Showing posts with label deadline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label deadline. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

AP sources: ObamaCare “on track” to hit seven million sign-ups before deadline

APsources:ObamaCare“ontrack”tohitseven

AP sources: ObamaCare “on track” to hit seven million sign-ups before deadline

posted at 11:21 am on April 1, 2014 by Allahpundit

I’m not sure what “on track” means given that the deadline’s now come and gone. Presumably it’s a reference to last week’s extension for people who are “in line”: All you need to do is swear that you tried to sign up before March 31st but ran into technical problems and you get extra time to complete the process. That extension was, transparently, all about giving the White House a better chance to reach seven million sign-ups — their original projection for enrollment this year — so that they can now declare “mission accomplished.” It was, like so many of O-Care’s exemptions and shifting deadlines, all about politics. Even though anyone who’s following this issue knows that a good million or more of these sign-ups are or soon will be invalid due to nonpayment of premiums or the simple fact that “sign-ups” includes some people who selected a plan on Healthcare.gov even though they didn’t actually complete the purchase.

Obama’s going to take a victory lap at 4:15 p.m. today. If he’s excited about this number, imagine how excited he’ll be when he finds out how many sign-ups are valid.

Beating expectations, President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul was on track to sign up more than 7 million Americans for health insurance on deadline day Monday, government officials told The Associated Press.

The 7 million target, thought to be out of reach by most experts, was in sight on a day that saw surging consumer interest as well as vexing computer glitches that slowed sign-ups on the HealthCare.gov website…

Seven million was the original target set by the Congressional Budget Office for enrollment in taxpayer-subsidized private health insurance through new online markets created under Obama’s signature legislation.

Not only are “sources” whispering to the media about up-to-the-minute sign-up data, an HHS spokesman reported last night that the website had received nearly five million visits on Monday alone. Which led Byron York to marvel:

We still don’t have data about how many of the seven million were previously uninsured (CBO projected as recently as February that 13 million people formerly without insurance would gain it under O-Care, including the Medicaid expansion) or what the age mix of the various new state risk pools is. Logically, you would think the late enrollment surge would consist mainly of “young knuckleheads” who held off on signing up until the last minute because they don’t desperately need coverage. That’s good news for insurers and for fans of the law, of course, since more young adults in the pool means more healthy people being gouged to subsidize those with preexisting conditions, which in turn means premiums will rise less steeply next year. The bad news for insurers is that, per some recent estimates, young adults comprised just 25-27 percent of the overall risk pool headed into the final month of enrollment. There’d have to be a lot of twentysomethings diving in over the past four weeks to get the administration close to its target of 40 percent or so overall.

In case you missed it yesterday, by one estimate, three-quarters of new ObamaCare enrollees are paying higher premiums now than they used to — which, of course, is very much by design, no matter what The One might tell you. If you’re going to have guaranteed issue and community rating for the sick, the extra revenue to pay for their treatment has to come from somewhere. Exit question: What happens next year when roughly half of new enrollees with subsidized coverage lose their subsidies, bumping them down to Medicaid coverage or no coverage at all?


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Monday, March 31, 2014

Quotes of the day

Quotesoftheday postedat10:21

Quotes of the day

posted at 10:21 pm on March 31, 2014 by Allahpundit

RACHAEL RAY: Listen, I want to take time to talk about Healthcare.gov because today is the deadline right?

VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: That is right. Today is the deadline. I think everyone is going to be really surprised and pleased how well this has turned out. But I want to say one thing, Rachel. Anybody who is in line now, anybody who is on the web, in person being interviewed and/or on the telephone, they are able to — even if the deadline closes — to stay in line. They can get into the system. It is a little bit like people, when the polls close at 8 and there are people waiting, they get to vote. So I think people are going to be really, really surprised how well this has turned out.

***

As Americans around the country raced on Monday to sign up for health plans in new insurance marketplaces before a midnight deadline, HealthCare.gov, the online federal insurance exchange, was closed to new customers for two periods starting at dawn.

Federal health officials said that a midday shutdown was caused primarily by the large numbers of customers coming to the federal Web site, while software problems were responsible for the site opening about three hours late in the morning…

At noon, 109,000 people at once were on HealthCare.gov, twice as many as the day before, according to federal health officials.

The pauses in new sign-ups have come as record numbers of people on Monday also flooded a network of call centers for help in getting insurance through the marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act. By noon on Monday, the centers logged 350,000 callers, roughly triple the volume on the second-highest day, Dec. 23, as the deadline approached for people to choose health plans in time for their coverage to start on New Year’s Day.

***

According to the White House, officials and celebrity surrogates over the past six weeks have completed more than 300 individual radio interviews across the nation. That includes 20 radio interviews by the president, first lady and vice president. Chief of staff Dennis McDonough and senior advisers Dan Pfeiffer and Phil Schiliro participated in an additional 30 interviews. Cabinet secretaries have also completed some 60 radio interviews nationwide.

Valerie Jarrett alone has also completed 60 radio interviews and appeared on TV and Internet shows to promote the initiative. In an interview with Popsugar posted Friday, Jarrett pitched the law and fielded questions on One Direction and Snooki.

That effort has been magnified by the administration’s use of celebrities to get the word out about the ObamaCare deadline. According to the White House, celebrity “influencers” have posted messages about the law to more than 349,481,000 followers and have seen their messages retweeted more than 40,000 times

“A key part of the administration’s strategy has been to work with celebrities, athletes and other key influencers who were interested in helping us get the message out about the importance of getting health insurance, and had an enormous power to reach consumers outside of the Beltway — especially young people — through their social media platforms,” the White House official said.

