Obama says 'sorry' to Americans losing health insurance

[Chicog]

It's really difficult for a non-American to figure out <deleted> is going on. I mean, most countries in the world manage to provide their citizens with a "socialist" health-care system of one kind or another. Some are better than others, but nowhere in the whole world do people get ripped off by doctors and hospitals and insurance companies as much as they seem to do in the US of A.

Why is it so difficult for Americans to put together a good citizen-owned healthcare system? (And why get diverted into the playground abuse of the person who happens to be president right now? Casting this distracting abuse at Obama suits the insurance companies very nicely.)

The much admired (by progressive Americans) British NHS is bankrupting the Country and gives you a 47% lower chance of survival for intensive care admissions compared to the current U.S system.

Well firstly it isn't bankrupting the country, the welfare benefit system and the banks are, and secondly, you can twist any stats you want, but no-one in the US without medicare is going to get top notch treatment in an ICU.

So please stop comparing it with the UK system, which doesn't cost the individual that much and doesn't stop you taking out private insurance either.

[NeverSure]

The republicans have long fought to not allow any attempt at getting broad coverage for US citizens. The US is to medical care what driving privileges in Saudi Arabia are to women.

We now have something in place and once you are done jumping up and down and tossing your toys out of the pram, why don't you sit down and get your party to start fixing what you don't like.

Before this debacle, 85% of Americans had health insurance. Some of the remaining 15% were purely irresponsible as is always the case in society.

Doing something for the remaining 15% wasn't considered. Addressing the outrageous costs wasn't considered but rather money was poured to those who create those costs and benefit from them.

"My party" start fixing? The Democrats control the Senate and the White house and Obama flat-out said he wouldn't negotiate with "my party." So the Democrats got what they wanted, following Obama like lemmings, and now we are all stuck with it including Obama who has had to apologize to the American people for the clusterxxxx.

Democrats who are up for re-election next year, who helped push this through are now panicking and meeting with Obama to try to save themselves. Link

"President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and other senior administration officials met privately at the White House on Wednesday with frustrated Senate Democrats facing reelection in 2014 to discuss the botched Obamacare rollout.

The two-hour meeting comes as the Obama administration and congressional Democrats work to assess the political fallout from the health care overhaul’s troubled implementation. Lawmakers passed on the frustration expressed by their constituents and the White House walked through their steps to repair the program." Link

"My party?" Link

How about "the other party" which has control, screwed the pooch, and is panicking?

"President Barack Obama discussed the Affordable Care Act’s disastrously botched rollout with 16 Democratic senators at the White House on Wednesday, including those seen as most vulnerable in the 2014 elections."

"But Senators Mark Begich of Alaska and Mark Udall of Colorado reported back that they gave the president an earful about the embarrassing — and potentially politically crippling — rollout of the insurance marketplaces at the heart of the law."

“It’s absolutely unacceptable in this day and age that the administration can’t deliver on the promises it made..." Link

[F430murci]

Jeez, a little bit of internet knowledge is a dangerous things and no-one seems to have any grasp on the way things are done at hospitals and what areas are out of control as far as health care costs or why . . . A while back, I explained this in pretty good detail and provided real world examples of hospital charges that are the crux of the problem. It is NOT what doctors get paid, what nurses are assigned to do, what a medical director does (incidentally, the medical directors at all of my nursing homes and hospitals do provide direct patient care) . . .

There is good information out there. Below is some a tid bit. I may provide more later, but it is important to digest the below if you really want to get an understanding.

I explained the reason for the discrepancy in pricing that, for some unknown political reason, no one publicly states. Nevertheless, the articles does somewhat illustrate the problems in addition to the up to 10,000 % mark ups on supplies and drugs I illustrated in another thread.

-----

When a patient arrives at Bayonne Hospital Center in New Jersey requiring treatment for the respiratory ailment known as COPD, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, she faces an official price tag of $99,690.

Less than 30 miles away in the Bronx, N.Y., the Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center charges only $7,044 for the same treatment, according to a massive federal database of national health care costs made public on Wednesday.

Americans have long become accustomed to bewilderment and anxiety when confronting health care bills.

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Medicare-Provider-Charge-Data/index.html

Within the nation’s largest metropolitan area, the New York City area, a joint replacement runs anywhere between $15,000 and $155,000. At two hospitals in the Los Angeles area, the cost of the same treatment for pneumonia varies by $100,000, according to the database.

In 1999, average charges billed to Medicare were equal to 104 percent of the cost to provide medical care, according to a report issued last June by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an expert panel that counsels Congress. By 2010, the ratio had more than doubled to 218 percent.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/08/hospital-prices-cost-differences_n_3232678.html

-----

and then we get this

Hospitals are quitting a key Obamacare cost-control program

If you read the above, this headline should come as no surprise.

