Obama's Healthcare

[zimmy]

Never mind... you apparently don't get the question. This thread is about a bs report that a kids health care costs doubled because of the health care law. You say moronic statements about me and Obama knowing more than the actuaries. Completely irrelevant to this thread. You post info that costs will be 11% higher than if the law hadn't passed. What the difference in coverage is with those increases is irrelevant, as I had no interest in discussing details of the law beyond whether it is legitimate and factual that a law that hasn't gone into full effect doubled a poor Christian boys health care costs. Even in your attempts to disprove your fantasy that I have said the law will decrease costs, you reinforce what I have said in my comments about the original post. The law didn't double his costs, even though the right is running that it did. Why do they have to lie and distort everything? Maybe I'll give you a try again after the summer. Later, Jim.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Never mind... you apparently don't get the question. This thread is about a bs report that a kids health care costs doubled because of the health care law. You say moronic statements about me and Obama knowing more than the actuaries. Completely irrelevant to this thread. You post info that costs will be 11% higher than if the law hadn't passed. What the difference in coverage is with those increases is irrelevant, as I had no interest in discussing details of the law beyond whether it is legitimate and factual that a law that hasn't gone into full effect doubled a poor Christian boys health care costs. Even in your attempts to disprove your fantasy that I have said the law will decrease costs, you reinforce what I have said in my comments about the original post. The law didn't double his costs, even though the right is running that it did. Why do they have to lie and distort everything? Maybe I'll give you a try again after the summer. Later, Jim.

"This thread is about a bs report that a kids health care costs doubled because of the health care law"

I addressed that directly. One of the provisions in Obamacare is that there is a limit in the surcharge that insurance companies can levy on older and unhealthy people. When companies must charge less for old and sick people, that necessarily means that young and healthy people (like students) must pay more. Additionally, the college kid has mandatory higher limits on maximum benefits. That means his carrier must provide more benefit, which means he must pay more.

Obamacare mandated that the college kids get more coverage, and more significantly, Obamacare mandates that we reduce the discount that we give to young, healthy people.

Obamacare increases benefits, thus it drives up costs. My cat understands this by now. Obama himself is no longer claiming that Obamacare won't increase costs.

Either you are wrong, or everyone else is wrong, and the "everyone else" includes smart people who crunth these numbers for a living.

Good day.

[zimmy]

Is there anyone out there that can at least put up a link that shows what has been implemented in the law that doubled this kids insurance? Despite the nonsense of some people on here, I am not making any claims either way about whether costs will rise. All I can find though is that a school or a student "claims" the law is causing prices to double. It reminds me of when yozuri darters went from $9 to $16. Yozuri claimed it was because the price of magnetic balls went up, but there was little evidence in the metals market that a few tiny balls should cause an 80% increase in the lure. Oh well, we won't have to worry about it anyway, the Mayan calender ends soon so the end of civilization is right around the corner.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Is there anyone out there that can at least put up a link that shows what has been implemented in the law that doubled this kids insurance? Despite the nonsense of some people on here, I am not making any claims either way about whether costs will rise. All I can find though is that a school or a student "claims" the law is causing prices to double. It reminds me of when yozuri darters went from $9 to $16. Yozuri claimed it was because the price of magnetic balls went up, but there was little evidence in the metals market that a few tiny balls should cause an 80% increase in the lure. Oh well, we won't have to worry about it anyway, the Mayan calender ends soon so the end of civilization is right around the corner.

"Is there anyone out there that can at least put up a link that shows what has been implemented in the law that doubled this kids insurance?"

I posted something along those lines. I'll do it again...Here is the link that itemizes some of the features of Obamacare that will increase costs...

Obamacare Increases Health Insurance Premiums

Some key items...here's the biggie for college kids...

Minimized Youth Discount

"The average 60-year-old consumes about six times as much health care as the average 20-year-old, but Obamacare mandates that insurers charge the oldest individuals in the risk pool no more than three times the lowest rate. As a result, young individuals will pay much more than the actuarially fair amount for their premiums. Management consulting firm Oliver Wyman estimated that premiums will rise by 45 percent for those age 18–24,"

Do you understand Zimmy?? Among other things,Obamacare mandates that companies must reduce the discount they give to young, healthy folks, like college students...

Some other drivers...