***

A better way to measure progress is to look at numbers from a handful of states that are collecting this kind of data and have reported it. Last week, New York officials told CNBC that 59 percent of people getting insurance through the state marketplace had no coverage before. The numbers were even higher in Kentucky, where officials told the network that 75 percent of people selecting plans had been uninsured before.

And according to Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat, officials in Washington state who have studied their enrollment data believe that the overall effect of Obamacare has been to reduce the ranks of the uninsured by about 25 percent. To give you a sense of scale, the Congressional Budget Office has predicted that the Affordable Care Act will in 2014 decrease the number of uninsured nationally from about 57 million to about 44 million—a reduction of about 23 percent. So if those Washington officials are right, their state is actually outperforming expectations by a little bit…

According to Noam Levey of the Los Angeles Times, unpublished research from the Rand Corporation suggests that the uninsurance rate among working-age adults has fallen from 20.9 percent in the fall to 16.6 percent now. That’s roughly consistent with previously published survey findings from Gallup. Again, it’s hard to know how accurate these surveys are. But they certainly suggest the law is succeeding in reducing the number of people without health coverage. The question is by how much.

***

According to the Times, which cites a study from Rand Corp., “At least 6 million people have signed up for health coverage on the new marketplaces, about one-third of whom were previously uninsured.” That suggests that two million uninsured Americans gained coverage as a result of the law…

[A]s recently as February — when analysts knew how many states weren’t going along with the Medicaid expansion and were aware of the early technical glitches facing the rollout of Obamacare — the CBO still projected that the law would reduce the number of uninsured by 13 million.

Even adding the 3 million young adults under 26 who were added to their parents’ insurance policies, the resulting 9.5 million total would still be significantly below expectations.

***

Assume all the numbers are correct, or at least close to correct. By far the largest part of Obamacare’s health coverage expansion has come from a) expanding Medicaid, and b) allowing young people to stay on their parents’ coverage. The part where Democrats essentially blew up the health care markets, imposed the individual mandate, and caused premiums to rise and deductibles to skyrocket? That hasn’t been such a success. If the Times number are correct, all of that — placing new burdens of higher costs and narrower choices on millions of Americans, in addition to setting the stage for coming changes in employer-based coverage — has resulted in two million of the previously uninsured gaining coverage.

The bottom line is that Democrats could have enacted two relatively small changes (small relative to the entirety of Obamacare, that is) in the health care system and achieved most of what Obamacare has achieved so far. Would Republicans have supported such changes back in 2009 and 2010? Who knows? Maybe a few would have — certainly the until-26 change — but the point is in the brief period when Obamacare was enacted, Democrats had about 255 votes in the House and 60 in the Senate. They could do what they wanted, which included pursuing more modest reforms that would have helped millions. Or they could blow things up and impose burdens on millions even as they helped others. Acting on decades of pent-up demand to take control of the health care system, they chose to blow things up.

***

What’s important to remember is that this is not how Obamacare was supposed to work. The Congressional Budget Office, in its original estimates, predicted that the vast majority of the people eligible for subsidies on the exchanges would be previously uninsured individuals.

Instead, the vast majority are previously insured people, many of whom are getting a better deal on the exchanges because they either qualify for subsidies, or because they’re older individuals who benefit from the law’s steep rate hikes on the young…

This is a problem that may get worse over time, as the cost of plans continues to go up. In the McKinsey survey, of those who had decided not to sign up for Obamacare, the most common reason was the “affordability” of the offered plans. Indications from insurers like Aetna and WellPoint is that the premiums on the exchange will go up substantially next year.

***

The CEO of the Cleveland Clinic says that a majority of Americans who signed up for Obamacare have seen their premiums rise.

“About three-quarters of them find that their premiums are higher than they had been previously with other insurance,” Toby Cosgrove told Fox News…

“We know for example that we’re going to get paid less for what we do,” Cosgrove stated. “Hospitals are going to be paid less for what they do. We also know that insurers are paying less for what we do.”

***

I was one of those people who made a “firm pronouncement about how the Affordable Care Act (was) doing.” I fully expected the numbers of uninsured to skyrocket this year.

But that was because I thought the law was the law. I expected that the massive cancellations of group plans throughout 2014 would result in 25 million people previously covered to be wandering in the wilderness this year trying to figure out what to do next.

I had no idea that the law could be changed or delayed with a wave of the imperial hand. Silly me. Today, I have completely lost track of what is still required and what has been delayed. So I have sworn off making “firm pronouncements” of anything having to do with this bucket of porridge known as Obamacare… and I suggest others should, too.

***

“Even though the website is working, the stench of the rollout lingers. Sebelius’s screw up will almost certainly cost us a bunch of seats,” said one Democratic operative. “But in time — certainly going into 2016 — the politics of the ACA will change. People do not like to lose benefits once they have become accustomed to receiving them. Why do you think the Dems never fundamentally changed or repealed the Bush prescription drug entitlement?”

That’s why Democratic campaign officials want to put so much focus on what would happen if the nation went back to the old health care system. Until now, they’ve spent more time trying to find success stories of newly insured, happy people. But for the elections, they’re leaning toward a different approach: finding horror stories of people who used to get turned down for health insurance or bankrupted by an illness, and having them say in TV ads, “Don’t make me go back to that.”

Democratic pollster Mark Mellman points out that the newly insured people haven’t had a chance to show whether they will be committed voters yet. “If you can communicate with them and explain what they stand to lose if the law is repealed, that will make a difference,” he said Mellman. “By November, we’ll be in a different position with those folks.”

