The Truth Behind GOP Opposition to ObamaCare

[Objective Voice]

Ohio Governor John Kasich let the cat out of the bag when he revealed the truth behind why the GOP is opposed to Obamacare in this Washington Post article:

Ohio Governor John Kasich, who has accepted the Medicaid expansion in his state, recently suffered from an outbreak of accidental candor, making these remarks about the Medicaid expansion and the prospects for repealing Obamacare:

“That’s not gonna happen,” Kasich told The Associated Press during a recent re-election campaign swing. “The opposition to it was really either political or ideological,” the Republican governor added. “I don’t think that holds water against real flesh and blood, and real improvements in people’s lives.”

This isn't to say that Republicans didn't have real concerns about how the law was structured or the mechanics involved. But when you get right down to it Republican opposition had more to do with not giving a Democrat President or his party a major social-political victory than it was about reforming our nation's health care system in a way that works for a vast majority of people. Sen. McConnell's flub over KyNect, Kentucky's state-sponsored HIE which was built using a federal grant and based on the ACA, is also quite humorous. After reading the commentary, a familiar refrain came to mind:

"If you like your [state-sponsored] health insurance (brought to you via the Medicaid expansion), you can keep it...until I work to repeal the very law that made it possible for you to have health insurance."

It's kinda funny. The so-called train wreck McConnell continues to condemn turns out to be a sweet ride for his constituents.

 

[CalGun]

I don't think Republicans have ever stated that those with pre existing condition, poor and under employed wouldn't benefit. They are just willing to point out the government is taking (stealing really) the middle class health care system and redistributing to those people. That fundamental problem remains. You have a finite system, a capacity, and the left has taken that capacity and redistributed it equally among the middle class and poor - while making the middle class pay for it. The people will see through this - the masses. We'll see in a few weeks. You'll also see the next "D" avoid the topic like all hell in 2016.

Ohio Governor John Kasich let the cat out of the bag when he revealed the truth behind why the GOP is opposed to Obamacare in this Washington Post article:



This isn't to say that Republicans didn't have real concerns about how the law was structured or the mechanics involved. But when you get right down to it Republican opposition had more to do with not giving a Democrat President or his party a major social-political victory than it was about reforming our nation's health care system in a way that works for a vast majority of people. Sen. McConnell's flub over KyNect, Kentucky's state-sponsored HIE which was built using a federal grant and based on the ACA, is also quite humorous. After reading the commentary, a familiar refrain came to mind:

"If you like your [state-sponsored] health insurance (brought to you via the Medicaid expansion), you can keep it...until I work to repeal the very law that made it possible for you to have health insurance."

It's kinda funny. The so-called train wreck McConnell continues to condemn turns out to be a sweet ride for his constituents.

 

[Objective Voice]

I don't think Republicans have ever stated that those with pre existing condition, poor and under employed wouldn't benefit. They are just willing to point out the government is taking (stealing really) the middle class health care system and redistributing to those people. That fundamental problem remains. You have a finite system, a capacity, and the left has taken that capacity and redistributed it equally among the middle class and poor - while making the middle class pay for it. The people will see through this - the masses. We'll see in a few weeks. You'll also see the next "D" avoid the topic like all hell in 2016.

You make some very valid points. However, it's a real problem for Republican politicians when they finally acknowledge that the health care access problem does, in fact, exist for the very people you've mentioned and yet they've done nothing in the years since "HillaryCare" to change the system. Instead, they remain firmly entrenched against ObamaCare despite acknowledging that the state-sponsored "tax and spend" health care system (Medicaid) does work to a degree.

I'll grant you that things would be much better if everyone who uses the health care system (Medicaid/Medicare) paid for it, but since "taxation" remains a ideological problem for Republicans, ObamaCare was the best health care reform system American citizens could hope to get.

Put simply: Eliminating pre-existing conditions and broadening access to health care services were issues Republicans talked about in the past as worthwhile issues, but they've never done anything about it since the Clinton era. Republicans even balked at the individual mandate - a concept they first conceived - just because it was hijacked by the Democrat Party.

It's just interesting to me how twisted and two-faced folks have become about this issue. But I'm glad this cat is finally out of the bag.

