<p>"Whoa- interesting prediction. "</p>
<p>I don’t know about interesting - just common sense, imo.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To be honest, I don’t really care. Elections have consequences. Obamacare is the law. What I think about it is irrelevant, one way or the other. I’m going to worry about my own health insurance. At this point, I really couldn’t care less whether anyone else gets health care or not…</p>
<p>I think the dotgov not working is a big reason this might not work out. I think a lot of people are freaked out about their new price points. And I think a lot of them are eligible for subsidies. But they can’t find this out. </p>
<p>It has far reaching impact outside the issue of the tech not working, IMHO</p>
<p>Here is today’s press release on California:[Covered</a> CA Enrollment Data 11/21/13](<a href=“Covered CA Enrollment Data 11/21/13 | PDF | Insurance | Healthcare”>Covered CA Enrollment Data 11/21/13 | PDF | Insurance | Healthcare)</p>
<p>360,464 applications completed</p>
<p>79,891 enrolled as of Nov. 19</p>
<p>Projections are:
39% Med-Cal
31% non-subsidized
30% subsidized</p>
<p>[Americans</a> Like Obamacare Where They Can Get It : The New Yorker](<a href=“http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2013/11/americans-like-obamacare-where-they-can-get-it.html]Americans”>Americans Like Obamacare Where They Can Get It | The New Yorker)</p>
<p>I don’t know why complying with a law implies that one likes the law.</p>
<p>That article had no polling, just surmise and anecdotes.</p>
<p>[Support</a> cratering for Obama and health care law | MSNBC](<a href=“http://www.msnbc.com/the-daily-rundown/support-cratering-obama-and-health-care-l]Support”>Support cratering for Obama and health care law)</p>
<p>Adding also, that it was announced that California is not going to allow the “fix.” You cannot keep your non-compliant insurance. So everyone who had their insurance cancelled will be clamoring for coverage now, too.</p>
<p>Calmom, are you saying that children who live out of state can get in network treatment if their parents have Anthem in Ca. after Jan 1? I may be wrong but I thought dstark was told that was not available for Anthem customers. This multi-state label might have a legal connotation but most people are going to conclude it provides access to providers out-of-state when in fact it doesn’t. If I decide I need to go to the Mayo Clinic because of better treatment options, that will not be available to me.</p>
<p>You claim I am playing games, but the reason why I am posting on this thread is to make people aware of the restricted networks and the lack of doctors and hospitals in many of these exchange plans. I have been saying this in almost every post since I starting posting. People have a tendency only to look at premiums and don’t consider the most important element of any insurance plan, the all important network. </p>
<p>You for some reason seem to minimize this concern, which I think is a grave mistake. So I will continue to point out this flaw in ACA-compliant plans until I am satisfied this is changed and insurers forego pursuing this deliberate policy of limiting subscribers’ choices.</p>
<p>“That article had no polling, just surmise and anecdotes.”</p>
<p>Since people in 37 out of 50 states have no functioning marketplace and little information coming from their state (there have been many articles on this thread highlighting the lack of good information available from those state gov’t’s and in some cases even making it against the law to assist people in understanding what is available and banning assistance) it’s no wonder a majority disapprove. </p>
<p>I’m all for those state’s completely dumping O’care - the sooner the better, imo. I cared before about making health insurance available for everyone but I’ve reached the point that I don’t care what happens to the people of those states. They don’t want it - fine by me. I know my state will never go back to the way it was and that is all I care about now.</p>
<p>In California, probably the most progressive Obamacare state, 50% approve of it in a recent poll:[Californians</a> have their doubts about healthcare law - latimes.com](<a href=“Californians have their doubts about healthcare law”>Californians have their doubts about healthcare law)</p>
<p>" I really couldn’t care less whether anyone else gets health care or not"</p>
<p>I appreciate the honesty. </p>
<p>This may affect you in the future and if nobody cares… You will understand. :)</p>
<p>Texaspg, I dont know if Cedars Sinai is in network on any exchange plans. Might be important to some. I am in Nor Cal and we have Stanford…I think you would agree Stanford is a pretty good place… and the UCs. I went to Cal so I expect kind words about the UCs. 
When my daughter came down with a brain tumor, two different doctors suggested UCSF. Since I only talked to two doctors outside of the doctors treating her, UCSF is batting 1.000. :)</p>
<p>Magnetron, wow. Thanks for the info.
Concierge services are expanding to hospitals. </p>
<p>Maybe we will morph into a Switzerland type system.</p>
<p>Those that like the idea of states opting out of ACA… Some of you are paying for parts of ACA with the different taxes and fees.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see any way but to be fatalistic about it. The law says I have to have government-approved insurance. My state only has one provider of government-approved insurance int the individual market. Therefore, my health care options are completely in the hands of the government rules makers. For example, the government rules say that as long as the provider network includes a hospital within 40 miles of me, then my health care is adequate. The fact that I can’t get coverage at my local hospital is perhaps interesting in the abstract, but I don’t have any options, so there’s no sense giving myself an aneurysm worrying about something I can’t change. I can’t keep coverage for treatment at my local hospital. Period.</p>
<p>If I get sick and can get approved treatment at an approved network provider, then I’ll get treatment. If I get sick and can’t get to an approved network provider, then I won’t get treatment. Pretty simple really. I’m not happy about it. It all seems a bit third-world to me. But, there is nothing I can do about it. It is what it is.</p>
<p>Under that set of circumstances, how can I possibly care if somebody else is able to get coverage? The government dictates what coverage they can get. There’s nothing I can do about. It is what it is. It’s the law.</p>
<p>" I may be wrong but I thought dstark was told that was not available for Anthem customers"</p>
<p>You better verify like I said before. There is a chat feature where you can communicate with a live person on Anthem’s site. </p>
<p>I was supposed to receive an email from Anthem this morning describing the various plans in detail. </p>
<p>Didnt get it.</p>
<p>What is making my decision more difficult is my kid who lives out of state may move to another state during the year. Maybe a state that has opted out of medicaid. Hopefully, he can sign up for a non subsidized plan with no problems.</p>
<p>GP. No grandfathering in Cal for you. Your decision is pretty much over. </p>
<p>Dave Jones is one of my favorite persons who hold political office but I am glad covered cal said forget it about keeping “grandfathered plans”.</p>
<p>[Behind</a> the Numbers - Health Care Reform Circa 1965: Polling on Medicare](<a href=“http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/07/health_care_reform_circa_1965.html]Behind”>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/07/health_care_reform_circa_1965.html)</p>
<p>Moderator’s Note</p>
<p>Before we get too far ahead with all the polling data, I need to warn people it wont be relevant to this thread. Again, polling is not part of insurance and it is immaterial whether someone loves or hates it. Most people want or need insurance. If they don’t want it, they can stay off this thread.</p>
<p>The top CA insurers in the latest CoveredCalifornia press release are Anthem(28.1%), Kaiser Permanente(26.8%) and Blue Shield (25.6%). </p>
<p>It doesnt seem like Kaiser gets much attention on this thread as an alternative… why is that?</p>
<p>I think the situation in NH is unconscionable, Idad. I don’t blame you for feeling ripped off.</p>
<p>I think forty miles is too far. Insurers need to be regulated like kindergartners, it seems.</p>
<p>Because Kaiser is a HMO. It severely limits your choices.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let’s be intellectually honest. Price and wage controls after the world war II and changes to tax code in 1954 are largely responsible for the system we ended up with.</p>
<p>Why no outrage over homeowner or car insurance practices?</p>