***

As the Obama administration and the uninsured race to meet today’s (sort-of) deadline for Americans to have purchased health insurance, we can now say something we weren’t 100% confident about back in October in November: The health-care law is here is to stay. More than 6 million have now enrolled in a health-care plan under the federal and state exchanges, which is up from a mere 100,000 back in October. And given the recent enrollment surge, it’s possible the final number is close to 7 million. What’s more, when you add the folks who’ve gotten insurance via expanded Medicaid and those under 26 who are on their parents’ insurance, overall total could be as high as 15 million. (So even if you subtract the 5 million Republicans estimate had been insured before, the net new insured appears could be around 10 million.) And then consider that the Congressional Budget Office has projected enrollment in the exchanges to double in 2015 (from 6 million to 13 million) and nearly double again in 2016 (from 13 million to 22 million). Bottom line: Repeal is more unlikely than it’s ever been before. How do you negate the health-care plans for these millions of Americans? So now what?…

”Next year is going to be interesting. What we’re hearing from the insurers thus far is that they’re expecting double-digit increases for the cost of these health plans on the exchange in 2015,” conservative health-care expert Avik Roy said on “Meet the Press” yesterday. “We still haven’t heard about how much the plans are going to cost for employer-sponsored insurance under Obamacare as it was before. And those things are going to affect the election in November for sure.” Liberal health-care expert Jonathan Cohn countered, “We’ll wait and see where those premiums come in. They are getting a lot of people in now,” he said on “Meet the Press” yesterday. “You know, there’s been this pattern where they always predict the worst. You know, the website wasn’t working: ‘No one will ever sign up.’ And then it was, ‘Well, no one will get to the doctor.’ And you know what? Things were okay. There were problems, but things worked out well. I’m pretty optimistic.”

***

We don’t know yet what the paid enrollment looks like or how successfully the program is actually enrolling the uninsured. (After some grim estimates, this Rand study is making liberals feel a little more optimistic, but still suggests a below-expectations result.) We don’t know what the age-and-health-status composition of the enrollee pools looks like or what that means for premiums next year and beyond. We don’t know if any of the suspended/postponed provisions of the law will actually take effect. And we certainly don’t know what any of this means for social policy in the long run.

But we do know that there won’t be an immediate political unraveling, and that we aren’t headed for the kind of extremely-low-enrollment scenario that seemed conceivable just a few months ago, or the possible world where cancellations had ended up outstripping enrollment, creating a net decline in the number of insured. And knowing that much has significant implications for our politics. It means that the kind of welfare-state embedding described above is taking place on a significant scale, that a large constituency will be served by Obamacare (through Medicaid as well as the exchanges) in 2016 and beyond, and that any kind of conservative alternative will have to confront the reality that the kind of tinkering-around-the-edges alternatives to Obamacare that many Republicans have supported to date would end up stripping coverage from millions of newly-insured Americans. That newly-insured constituency may not be as large as the bill’s architects originally hoped, or be composed of the range of buyers that the program ultimately needs. But it will be a fact on the ground to an extent that was by no means certain last December. And that fact will shape, and constrain, the options of the law’s opponents even in the event that Republicans manage to reclaim the White House two years hence.

***

***

Via RCP.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

On cue: Obama administration extends healthcare deadline for people who started enrolling before March 31st everyone

Oncue:Obamaadministrationextendshealthcaredeadlinefor

On cue: Obama administration extends healthcare deadline for people who started enrolling before March 31st everyone

posted at 9:31 pm on March 25, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

We all knew this one was coming, right? Administration officials can stand around and talk about how the March 31st deadline is the real deal until they’re blue in the face, but you know they’ve been watching the pace at which Healthcare.gov signups have been trickling in like hawks — and while they’ve been conspicuously backing away from their erstwhile goal of 7 million enrollments in the opening phase, this would seem to suggest that the pace still isn’t running as quickly as they’d like it to be. From the Washington Post:

The Obama administration has decided to give extra time to Americans who say that they are unable to enroll in health-care plans through the federal insurance marketplace by the March 31 deadline.

Federal officials confirmed Tuesday evening that all consumers who have begun to apply for coverage on HealthCare.gov, but who do not finish by Monday, will have until about mid-April to ask for an extension.

Under the new rules, people will be able to qualify for an extension by checking a blue box on HealthCare.gov to indicate that they tried to enroll before the deadline. This method will rely on an honor system; the government will not try to determine whether the person is telling the truth. …

Administration officials said the accommodation is an attempt to prepare for a possible surge of people trying to sign up in the final days before the deadline. Such a flood could leave some people unable to get through the system.

An “honor system.” Glorious.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

WH to issue another ObamaCare rule change — to help Democratic incumbents

WHtoissueanotherObamaCarerulechange—

WH to issue another ObamaCare rule change — to help Democratic incumbents

posted at 8:41 am on March 4, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

How blatant is this latest unilateral change from the Obama administration on the law they claim is working well? The Hill can’t avoid connecting the dots in its lead sentence:

The Obama administration is set to announce another major delay in implementing the Affordable Care Act, easing election pressure on Democrats.

As early as this week, according to two sources, the White House will announce a new directive allowing insurers to continue offering health plans that do not meet ObamaCare’s minimum coverage requirements.

ADVERTISEMENT

Prolonging the “keep your plan” fix will avoid another wave of health policy cancellations otherwise expected this fall.

The cancellations would have created a firestorm for Democratic candidates in the last, crucial weeks before Election Day.

Actually, HHS thought they had already avoided that outcome with its previous extension. That pushed off the deadline for plans to meet the requirements of ObamaCare until January 1, 2015, which is after the midterms. However, none of the geniuses at HHS seemed to know that insurers have to send out cancellation notices 90 days in advance, which would mean that letters would go out no later than October 1 … five weeks or so before the vote.

