<ol>
<li><p>If the person is clearly not subsidy eligible, they may simply find it easier to sign up for the off-exchange plan. They don’t have to provide financial info, they don’t have to deal with a stupid non-functioning web site. Also, the insurance companies that are terminating non-grandfathered policies are offering to automatically roll their insureds over to the new policies. So for some people its just less of hassle, and for the insurance company it’s a way to retain existing customers rather than having them browsing competing companies on the exchange.</p></li>
<li><p>Some of the companies are also offering alternative plans that offer slightly different rate and compensation structures. So some people might prefer a different model – for example, perhaps there is a PPO on the exchange but the same company is offering a less expensive off-exchange HMO or EPO. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>I do worry that some people may not realize that they are subsidy eligible because they don’t understand all the ins and outs of calculating MAGI.</p>
I don’t know what you mean. (?) The same rules and regs apply whether the policy is sold off exchange or on-- the main difference is that a person can’t get a tax credit for off-exchange.</p>
But you posted that you were aware that you were losing grandfather status when you opted for it. You knew the market was changing and the same plans wouldn’t be available down the line.</p>
<p>Thanks for the correction, calmom. I had thought that off-exchange plans were subject to underwriting, rescission, excessive premium increases, etc.</p>
<p>I had no idea what the ramifications were going to be. How could anyone have known about the stinky networks and the huge premium increases two years ago.</p>
<p>Because there are no “huge premium increases” – you happened to have a below-market premium because Blue Shield used to have separate rate categories based on health histories. There actually was a class action brought against them about the way they went about assigning people to the categories. </p>
<p>The premiums being quoted now are significantly below what was projected. </p>
<p>Obviously if a law was being passed that said that the insurance companies had to sell policies to all comers, they weren’t going to be able to offer cut-rate policies to people who were assigned to low-risk pools any more.</p>
<p>OK, Goldenpooch, we get it. You’re unhappy. Apparently you are not the slightest bit phased by the reasons ACA was put in place – abusive insurance companies, the need to ensure that our children can get insurance 20 years from now, etc. Apparently you don’t realize how lucky you’ve been for 40 years to get A+ insurance that was pretty reasonably priced. And you certainly don’t accept that those who’ve been lucky enough and healthy enough to have good affordable insurance all these years may need to sacrifice a little for those who haven’t been so fortunate. We get that. But continuing to whine about it isn’t going to change anything.</p>
<p>Everyone should be a part of the sacrifice. But is everyone? Seems that govt workers (fed/state/local) have heavily subsidized premiums for themselves AND their family ($150/month? $200something/month? For FAMILY plans?) That is absurd. Taxpayers are subsidizing these workers’ premiums to an extent that they shouldn’t be. Time for ALL to tighten their belts. I notice that govt employees on this thread preach to us about the benefits of the ACA. Their positions are considerably weakened IMHO because they aren’t really being affected unless they experience premium increases they pay along the lines of what the real world of civilian workers in the US is experiencing in many cases.</p>
<p>CTTC, I think you’re touching on an important point, which is that “government” has two very different roles in the conversation. One is as rule-maker, which is really just the members of Congress and their senior staffs. The other is as employer, which is everybody else at the federal, state, and local level.</p>
<p>Goverments are gigantic employers of white-collar staff. The interesting comparison would be to see what various governments offer in the way of health care benefits compared to similarly large employers of similar white-collar staff, like universities and large tech and professional service companies. In my limited experience, white-collar folks at big employers tend to pay little of their health care premiums whether the employers are public or private, but I don’t think I’ve seen any studies on the point.</p>
<p>I dont think Obamacare was ever sold on everyone “sacrificing”. This was manna from heaven. </p>
<p>At most there was supposed to be a surcharge tax on ‘Cadillac health plans’, but I doubt that ever comes off. The Individual Mandate is now a tax and one that is not allowed to be cohersive so it cant really be that revenue generating.</p>
<p>I don’t like the law, I think it has a lot of flaws, but I do believe it solved many problems and I understand why people who support it, do so.</p>
<p>However, I am absolutely livid about exceptions, especially Congress. They SHOULD drink their own champagne and buy the insurance on the exchanges. Maybe they would then go ahead and fix the glitches in they law after experiencing it first hand.</p>
<p>P.S.