So ask yourself where the problem really resides, who is really resistant to change and why Obamacare is now failing miserably. It is failing because of industry greed and resistance to costs control of entities with lobbying power.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/22/hospitals-are-quitting-a-key-obamacare-cost-control-program/

[folium]

While I would agree that Obama has dramatically mismanaged what should be/should have been (depending on the outcome) an enduring legacy of providing at least some healthcare for all US citizens irrespective of their wealth (which I would not regard as socialist, more the hallmark of a decent society), when was the last time the US had a decent, effective CEO of a President?

The really scary thing about the nature of the Presidential electoral process and the largely non-competitive/gerrymandered congressional districts is that success boils down to pandering to small numbers of activists and style over substance.

Not a great way to select the leaders of the most powerful nation on Earth....

[NeverSure]

Jeez, a little bit of internet knowledge is a dangerous things and no-one seems to have any grasp on the way things are done at hospitals and what areas are out of control as far as health care costs or why . . . A while back, I explained this in pretty good detail and provided real world examples of hospital charges that are the crux of the problem. It is NOT what doctors get paid, what nurses are assigned to do, what a medical director does (incidentally, the medical directors at all of my nursing homes and hospitals do provide direct patient care) . . .

There is good information out there. Below is some a tid bit. I may provide more later, but it is important to digest the below if you really want to get an understanding.

I explained the reason for the discrepancy in pricing that, for some unknown political reason, no one publicly states. Nevertheless, the articles does somewhat illustrate the problems in addition to the up to 10,000 % mark ups on supplies and drugs I illustrated in another thread.

-----

When a patient arrives at Bayonne Hospital Center in New Jersey requiring treatment for the respiratory ailment known as COPD, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, she faces an official price tag of $99,690.

Less than 30 miles away in the Bronx, N.Y., the Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center charges only $7,044 for the same treatment, according to a massive federal database of national health care costs made public on Wednesday.

Americans have long become accustomed to bewilderment and anxiety when confronting health care bills. The new database underscores why, revealing the perplexing assortment of prices for medical care, with the details of bills seemingly untethered to any graspable principle.

Even within the same metropolitan area, hospitals charge prices that differ by staggering degrees for the same procedures. People without health insurance pay vastly higher costs for care when less expensive options are often available nearby. Virtually everyone who seeks health care winds up paying inflated prices in one form or another as these stark disparities in price sow inefficiencies throughout the market.

While this basic picture has emerged as the consensus reality among health care experts, their evidence has been primarily anecdotal. Hospitals have protected their price lists -- documents known as charge masters -- as closely guarded secrets.

Their prices are secret no more.

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Medicare-Provider-Charge-Data/index.html

Within the nation’s largest metropolitan area, the New York City area, a joint replacement runs anywhere between $15,000 and $155,000. At two hospitals in the Los Angeles area, the cost of the same treatment for pneumonia varies by $100,000, according to the database.

In 1999, average charges billed to Medicare were equal to 104 percent of the cost to provide medical care, according to a report issued last June by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an expert panel that counsels Congress. By 2010, the ratio had more than doubled to 218 percent.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/08/hospital-prices-cost-differences_n_3232678.html

-----

and then we get this

Hospitals are quitting a key Obamacare cost-control program

If you read the above, this headline should come as no surprise.

So ask yourself where the problem really resides, who is really resistant to change and why Obamacare is now failing miserably. It is failing because of industry greed and resistance to costs control of entities with lobbying power.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/22/hospitals-are-quitting-a-key-obamacare-cost-control-program/

You are saying essentially the same thing I said, but reaching a different conclusion.

I said that nothing was done to address the costs of health care when implementing Obamacare. I said that insurers were free to set their own prices or to drop plans entirely, with no controls. I said that many hospitals are refusing to accept many of the Obamacare plans. I said that the first thing that should have been done was to address the costs of health care in America. I gave a couple of ideas which would fit in with what you said.

But I blame that on the leaders who designed and implemented the new system. They got the cart before the horse and set about to pour more money into a broken system. They did it in a rag-tag manner that makes the experience different in each state. They protected the big money interests such as insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, equipment manufacturers, lobbyists and stuck it to the American consumer.

The buck stops with the people who forced this through as it is, and that is Obama and his Democrats.

Oh, and don't accuse me of lacking knowledge. I retired as the head of IT for a 450 bed hospital in the US. We had 3 separate systems. One was for billing, one was for patient care and records, and a brand new one was for the compliance people to meet the then upcoming Obamacare regulations. I mean literally 3 systems with 3 domain controllers, active directories, installed specialty software, etc.

