ACA (Obamacare) updates for 2014

So... just a few days ago Lady Jazzer was touting the administrations recent "sign up" figures for the ACA and a number of people were trying to point out to her that the count itself does not necessarily equal any sort of success.

But she just wanted to stick by the head count itself, applying no logic or reason to the possible demographics (or lack of demographics) within that current total of 3.3 million people who have supposedly "signed up."

Well that's fine if she wants to be the water boy for HHS and the ACA and continue to spread the propaganda, but intelligent people have questions about the fabric that makes up those 3.3 million folks.

I had posted a list I had create, a list of questions that needs to be applied to any ACA data set. The list was as follows...

1) How many people who signed up have made their first and/or second premium payments?

2) How many who signed up through Medicare were already eligible for Medicare and would have been signing up for Medicare even if the ACA didn't exist?

3) How many of the new millennial's (18 to 29) have signed up (Huffington Post says the majority of the new millennial's won't sign up http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mariel-kl ... 01266.html ... and a Harvard study supports that contention) ?

4) How many very sick and heavily subsidized people have sign up?

5) Of those that have signed up, how many were able to keep their policies and their network of doctors if they wanted those policies and doctors?

6) How many people have registered for ACA coverage but have not completed their enrollment as of yet.

Well... the New York Times attempted to answer point 1 above and here is what they have discovered.

One-Fifth of New Enrollees Under Health Care Law Fail to Pay First Premium

Matthew N. Wiggin, a spokesman for Aetna, said that about 70 percent of people who signed up for its health plans paid their premiums. For Aetna policies taking effect on Jan. 1, the deadline for payment was Jan. 14, and for products sold by Coventry Health Care, which is now part of Aetna, the deadline was Jan. 17…

Kristin E. Binns, a vice president of WellPoint, said that 76 percent of people selecting its health plans on an exchange had paid their share of the first month’s premium by the due date of Jan. 31. The company had received more than 500,000 applications for individual coverage through the exchanges in 14 states, she said…

One big company, Humana, said it had received 200,000 applications for insurance through the exchanges. “About 75 percent of the people paid, and 25 percent did not pay,” said Thomas T. Noland Jr., a senior vice president there. Customers had until Jan. 31 to pay for coverage that took effect on Jan. 1.

(Read the whole article at the NYT)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/14/us/po ... d=all&_r=0

Or how about this information from Investor's Business Daily?

Washington and Wisconsin have reported that barely half of those signing up submitted payments. But the paying portion is 66% in Nevada, 80% in Vermont and 85% in Rhode Island.

Even if 85% were the national average, though, it would still cut ObamaCare’s paid enrollment by a half million to 2.8 million vs. a March 31 goal of 7 million.

It’s possible that paid enrollees represent an even costlier patient population than the updated national sign-up figures suggest.

http://news.investors.com/politics-obam ... le-men.htm

So when Lady Jazzer talks about the 3.3 million people who have "signed up" one way or another for health insurance by stating "I stand by 'em... Facts don't change...Right-wing talking-points do,"

Well she's incorrect. Her opinion is that 3.3 million people have their name on someone's list. Insurance company, the HHS ACA database, maybe an employers HR department (well, even barely opinion since her only debating point is a single number 3,300,000 and nothing more and nothing less.).

But you're only allowed your opinion, not your own facts Lady Jazzer. The fact is this law is in trouble. And that fact has been proven by multiple media outlets, health care professionals, insurance companies and even Democrats.

Thank you for playing.

ACA is all about intentions, they were going to insure the uninsured and that is what they intend to do. Too bad they don't know how to do it. Millions more will be forced onto Medicaid where they will have difficult times finding doctors willing to treat them, so they will instead wait until it gets bad and continue to flood the emergency rooms. #goodintentions

FredHayek wrote: ACA is all about intentions, they were going to insure the uninsured and that is what they intend to do. Too bad they don't know how to do it. Millions more will be forced onto Medicaid where they will have difficult times finding doctors willing to treat them, so they will instead wait until it gets bad and continue to flood the emergency rooms. #goodintentions

I disagree, the ultimate intention was to eventually have much more control over our lives through a government controlled system. Fortunately, these same geniuses were not even capable of vetting the company that rolled out a steaming turd website.

This whole thing just reminds even the low info Obamatrons that government does not equal efficiency or competency. But still so many refuse to accept reality and will continue to bend over for the sake of "winning". They would have been better off trying honesty and pushing the single payer system they think this law will turn into.

FredHayek wrote: Great point LOL. It is amazing how cheap services get when you can pay cash at point of sale versus dragging insurance companies and federal mandates into it. A number of years ago Colorado started a low cost prescription program for low iincome people. They finally shut it down after finding out Wal-Mart was providing the drugs cheaper than their bureaucracy could even with taxpayer's help.

It is just basic common sense really. I do not add to my homeowners insurance coverage for snow plowing, painting the deck, lawn mowing, or trash pick-up.

I do not add oil changes, new tires, or tune-ups to my car insurance.

Somehow though there is this magic formula that healthcare is cheaper if we bundle it all into a massive uniform HMO policy with 20% administratve overhead/fees and pre-pay it every month without shopping around. Like Forrest Gump says... One less thing to worry about. Life is like a box of chocolates. LOL

LOL wrote: Obamacare is not "insurance". LOL I've been sayin this for 4 years. It is mandated wasteful cost sharing not risk pooling.
I'm amazed a reporter actually wrote this piece. I'm even more amazed at how few people actually "get this" fairly simple concept.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/20 ... insurance/

"Another math lesson seems to be needed here: Insurance is only a good deal when it actually works like insurance. Using insurance to pay for routine care and predictable healthcare needs makes it no longer insurance, but inefficient cost pooling.

Using insurance to pay for routine healthcare services distorts price signals and increases costs through layers of administration. ObamaCare’s requirements that insurance pay for even more routine care than before codifies the fundamental flaw in the “insurance” (actually cost-pooling) “market” that we have today."

This is funny, I don't care who you are.

archer wrote: I'm sure you all are absolutely right, how could you not be? No major legislation, like Social Security, Medicare, medicare Part D, etc have needed any changes, tweaks, adjustments after passage. They have all been nearly perfect right out of the gate.

“The biggest problems that we're facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the Executive Branch and not go through Congress at all, and that's what I intend to reverse when I'm president of the United States of America,” Obama said on March 31, 2008, in Lancaster, Pa.

BlazerBob wrote:
This is funny, I don't care who you are.

Its no joke, check out the Docs web page and statement on Medicare. Expect to see more of this coming in the future.

http://www.samuelvallerymd.com/medicare.html

No joke but the Dollar General part cracked me up.

Time to go to court about all the changes Obama is making without consulting Congress? I know it is called Obamacare, but that doesn't mean he gets to rule it like a fiefdom.

If Bob were a Dr.