How to Protect Yourself From Obamacare

[Townsend]

No scan needed.  It's empty.

Brain cloud

[Gaspar]

Interesting article today in the WSJ written by Howard Dean.  He seems to be using some language that was previously taboo among Democrats.  Perhaps they are easing their way into the term "Death Pannel?"  
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324110404578628542498014414.html?mod=WSJ_article_MoreIn_Opinion

"The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.

There does have to be control of costs in our health-care system. However, rate setting—the essential mechanism of the IPAB—has a 40-year track record of failure. What ends up happening in these schemes (which many states including my home state of Vermont have implemented with virtually no long-term effect on costs) is that patients and physicians get aggravated because bureaucrats in either the private or public sector are making medical decisions without knowing the patients. Most important, once again, these kinds of schemes do not control costs. The medical system simply becomes more bureaucratic.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has indicated that the IPAB, in its current form, won't save a single dime before 2021. As everyone in Washington knows, but less frequently admits, CBO projections of any kind—past five years or so—are really just speculation. I believe the IPAB will never control costs based on the long record of previous attempts in many of the states, including my own state of Vermont.

If Medicare is to have a secure future, we have to move away from fee-for-service medicine, which is all about incentives to spend more, and has no incentives in the system to keep patients healthy. The IPAB has no possibility of helping to solve this major problem and will almost certainly make the system more bureaucratic and therefore drive up administrative costs.

To date, 22 Democrats have joined Republicans in the House and Senate in support of legislation to do away with the IPAB. Yet because of the extraordinary partisanship on Capitol Hill and Republican threats to defund the law through the appropriations process, it is unlikely that any change in the Affordable Care Act will take place soon.

The IPAB will cause frustration to providers and patients alike, and it will fail to control costs. When, and if, the atmosphere on Capitol Hill improves and leadership becomes interested again in addressing real problems instead of posturing, getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on."

[Townsend]

House Votes To Quash Obamacare, For The 40th Time

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/02/208314182/house-votes-to-quash-obamacare-for-the-40th-time

40

Gettin' it done.

[Gaspar]

At the same time, the White House approved an exemption for members of Congress.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/congress-to-get-obamacare-exemption-report-2013-08-02?dist=tcountdown

Congress, unions and big business have dodged the bullet.

[guido911]

Remember how "death panels" was the lie of the year?

[Townsend]

At the same time, the White House approved an exemption for members of Congress.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/congress-to-get-obamacare-exemption-report-2013-08-02?dist=tcountdown

Congress, unions and big business have dodged the bullet.

You know that's not what that link says, right?

[Hoss]

You know that's not what that link says, right?

You mean, Gas misinterprets another story?  Naw!  Really?

[Gaspar]

You know that's not what that link says, right?

You do understand what they did right?  I'll take it slow.

The Affordable Care Act contains a provision which says members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans "created" by the law or "offered through an exchange" just like what is available to their constituency. 

. . .and, just like their constituency, if they are provided a "top-tier" plan through their employer, in this case the gov't, they must face higher out-of-pocket costs to help subsidize the exchange for those less fortunate. 

. . .but Congress wants nothing to do with that, so the President and his staff worked with the Office of Personnel Managment LINKY to come up with a solution.  That solution was that the OPM would go ahead and pay the increased premium, so that congress (and their staff) would not face any of the increased expenses of Obamacare that their constituency will face.

So Congress with get the top tier plan under the exchanges, but be exempt from the additional out-of-pocket costs that us peasants have to pay.

[Townsend]

You do understand what they did right?  I'll take it slow.

The Affordable Care Act contains a provision which says members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans "created" by the law or "offered through an exchange" just like what is available to their constituency. 

. . .and, just like their constituency, if they are provided a "top-tier" plan through their employer, in this case the gov't, they must face higher out-of-pocket costs to help subsidize the exchange for those less fortunate. 

. . .but Congress wants nothing to do with that, so the President and his staff worked with the Office of Personnel Managment LINKY to come up with a solution.  That solution was that the OPM would go ahead and pay the increased premium, so that congress (and their staff) would not face any of the increased expenses of Obamacare that their constituency will face.

So Congress with get the top tier plan under the exchanges, but be exempt from the additional out-of-pocket costs that us peasants have to pay.

So get on out there and get it fixed.  Let us know how it goes.

[Gaspar]

So get on out there and get it fixed.  Let us know how it goes.

May not have to.  It turns out that the president's fix is illegal.

OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in congressional pay in return for less overall compensation. Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324635904578644202946287548.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

[Townsend]

May not have to.  It turns out that the president's fix is illegal.

OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in congressional pay in return for less overall compensation. Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324635904578644202946287548.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Think that'll stop it?

[Gaspar]

Think that'll stop it?

Nope!  Just bumps in the road. 

[Townsend]

Nope!  Just bumps in the road. 

Ding

[Gaspar]

More bumps.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/13/yet-another-white-house-obamacare-delay-out-of-pocket-caps-waived-until-2015/

Yet Another White House Obamacare Delay: Out-Of-Pocket Caps Waived Until 2015

[Townsend]

Paul, Cruz plan anti-Obamacare rally



http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/defund-obamacare-advocates-rally-95917.html?hp=f1

Obamacare opponents are planning a defunding rally for the first day lawmakers return from August recess and just three weeks before millions can start enrolling in coverage.
Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah), who have been leading calls in the Senate to defund the law in any spending bills, will headline the Sept. 10 Exempt America from Obamacare event, organized by Tea Party Patriots and ForAmerica, along with other conservative groups.

Betcha that'll be some good people watchin'.