 

[CalGun]

Republicans have proposed several solutions - they just aren't democrat power grubbing solutions. The Republicans believe more affordable health care comes by expanding the system, creating more competition (something states / democrats reject). Republicans have long touted individual savings accounts that are not taxed as income to be used for health care burdens, but again you hardly need a bureaucrat to manage it so the left opposes it. In fact had the left/ obummer simply incorporated some of these into obamafarce he'd have found several Republican supporters but they ignored every desire from the Republicans and deserve the angst they get over the partisan bought legislation.

You make some very valid points. However, it's a real problem for Republican politicians when they finally acknowledge that the health care access problem does, in fact, exist for the very people you've mentioned and yet they've done nothing in the years since "HillaryCare" to change the system. Instead, they remain firmly entrenched against ObamaCare despite acknowledging that the state-sponsored "tax and spend" health care system (Medicaid) does work to a degree.

I'll grant you that things would be much better if everyone who uses the health care system (Medicaid/Medicare) paid for it, but since "taxation" remains a ideological problem for Republicans, ObamaCare was the best health care reform system American citizens could hope to get.

Put simply: Eliminating pre-existing conditions and broadening access to health care services were issues Republicans talked about in the past as worthwhile issues, but they've never done anything about it since the Clinton era. Republicans even balked at the individual mandate - a concept they first conceived - just because it was hijacked by the Democrat Party.

It's just interesting to me how twisted and two-faced folks have become about this issue. But I'm glad this cat is finally out of the bag.

 

[Greenbeard]

The Republicans believe more affordable health care comes by expanding the system, creating more competition (something states / democrats reject).

The system is expanding: they'll be 25 percent more insurers competing in the marketplaces next year alone.

Not to mention the law facilitated new market entrants to compete in states:

Small Health Insurance Co-Ops Seeing Early Success

Many of us know the names of some of the big U.S. health insurance companies — like Blue Cross, Aetna and Wellpoint. But what about CoOportunity Health, or Health Republic Insurance of New York? These are among 23 new companies started under the Affordable Care Act. They're all nonprofit, member-owned insurance cooperatives that were begun, in part, to create more competition and drive prices down.

"In some states, co-ops are dominating the marketplace," Morrison says, "with 80 percent of the enrollees going to the co-op."

That's in Maine. Morrison says most co-ops are very happy with their enrollment numbers. Their rates are often the lowest that are available through an exchange.

"The co-op states have 8.4 percent lower premiums, on average, than [other states] across the marketplace," says Morrison. "So co-ops are creating that competition. They're keeping rates down in the states they're operating in."

Republicans have long touted individual savings accounts that are not taxed as income to be used for health care burdens, but again you hardly need a bureaucrat to manage it so the left opposes it.

The number of HSAs and HRAs has doubled since the ACA passed.

In fact had the left/ obummer simply incorporated some of these into obamafarce he'd have found several Republican supporters but they ignored every desire from the Republicans and deserve the angst they get over the partisan bought legislation.

Since those principles were incorporated, seems to be a flaw in your reasoning.

 

[274ina]

I don't think Republicans have ever stated that those with pre existing condition, poor and under employed wouldn't benefit. They are just willing to point out the government is taking (stealing really) the middle class health care system and redistributing to those people. That fundamental problem remains. You have a finite system, a capacity, and the left has taken that capacity and redistributed it equally among the middle class and poor - while making the middle class pay for it. The people will see through this - the masses. We'll see in a few weeks. You'll also see the next "D" avoid the topic like all hell in 2016.

The middle class do not make over $250,000 and pay the Obamacare taxes. FACT>

And your argument is so stupid, you even contradict yourself.

"redistributed it equally among the middle class and poor - while making the middle class pay for it"

 

[iguanaman]

Republicans have proposed several solutions - they just aren't democrat power grubbing solutions. The Republicans believe more affordable health care comes by expanding the system, creating more competition (something states / democrats reject). Republicans have long touted individual savings accounts that are not taxed as income to be used for health care burdens, but again you hardly need a bureaucrat to manage it so the left opposes it. In fact had the left/ obummer simply incorporated some of these into obamafarce he'd have found several Republican supporters but they ignored every desire from the Republicans and deserve the angst they get over the partisan bought legislation.

You do a fine job with the talking points but have you ever looked into whether they are accurate?
For example there are 161 Republican sponsored amendments included in the ACA and not ONE Republican voted for the act.
Republicans wanted to sell insurance across State lines. What do you think the healthcare marketplace does?
When will you admit that he ACA is working and will never be repealed? What would you like with your crow?

