Members of Congress to get first taste of health care law

[pbrauer]

According to one of my favorite media watch dogs, yesterday the Sunday talks shows were pushing the idea members of Congress were exempt from Obamacare (PPACA), they are not as pointed out in this article from the Vancouver Washington Columbian.

Members of Congress to get first taste of health care law | The Columbian

WASHINGTON - If Americans remember anything about the 2010 health care law, it might be the president's refrain that "if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

Everyone, that is, except members of Congress and their staff members.

A provision inserted into the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) made an exception: House and Senate members and their congressional staff must give up their federal coverage Dec. 31.

Instead, they're required to enroll in plans sold through the new "health exchanges" in their districts or place of residence.

That September 2009 amendment, offered by Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, sprang from the GOP's attempts to derail health care reform. Grassley argued politicians should live with their own law, which he opposed. The amendment survived when Democrats pushed the legislation through six months later without a single Republican vote.

clip


Now members of Congress will join the earliest initiates to the ACA.


​

 

[FederalRepublic]

According to one of my favorite media watch dogs, yesterday the Sunday talks shows were pushing the idea members of Congress were exempt from Obamacare (PPACA), they are not as pointed out in this article from the Vancouver Washington Columbian.

Members of Congress to get first taste of health care law | The Columbian

WASHINGTON - If Americans remember anything about the 2010 health care law, it might be the president's refrain that "if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

Everyone, that is, except members of Congress and their staff members.

A provision inserted into the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) made an exception: House and Senate members and their congressional staff must give up their federal coverage Dec. 31.

Instead, they're required to enroll in plans sold through the new "health exchanges" in their districts or place of residence.

That September 2009 amendment, offered by Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, sprang from the GOP's attempts to derail health care reform. Grassley argued politicians should live with their own law, which he opposed. The amendment survived when Democrats pushed the legislation through six months later without a single Republican vote.

clip


Now members of Congress will join the earliest initiates to the ACA.


​

I'm guessing the fact that they will have 70% of their premiums covered by the taxpayers isn't worth mentioning to you?

 

[roughdraft274]

I'm guessing the fact that they will have 70% of their premiums covered by the taxpayers isn't worth mentioning to you?

Many workers get their premiums partially covered by their employer. And btw, ObamaCare isn't the legislation that started paying parts of congress's premium. That was around before ObamaCare. They already enjoy the 70% subsidy. So I'm not sure why you say "they will have 70%..." In reality it's "They will continue to have 70%".

 

[pbrauer]

Many workers get their premiums partially covered by their employer. And btw, ObamaCare isn't the legislation that started paying parts of congress's premium. That was around before ObamaCare. They already enjoy the 70% subsidy. So I'm not sure why you say "they will have 70%..." In reality it's "They will continue to have 70%".

My guess is that he already knew this, his intention was to deceive.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Many workers get their premiums partially covered by their employer. And btw, ObamaCare isn't the legislation that started paying parts of congress's premium. That was around before ObamaCare. They already enjoy the 70% subsidy. So I'm not sure why you say "they will have 70%..." In reality it's "They will continue to have 70%".

Agreed. They will continue to enjoy a 70% subsidy. Do you think the same will be true for the rest of us when premiums go through the roof? The federal subsidies are definitely not continued at 70% for the average citizens in the same pay range as a congressional staffer.

My guess is that he already knew this, his intention was to deceive.

I was aware, but have no intention to deceive. You, however, conveniently left out that detail. Shall I assume your intention was to deceive?

 

[roughdraft274]

Agreed. They will continue to enjoy a 70% subsidy. Do you think the same will be true for the rest of us when premiums go through the roof? The federal subsidies are definitely not continued at 70% for the average citizens in the same pay range as a congressional staffer.

Unfounded speculation. It's already been reported that states that played along with ObamaCare and set up state exhanges, which is simply a easy to navigate market for health insurance, that provides easy to compare plans from competing health insurance companies, that premiums are generally below what was expected and are more affordable that the CBO had even scored them to be.