I know how it all works.

[samran]

How would you control costs, Neversure? Serious question.

[F430murci]

Jeez, a little bit of internet knowledge is a dangerous things and no-one seems to have any grasp on the way things are done at hospitals and what areas are out of control as far as health care costs or why . . . A while back, I explained this in pretty good detail and provided real world examples of hospital charges that are the crux of the problem. It is NOT what doctors get paid, what nurses are assigned to do, what a medical director does (incidentally, the medical directors at all of my nursing homes and hospitals do provide direct patient care) . . .

There is good information out there. Below is some a tid bit. I may provide more later, but it is important to digest the below if you really want to get an understanding.

I explained the reason for the discrepancy in pricing that, for some unknown political reason, no one publicly states. Nevertheless, the articles does somewhat illustrate the problems in addition to the up to 10,000 % mark ups on supplies and drugs I illustrated in another thread.

-----

When a patient arrives at Bayonne Hospital Center in New Jersey requiring treatment for the respiratory ailment known as COPD, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, she faces an official price tag of $99,690.

Less than 30 miles away in the Bronx, N.Y., the Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center charges only $7,044 for the same treatment, according to a massive federal database of national health care costs made public on Wednesday.

Americans have long become accustomed to bewilderment and anxiety when confronting health care bills. The new database underscores why, revealing the perplexing assortment of prices for medical care, with the details of bills seemingly untethered to any graspable principle.

Even within the same metropolitan area, hospitals charge prices that differ by staggering degrees for the same procedures. People without health insurance pay vastly higher costs for care when less expensive options are often available nearby. Virtually everyone who seeks health care winds up paying inflated prices in one form or another as these stark disparities in price sow inefficiencies throughout the market.

While this basic picture has emerged as the consensus reality among health care experts, their evidence has been primarily anecdotal. Hospitals have protected their price lists -- documents known as charge masters -- as closely guarded secrets.

Their prices are secret no more.

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/Medicare-Provider-Charge-Data/index.html

Within the nation’s largest metropolitan area, the New York City area, a joint replacement runs anywhere between $15,000 and $155,000. At two hospitals in the Los Angeles area, the cost of the same treatment for pneumonia varies by $100,000, according to the database.

In 1999, average charges billed to Medicare were equal to 104 percent of the cost to provide medical care, according to a report issued last June by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an expert panel that counsels Congress. By 2010, the ratio had more than doubled to 218 percent.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/08/hospital-prices-cost-differences_n_3232678.html

-----

and then we get this

Hospitals are quitting a key Obamacare cost-control program

If you read the above, this headline should come as no surprise.

So ask yourself where the problem really resides, who is really resistant to change and why Obamacare is now failing miserably. It is failing because of industry greed and resistance to costs control of entities with lobbying power.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/22/hospitals-are-quitting-a-key-obamacare-cost-control-program/

You are saying essentially the same thing I said, but reaching a different conclusion.

I said that nothing was done to address the costs of health care when implementing Obamacare. I said that insurers were free to set their own prices or to drop plans entirely, with no controls. I said that many hospitals are refusing to accept many of the Obamacare plans. I said that the first thing that should have been done was to address the costs of health care in America. I gave a couple of ideas which would fit in with what you said.

But I blame that on the leaders who designed and implemented the new system. They got the cart before the horse and set about to pour more money into a broken system. They did it in a rag-tag manner that makes the experience different in each state. They protected the big money interests such as insurance companies, doctors, hospitals, equipment manufacturers, lobbyists and stuck it to the American consumer.

The buck stops with the people who forced this through as it is, and that is Obama and his Democrats.

Oh, and don't accuse me of lacking knowledge. I retired as the head of IT for a 450 bed hospital in the US. We had 3 separate systems. One was for billing, one was for patient care and records, and a brand new one was for the compliance people to meet the then upcoming Obamacare regulations. I mean literally 3 systems with 3 domain controllers, active directories, installed specialty software, etc.

I know how it all works.

I did not mean to imply that post toward anything you said except that some medical director do provide care. Medical directors at nursing homes are actually the only doctors that provides care, although they usually just send NPs and go in an audit charts, write scripts and see patients once a month per guidelines.

[Loptr]

Sorry hardly does it Mr President. It is within your power to change the restrictions on policy types and coverage, but you won't. So platitudes will have to do.

Millions are losing their health care coverage in the US while being forced to replace them with policies at much higher rates and deductibles. Once again the insurance companies have struck gold on the backs of the middle class. Ironically, the very people Mr Obama was trying to protect.

