• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obamacare: Smokers May Get Break From Penalties.....

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Obamacare: Smokers' penalties may be temporarily limited by glitch caused by conflicting rules.



A conflict in the Affordable Care Act has led to an unexpected glitch that may take up to a year to correct, and in the meantime, older smokers could face lower premiums, or younger smokers could face higher ones.

Under Obamacare, insurers can charge smokers up to 50 percent higher premiums to offset their risk.

But another provision prevents insurers from charging older customers more than three times what they charge the youngest adults in the pool.

The conflict has led to a system in which a 65-year-old smoker's premium can't be processed if it is more than three times the premium of a 21-year-old smoker.

Until the system is updated, the Obama administration suggested insurers limit the penalties across all age groups, citing a Department of Health and Human Services report that proposed a 20 percent penalty.....snip~

Read more: Obamacare: Smokers may get break from penalties - UPI.com


Another hit by Obamacare.....young smokers will take most of the brunt. Just another glitch huh? All fair eh? Now all will get the break.
 
Last edited:

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Besides asking who actually read the bill, I wonder who proof-read the thing.....

Good job, people, good job.... *shakes head sadly*
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Besides asking who actually read the bill, I wonder who proof-read the thing.....

Good job, people, good job.... *shakes head sadly*
Heya GG. :2wave: How you like that report from Health and Human Services. They suggested a 20% penalty all across the board.
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Heya GG. :2wave: How you like that report from Health and Human Services. They suggested a 20% penalty all across the board.
I don't have an issue with smokers paying a slightly higher premium, and yes it should be straight across the board.

BUT

If smokers are going to be penalized, then how about known drug users? Alcoholics? People with pre-existing conditions? Overweight/underweight? People who don't eat their veggies.....

(do I have to spell out where I'm going with this?)
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
I don't have an issue with smokers paying a slightly higher premium, and yes it should be straight across the board.

BUT

If smokers are going to be penalized, then how about known drug users? Alcoholics? People with pre-existing conditions? Overweight/underweight? People who don't eat their veggies.....

(do I have to spell out where I'm going with this?)
Well, you saw what we had up on the Obesity Counseling. Exchanges, Businesses with over 50 employees, Smokers, the 15 man panel, and Doctors closing up shop and or not taking any more patients. Wonder when Obama will start calling the glitches.....Gremlins.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,467
Reaction score
37,743
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I don't have an issue with smokers paying a slightly higher premium, and yes it should be straight across the board.

BUT

If smokers are going to be penalized, then how about known drug users? Alcoholics? People with pre-existing conditions? Overweight/underweight? People who don't eat their veggies.....

(do I have to spell out where I'm going with this?)
Why not is obvious - PPACA sets "private" medical care insurance premium rates on a "fairness" basis not on an actuarial risk basis. Smokers are a smaller minority than those overweight or outright obese.
 

Spartacus FPV

Better You = Better World
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
14,870
Reaction score
7,126
Location
Your Echochamber
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I wonder if my bumming a cig maybe once a month when I'm out drinking with friends who are smokers makes me a smoker under their eyes?
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I wonder if my bumming a cig maybe once a month when I'm out drinking with friends who are smokers makes me a smoker under their eyes?
Only if they can charge you more for it.... :wink:
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Why not is obvious - PPACA sets "private" medical care insurance premium rates on a "fairness" basis not on an actuarial risk basis. Smokers are a smaller minority than those overweight or outright obese.
There was a wee bit of sarcasm in there.

Generally, if you're going to rate one health condition, then you should be rating them ALL.....
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,467
Reaction score
37,743
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
There was a wee bit of sarcasm in there.

Generally, if you're going to rate one health condition, then you should be rating them ALL.....
Of course you should, but PPACA says that "private" medical care premium rates may be based only on age and smoking tobacco status, and that their overhead (including profit) may not exceed 15% for large insurance companies and 20% for small insurance companies.
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Of course you should, but PPACA says that "private" medical care premium rates may be based only on age and smoking tobacco status, and that their overhead (including profit) may not exceed 15% for large insurance companies and 20% for small insurance companies.
I do understand that, but I think you and I are kicking the same beast, lol. For the government to dictate that one, and only one 'condition' should be considered for rating pretty much paints the picture.
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,800
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
smokers get a penalty.. but fat people don't, even though obesity is worse than smoking.... makes perfect sense.

well, it's not like I expected medical science to get in the way of politics....
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
There was a wee bit of sarcasm in there.

Generally, if you're going to rate one health condition, then you should be rating them ALL.....
So are you saying we should look for the next glitch to be with medical marijuana and cancer treatments GG? That Obama will want to get them all in on the good **** too.
 

clownboy

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
26,087
Reaction score
10,860
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
More boneheaded thinking from the Obamacare set. Let's see, one of the objectives of the mandate was to require medical insurance to lessen the use of emergency rooms as primary care. So what the heck, let's take the folks who figures say will require more expensive care in their latter years, and make health insurance even less affordable for them, forcing them to use the most expensive form of health care, the emergency room, as primary care.

Yeah, that's makes sense, right?
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
So are you saying we should look for the next glitch to be with medical marijuana and cancer treatments GG? That Obama will want to get them all in on the good **** too.
Not so much the treatments, as far as I've read, I haven't seen restrictions in the actual bill for treatments. I will be curious to see what the plan documents from the insurers say, however.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
76,070
Reaction score
43,911
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I don't have an issue with smokers paying a slightly higher premium, and yes it should be straight across the board.
They already do. Over 50% of the cost of cigarettes are taxes and the reason they put them there was to offset the additional costs smokers have on the healthcare system (without evaluating what effects they have on pension plans and corporate profit). They already pay.
 
Top Bottom