Mandated Benefits

Obamacare mandates that insurance companies cover a minimum package of benefits. The more comprehensive and generous the insurance, however, the more expensive it will be. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the benefit mandates in Obamacare—in combination with the limited cost-sharing—will increase premiums 27–30 percent in the individual market and up to 3 percent in the small group market

" Elimination of the Good Health Discount

In order to charge individuals a fair premium, insurers in the individual market engage in underwriting to determine applicant risk. That is, healthy individuals are less of a risk and thus enjoy lower premiums, the same way good drivers get discounts on their auto insurance. Obamacare bans this type of underwriting to rate premiums. The result will be higher premiums for the vast majority of individuals who are relatively healthy"

No Annual or Lifetime Limits on Health Benefits and Mandated Coverage of Children Under 26

These provisions are already taking effect, and they raise the cost of providing insurance. Several insurers have attributed a portion of their annual rate hikes for this year to provisions in Obamacare

"Obamacare includes many new taxes, including a 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices and annual fees on health insurance providers. A tax placed on insurance companies or medical device companies will be passed to consumers in the form of higher premiums"

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Several insurers have attributed a portion of their annual rate hikes for this year to provisions in Obamacare

One last thing Thanks for pointing this out. A portion makes sense. Based on all available information, the school claiming the law doubled the cost for the kid is almost certainly a distortion or, worse yet, a lie.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

The President and the Democratic leaders in Congress championed this bill and they said it was going to lower the cost of healthcare,” not according to a young Christian College student whose health insurance is going to double from about 600 a year to over 1300 dollars when he returns to college in the fall. He is begining to learn what "Hope and Change is." I am sure other colleges will be dropping their health plan and opting for Obama Care.

This is only the beginning, those of us that have health care thru our employer will be dropped, employer will pay the fine for dropping us which is a small price compared to what they will be saving in the long run.

those 1200 or so (many more applied for and denied)Obamacare Waivers were probably unecessary...right???

Student Health Insurance - NJCU :: Office of the Controller - NJCU :: Office of the Controller

In fact, the NJ State Colleges and Universities have come together to develop a group plan in an effort to keep costs as low as possible, while offering comprehensive student insurance package. The increases indicated are caused by the Public Health Service Act and the Affordable Care Act signed into law by President Obama in 2010. A provision of that act that is now in effect requires that College and University Student Health Plans meet certain minimum coverage requirements.

In addition to the State mandates, the United States Department of Health and Human Services has issued proposed that would establish rules for student health insurance coverage under the Public Health Service Act and the Affordable Care Act. Some of the major coverage changes are as follows:

■Plan maximum goes from $50,000 to $100,000
■Rx maximum increases $1000.00 to $100,000

■Wellness benefit increases to $100,000 without co-pay or deductible for in-network services.

William Paterson University - Health Insurance - Explanation of increase

Health Insurance - Explanation of increase-This year student health insurance cost will be increasing from $250 to $715 annually for undergraduate and from $361 to $1,033 for graduate students. In addition to the State mandates, the United State Department of Health and Human Services has issued proposed regulation that would establish rules for student health insurance coverage under the Public Health Service Act and the Affordable Care Act.

As the new federal health care laws and regulations are implemented over the next several years we know that we will be required to improve the level of coverage offered by our plan and consequently the cost of the premium will continue to increase due exclusively to those mandated changes.



Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/0...#storylink=cpy

MOSCOW — The Idaho State Board of Education opted Wednesday to keep its mandate that full-time public college and university students be insured.
Several institutions asked the board to suspend the rule for a year because of unexpected sharp increases in premiums. But the board ultimately decided the risk of having uninsured students outweighed the increased costs they will have to absorb.
In 2009, Lewis-Clark State College, Boise State University and Idaho State University joined in a consortium to purchase student health insurance in an effort to keep down costs. The effort largely worked until this year

The premium increases, revealed earlier this month, would hike costs at LCSC from $1,232 per year to $1,703, a 38.2 percent jump. ISU students will see a 46.5 percent increase to $1,861, and Boise State University students a 30.9 percent increase to $2,124.


UI financial Vice President Ron Smith spoke strongly against a yearlong waiver of the mandate due to the fear that healthy students would opt to go uninsured and shrink the pool of participants. That would likely lead to higher premiums next year.




http://www.northampton.edu/Student-R...-Insurance.htm

Anticipated Student Insurance Rate Increase


New healthcare reform legislation mandates that 2012-2013 student insurance plans must provide increased coverage. These benefit requirements are expected to increase the cost of the student insurance plan. Premiums are anticipated to be between $1,400-$1,800 per year.

