<p>Texas, no, because for my age group I think it is almost as expensive as the bronze plan. It also has the same problem with the provider networks as the other ACA plans.</p>
<p>Three plans? If I did, I misspoke. It’s two accounts- one for my mom and one for my fiance. Getting the same error message for both.</p>
<p>Its probably my reading since you mentioned having issues and followed up by mentioning mom and fianc</p>
<p>Allowing people with cancelled plans to enroll in catastrophic plans does not really solve anything. The only real difference between the bronze and the catastrophic is the former has a deductible of $5,000 and the latter is $6,350. The difference in premiums is only a few dollars. I actually checked the prices on the Blue Shield website for people in the 30 and under group.</p>
<p>GP, I’m actually tired of people telling me how bad your plan was too. Seriously. There really were perfectly good inexpensive plans that were cancelled because they were only being offered to healthy people. No point in pretending they were bad.</p>
<p>Yeah, I got a three month extension through March 31. I think I have found a way to escape the ACA individual market but can’t really say anything until I know for sure.</p>
<p>CF, I like it when we agree. :)</p>
<p>I called BCBS today and cancelled the ACA plan. I am going to keep my old plan one more month until I see what my income is for this year. The premiums ended up being about the same (for the ACA plan and the old plan once they lowered the premium) and I wanted to see what my income was going to be for this year (2013). I can’t access my old pay stubs since I left my job a few months ago. </p>
<p>It makes sense for me to do it this way for now in case my income was way less this year than what I “predicted” for next year. That, and any services I might need in January are covered by my U’s health care system so I don’t need to worry about differences in prices for seeing the doctor, etc.</p>
<p>GP, it’s rare but I like it too ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, I know things get lost when you’re at several thousand posts, but I’ve been done with mine for a while (since the first week of December) and updated everyone on how easy it was when I did it then. Got the bill about a week ago but decided not to do it because of what I mentioned 2 posts up.</p>
<p>
That’s not exactly true . In June 2011, California passed a law requiring that policies cover maternity as of July 2012. The California law was passed more than a year after passage of PPACA, and specifically refers to PPACA in the bill text. So the argument that ACA isn’t needed because California “already” mandated that coverage is specious: California’s protection didn’t exist at the time PPACA was passed, and it’s hard to know whether California would have passed the law but for the impending requirements of PPACA. </p>
<p>The statute is here - note that it specifically refers to the PPACA and essentially is simply written as an interim measure.
</p>
<p>Calmom, what I said was true. Prior to 2014 all plans on the individual market had maternity benefits. I never said it predated ACA. It was only an interim measure because the federal law was going to supersede state law starting in 2014. Our legislators enacted it because in California they have a history of mandating benefits, not unlike what the federal govt did with ACA. </p>
<p>Regardless, I was perfectly happy without maternity benefits inasmuch as my premium probably went up because of this mandate. With or without the maternity benefits, there was nothing wrong with my pre-ACA plan.</p>
<p>I just did a little research and Ca had 53 different state benefits mandates besides maternity benefits. They range from severe mental illnesses and other disorders, such as autism, anorexia nervosa to a variety of panic disorders. There were also mandates for mammography screening and minimum length of stay in hospital after childbirth. The list is long. </p>
<p>California didn’t need the federal govt to mandate benefits, as our legislators were already world class in promulgating regulations. I would challenge anyone in rivaling California in the art of regulating.</p>
<p>Lol. I can beat California…with Canada ;)</p>
<p>(We ex-pats DO consider California to be a little Canada-in-training though :))</p>
<p>We have tougher energy regulations than Canada. Nah, Canada can’t hold a candle to us.</p>
<p>“I would challenge anyone in rivaling California in the art of regulating.”</p>
<p>New York. #50 on the list. CA is #49. </p>
<p>[Freedom</a> in the 50 States 2013 | Overall Freedom | Mercatus Center](<a href=“http://freedominthe50states.org/]Freedom”>http://freedominthe50states.org/)</p>
<p>I interrupt the regular CA-centric posts to note this trend which some predicted in past posts. </p>
<p>[In</a> ominous sign, many health plan buyers are just picking the cheapest | Star Tribune](<a href=“http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/236935051.html]In”>http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/236935051.html)</p>
<p>(I am not in CA and was looking for both individual and SHOP plans on the marketplace. My state does not have its own exchange.)</p>
<p>Romani, when you applied for coverage in 2014, were you asked about your prior coverage?</p>
<p>Were you asked dates of prior coverage and the cost of that prior coverage?</p>
<p>No, dstark, I don’t believe I was. I just went through my mom’s app again to try to submit it and she was not asked at all so I’d guess I wasn’t either </p>
<p>ETA: It does ask whether or not you’re eligible for employer coverage and, if so, whether or not you’re using it. I know that. I know that they didn’t ask when my coverage started because I honestly have no idea when my coverage started.</p>
<p>Asking those questions on the application would have been an easy way to track the new policyholders who signed upmon an exchange. :)</p>
<p>The state of NY does ask.</p>
<p>Did your mom’s application go thru?</p>
<p>My son has successfully applied in NY.
Applied today. :)</p>