HHS: Premiums under ObamaCare lower than expected - The Hill's Healthwatch

 

[obvious Child]

Now members of Congress will join the earliest initiates to the ACA.

Heck yeah.

Congress should [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food]Dog Food[/URL]

I've long argued that Congress can do whatever it wants with Healthcare. As long as they have to participate in it at the same level as everyone else.

 

[pbrauer]

I was aware, but have no intention to deceive. You, however, conveniently left out that detail. Shall I assume your intention was to deceive?

I am sorry, but you seemed to imply this was new with Obamacare, please accept my apology. I don't believe I left out anything that was pertinent to the story.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Unfounded speculation. It's already been reported that states that played along with ObamaCare and set up state exhanges, which is simply a easy to navigate market for health insurance, that provides easy to compare plans from competing health insurance companies, that premiums are generally below what was expected and are more affordable that the CBO had even scored them to be.

HHS: Premiums under ObamaCare lower than expected - The Hill's Healthwatch

It's not unfounded speculation. It's a question posed to you. If premiums don't increase dramatically, then the 70% won't matter and I'll admit you were correct. Will you do the same if/when they do? Or will you blame the insurance companies and move on?

 

[FederalRepublic]

I am sorry, but you seemed to imply this was new with Obamacare, please accept my apology. I don't believe I left out anything that was pertinent to the story.

Fair enough. If premiums don't increase dramatically, it's not pertinent specifically to Obamacare. Even so, as a matter of policy, they have insulated themselves from the effects, as members of priveledged classes tend to do.

 

[specklebang]

Will I be able to use my Death Panel powers on members of Congress?

If yes, all this will have been worthwhile and I promise you citizens a spectacular bloodbath. If not, lets hope their presence in the system will encourage the bureaucracy to do a better job for all of us since you never know who you might be dealing with.

 

[roughdraft274]

It's not unfounded speculation. It's a question posed to you. If premiums don't increase dramatically, then the 70% won't matter and I'll admit you were correct. Will you do the same if/when they do? Or will you blame the insurance companies and move on?

If premiums increase more dramatically then they did before ObamaCare then I'll admit I'm wrong. All the evidence is pointing in the other direction though, as I've already demonstrated.

 

[Samhain]

If premiums increase more dramatically then they did before ObamaCare then I'll admit I'm wrong. All the evidence is pointing in the other direction though, as I've already demonstrated.

Aon Hewitt's study indicated that the law will boost yearly premiums artificially by 2-3% points, in addition to the normal growth(premiums+deductibles+out of pocket). They determined that by examining pools as individual, small group, and large group, the individual group would be the hardest hit.

Although, the individual group represents the smallest total participation( 9% ), it would see the largest up-tick in membership, and thus the largest increase, as the law is focused on getting individuals onto the health exchanges. 2013 is projected to see a 6.7% increase in insurance costs, compared to a 4.9% in 2012, and a 8.9% increase in 2011.

If employers find that providing health insurance is no longer cost effective, and more people are moved onto the exchanges, the overall insurance rate increases(premiums+deductibles+out of pocket) will quickly return to double-digit yearly growth.

 

[FederalRepublic]

If premiums increase more dramatically then they did before ObamaCare then I'll admit I'm wrong. All the evidence is pointing in the other direction though, as I've already demonstrated.