I checked(that's up from $654)




http://articles.courant.com/2010-09-...-health-reform

State OKs Anthem Rate Hikes, Some More Than 20 Percent

September 17, 2010|By MATTHEW STURDEVANT,

The state's largest health insurer was granted rate hikes Friday that will be well over 20 percent for some plans, drawing sharp criticism from the attorney general.

Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield in Connecticut requested a wide range of premium increases, which will take effect Oct. 1, to cover the costs of new benefits required by federal health reform. Higher prices mostly affect new members shopping for a health plan on the individual market rather than people who have group plans through an employer or some other organization.


The Connecticut Department of Insurance approved Anthem's request without changes, including a boost of as much as 22.9 percent just to comply with one provision: eliminating annual spending limits per customer

[zimmy]

I will look into the details of scott's post to confirm. I went to the first link.
"For the 2012-13 academic year student health insurance cost will be increasing from $715 to $855."
Student Health Insurance - NJCU :: Office of the Controller - NJCU :: Office of the Controller

That is about a 15% increase. Pretty sure that isn't double.

[Joe]

Colleges are notorious for hiding what are really tuition hikes in various fees. I'm not saying the health costs doubled or whatever. Just that the methods that colleges employ to get to the real cost of attending are arbitrary.
They try and keep the tuition levels competitive with competing institutions - because that's what Mom and Dad go by. Once students are accepted and kids have gone to orientation, and have established a sense that this is the right school - then.....fee shock! Followed by textbook shock.

[Raven]

[zimmy]

It is nice to see all my quotes, but just to be clear, the question about the chain email... it was actually a chain email

[zimmy]

Premium Rate Increase Requests For Two More Health Insurers In Six States Deemed Excessive

In response to health insurance premium rate increases that it deemed excessive, the Department of Health and Human Services has called on Assurant Inc.'s Time Insurance Company and Bedford Park, Ill.-based United Security Life and Health Insurance Company to either offer rebates to customers in six states or rescind premium hikes ranging up to 24 percent.

The recently announced rate hikes affect about 60,000 individual and small group insurance customers in Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, and Wyoming. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires health insurers to justify premium increases of more than 10 percent but does not authorize the government to rescind those rates that are found excessive or unreasonable. In March, two insurers in nine states were found to have requested excessive premium rate increases. This latest review results pertain to two other health insurers in six of the nine states for which premium rate increases were first reviewed.


In these six states, the rate increases requested by Time Insurance for individual and small group insurance were identical to those requested by John Alden Life Insurance Company, another health insurance company doing business in the same states—for example 18 percent for individual and 23 percent for small group insurance. United Security requested the highest rate increases, 20 percent in Arizona and 26 percent in Louisiana, but up to 34 percent in Nebraska (still pending review).

"These increases are unreasonable for enrollees of these plans," said Gary Cohen, director of the HHS Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight. Cohen said the rate changes also failed to meet federal standards requiring health insurers to devote at least 80 percent of higher premium revenues to health care services.

Health Reform Talk: Premium Rate Increase Requests For Two More Health Insurers In Six States Deemed Excessive

[RIJIMMY]

Here you go Zim
I believe Politico is generally considered an un-biased source

Health care reform: Four inconvenient truths - POLITICO.com

[zimmy]

Thanks Jimmy. A couple things to take from it:

"It’s not clear whether a lot of people actually expected premiums to go down — but there’s already a perception that the law has increased the cost of insurance, which is feeding the negative attitudes. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll released this week found that 49 percent believe the law has “significantly increased the price of health insurance.That’s not true. An Aon Hewitt survey of health plans found that health insurance premiums on average rose 12.3 percent in 2011 — but only an average of 1.5 percent can be attributed to the health law. And health premiums had been rising for years before the law was passed."
"
"But what is true is that what most people pay for their insurance — either through higher premiums or bigger co-pays and deductibles — aren’t rising more slowly. That’s because the main drivers of rising costs — including technology, expensive new drugs, an aging population, a surge in chronic diseases, and Americans’ propensity to use a lot more health care than many other countries, even if it doesn’t make them any healthier — have nothing to do with the law."