This incapable nimrod of a leader allowed the insurance companies to insist on dozens of provisions that were predatory, and were never doing to benefit anyone except these heinous companies. He allowed the mandatory provision which stated this:

1. U.S. citizens living outside of the United States but who are not bona fide residents of a foreign country are required to have health insurance or face fines.
   If you:
   a) have told your country of residence that you are not a resident of that country
   and
   are not required to pay income tax in your country of residence,
   then you are not a bona fide resident of that country.
   If you don’t meet these stipulations—or any of the other listed IRS requirements—and you do not purchase health insurance, then you could face fines in 2014 of $285 per family (US$95 for individuals)—or 1% of your income, whichever is the greater amount... That amount will rise to a whopping $2,085 per family (US$695 for individuals) or 2.5% of your income by 2016.
   To avoid these fines, it’s in your best interest to purchase at least minimum essential coverage.
   Good news if you are entitled to Medicare, however: Medicare qualifies as minimum essential coverage. If you’re eligible for Medicare, you won’t be at risk of fines.

So, he essentially set up nearly all ex-pets to be fined by the IRS for NOT HAVING health care insurance by an American company. Even if you are covered over here, that DOES NOT COUNT, and will not be considered by this predatory law. He essentially allowed this heinous practice on his watch. He could have fought it. He did not. He usually does not. His administration is not about fighting for the American people. It is about representing the interests of corporate America. Obamacare is a travesty for the average American. And it seems to be an excuse for government overreach.

The one saving grace in this entire debate is that the only way the US government (IRS) can extract a fine from taxpayers is if they collect it from Income Tax Refunds. In other words, if you never get a refund from the IRS on your annual federal tax return, you can never be levied this ACA tax for failure to comply. Since I have not received a refund check from the IRS in over 30 years, I doubt I will ever have to worry about non-compliance.

[Loptr]

To the Obamacare defenders: If things are really going so well, why is Obama apologizing?

This disaster (unofficially but worldwide) has his name on it and will be his legacy.

The Democrats fought hard for this. No Republican ever voted for it. Now Obama and the Democrats own it.

They protected the big money - the insurance companies, drug companies, equipment manufacturers, doctors and lobbyists et al, and screwed the average American. All of the above including insurance companies are free to charge what they want or even refuse care or policies, and the American public has to pay for it or pay a fine.

This is a long way from being over, politically.

Which is exactly why a Single-Payer system will never work in the US. In order to implement Single-Payer, it means the destruction of the entire health care insurance business in the US. Which will happen about the same time the cows come home.

[Loptr]

All so totally predictable... Can't understand why ANYone, in EITHER party, didn't know from the moment it became widely known that legislators weren't even bothering to READ the bill, that this was one of the inevitable outcomes. ...like credibility was EVER this guy's strong suit!

Get your laugh tracks ready boys & girls, because all the fun is merely just beginning!

Because they were told by the Senate Leader at the time, Nancy Pelosi, that they HAD to PASS the Bill before they could find out what's in it. How f'ed up is that?

You think I'm joking?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU

[NeverSure]

How would you control costs, Neversure? Serious question.

Well I gave a couple of examples Here.

Another is that insurance companies aren't allowed to sell insurance across state lines. That means that we have 50 different systems with 50 different insurance commissioners and not enough competition in each state. A simple change that would allow an insurance company to sell in any state would increase competition greatly, and surely lower premiums for the consumer.

A lot of paper shuffling required by the federal government should stop. The government seems very good at making things complicated and expensive.

Tort reform would help. Doctors and hospitals pay a huge amount of money for malpractice insurance because the US is so litigious. Put some caps on awards, and require the plaintiff to pay the legal costs of the defendant if the defendant prevailed. That would bring only the most serious and obvious cases to trial and the awards would be reasonable.

This isn't health care, but it's so outrageous that it shows the need for tort reform in the US. Last summer a woman in Oregon was awarded $18.6 million dollars because a credit rating agency failed to fix an error in her credit report. Yes they screwed up repeatedly and yes they caused the woman a lot of grief, but $18.6 large? Outrageous? Link

The list could go on but the gains would be enormous.

[F430murci]

How would you control costs, Neversure? Serious question.

Well I gave a couple of examples Here.

Another is that insurance companies aren't allowed to sell insurance across state lines. That means that we have 50 different systems with 50 different insurance commissioners and not enough competition in each state. A simple change that would allow an insurance company to sell in any state would increase competition greatly, and surely lower premiums for the consumer.

A lot of paper shuffling required by the federal government should stop. The government seems very good at making things complicated and expensive.