The government workers are getting good deals because they are part of the union, so it is a separate discussion that probably does not belong on CC. I rolled my eyes at $150 comment. This year, I pay $499 per month for my $3000 deductible 80/20 family plan that my employer subsidizes. Obviously next year it will be more. I would love to pay $150, even for single coverage.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not in my and my friends experience in the last several years. It used to be true. Not anymore.</p>
<p>I wonder what will happen if these problems with the system aren’t fixed soon. People will be saying “you can’t tax me for not signing up. I tried but kept getting error messages or couldn’t log on or I couldn’t understand it and no one could answer my questions”. </p>
<p>And yes, it was sold as 1) people will save $2500 on healthcare costs, 2)if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. 3)If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. </p>
<p>So don’t say people who are facing a huge increase in costs are being selfish. Or that those who can’t keep their doctors or their plans should have known better. Their only mistake was believing those who made the false promises.</p>
<p>Seems to me that government workers have insurance like other workers. Like other employees of big enterprises, their employer pays. The insurance is part of their compensation, just as it would be part of their compensation if they worked for private employers. </p>
<p>My husband has insurance from his employer and we don’t pay any of the premium. This is the norm in his white-collar field. If he went to work for the government, I would expect that we paid little of our insurance premium, because how could the government attract employees if the government benefits were way worse than benefits in private industry?</p>
<p>This makes absolutely no sense to me. None whatsoever. The exchanges are for people who don’t have insurance through their employer. People who work for the government do have insurance through their employer. If you suddenly say that Congressional staffers don’t have health insurance through their employer, you are snatching away a valuable benefit from a person who doesn’t make a very high salary. That is so unfair. </p>
<p>Members of Congress, eh, they make a lot of money, so I suppose it wouldn’t be as bad to snatch away benefits from them, but if you suddenly make the staffers buy insurance on the exchanges you are snatching away a benefit worth thousands of dollars from someone who only makes $30K a year. Ridiculous.</p>
<p>No. No it wasn’t. Please be accurate. The claim was that the average family would save $2500. I’m sure you understand the difference between the average and one individual. A whole lot of families are saving a whole lot of money because they are getting subsidies. Do you understand how to compute an average?</p>
<p>I think a lot of families think of themselves as middle class or average or typical. They don’t see themselves as 1%ers. Given that, they did not expect to be hit with huge rate increases. And I see you didn’t address the other two ‘selling’ points or the fact that people are going to protest being hit with a tax for something to tried to sign up for but couldn’t.</p>
<p>Be careful about going on there to “check” the prices or whatnot if you don’t need the exchanges, or if you won’t get a subsidy.</p>
<p>Once you are in there, if you don’t sign up, even if you don’t decide to use it and have other insurance, you will be fined. It is going to be some huge process to get out of that paperwork.</p>
<p>Stay away unless it’s something you need.</p>
<p>I’m appalled at the way this is being handled by the government, though I shouldn’t be. Par for the course.</p>
<p>And stop telling people who are paying thousands more a year to not “whine.” Jeez. Of course they are upset. Just because you might be benefitting because of a pre existing or subsidy doesn’t mean that the the insurance companies not sharing in the “sacrifice” shouldn’t bother the people who can’t afford the coverage they once had.</p>
<p>All sorts of people are paying all sorts of extra money so that people with pre existing can have affordable coverage. To tell them they are being uncompassionate or whiny is the height of entitlement mentality, and it isn’t going to make the people really grateful that they decided they wanted to go this way.</p>
<p>Poet girl…where did you hear that folks with insurance will be fined…just because they checked the exchanges? </p>
<p>It is pretty clear on my husband’s W2 form that he is contributing towards his health insurance premiums. I guess they could ask ME for proof of coverage since I’m on his plan. no problem!</p>
<p>IF the exchanges are still buggy in a few weeks, then we can discuss how to deal with people who can’t sign up. It’s too early for that discussion now, because the deadline is over two months away. This is not a defense for the bugginess, just a comment that we still have plenty of time.</p>
<p>Sounds to me like most people here are keeping their doctors. I know I’m keeping mine.</p>
<p>This is nonsense. Someone has been pulling your leg. Here’s the way the penalty works: On your tax form, you’ll have to specify what insurance policy you have. If you don’t give an insurance policy, you will be liable for the penalty.</p>