By all evidence, you mean the article you posted. Meanwhile:

Low-premium, high-deductible health plans are endangered by Affordable Care Act - The Washington Post

Opponents of Obamacare Think Health Care Costs Will Rise - Stephanie Slade (usnews.com)

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2...emium-joy-under-the-affordable-care-act/?_r=0

Ohio Department of Insurance

Quick Facts about Health Care Reform and Premiums | AHIP Coverage

Why Healthcare Costs Are About To Explode - Forbes

Will Employers Drop Health Insurance Because of the Affordable Care Act? - WSJ.com

Aetna insurance company warns of higher health care costs - Washington Times

ACA premium sticker shock could fuel foes - Brett Norman - POLITICO.com

 

[iliveonramen]

By all evidence, you mean the article you posted. Meanwhile:

Low-premium, high-deductible health plans are endangered by Affordable Care Act - The Washington Post

Opponents of Obamacare Think Health Care Costs Will Rise - Stephanie Slade (usnews.com)

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2...emium-joy-under-the-affordable-care-act/?_r=0

Ohio Department of Insurance

Quick Facts about Health Care Reform and Premiums | AHIP Coverage

Why Healthcare Costs Are About To Explode - Forbes

Will Employers Drop Health Insurance Because of the Affordable Care Act? - WSJ.com

Aetna insurance company warns of higher health care costs - Washington Times

ACA premium sticker shock could fuel foes - Brett Norman - POLITICO.com

Lots of opinion pieces peppered with surveys by partisan opponents of the plan.

The only piece based facts is the endangerment of low-premium high-deductible plans because they don't meet the lowest threshold that is considered "health insurance".

As for Ohio...I'm curious about that because most exchanges in big states have ended up seeing prices drop. I guess for some reason blue states are just better at implementing ACA.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Lots of opinion pieces peppered with surveys by partisan opponents of the plan.

The only piece based facts is the endangerment of low-premium high-deductible plans because they don't meet the lowest threshold that is considered "health insurance".

As for Ohio...I'm curious about that because most exchanges in big states have ended up seeing prices drop. I guess for some reason blue states are just better at implementing ACA.

Or blue states had higher premiums to begin with and are simply sharing the burden of their mismanagement with the rest of us.

 

[iliveonramen]

Or blue states had higher premiums to begin with and are simply sharing the burden of their mismanagement with the rest of us.

Please explain why that would be.

How are exchanges different than our current situation other than the fact that the prices for comparable plans are made plain to potential buyers?

 

[Deuce]

Or blue states had higher premiums to begin with and are simply sharing the burden of their mismanagement with the rest of us.

Feel free to let us know which mechanism of the bill you think is allowing them to do that.

 

[ocean515]

If premiums increase more dramatically then they did before ObamaCare then I'll admit I'm wrong. All the evidence is pointing in the other direction though, as I've already demonstrated.

On the other hand, there have been numerous studies indicating your information may not be accurate.

The New York Times Tries -- And Fails -- To Protect Obamacare From Health Insurance 'Rate Shock' - Forbes

Yesterday, fans of Obamacare were cheering. A front-page story in the New York Times announced that individuals shopping for health insurance in New York would see their premiums halved, based on figures released by the Andrew Cuomo administration.​

 

[roughdraft274]

By all evidence, you mean the article you posted. Meanwhile:

Low-premium, high-deductible health plans are endangered by Affordable Care Act - The Washington Post

Opponents of Obamacare Think Health Care Costs Will Rise - Stephanie Slade (usnews.com)

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2...emium-joy-under-the-affordable-care-act/?_r=0

Ohio Department of Insurance

Quick Facts about Health Care Reform and Premiums | AHIP Coverage

Why Healthcare Costs Are About To Explode - Forbes

Will Employers Drop Health Insurance Because of the Affordable Care Act? - WSJ.com

Aetna insurance company warns of higher health care costs - Washington Times

ACA premium sticker shock could fuel foes - Brett Norman - POLITICO.com

Good job. You posted alot of "would or could" sources. Nothing with cold hard facts or numbers. Yes, I understand alot of people are trying to use scare tactics and saying that premiums are going to skyrocket. In reality, that has not happened and is not likely to happen. And in the instances where we can look and see what has happened to premiums, we see that they have either reduced or have increased slower than in the past. None of your sky is falling sources negate that fact.