I gagged too when I heard that and thought about all the potential security concerns over our personal data. Huge potential problem. My hope is the site is still a debacle at the end of November and they push back the deadlines so they can get really take the time to get it right. In the meantime there will be lots of folks in health care limbo. Obama lied and he continues to be a terrible leader. This was his main priority and he and his folks F'd it up. So now the law is a debacle and so is the execution.
Obamacare Death Squads
- Thread starter Old_alum
- Start date
Pride, A "punch list" is a term that's used in construction basically that identifies things that the builder needs to address that were not done correctly or are broken. LOL...never heard it used in an IT setting, but this website is kind of like having holes in the sheetrock. Pride, you are absolutely correct in that a private corporation would never launch an untested site like this and they would take it off line to repair, especially if you were handling secure information.
And it appears that it will just get dicier. Heard on the news this morning that they believe they will make the end of November deadline but they still anticipate some problems with the site? Sounds very secure to me? Bit off more than they can chew. This is what happens when big government wants to run things.
I really think you are wrong on this. Look at the blue cross one.
http://www.horizonazul.com/sites/default/files/ifp/en/IHC_Adv_EPO_Bronze_100_50%20$30_50P_On_Exchange(G3457_P2160_G3547_P2161).pdf
"You must pay all the costs up to the deductible amount before this plan begins to pay for covered services you use."
Then the next part says
"You don't have to meet deductibles for specific services, but see the chart starting on page 2 for other costs for services this plan covers."
Then looking at specific services -
Physician visit = $30 copay (No mention of deductible)
Specialist visit = 50% coinsurance after deductible.
The gold plan says the same thing btw... You really think the best individual plan blue cross offers in the exchange will not pay anything towards doctor visits until a deductible is met?
Merge,
Did you miss this part on the linked Blue Cross plan on page 1:
"See the chart starting on page 2 for how much you pay for covered services after you meet the deductible."
Like I said, I've unfortunately had to look thoroughly at these plans, made calls to the providers, etc. and this will be the next shit to hit the fan.
This post was edited on 11/12 10:48 PM by SPK145
Did you miss this part on the linked Blue Cross plan on page 1:
"See the chart starting on page 2 for how much you pay for covered services after you meet the deductible."
Like I said, I've unfortunately had to look thoroughly at these plans, made calls to the providers, etc. and this will be the next shit to hit the fan.
This post was edited on 11/12 10:48 PM by SPK145
Speaking of which, here's the next piece of shit to hit the fan....
The House Oversight Committee released an Obama administration memo that shows four days before the launch, the government took an unusual step. It granted itself a waiver to launch the website with "a level of uncertainty ... deemed as a high (security) risk."
The Project Manager responsible for the project was never made aware of this as well.
You can't make this crap up. So we have plans being cancelled and replacement ones that are more expensive, a web-site that doesn't work and now when it does there are serious patient and data privacy glitches....can't wait till it goes live for the wave of fraud to begin. Government at it's finest.
healthcare gov security issues
The House Oversight Committee released an Obama administration memo that shows four days before the launch, the government took an unusual step. It granted itself a waiver to launch the website with "a level of uncertainty ... deemed as a high (security) risk."
The Project Manager responsible for the project was never made aware of this as well.
You can't make this crap up. So we have plans being cancelled and replacement ones that are more expensive, a web-site that doesn't work and now when it does there are serious patient and data privacy glitches....can't wait till it goes live for the wave of fraud to begin. Government at it's finest.
healthcare gov security issues
I will trust you on this one since I haven't done the leg work that you have, and I will eat some crow on it as well.
offering a plan that will not cover basic medical issues unless people hit a deductible is a mistake and will not improve health outcomes. That is a pretty upsetting result to come to.
Of course people can opt for a better plan... but will they?
What I don't understand is today's announcement by President Obama that folks can now keep their insurance? Is the White House allowed to change a law that was signed into legislation? Isn't that what the Congress and Senate are for? I believe that this announcement today is just not possible under our separation of powers. Someone needs to explain this to me?