Tort reform would help. Doctors and hospitals pay a huge amount of money for malpractice insurance because the US is so litigious. Put some caps on awards, and require the plaintiff to pay the legal costs of the defendant if the defendant prevailed. That would bring only the most serious and obvious cases to trial and the awards would be reasonable.

This isn't health care, but it's so outrageous that it shows the need for tort reform in the US. Last summer a woman in Oregon was awarded $18.6 million dollars because a credit rating agency failed to fix an error in her credit report. Yes they screwed up repeatedly and yes they caused the woman a lot of grief, but $18.6 large? Outrageous? Link

The list could go on but the gains would be enormous.

Tort reform is not the problem, but it is an easy target.

I represent the hospitals, doctors and nursing homes. I have clients in states where tort reform is pretty restrictive such as Texas, Florida, Mississippi and now Tennessee. Guess what? This has done nothing to decrease cost of premium and insurance companies just take advantage of this to increase their profit margins for investors.

Prior to tort reform in these states, it was already exceedingly hard to sue doctors and hospitals. No one files medical malpractices unless damages are huge and liability is a slam dunk. Why? Because doctors never settle no matter what and the insurance policies covering them require their consent. They will not settle for a litany of reasons which also includes a three strike type of law that most states have. Plaintiff's lawyers know this and realize the average costs to take a med mal case to trial is $ 50,000 to $ 100,000. They will not touch these cases unless a slam dunk, but alas the media and dim whits with agendas state otherwise.

The fact is 98 % of medical malpractices are never even known to the public. A very small percentage of the ones known are pursued. The number of people or injured or killed daily by medical malpractice that results in no litigation is actually a pretty sad statistic. The sadder part is that the costs of caring for those injured or familyies losing their bread winner is passed on to those that can least afford it under our system.

Neversure, I have to say that you citing tort reform as a problem shows your complete lack of grasp of this topic. You may have worked IT in a hospital, but . . . sorry bud . . .IT people are just as clueless as Jane Doe society about the real issues and medical malpractice. You think you know something, but you don't. I am on QA and set up peer review committees. I should not be saying what I am saying, but my client's still need me nonetheless. I also feel like the tort system keeps people honest and protect people.

[NxaiPan]

Ok so what is the answer to the lack of healthcare for some 49 million Americans?

Is it just a case of, tough luck, earn more and be able to afford the premiums?

Or is it a case of, if you can't hack it go somewhere else?

Is this just part of the American Dream?

[Publicus]

Sure, Obamacare is a nice utopian program where everyone is treated to affordable healthcare. It is another social engineering project trying to provide everything for everyone. The problem is nothing is equal in this world. Why not extrapolate health care to the whole world and let's take care of everyone? I am not saying that there aren't needed changes but this plan is a "clusterfu*k". Sorry but this is the icing on the cake in my book as to how the fools in Washington, D.C. are inept at doing anything.

To your situation, I am making an assumption from what you stated in your post but it sounds like you are living in Thailand on a fixed retirement income at a level that would give you a subsidy and that you are not yet 65 and eligible for medicare so you probably retired earlier than most. Living in Thailand probably means your expenses are not as much as they would be in the USA. But if you were in the USA on a fixed retirement income and just making ends meet the $150 might be next to impossible. I know people who just cannot afford this program even with the subsidy. For many people back in the USA health care is unaffordable even at $150.00 a month because they are trying to pay rent, utilities, car expenses to get to work, and so forth. But the law states they must enroll and pay. The program was not well thought out. I don't think one person in Congress read the Bill cover to cover because they are all acting surprised at the ramifications of what they passed. Obama was so eager to get this bill passed it was just pushed through with no debate and no hearings to speak of and we know which party pushed it through. Do you suppose Obama bothered to read the Bill on which he placed his signature? He lied to the American people over and over during the last campaign. He should just tell the American people he did not have any idea what was going to happen because he had not read it.

Additionally, just whom do you think is picking up the tab for the $250 subsidy to which you would be entitled? It's going to be some young person trying to start his life and maybe trying to save money to purchase a home or condo who is forced to buy health care he doesn't need at the moment probably paying full fare so you can have your subsidy. Why do you think it is so important for them to sign up the younger people? It is to subsidize someone like you. It's probably the most massive tax plan ever created to take money from some to subsidize others so we can all be equal. While I don't know your particular situation and recognizing that you are evidently not participating in the program while living overseas, in theory maybe you should still be working to cover the $400 until you reach medicare age rather than letting someone else foot the bill for your subsidy. Sure there are lots of people who will benefit from this program but there are many more who are finding that the president lied over and over and there are millions of people receiving notices of cancellation and having to now scramble to figure out a program that neither Obama nor the members of Congress can explain and in which they average covered person will end up paying more for their coverage.