According to a HELP Committee document about bipartisan aspects of the health reform bill the committee passed July 15, 2009, its final bill included "161 Republican amendments," including "several amendments from Senators [Mike] Enzi [R-WY], [Tom] Coburn [R-OK], [Pat] Roberts [R-KS] and others [that] make certain that nothing in the legislation will allow for rationing of care," and reflected the efforts of "six bipartisan working groups" that "met a combined 72 times" in 2009 as well as "30 bipartisan hearings on health care reform" since 2007, half of which were held in 2009 [HELP Committee document, 7/09]. And according to the Senate Finance Committee's September 22, 2009, document detailing the amendments to the Chairman's Mark considered, at least 13 amendments sponsored by one or more Republican senators were included in the bill.

Fact Check: How the health care law was made | America's Health Care

 

[CalGun]

Wow ignorance is bliss....the middle class are paying increased rates to compensate for the deadbeat losers you keep begging for power from. Get a grip and recognize a dose of reality.

The middle class do not make over $250,000 and pay the Obamacare taxes. FACT>

And your argument is so stupid, you even contradict yourself.

"redistributed it equally among the middle class and poor - while making the middle class pay for it"

 

[CalGun]

Show me where your beloved market place takes an insurance provider from one state and offers it in another where it didn't before. Talk about manipulating BS that's all you radical leftist do.

You do a fine job with the talking points but have you ever looked into whether they are accurate?
For example there are 161 Republican sponsored amendments i


ncluded in the ACA and not ONE Republican voted for the act.
Republicans wanted to sell insurance across State lines. What do you think the healthcare marketplace does?
When will you admit that he ACA is working and will never be repealed? What would you like with your crow?


Fact Check: How the health care law was made | America's Health Care

 

[Greenbeard]

Show me where your beloved market place takes an insurance provider from one state and offers it in another where it didn't before. Talk about manipulating BS that's all you radical leftist do.

In the Spotlight: ACA and Multi-State Plans

One of the key goals of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is to spur a competitive and open marketplace for health insurance. Several components work together to achieve this goal – online shopping through Health Insurance Marketplaces (often called Exchanges), easy shopping tools to help consumers compare plans (called Summary of Benefits and Coverage), and increased consumer options with multi-state plans. Traditionally, health insurance has been a predominantly state-run enterprise with state Department of Insurances reviewing and approving insurance plans to be sold in the state.

In contrast, a multi-state plan is a health insurance plan that has been approved at the federal level to be sold in multiple states. To date, most states have fairly concentrated individual health insurance markets – in fact, according to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 30 states are dominated by a single insurance company with more than half the enrollees in the individual market. The small group market is usually more competitive with two or three insurance companies competing for most business. Under ACA, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has been designated as the agency responsible for implementing and overseeing the multi-state plans. In accordance with ACA, OPM will select at least two multi-state plans, one of which must be a not-for-profit plan. The multi-state plans were required as an alternative to force competition in the states

 

[CalGun]

Planning is not implementing.

Please show me a state resident that can buy a more affordable plan from another states provider thanks to your beloved obumblingcare.

In the Spotlight: ACA and Multi-State Plans

 

[Objective Voice]

Republicans have proposed several solutions - they just aren't democrat power grubbing solutions. The Republicans believe more affordable health care comes by expanding the system, creating more competition (something states / democrats reject). Republicans have long touted individual savings accounts that are not taxed as income to be used for health care burdens, but again you hardly need a bureaucrat to manage it so the left opposes it. In fact had the left/ obummer simply incorporated some of these into obamafarce he'd have found several Republican supporters but they ignored every desire from the Republicans and deserve the angst they get over the partisan bought legislation.

Not to keep harping on health care reform arguments of the past but, I think you may want to go back and re-read some of the proposals that came out of House and Senate Republican health care reform committees particularly where HSAs were concerned. Per this table from the Kaiser Family Foundation, only 3 Republican bills* had anything to do with HSAs and none would have allowed funds contributed to same to be non-taxable. If anything, the proposals sought to either create a tier system for HSAs or increase the contribution threshold to same, but no contribution to a HSA would have been tax-free.