In addition I saw some feedback from insurance company presidents that said this change will also raise insurance rates even further. What a debacle!
In addition I saw some feedback from insurance company presidents that said this change will also raise insurance rates even further. What a debacle!
Another good opinion piece on why government should not run health care. Just like the credit crisis they decide who the winners and losers are and who pays more (that's you and me unless you are in a union).
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303309504579182061106839366?mod=hp_opinion
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303309504579182061106839366?mod=hp_opinion
Self funded plans are looking to opt out of paying for reinsurance that they will see no benefit from.
The transaction fee is setting up a reinsurance program that will help with the expenses for any insurance plan that gets a large number of very sick people who use a lot of healthcare.
Self funded plans would get no benefit from the reinsurance which is why we may be letting them off the hook for the costs to fund it.
It seems to me that the government is getting that one right.
I see your point but it also limits the pool with working hopefully healthy people.
The other issue is we will pay for coverage we don't need. How come we don't get an exception.
The other issue is we will pay for coverage we don't need. How come we don't get an exception.
They were never in the pool to begin with and may or may not be healthy.
They shouldn't have to pay a fee to provide reinsurance for insurance companies.
The minimum level of coverage is a different argument, and I think setting a minimum is generally a good idea since a lot of irresponsible people will always opt for the cheapest choice... but back to what SPK said, I am upset that the minimum level of coverage does not pay for doctor visits until meeting a deductible. I think that is a huge mistake.
Finally someone figured out what I figured out weeks ago........
On Health Exchanges, Premiums May Be Low, but Other Costs Can Be High
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: December 9, 2013
WASHINGTON ? For months, the Obama administration has heralded the low premiums of medical insurance policies on sale in the insurance exchanges created by the new health law. But as consumers dig into the details, they are finding that the deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs are often much higher than what is typical in employer-sponsored health plans.
Until now, it was almost impossible for people using the federal health care website to see the deductible amounts, which consumers pay before coverage kicks in. But federal officials finally relented last week and added a "window shopping" feature that displays data on deductibles.
Large Deductibles
On Health Exchanges, Premiums May Be Low, but Other Costs Can Be High
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: December 9, 2013
WASHINGTON ? For months, the Obama administration has heralded the low premiums of medical insurance policies on sale in the insurance exchanges created by the new health law. But as consumers dig into the details, they are finding that the deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs are often much higher than what is typical in employer-sponsored health plans.
Until now, it was almost impossible for people using the federal health care website to see the deductible amounts, which consumers pay before coverage kicks in. But federal officials finally relented last week and added a "window shopping" feature that displays data on deductibles.
Large Deductibles
That is a pretty horrible article actually.
Why are they comparing the plans in the exchange to employer sponsored plans? That doesn't make any sense at all.
They glaze over the one comparison that they made to the individual market...
""These plans are more generous than what's prevalent in the current individual insurance market, but significantly less generous than most employer-sponsored insurance."
They could have also written about what you pointed out earlier with not covering physician visits until a deductible is met, which is the real problem with these plans in my opinion.
Merge, agree that was clearly a way to slant the story to prove a point. There is a reality that is happening though that with the advent of the exchanges, some employers are beginning to opt out of providing sponsored insurance and providing a stipend to the employee to go out on the exchange. I believe one of the drug chains...I think it was Rite-Aid, recently did this. On the one hand it gives the employer a better means to manage their healthcare costs going forward by having a fixed cost/employee and they also eliminate all of the administrative work to manage plans.
The downside is it may put them at a competative disadvantage in competing for talent. Rite-Aid is the first large employer I heard doing this, but you can see mid-size companies doing the same which puts more people in a higher cost situation.
The downside is it may put them at a competative disadvantage in competing for talent. Rite-Aid is the first large employer I heard doing this, but you can see mid-size companies doing the same which puts more people in a higher cost situation.