D’oh!

The extension itself is nothing more than a big lie anyway. It’s the Obama administration attempt to avoid having to deal with the “keep your plan” promise, but as this extension shows, the lie won’t get undone no matter what the White House tweaks in the deadlines. It’s just getting kicked down the road in a bald-faced attempt to avoid accountability for their serial dishonesty. The pain will come no matter what; Barack Obama and his team just don’t want to deal with the electoral consequences of it.

As The Hill points out, it also exposes the fierce urgency of now argument as a lie, too:

Allowing insurers to continue offering noncompliant health plans for several years would substantially alter the health insurance landscape under ObamaCare.

It would also undercut one rationale for the healthcare reform law.

The Hill quotes Obama warning about the dangers of low-cost health-care plans, and the need for government to force them out of the marketplace. Now that it’s his own political health and that of his fellow Democrats at risk, Obama and his administration are singing quite a different tune.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Today’s big ObamaCare lie: Sebelius claims she never set a goal of seven million sign-ups

Today’sbigObamaCarelie:Sebeliusclaimsshenever

Today’s big ObamaCare lie: Sebelius claims she never set a goal of seven million sign-ups

posted at 4:41 pm on February 25, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via CNS and BuzzFeed, an egregious lie even by the administration’s usual standards for ObamaCare, which is saying something. In fact, this lie, that Sebelius herself never embraced the seven-million figure she’s now trying to pawn off on CBO, was exposed nearly two months ago by one of the biggest papers in the country — and here she is, two months later, still pushing it to try to cover her ass. Quote:

Here’s Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius speaking to reporters last June: “We’re hopeful that 7 million is a realistic target.”

And here she is on Sept. 30, in an interview with NBC News: “I think success looks like at least 7 million people having signed up by the end of March 2014.”

Moreover, on Sept. 5, 2013, Marilyn Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, sent Sebelius a memo titled, “Projected Monthly Enrollment Targets for Health Insurance Marketplaces in 2014.”

The memo offered an estimate of 7,066,000, drawing both on CBO’s estimate and the experience of the universal health plan in Massachusetts, Medicare Part D “and conversations with employers, issuers and states.” It projected that enrollment would be 3.3 million by the end of December.

WaPo gave her just two Pinocchios out of four for distancing herself from the “seven million” figure back in January even though she (a) had adopted that number months earlier and (b) already was (and still is) exaggerating the total number of O-Care sign-ups by refusing to say how many are facing cancellation due to not having paid their first month’s premium. By most estimates, that number is in the ballpark of 20 percent. If that trend continues all the way to the March 31st deadline, hitting the magic “seven million” number would mean that the official numbers were padded with more than a million busted enrollments.

Three clips for you, in order: Today’s big lie; Sebelius telling NBC on September 30th of last year that seven million is the target; and then, just for fun, Jay Carney trying to spin his way out of this clusterfark last month. Note that September 30, 2013 was literally the eve of ObamaCare’s launch. Up until the very last minute, when she knew (or certainly should have known) that the website was a disaster in the making and would be hobbled for weeks or months, she passed on an easy opportunity to set expectations for enrollment much lower. Sheesh.




Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Friday, December 27, 2013

Quotes of the day

Quotesoftheday postedat8:31

Quotes of the day

posted at 8:31 pm on December 26, 2013 by Allahpundit

More than half of the counties in 34 states using the federal health insurance exchange lack even a bronze plan that’s affordable — by the government’s own definition — for 40-year-old couples who make just a little too much for financial assistance, a USA TODAY analysis shows…

“The ACA was not designed to reduce costs or, the law’s name notwithstanding, to make health insurance coverage affordable for the vast majority of Americans,” says health care consultant Kip Piper, a former government and insurance industry official. “The law uses taxpayer dollars to lower costs for the low-income uninsured but it also increases costs overall and shifts costs within the marketplace.”…

Karen Pollitz, a senior fellow at the Kaiser Family Foundation, acknowledges that catastrophic and even bronze plans would be very difficult for many 40 or 50-something consumers to afford with their $5,000-$6,000 annual deductibles.

“Most people don’t have that kind of money in the bank, and I think it’s going to create problems for people,” Pollitz says.

***

As hundreds of thousands enroll for coverage beginning Jan. 1, analysts are warning that the plans are likely to give them access to fewer doctors and hospitals. So much so, they warn, that the system could begin to resemble Medicaid, the health care program for low-income Americans.

“Indeed, I think this will eventually be like Medicaid,” said Merrill Matthews, director of the Council for Affordable Health Insurance…

Just as with Medicaid, analysts warn that if payments get too low, many doctors might start refusing to see patients. That will leave more and more patients jockeying to see fewer and fewer doctors…

“These networks are going to be jammed with people,” Robert Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, said. “Far more than they’re treating now, and I don’t doubt that we’re going to have problems with access to these doctors. There just aren’t going to be enough of them.”

***

If the Affordable Care Act can get through its first days of actual health coverage without big eruptions, the Obama administration may finally be able to move toward a narrative that focuses on how the law can work. But if it has to spend those days putting out more fires, the phrase “troubled rollout” won’t be going away anytime soon…

The point of the Affordable Care Act is to cover people who haven’t had health insurance before, and it may have already reached some of those people. But because they’re new to health insurance, they may be in for a rude shock: It doesn’t cover everything.

There are deductibles, for example — the amount of money you have to spend out of pocket before coverage kicks in — which can be very high with “bronze” Obamacare plans, the cheapest kind. There are also co-payments for office visits, as well as co-insurance, the percentage of medical expenses you have to pay even if most are covered by your insurance.