For the record I supported Obama in 2008 as he sure put up a good front, but honestly he has only continued to show how completely ill-equipped he was to "run the show". It's like he has been participating in "on the job training" for the past 5 years. We have no domestic policy and no foreign policy. It is like he is holding onto the rudder of a boat hoping it won't crash and sink on his watch.

*Deleted posts edited out*

*Edited*

An unspoken reality of Washington is that Senators or Representatives hardly ever read the legislation they vote on - almost never. If Members of Congress took the huge volume of time required to read every bill they voted on, they'd barely have time from being locked away in their office, phone shut off, to get to the Floor to vote on the bills.

The Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress reads all the bills and writes concise prose expositions of each bill, which are then read by Congressional staff, who then summarize the CRS concise summary to the Member of Congress who employs them as professional personal office staff.

Lobbyists who write the bills Members of Congress sometimes introduce explain the bills to the staffs of other Members of Congress. A particular staff professional then explains the bill to the Senator or Rep who employs the staff professional for the very purpose.

Perhaps this will give some idea of what I'm talking about.

H. R. 3590

One Hundred Eleventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the fifth day of January, two thousand and ten

An Act

Entitled The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Patient Protection

and Affordable Care Act’’.

(TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents of this Act

is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I—QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL AMERICANS

Subtitle A—Immediate Improvements in Health Care Coverage for All Americans

Sec. 1001. Amendments to the Public Health Service Act.

‘

‘PART A—INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP MARKET

TITLE I—QUALITY, AFFORDABLE

HEALTH CARE FOR ALL AMERICANS

Subtitle A—Immediate Improvements in

Health Care Coverage for All Americans

SEC. 1001. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.

Part A of title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act (42

U.S.C. 300gg et seq.) is amended—

(1) by striking the part heading and inserting the following:

‘‘PART A—INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP MARKET

REFORMS’’;

(2) by redesignating sections 2704 through 2707 as sections

2725 through 2728, respectively;

(3) by redesignating sections 2711 through 2713 as sections

2731 through 2733, respectively;

(4) by redesignating sections 2721 through 2723 as sections

2735 through 2737, respectively; and

(5) by inserting after section 2702, the following:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf

[F430murci]

Ok so what is the answer to the lack of healthcare for some 49 million Americans?

Is it just a case of, tough luck, earn more and be able to afford the premiums?

Or is it a case of, if you can't hack it go somewhere else?

Is this just part of the American Dream?

Short answer is drug companies, medical device companies and ridiculous companies that provide low technology like beds, alcohol pads, gowns and etc. are gouging the consumer beyond belief. They have tremendous lobbying power. Who will stand up against them, hopefully the government will eventually. Private insurance just raises premium to cover their bs gouging and that will always be the case. Private insurance and self pay also subsidize the uninsured. The solution is to take it out of the private market to ensure consistent and fair pricing. This will never happen unless we get something like obamacare. I don't necessarily like it, but it is truly the only solution. The problem now is people are screwing it up because whack jobs and tea party folks are killing enrollment. Obamacare needs proper enrollment to correctly allocate risk and reign in costs issues. <deleted> got really messed up because lobby power whose financial lines were being impacted made it a personal financial issue which it should not have been. I can say without a doubt that Obamacare would have resulted in lower premiums for everyone in 3 years had it been implemented, but with all of the bs I do not think it can be implemented. The funny part is whack jobs and political nuts who are so opposed to it will actually be the victims of not having it in the future. They are just too short sighted or blinded by the passion to see it. I am okay either way, but at least I can call a spade a spade.

[NxaiPan]

Ok so what is the answer to the lack of healthcare for some 49 million Americans?

Is it just a case of, tough luck, earn more and be able to afford the premiums?

Or is it a case of, if you can't hack it go somewhere else?

Is this just part of the American Dream?

Short answer is drug companies, medical device companies and ridiculous companies that provide low technology like beds, alcohol pads, gowns and etc. are gouging the consumer beyond belief. They have tremendous lobbying power. Who will stand up against them, hopefully the government will eventually. Private insurance just raises premium to cover their bs gouging and that will always be the case. Private insurance and self pay also subsidize the uninsured. The solution is to take it out of the private market to ensure consistent and fair pricing. This will never happen unless we get something like obamacare. I don't necessarily like it, but it is truly the only solution. The problem now is people are screwing it up because whack jobs and tea party folks are killing enrollment. Obamacare needs proper enrollment to correctly allocate risk and reign in costs issues. <deleted> got really messed up because lobby power whose financial lines were being impacted made it a personal financial issue which it should not have been. I can say without a doubt that Obamacare would have resulted in lower premiums for everyone in 3 years had it been implemented, but with all of the bs I do not think it can be implemented. The funny part is whack jobs and political nuts who are so opposed to it will actually be the victims of not having it in the future. They are just too short sighted or blinded by the passion to see it. I am okay either way, but at least I can call a spade a spade.