*Proposed Republican healthcare reform bills were:

Senate Finance Committee "America's Healthy Future Act, 2009
Senate HELP Committee "Affordable Health Choices Act, 2009 (S. 1679)
Patient Choices Act, 2009 (S. 1099 and H.R. 2520)

In any case, I think people would be interested to know that in at least one of the proposals, Republicans would have imposed a health care tax and also mandated that individuals purchase health insurance. Moreover, they were all for creating state-sponsored HIEs using federal grants. I pointed these same issues out years ago. That's why hearing that a Republican Governor finally admitting that their opposition to the ACA was all political doesn't surprise me. I'm just surprised one of them was so willing to admit it to the media.

 

[Greenbeard]

Planning is not implementing.

"Plan" here means an insurance product, not a future course of action. Multi-state plans are those insurance products that can be sold in multiple states simultaneously.

Please show me a state resident that can buy a more affordable plan from another states provider thanks to your beloved obumblingcare.

You said "Show me where your beloved market place takes an insurance provider from one state and offers it in another where it didn't before." I take it from this follow-up question that you're acknowledging your first request has been satisfied.

Multi-state plans exist this year and OPM is aiming to expand both the offerings and offerers for next year:

In light of the breadth of its charge, the Affordable Care Act provides for the MSP Program to be phased in over several years. We built a strong foundation for the Program in the inaugural year, having certified more than 150 MSP options that are now available to consumers in 30 States and the District of Columbia. OPM also certified MSP options for the Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) in four States and the District of Columbia. For 2015, our goal is to expand MSP coverage to at least five additional States, and to add one or more new MSP issuers or groups of issuers.

As for whether they're a "more affordable plan" (presumably than the cheapest plan in the marketplace) the MSPs tended to be broader network PPOs this year, which are generally not cheaper than narrower network offerings. The MSPs bring additional choice and competitors into marketplaces, which keeps premiums and their growth down for everybody but that doesn't guarantee the MSP is going to itself be the lowest price plan on the market.

 

[CalGun]

You enjoy your beloved governments writings, but still can't show me where I (a legal Nevada resident) can buy a policy from idaho, Oregon, or California - all of which would be closer to me due to my proximity. I'm still only allowed insurance companies / plans within the NV border. Your "plans' are like futuristic icons and with your regimes proclivity to move things off into the distant future I see no reason to believe they will ever materialize.

The point here is the Republicans "plans" for increased competition, decreased legal costs, and individual savings / responsibility were ignored by your regime. So there is no reason for the Republicans to do anything but dismantle the boondoggle before it bankrupts the nation.

"Plan" here means an insurance product, not a future course of action. Multi-state plans are those insurance products that can be sold in multiple states simultaneously.



You said "Show me where your beloved market place takes an insurance provider from one state and offers it in another where it didn't before." I take it from this follow-up question that you're acknowledging your first request has been satisfied.

Multi-state plans exist this year and OPM is aiming to expand both the offerings and offerers for next year:



As for whether they're a "more affordable plan" (presumably than the cheapest plan in the marketplace) the MSPs tended to be broader network PPOs this year, which are generally not cheaper than narrower network offerings. The MSPs bring additional choice and competitors into marketplaces, which keeps premiums and their growth down for everybody but that doesn't guarantee the MSP is going to itself be the lowest price plan on the market.

 

[ludin]

You enjoy your beloved governments writings, but still can't show me where I (a legal Nevada resident) can buy a policy from idaho, Oregon, or California - all of which would be closer to me due to my proximity. I'm still only allowed insurance companies / plans within the NV border. Your "plans' are like futuristic icons and with your regimes proclivity to move things off into the distant future I see no reason to believe they will ever materialize.

The point here is the Republicans "plans" for increased competition, decreased legal costs, and individual savings / responsibility were ignored by your regime. So there is no reason for the Republicans to do anything but dismantle the boondoggle before it bankrupts the nation.

they can't show you because it doesn't exist.

even a multi-state plan has to conform to that states insurance regulation.

so you can't go into a different state and buy and insurance policy. IE no competition.

 

[reinoe]

Planning is not implementing.

Please show me a state resident that can buy a more affordable plan from another states provider thanks to your beloved obumblingcare.

Hopefully it'll never happen.