There’s no way to know how big an issue this could be before January arrives — but if newly insured people think they’re getting free health care, or just think the deductibles are too high, they could be disappointed with their first experiences with Obamacare.

***

After a month of trying, I still can’t complete an application to join the D.C. Health Exchange. For a week, the Obamacare marketplace asked me to prove my citizenship, my daughter’s existence, and my fixed address in the District of Columbia, but it would not allow me to submit the requested material…

But it’s not all bad. What I like is that I can access the D.C. exchange in twenty different languages, including Apache, Navajo, and Irish. Which is great because I see so many Irish here who have a heck of a time assimilating, what with the fact that they only speak Irish and not the King’s English. (You can also receive notices in American Sign Language—l’d make a joke here but I might offend the deaf. But I guess since they can’t read and need American Sign Language I might as well let one rip. But I’ll refrain nevertheless.)…

Obeisance to some banal multicultural diktat isn’t costless, and since I’m mad as hell about having wasted a good chunk of a month on this dysfunctional website and can’t find an obvious villain, I will hold in enmity whoever decided that the Navajo and the Irish needed to be able to navigate the D.C. Health Exchange in their native tongue, and condemn the system that concluded it was a necessary thing to do.

***

COLBY: What do you think about these bailouts of insurance companies, as well? Could that happen?

YORK: It absolutely will happen –

COLBY: Will happen?!

YORK: As a matter of fact, it’s written into the law. There’s something called “risk corridors,” which basically ensure that if an insurance company ends up paying a lot more in benefits than it takes in in premiums, then the federal government will bail it out — it will make it good. And it looks like we are entering a situation — certainly in the first month of January — where the insurance companies will be in that situation. And they’e not going to take the losses. It will be the taxpayer who makes up for those losses.

***

The enrollment figures may be well short of what the Obama administration had hoped for. But the fact that a significant number of Americans are now benefiting from the program is resulting in a subtle shift among Republicans.

“It’s no longer just a piece of paper that you can repeal and it goes away,” said Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin and a Tea Party favorite. “There’s something there. We have to recognize that reality. We have to deal with the people that are currently covered under Obamacare.”

And that underscores a central fact of American politics since Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act during the Depression: Once a benefit has been bestowed, it is nearly impossible to take it away.

***

It’s almost impressive how poorly the Obama administration managed the start of its signature achievement. What many envisioned as American liberalism’s crowning modern achievement looked instead like something out of a Marx Brothers movie—a comedy of errors, with each glitch leading to another larger failure.

Equally impressive, however, is the law’s staying power, at least so far. Liberal activists are weary, but still hopeful. Democrats in Congress are anxious and watchful, but only a few have started to defect. And the administration remains as firm in its defenses of the law as ever, even as the president’s poll numbers sag, and long-soft support for the law grows softer still.

What Obamacare has proven this year is not that it can work, but that it can survive, not so much as a specific legislative initiative, but as a policy idea and a political vision. Whether it can do more than that will require another year, at least, to know for sure.

***

Yet opponents should not sit back and revel in dysfunction. The Affordable Care Act was enacted in response to genuine problems. Without a clear alternative, we will simply patch more, subsidize more, and ignore frauds and scandals, as we do in Medicare and other programs…

We can have a single government-run airline too. We can ban FedEx and UPS, and have a single-payer post office. We can have government-run telephones and TV. Thirty years ago every other country had all of these, and worthies said that markets couldn’t work for travel, package delivery, the “natural monopoly” of telephones and TV. Until we tried it. That the rest of the world spends less just shows how dysfunctional our current system is, not how a free market would work.

While economically straightforward, liberalization is always politically hard. Innovation and cost reduction require new businesses to displace familiar, well-connected incumbents. Protected businesses spawn “good jobs” for protected workers, dues for their unions, easy lives for their managers, political support for their regulators and politicians, and cushy jobs for health-policy wonks. Protection from competition allows private insurance to cross-subsidize Medicare, Medicaid, and emergency rooms.

But it can happen. The first step is, the American public must understand that there is an alternative. Stand up and demand it.

***

***



Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Monday, December 23, 2013

Merry Christmas, insurers: HHS secretly extends ObamaCare enrollment until midnight tomorrow

MerryChristmas,insurers:HHSsecretlyextendsObamaCareenrollment

Merry Christmas, insurers: HHS secretly extends ObamaCare enrollment until midnight tomorrow

posted at 1:01 pm on December 23, 2013 by Allahpundit

Try to see it from the White House’s perspective. They took an unholy beating in the media last week for dropping a new package of panicky “fixes” on the public with just days to go before the enrollment deadline. Faced with that hostility, how should a smart, adaptive PR team handle a new “fix” that pushes the deadline back again? Right: Simply … don’t announce it at all. There’s someone out there who’ll be sitting in front of his computer tomorrow, bummed that he spaced on today’s deadline, who’ll try signing up at Healthcare.gov on a lark in hopes of getting his coverage in place for January 1st anyway. And lo and behold, to his surprise, it’ll work! It’s a Christmas (Eve) miracle, courtesy of Sebelius Claus, even though enrollment is supposed to end at midnight tonight (and was initially supposed to end on December 15th). And no one in the mean ol’ media is the wiser. Until now.

The new deadline, by the way: Literally one minute before Christmas. If you work for an insurance company and you’re facing a 16-hour shift on Wednesday while your family’s home celebrating, just remember — this is what your boss gets for betting that Barack Obama could reinvent the industry, Hopenchange-style.