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

[Jingthing]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

[Publicus]

How would you control costs, Neversure? Serious question.

Well I gave a couple of examples Here.

Another is that insurance companies aren't allowed to sell insurance across state lines. That means that we have 50 different systems with 50 different insurance commissioners and not enough competition in each state. A simple change that would allow an insurance company to sell in any state would increase competition greatly, and surely lower premiums for the consumer.

A lot of paper shuffling required by the federal government should stop. The government seems very good at making things complicated and expensive.

Tort reform would help. Doctors and hospitals pay a huge amount of money for malpractice insurance because the US is so litigious. Put some caps on awards, and require the plaintiff to pay the legal costs of the defendant if the defendant prevailed. That would bring only the most serious and obvious cases to trial and the awards would be reasonable.

This isn't health care, but it's so outrageous that it shows the need for tort reform in the US. Last summer a woman in Oregon was awarded $18.6 million dollars because a credit rating agency failed to fix an error in her credit report. Yes they screwed up repeatedly and yes they caused the woman a lot of grief, but $18.6 large? Outrageous? Link

The list could go on but the gains would be enormous.

Most lawyers support the Democratic Party while almost all doctors support the Republican Party.

So the view of each in the matter of Torts laws and litigation depends on whether your shingle says J.D. or M.D.

Democratic Party legislators and governors write Torts laws that help the patient plaintiff.

Republican Party legislators and governors write Torts laws that favor the defendant doctor.

Fact and reality.

Republican Party people constantly howl against Torts laws. Don't want 'em, don't support 'em, always try to kill 'em.

Ok so what is the answer to the lack of healthcare for some 49 million Americans?

Is it just a case of, tough luck, earn more and be able to afford the premiums?

Or is it a case of, if you can't hack it go somewhere else?

Is this just part of the American Dream?

The first initial steps towards getting to the answers consists of ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act. Then continue to work from that starting point.

The Republican Party has done nothing historically to deal with your question and opposes anything and everything that would attempt to address your question, or even to begin to address your valid question..

[NxaiPan]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

But what happens if you have the misfortune to be sick, poor and let's say 55...?

[Jingthing]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

But what happens if you have the misfortune to be sick, poor and let's say 55...?

Exactly. That's why the status quo wasn't acceptable. The fight for a truly decent civilized and affordable health care system in the USA ain't over by a long shot. Obamacare is a starting point which may yet be shot down by the obstructionists.

[Ulysses G.]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

But what happens if you have the misfortune to be sick, poor and let's say 55...?

Medicaid is for poor people who don't have health insurance. We need much more, but it is available.

[NxaiPan]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

But what happens if you have the misfortune to be sick, poor and let's say 55...?

Medicaid is for poor people who don't have health insurance. We need much more, but it is available.

Available? How? Where? For whom?

[pmarlin]

And some posters seem to be telling porkies as well:

From the OP:

Thousands of Americans have since received notices from their health insurance companies that their policies will be cancelled.

From Loptr:

Millions are losing their health care coverage

Anyway, get all those toxic anti-Obama juices out of your system. You'll feel better.

Does 52 million work for you? http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/07/207909/analysis-tens-of-millions-could.html

[Publicus]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

But what happens if you have the misfortune to be sick, poor and let's say 55...?

The Medicaid program is for the poor and the indigent.

Medicare, enacted in 1965 by Democrats in control of the Congress and the White House, is for persons aged 65 or older.

Medicaid, enacted in 1965 by Democrats in control of the Congress and the White House, is for the poor and the indigent.

Neither program is sufficient or adequate.

Worse yet, private doctors and private hospitals daily swindle their way through both programs in fraud and abuse since the laws were enacted. This is documented and well known. The fraud and abuse issue is visited and revisited by the Congress and the White House, but the doctors and hospitals have powerful lobbies and lawyers that protect them.

ObamaCare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, begins effectively to address both the inadequacy of Medicare and Medicaid, and the swindling of the taxpayer by so many doctors, hospitals and providers which participate in either program, Medicaid especially. And to protect the patients.