"“President Obama repeatedly promised during the health care debate, ‘if you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it,’” House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans said in a statement Friday...Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) cited the 20 million figure, saying: This law keeps getting worse and worse; it needs to be repealed.
Supporters of the law say it’s not as bad as all that. The 20 million figure is the extreme scenario, they point out — CBO says that 3 million to 5 million is more likely. And that’s out of the 161 million Americans who would have had workplace health insurance before the law was passed.
Even in that case, the number is misleading, according to Topher Spiro of the Center for American Progress, because CBO says about 3 million wouldn’t be forced out. They would leave their workplace coverage voluntarily — possibly for better coverage, with subsidies, through the law’s new health insurance exchange"


The devil is in the details on both sides of the issue.

Read more: Health care reform: Four inconvenient truths - POLITICO.com

[RIJIMMY]

of course you ignored Obamas promises. Why the costs are rising is irrelevant. Obama promised they would decline, they have not and will not.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

of course you ignored Obamas promises. Why the costs are rising is irrelevant. Obama promised they would decline, they have not and will not.

I haven't ignored that Jimmy, everything I have posted is relevant to the question of the legitimacy of the article. I don't know specifically what his claims were, but I will look into it. I believe it center more on controlling costs, not that they will be lower than they are today. I don't know that for sure and it is beside the point.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I don't know specifically what his claims were, but I will look into it. I believe it center more on controlling costs, not that they will be lower than they are today. I don't know that for sure and it is beside the point.

Zimmy, Obama said costs would decrease. I have never, ever, heard anyone deny that Obama claimed this.

"http://www.factcheck.org/2008/06/obamas-inflated-health-savings/"

"■Obama says he’ll "lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year”"

OK, how many fishermen on here are paying $2500 less a year for health insurance, thanks to Obamacare...

"it is beside the point"

If the point is whether or not Obama knows his azz from his elbow, his promises are most certainly not besides the point.

Keep your head in the sand, Zimmy. Take yoru head out for the November elections, and listen to the bell, it tolls for thee.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Zimmy, Obama said costs would decrease. I have never, ever, heard anyone deny that Obama claimed this.

"http://www.factcheck.org/2008/06/obamas-inflated-health-savings/"

"■Obama says he’ll "lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year”"

OK, how many fishermen on here are paying $2500 less a year for health insurance, thanks to Obamacare...

You're citing a campaign quote about a specific policy change which isn't necessarily what was implemented as law.

I don't think any discussion on health care costs is valid without a good what if we kept the current course. Even with tort reform and interstate competition (which I support) there still are massive issues.

-spence

[zimmy]

"Obama repeated a version of that vow during debate over the federal law, saying the legislation plus some effort to reduce costs from labor unions, and insurance, drug and medical industries “could save families $2,500 in the coming years – $2,500 per family.” That time, the administration had determined the savings in national expenditures could total $2 trillion over 10 years, and with a little math, that works out to $2,500 a year for a family of four. That assumes the savings happen, that is, and that every penny saved somehow translates to lower prices, lower taxes or higher wages for families.
It should be noted that Obama is promising to slow the rate of growth of premiums or health care spending, so costs would still rise, but not by as much."

FactCheck.org : FactChecking Health Insurance Premiums

This is in reference to the campaign statement I see in Spence's post was addressed above. The savings were based on a switch to IT instead of paper. He should have known that there wouldn't be full implementation and that savings wouldn't necessarily get passed on to consumers.

"Obama says his plan will "lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year," partly through the use of electronic records. But experts say large savings from health IT are unlikely to flow to consumers.

Desroches points out that the average voter may never see the savings that the RAND study postulates. "Definitely insurance companies and federal and state payers would see savings," Desroches says. "I’m not sure individuals will see savings, [except] in the unlikely event that payers realize these savings and pass them on in the form of lower premiums."

FactCheck.org : Obama’s Inflated Health “Savings”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

You're citing a campaign quote about a specific policy change which isn't necessarily what was implemented as law.

I don't think any discussion on health care costs is valid without a good what if we kept the current course. Even with tort reform and interstate competition (which I support) there still are massive issues.

-spence

"You're citing a campaign quote "

wrong, wrong, wrong. The promise of $2500 decreases was a direct claim about Obamacare, which was passed long after the election. Obama made that promise both as a candidate as a sitting president.

"without a good what if we kept the current course"

Zimmy, Obama said premiums would decrease. He was spectacularly wrong.

"Even with tort reform and interstate competition (which I support) there still are massive issues."

On that we agree. And what's worse, that means we both know more about this issue than Obama. Because he claimed that he could magically decrease costs.

Zimmy, all I'm doing is holding the man accountable for what he said...