One individual familiar with the unannounced extension said that it is, in part, intended as a buffer in case the Web site has trouble if a last-minute surge of insurance-seekers proved more than the computer system could handle.

According to the two individuals, both of whom spoke on condition of anonymity about a matter that is not public, the one-day extension is automatic, built into the computer software, and cannot be overridden by individual insurers if they object

On Monday morning, one insurance industry official, informed by The Washington Post about the quiet deadline extension, said that it “creates further challenges to get people enrolled and get their coverage start in January.” The official asked not to be identified because the change hasn’t been made public.

Remember that bit about insurers not being able to override HHS’s fix. Lefties grumble whenever conservatives call this a government takeover of health care, but with every new half-assed, nakedly political HHS-mandated “fix,” that term becomes more accurate. I wonder, in fact, if HHS even gave the industry a heads up before deciding that they had no choice but to process applications filed at 11:55 p.m. on Christmas Eve. It’s possible. I remember more than one news story in November claiming that insurers were blind-sided by Obama’s ass-covering “okay, let’s go ahead and un-cancel some canceled plans” announcement. But that’s life now that the industry works for the government. When the CEO tells you you’re working Christmas Eve, you’re working Christmas Eve.

One silver lining for the White House, though: Per this same WaPo piece, they’ve now had nearly 900,000 people sign up through Healthcare.gov alone. As of November 30th, that number was somewhere around 127,000 or so. Predictably, sign-ups really did skyrocket in December with the deadline bearing down and the website now stable enough to handle many of them, if not quite all. Then again, who knows what “sign-ups” means at this point? Are these people whose 834 information was successfully relayed to their new insurer and who’ve paid their first month’s premium? Or are these people who placed a plan in their virtual shopping cart but didn’t purchase it; or who did purchase a plan but had their 834 converted into gibberish; or who signed up successfully but forgot that nonpayment means no coverage on January 1st even if you did everything else right? I’ll leave you with this from Pro Publica’s Charles Ornstein, published just four short days ago. Good luck, America:

I’ve heard from a number of consumers this week saying that they had not yet received invoices from their insurance companies, and so they have been unable to pay their first month’s premiums. Along the same lines, at a forum for health journalists last week, an official from the Community Service Society of New York said that she was told that three prominent insurance companies were only beginning to send out invoices to their enrollees.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Surprise: Insurers extend deadline to pay first month of ObamaCare plan premiums until January 10th

Surprise:Insurersextenddeadlinetopayfirstmonth

Surprise: Insurers extend deadline to pay first month of ObamaCare plan premiums until January 10th

posted at 4:01 pm on December 18, 2013 by Allahpundit

The deadline was December 31st, but faced with the prospect of 50 percent or more of their new enrollees going uncovered in January due to nonpayment, some individual insurers had already begun granting grace periods. Then HHS announced that it was strongly urging (wink wink) insurers across the industry to extend their deadlines too. And now, inevitably, here comes the umbrella group America’s Health Insurance Plans to say that its members have done exactly that.

No matter how messy the White House’s mismanagement of O-Care’s rollout gets, the insurance industry has no choice now but to try to clean it up. You bought the ticket, guys. Enjoy the ride.

As a result of the change, individuals who pick plans by Dec. 23 will be considered covered as of Jan. 1 as long as they pay their first month’s premiums by Jan. 10. Previously, payment had been required by Dec. 31…

In addition to asking insurers to allow consumers more time to process payments, HHS asked insurers to treat out-of-network providers as in-network, to continue to allow individuals to refill prescriptions that had been covered under previous plans and to accept partial payments for January premiums. AHIP did not address those requests in its statement.

It’s only the deadline for payment that’s changed, not the December 23rd deadline for enrollment, but we’ll see how that goes during the next few weeks. I’m sure the White House would love to extend the enrollment deadline into January too, with coverage retroactive to January 1st, but that’s more dangerous for insurers since in theory it would allow someone to sign up for insurance after they’ve already had an expensive accident. Maybe HHS could allow for retroactive enrollment with the caveat that claims over a certain amount won’t be covered? Or maybe they’ll just shovel some “risk corridor” money at insurers to cover any heavy losses from people who sign up to pay for pricey treatment that’s already been incurred. There are bound to be good-faith cases next month of people who really did try to sign up before this month’s deadline but were thwarted by lingering problems with Healthcare.gov or by the fact that the federal data hub still isn’t working well enough to let them enroll directly with insurers as a workaround. (At least one state exchange website has performed so terribly that some locals think they should switch to Healthcare.gov because it’s … more reliable.) Once you let those people enroll retroactively, why not let others whose attempt at enrollment in December wasn’t quite as diligent enroll too? All the better to pad HHS’s sign-up numbers.

But that raises a bigger question: Why would insurers further complicate their lives by bending over backwards this way for procrastinating consumers? Sure, they’d like to have some extra revenue in January by letting latecomers sneak in before January 10th, but insurers forgo revenue all the time by sticking to preset deadlines. Is this simply a little Christmas generosity on the industry’s part? No, silly: They were threatened by the federal government.

Health industry consultant Kip Piper said HHS doesn’t have the authority to enforce what he calls these “political requests” [for deadline extensions]. But HHS said it will consider insurers’ cooperation now when it decides which ones can participate on the insurance exchanges next year.

“They are simultaneously asking insurers to assume the cost and risk of non-payment, taking public credit for it, and threatening insurers with loss of business if they don’t comply,” said Piper, a former government and insurance industry official.

