<p>No, still getting the same error message :(</p>
<p>Bah. She’s currently uninsured so it’s not a huge deal if she goes a few more weeks without insurance, but it sure is crappy :/</p>
<p>That sucks.</p>
<p>There is going to be a huge drop off in applications after today.</p>
<p>Hopefully…that will lead to a successful application for your mom.</p>
<p>Here’s hoping :). </p>
<p>She currently is under the care of the same doctor that treated her before she lost her job (and insurance). He meets with her for check-ups for free (he really is a godsend) and through some kind of county partnership for low-income residents, she gets her prescriptions for a decent price. </p>
<p>But she also has had a hip issue for weeks that is getting worse. She’s been putting it off because she can’t afford to go see a doctor out of pocket. We were hoping she’d have insurance by next week but doesn’t look like it yet :/</p>
<p>texaspg, today’s deadline is for people to enroll in order to have coverage by Jan. 1. They don’t have to have paid by today; they have to have signed up by today.</p>
<p>Thanks. I just saw a story saying the deadline was quiety extended to tomorrow midnight. If that is the case, I wonder how people would know, being quiet and all…</p>
<p>[Obama</a> administration quietly extends health-care enrollment deadline by a day - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-administration-secretly-extends-health-care-enrollment-deadline/2013/12/23/66470068-6bdf-11e3-aecc-85cb037b7236_story.html]Obama”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-administration-secretly-extends-health-care-enrollment-deadline/2013/12/23/66470068-6bdf-11e3-aecc-85cb037b7236_story.html)</p>
<p>Of all the recent rule changes, moving the deadline a day seems like most innocuous, presuming that the insurance companies can handle it-- which they probably can. They weren’t going to be able to mail out bills on Christmas anyway; it’s a federal holiday.</p>
<p>I am thinking it is for the convenience of people like Romani who are having issues. I am saying they should announce so people are not freaking out today but I guess they want to get people finish it ASAP.</p>
<p>Some news from Texas. Glad to see some people in that state are finally signing up. </p>
<p>[Obamacare</a> sign-ups picking up steam in Texas | Dallas Morning News](<a href=“http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20131221-obamacare-sign-ups-picking-up-steam-in-texas.ece]Obamacare”>http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20131221-obamacare-sign-ups-picking-up-steam-in-texas.ece)</p>
<p>dstark, good to see your son was able to sign up. I know the costs in NY are more than in most places (even though it’s a lot less than it was here before ACA,) but everything in NY is always more expensive than anyplace else.</p>
<p>I agree, texaspg-- they want people who are procrastinating to get busy and sign up. And among procrastinators, some leave it to a little past the last minute, and those people need a deadline to exceed. If the procrastinators knew the deadline was midnight tomorrow instead of midnight tonight, there they’d be on Christmas morning, trying to sign up for Jan. 1.</p>
<p>Quietly extending the deadline might be the best way, even though it seems strange.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, our legislators had a very long history of failing to pass that provision – the same bill had been introduced and defeated year after year after year before passage of ACA. </p>
<p>The difference was that in 2011, there wasn’t much reason for the insurance companies to lobby against passage of short-term California health insurance reforms – so without the strong opposition, the law could pass.</p>
<p>
Try researching legislative history as well.</p>
<p>After PPACA passed, the state insurance lobbyists went home.</p>
<p>dstark, yes our health insurance premiums are $2600 per month.</p>
<p>If the Supreme Court had struck down ACA, everyone in Ca. today would have maternity benefits.</p>
<p>“If the Supreme Court had struck down ACA, everyone in Ca. today would have maternity benefits.”</p>
<p>Isn’t that true only for those who had existing insurance policies? Those who were unable to obtain insurance in the private marketplace didn’t.</p>
<p>Yes, that’s true, only for people who have insurance, which is somewhere north of 80% of Californians.</p>
<p>Somewhere north of 80% of Californians, but a much smaller percentage when you only consider the people who would ever need such benefits, namely young women.</p>
<p>It will be interesting to see how many young woman will have maternity benefits in 2014 and how many will be able to afford the deductibles and premiums.</p>
<p>You gotta figure that some of those young women already had in mind that they’d need lower deductibles. At least for the babies with winter/spring birthdays.</p>
<p>GP: According to Covered California, about 450,000 Californians have signed up for plans so far. To be sure, some of those people won’t pay. OTOH, we have over three more months of signups.</p>
<p>“My son has successfully applied in NY.”</p>
<p>I have to hand it to you, dstark, if anyone has gotten screwed by this law, it has been you. I admire your steadfast support for the law despite the obviously higher premiums you are paying. Either you’re totally brainwashed or you’re a very enlightened person. You don’t need to tell me which one is correct. :)</p>