 

[mtm1963]

Ohio Governor John Kasich let the cat out of the bag when he revealed the truth behind why the GOP is opposed to Obamacare in this Washington Post article:



This isn't to say that Republicans didn't have real concerns about how the law was structured or the mechanics involved. But when you get right down to it Republican opposition had more to do with not giving a Democrat President or his party a major social-political victory than it was about reforming our nation's health care system in a way that works for a vast majority of people. Sen. McConnell's flub over KyNect, Kentucky's state-sponsored HIE which was built using a federal grant and based on the ACA, is also quite humorous. After reading the commentary, a familiar refrain came to mind:

"If you like your [state-sponsored] health insurance (brought to you via the Medicaid expansion), you can keep it...until I work to repeal the very law that made it possible for you to have health insurance."

It's kinda funny. The so-called train wreck McConnell continues to condemn turns out to be a sweet ride for his constituents.

here's the AP story the progression liberal blogger sargent of the WP speaks about.

mr. sargent invented his headline. what a morning plum!!

AP News : GOP governors don't see 'Obamacare' going away

 

[Perotista]

I think as long as the majority of Americans are opposed to Obamacare the Democrats will be spending time, money and energy to defend it. Obamacare is probably here to stay, but you have an political agenda passed against the majority of Americans wishes that will probably have to be defended from its beginning until who knows when.

Today

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Public Approval of Health Care Law

Back when it was first passed:

Below are the polls thanks to RCP of public opinion on the ACA when the Senate passed it in November of 2009
CNN/Opinion Research 12/2-12/3 36% for 61% Against/Oppose +25
Rasmussen Reports 11/29 - 11/29 41% for 53% Against/Oppose +12
Gallup 11/20-11/22 44% for 49% Against/Oppose +5
Ipsos/McClatchy 11/19 - 11/22 34% for 46% Against/Oppose +12
Rasmussen Reports 11/21 - 11/22 38% for 56% Against/Oppose +18
FOX News 11/17 - 11/18 35% for 51% Against/Oppose +16
PPP (D) 11/13 - 11/15 40% for 52% Against/Oppose +12

Below are the polls thanks to RCP of public opinion on the ACA when the House passed it in March of 2010
Bloomberg 3/19 - 3/22 38% for 50% Against/Oppose +12
CNN/Opinion Research 3/19 - 3/21 39% for 59% Against/Oppose +20
CBS News 3/18 - 3/21 37% for 48% Against/Oppose +11
Rasmussen Reports 3/19 - 3/20 41% for 54% Against/Oppose +13
Quinnipiac 3/16 - 3/21 36% for 54% Against/Oppose +18
Democracy Corps (D) 3/15 - 3/18 40% for 52% Against/Oppose +12
FOX News 3/16 - 3/17 35% 55% Against/Oppose +20

By contrast when medicare was first passed, the majority of Americans were for it and supported it by a 61-31 margin.

The Gallup Brain: Medicare's Early Days

This is the difference of having something forced upon the people against their will which the election of 2010 emphasized the peoples rebellion against the Democrats for the ACA and the readily acceptance of medicare in which they wanted.

 

[274ina]

Wow ignorance is bliss....the middle class are paying increased rates to compensate for the deadbeat losers you keep begging for power from. Get a grip and recognize a dose of reality.

The middle class are paying less because they get a subsidy too.

Divide and couquer anyone? Only the ~5% are paying for the ACA. those making over $250,000 a year.

 

[Mycroft]

Ohio Governor John Kasich let the cat out of the bag when he revealed the truth behind why the GOP is opposed to Obamacare in this Washington Post article:



This isn't to say that Republicans didn't have real concerns about how the law was structured or the mechanics involved. But when you get right down to it Republican opposition had more to do with not giving a Democrat President or his party a major social-political victory than it was about reforming our nation's health care system in a way that works for a vast majority of people. Sen. McConnell's flub over KyNect, Kentucky's state-sponsored HIE which was built using a federal grant and based on the ACA, is also quite humorous. After reading the commentary, a familiar refrain came to mind:

"If you like your [state-sponsored] health insurance (brought to you via the Medicaid expansion), you can keep it...until I work to repeal the very law that made it possible for you to have health insurance."

It's kinda funny. The so-called train wreck McConnell continues to condemn turns out to be a sweet ride for his constituents.

Governor Kasich is certainly entitled to his opinion, but that doesn't mean he speaks for all Republicans...and certainly doesn't mean he speaks for Congressional Republicans.

My suggestion to him would be to let the Republicans in Congress dump Obamacare while he enacts it at his own State level if he thinks it's so useful.