Avik Roy made the same point a few days ago, pointing to the “menacing language” used by HHS in its new regulations urging insurers to comply with its extension “requests.” That should be illegal, says Roy, but is there any insurer bold enough to sue the feds over it, knowing that they might retaliate by booting them from the exchanges just as millions of new consumers are being forced onto them? This is why you don’t do business with the mafia: When they “ask” you for something, there’s no way to say no.

By the way, via Guy Benson, Ezra Klein’s Wonkblog has gone from arguing that the enrollment numbers are far less important than the demographic make-up of the exchange risk pools to arguing that it’s less important than you think that the risk pools contain lots of “young invincibles.” That’s the best evidence yet that HHS is lagging badly in signing up young adults.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Monday, December 16, 2013

Quotes of the day

Quotesoftheday postedat8:01

Quotes of the day

posted at 8:01 pm on December 15, 2013 by Allahpundit

Why do Republicans even bother trying to delay Obamacare? President Barack Obama’s doing it all by himself…

Sure, Obama’s not doing the things Republicans have suggested — push off centerpieces like the individual mandate, or even put the entire law on hold for a year. But piece by piece, the Obama administration keeps giving itself extensions on smaller parts of the law, because there’s always some piece that isn’t quite ready

There was also a tone to Thursday’s announcement that was close to pleading for help, as the administration urged insurers to cut the new customers a bit of slack — looking the other way if they sign up a few days late, and making their coverage retroactive if they pay a bit late…

“For all his attacks on our efforts, no one has done more to undermine the implementation of Obamacare than the president himself,” said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner.

***

The latest deadline delay for the Affordable Care Act could lead to even more enrollment problems and place a bigger burden on insurance companies, experts say.

The Department of Health and Human Services announced Thursday it would require insurance companies to accept premium payments for plans that start on Jan. 1 up until Dec. 31-eight days from the already once delayed date of Dec. 23.

“This will kill insurance companies,” says Devon Herrick, senior analyst at the National Center for Policy Analysis, of the latest deadline extension. “I don’t think insurance companies will be there on New Year’s Day figuring out what they owe, who they need to bill and who has legitimate coverage. You can see what a mess this is—I can’t imagine insurance companies can solve this in one day, especially when that day is a holiday.”…

“Is this possible? Yes. But is it practical? No. The challenge here is that the U.S. government is saying the transaction that happens to enroll someone is fundamentally easy, when it is fundamentally complicated.”

***

Enrollment records for close to 15,000 HealthCare.gov shoppers were not initially transmitted to the insurance plans they selected, according to a preliminary federal estimate released Saturday.

While these cases pose a challenge for the Obama administration, officials say they believe the situation is improving. Since early December, fewer than 1 percent of HealthCare.gov enrollments did not make their way to health insurance plans.

***

Insurers said that they had found many discrepancies and errors and that the government was overstating the improvements in HealthCare.gov.

In some instances, they said, the federal government reported that the home address for a new policyholder was outside an insurer’s service area. In other cases, a child was listed as the main subscriber — the person responsible for paying premiums — and parents were listed as dependents.

In some cases, children were enrolled in a policy by the federal government and parents were left off, or vice versa. In other cases, the government mixed up the members of a family: A child or spouse was listed two or three times in the same application in late November. Such errors can have financial implications, increasing the amount of premiums that a family is required to pay.

While some of the problems were discovered in the last few days, insurers said that they had previously reported many of the errors to the “help desk” at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and that the problems remained unresolved.

***

Some people who picked a health plan as far back as October through the Covered California exchange say insurers are telling them they still have no record of their enrollment. As a result, bills haven’t gone out and consumers can’t pay their initial premium to ensure coverage takes effect in less than three weeks.

Thomas Gallo of Glendora signed up his wife and son on the second day of enrollment in October. After hearing nothing for weeks, he said, he was told by the state in late November that his application and some others had been lost.

Gallo reapplied over the phone, but he said he still has no confirmation from Blue Shield of California about his family’s Silver plan. Gallo, a retired accountant, has Medicare for himself.

“The back end is so backed up, and no one can give me an answer,” said Gallo, a strong supporter of President Obama’s healthcare law. “What happens if we don’t get coverage by Jan. 1? There are real problems here.”

***

For the second week in a row, the Washington Healthplanfinder website is down, and it’s causing problems for people who are dealing with billing issues. Some of them say the website is mistakenly debiting their accounts

The Bruners enrolled for insurance on the Washington Healthplanfinder website, last October. They say they selected the bill pay date to be December 24th. Instead the Washington Healthplanfinder drafted the 835 dollar premium Monday…

One viewer emailed KING 5 saying, “They drafted my account this morning for a second time.”…

“We’ve got to figure out how to get money to pay the bills for the next week or two until we have another check come through,” said Josh Bruner. “It’s just crazy.”

***

“We’re encouraging [insurers] to offer retroactive coverage,” Michael Hash, director of HHS’s office of health reform, told reporters on a Thursday afternoon conference call. “For example, to allow someone who signs up and pays on January 5 to get coverage with a retroactive start date of January the first.”

“Many insurers do retroactive coverage in the current market,” HHS policy director Chiquita Brooks-Lasure said later on the same call. But health care industry consultant Bob Laszewski says that isn’t true.

“I don’t know what the hell they’re talking about,” Laszewski tells THE WEEKLY STANDARD. “I’ve been in the health insurance business for 40 years. You sign it prospectively, not retrospectively.”

Indeed, if people could buy insurance retroactively, why would they buy it when they’re healthy? If you could get your medical bills covered from a January 3 car accident by signing up on January 10, there would be no reason to pay a premium in December.