[Baloo22]

Exactly. That's why the status quo wasn't acceptable. The fight for a truly decent civilized and affordable health care system in the USA ain't over by a long shot. Obamacare is a starting point which may yet be shot down by the obstructionists

You say "Obamacare is a starting point...". Pearl Harbor was a starting point also! And, hopefully, Obamacare will be "shot down" / stopped by the obstructionists Peoples representatives in the House fueled in the rage of the American people against this disgusting and corrupt abortion.

What we need is a common-sense approach with honest leader explaining the approach to the American people. For example, start with a medical program that is already working. Move the eligibility age for Medicare down to age 55. Have a trial period for 3-4 years so that problems that come about may be identified and fixed. Then lower the eligibility age to 45 and do the same process. Do a gradual process that allows you to fix problems as they occur. A program like this uses a large part of common sense and would be accepted by many citizens.

Have a president with some integrity and respect of the American people explain the program to the people. And do not make such blatant and knowing lies to them such as Obama has made. Do not lie to the American people with "if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. Period.". And do not then brag about your "Obamacare" while millions are being forced off of the medical plans that they wanted to keep.

[Scott]

Quite a number of off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies have been deleted.

[Baloo22]

well that's karma for you..god help these folk when they get old and sick a few years down the line.

The USA has existing Medicare for the age 65 plus.

But what happens if you have the misfortune to be sick, poor and let's say 55...?

The Medicaid program is for the poor and the indigent.

Medicare, enacted in 1965 by Democrats in control of the Congress and the White House, is for persons aged 65 or older. Medicaid, enacted in 1965 by Democrats in control of the Congress and the White House, is for the poor and the indigent. Neither program is sufficient or adequate.

Worse yet, private doctors and private hospitals daily swindle their way through both programs in fraud and abuse since the laws were enacted. This is documented and well known. The fraud and abuse issue is visited and revisited by the Congress and the White House, but the doctors and hospitals have powerful lobbies and lawyers that protect them.

ObamaCare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, begins effectively to address both the inadequacy of Medicare and Medicaid, and the swindling of the taxpayer by so many doctors, hospitals and providers which participate in either program, Medicaid especially. And to protect the patients.

Do doctors and hospitals swindle and scam medicare and medicaid? Sure it occurs. Fraud and abuse has occurred in the past and will occur in past. That is what auditors, investigators, the FBI, and Federal prosecutors are for.

Your statement that Obamacare will address these problems is nothing but nonsense propaganda. Your Obamacare will do nothing to stop this nor to "effectively to address both the inadequacy of Medicare and Medicaid, and the swindling of the taxpayer by so many doctors, hospitals and providers which participate in either program, Medicaid especially."

[Publicus]

The Medicaid program is for the poor and the indigent.

Medicare, enacted in 1965 by Democrats in control of the Congress and the White House, is for persons aged 65 or older. Medicaid, enacted in 1965 by Democrats in control of the Congress and the White House, is for the poor and the indigent. Neither program is sufficient or adequate.

Worse yet, private doctors and private hospitals daily swindle their way through both programs in fraud and abuse since the laws were enacted. This is documented and well known. The fraud and abuse issue is visited and revisited by the Congress and the White House, but the doctors and hospitals have powerful lobbies and lawyers that protect them.

ObamaCare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, begins effectively to address both the inadequacy of Medicare and Medicaid, and the swindling of the taxpayer by so many doctors, hospitals and providers which participate in either program, Medicaid especially. And to protect the patients.

Do doctors and hospitals swindle and scam medicare and medicaid? Sure it occurs. Fraud and abuse has occurred in the past and will occur in past. That is what auditors, investigators, the FBI, and Federal prosecutors are for.

Your statement that Obamacare will address these problems is nothing but nonsense propaganda. Your Obamacare will do nothing to stop this nor to "effectively to address both the inadequacy of Medicare and Medicaid, and the swindling of the taxpayer by so many doctors, hospitals and providers which participate in either program, Medicaid especially."

Who's writing propaganda?

Physician heal thyself.

[Baloo22]

"ObamaCare Was Built On Web Of Lies, Paternalism", Investor's Business Daily

Hundreds of thousands of cancellation letters went out to people who had been assured a dozen times by the president that "if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. Period."

The cancellations lay bare three pillars of ObamaCare: (1) mendacity, (2) paternalism and (3) subterfuge.

Those letters are irrefutable evidence that Obama's repeated you-keep-your-coverage claim was false.

Read more at the link on the deceit and ineptitude of Obama and his administration on this Obamacare fiasco.

[Baloo22]

Take a look at this daffy and delusional democrat trying to shift the blame of these massive policy cancellation from Obamacare to "Capitalism".

What a loon!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVMsXXaDMVA&fmt=18