 

[Hard Truth]

I don't think Republicans have ever stated that those with pre existing condition, poor and under employed wouldn't benefit. They are just willing to point out the government is taking (stealing really) the middle class health care system and redistributing to those people. That fundamental problem remains. You have a finite system, a capacity, and the left has taken that capacity and redistributed it equally among the middle class and poor - while making the middle class pay for it. The people will see through this - the masses. We'll see in a few weeks. You'll also see the next "D" avoid the topic like all hell in 2016.

The flaw in your argument is that the government was already taking from the middle class to provide health care for the poor, but they were largely doing it with the poor using emergency rooms when their symptoms are at their worst, which is the least effective and efficient way healthcare can be provided.

 

[CalGun]

That's a lie and you know it. Sure you can find someone in the middle class paying less but as a group they are not. You spew lies like that they ought to ban you. Most in the middle class (requires working) don't enjoy a gift stolen by the government and handed to them....they are the ones stolen from. You are so disingenuous with this I can bother to read your pathetic crap hack garbage again....go find a new username to spew your LIES.

The middle class are paying less because they get a subsidy too.

Divide and couquer anyone? Only the ~5% are paying for the ACA. those making over $250,000 a year.

 

[CalGun]

It's only a flaw if you can prove the new system costs the middle class less. Can you? I don't think you can.

The flaw in your argument is that the government was already taking from the middle class to provide health care for the poor, but they were largely doing it with the poor using emergency rooms when their symptoms are at their worst, which is the least effective and efficient way healthcare can be provided.

 

[274ina]

That's a lie and you know it. Sure you can find someone in the middle class paying less but as a group they are not. You spew lies like that they ought to ban you. Most in the middle class (requires working) don't enjoy a gift stolen by the government and handed to them....they are the ones stolen from. You are so disingenuous with this I can bother to read your pathetic crap hack garbage again....go find a new username to spew your LIES.

really? Then show us all the part of the ACA that taxes the middle class and poor.

"• Medicare Tax on Investment Income 3.8% over $200k/$250k

• Medicare Part A Tax increase of .9% over $200k/$250k"



And the middle class is getting a huge subsidy or price cap, because of the ACA. Up to about $50,000 a year.

example
35 single non smoker $40k.

Household income in 2014:348% of poverty

levelMaximum % of income you have to pay for the premium, if eligible for a subsidy:9.5%

Health Insurance premium in 2014 (for a silver plan, before tax credit):$2,258 per year You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$0 per year
(which covers 0% of the overall premium)

Amount you pay for the premium:$2,258 per year
(which equals 5.64% of your household income and covers 100% of the overall premium)

The truth is here.....................

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-...e-plan-family=individual&adult-count=1&adults[0][age]=35&adults[0][tobacco]=0&child-count=0&child-tobacco=0#state=az&zip=85009&income-type=dollars&income=40%2C000&employer-coverage=0&people=1&alternate-plan-family=individual&adult-count=1&adults%5B0%5D%5Bage%5D=35&adults%5B0%5D%5Btobacco%5D=0&child-count=0&child-tobacco=0

 

[CalGun]

I never said tax, you said tax, I said COST but I get that level of common sense goes way over your head.

really? Then show us all the part of the ACA that taxes the middle class and poor.

"• Medicare Tax on Investment Income 3.8% over $200k/$250k

• Medicare Part A Tax increase of .9% over $200k/$250k"



And the middle class is getting a huge subsidy or price cap, because of the ACA. Up to about $50,000 a year.

example
35 single non smoker $40k.

Household income in 2014:348% of poverty

levelMaximum % of income you have to pay for the premium, if eligible for a subsidy:9.5%

Health Insurance premium in 2014 (for a silver plan, before tax credit):$2,258 per year You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:$0 per year
(which covers 0% of the overall premium)

Amount you pay for the premium:$2,258 per year
(which equals 5.64% of your household income and covers 100% of the overall premium)

The truth is here.....................

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-...e-plan-family=individual&adult-count=1&adults[0][age]=35&adults[0][tobacco]=0&child-count=0&child-tobacco=0#state=az&zip=85009&income-type=dollars&income=40%2C000&employer-coverage=0&people=1&alternate-plan-family=individual&adult-count=1&adults%5B0%5D%5Bage%5D=35&adults%5B0%5D%5Btobacco%5D=0&child-count=0&child-tobacco=0