***

“What’s wrong with ‘urging’ insurers to offer free care?” you might ask. “That’s not the same as forcing them to offer free care.” Except that the government is using the full force of its regulatory powers, under Obamacare, to threaten insurers if they don’t comply. All you have to do is read the menacing language in the new regulations that HHS published this week, in which HHS says it may throw otherwise qualified health plans off of the exchanges next year if they don’t comply with the government’s “requests.”…

The administration could pay insurers to cover up for its mistakes. But that would lead to criticism—as it has in other instances—that the White House is lawlessly throwing taxpayer money at insurers to, well, cover up for its mistakes. So, instead, they’re asking insurers to pay for the mistakes

[I]t will be up to insurers to sue to protect their rights. Like battered wives, they are unlikely to do so. Companies like Aetna and Humana are so terrified that the administration will run them out of business that they are more likely to do what they’re told, and quietly pass the costs on to consumers. The chaos and recriminations have made insurers like UnitedHealth, who have largely stayed out of the exchanges, look smart.

***

This tells us a few things, I think. The first is that the administration is deeply worried about people who had insurance they liked who are now going into January with either no insurance or with insurance that doesn’t cover doctors and treatments they’re receiving. And because the administration has access to the enrollment data, this further suggests to me that the enrollment spike we saw at the very end of November and the beginning of December has not reached a pace at which they can reasonably expect that the 5 million people who had their plans canceled will have replaced their coverage by Jan. 1. There’s no way to know for sure, of course, but if enrollment was still rapidly accelerating, they wouldn’t need to basically beg insurers to help them eke out as many December enrollments as possible.

The second thing it tells you is that the administration has reached the limits of its November strategy of using last-minute rule-making to implement on-the-fly changes to the law. Most in the latest round aren’t even rules, or even changes to rules; they’re requests. The insurers may well go along — they, too, have a big stake in Obamacare’s success. But by making the request in public, the administration has given itself room to blame insurers when people lose access to doctors, drugs or insurance. Now they can say, “Well, we asked them not to do that.”

Day by day, the administration is putting more of the onus on insurers to make this market work — voluntarily, out of the goodness of their hearts or at least out of mutual self-interest. In some ways, that may be a good thing; insurers are pretty good at delivering insurance, so giving them a freer hand may make sense. But, of course, it hands an awful lot of power to insurers that just a few months ago the administration seemed committed to taking away. It probably wouldn’t be doing that if it weren’t worried about how things are going.

***

Via RCP.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Chaos: HHS “asks” insurers to extend multiple ObamaCare deadlines

Chaos:HHS“asks”insurerstoextendmultipleObamaCare

Chaos: HHS “asks” insurers to extend multiple ObamaCare deadlines

posted at 7:41 pm on December 12, 2013 by Allahpundit

The December 23rd enrollment deadline? Time to move that to next month. The deadline to pay your first month of premiums? Let’s go ahead and move that back too. Emergency treatment needed from an out-of-network provider? It’d be swell if that was covered the same way in-network treatments are. And what if your coverage is temporarily screwed up in January when you desperately need your prescriptions refilled? HHS “strongly encourages” insurers to pick up the slack.

In other words, they’re finally realizing that lots of people who had planned to have coverage next month won’t have it, whether because of their own procrastination, HHS’s technological incompetence, or the mind-boggling logistical problems that have been forced on insurers by Obama’s screw-ups and ass-covering political “fixes.” So now they’re going to pile another bunch of “fixes” on them — mere suggestions, wink-wink — and hope for the best, and if chaos ensues anyway in January, it’ll be insurers who are scapegoated.

Phil Klein’s right: It’s panic time in the White House. Let’s let this be the end of the “things are working better now” propaganda.

Among the guidance the HHS announced:

– It is requiring insurers to accept payments until Dec. 31 for coverage starting on Jan. 1. It is also “urging” insurers to give individuals more time beyond that to pay for coverage. In other words, if somebody pays for coverage in the middle of January, HHS is asking insurers to retroactively make that person’s coverage effective as of Jan. 1. HHS is also asking insurers to cover individuals who offer a “down payment,” even if that payment only covers part of the first month’s premiums.

– In a press release, HHS said it was also “strongly encouraging insurers to treat out-of-network providers as in-network to ensure continuity of care for acute episodes or if the provider was listed in their plan’s provider directory as of the date of an enrollee’s enrollment.”

– HHS is also “strongly encouraging insurers to refill prescriptions covered under previous plans during January.”…

Of course, for insurers who have spent years designing plans to comply with the law, this would present huge and unreasonable logistical hurdles.

To put it slightly differently:

Would all/any of these new fixes be illegal if HHS flatly required them? I realize it’s gauche at this point to ask whether the King can rightly suspend elements of the law that are inconvenient to him, but I feel obliged to put it out there. Maybe that’s why they’re merely being “suggested” instead of mandated — if the insurers extend the deadlines “voluntarily” (wink wink) then there are no legal implications. My hunch, though, is that the fixes are being made optional more for CYA reasons than for legal ones. If HHS mandates them — and according to CNBC, they might yet mandate an enrollment extension if Healthcare.gov has another meltdown — then next month’s havoc can be laid squarely on them. If they merely suggest them, then the havoc is really kinda sorta the fault of insurers who should have done a better job gauging whether extending the deadlines were feasible. And if an insurer decides not to extend the deadline and people are angry that they weren’t able to enroll in time, well, then that’s just a bad-apple insurer showing why they’re a bad apple.

In other news today, because Healthcare.gov’s doing so amazingly well now, HHS announced that they’re going to extend the deadline for phasing out state high-risk pools from December 31st until January. Even some sick people, who have the strongest incentive to transition to the new exchanges, can’t get enrolled in time.


Related Posts:

Source from: hotair