<p>Flosst, flossy, flossy, what else did she say? </p>
<p>I can’t find a link that’s not political. Mostly, she said a lot of, “I don’t have that information.” And, it’s going great. </p>
<p>About the premiums flossy, you only mentioned part of what she said.</p>
<p>Wasnt there something about premium increases being less than in prior years. And she really doesnt know yet?</p>
<p>Sorry. She doesn’t know yet how many people have paid. And, yes the whole spending is up but down from projections so it’s a cut. Not, sure people will see it that way, although I do realize government does.</p>
<p>Supposedly she (or whoever talking to the reporters) said there is no chance the 3/31 would get extended because it is the law handed down on a stone tablet (I am making that part up) that they are choosing to follow. Some reporter persisted about why that date is different from all the other law stone tablets they have already broken and they would not respond.</p>
<p>
Something that’ll turn out both true and very unpleasant for every single… god forgive me, 'cuz I hate new age euphemisms… stakeholder.</p>
<p>That said, Sebelius admitting premiums are heading up suggests someone thought they could eat their cake and still administer the medicine prescribed in the above.</p>
<p>Yes…I hope theoretically Mar 31 is it. I dont know what we do with people who are in the process of signing up and dont finish on Mar 31. </p>
<p>I beleve that there are three states pushing for an extension. Right now.</p>
<p>Personal status update physician network:</p>
<p>I’ve mentioned in the past that my personal doctor was not on the new ACA networks but I was guessing that the problem would sort itself out over time. Here’s an update:</p>
<p>I went to my doctor at the very first of the year for a minor medical issue; two office visits. Insurance processed the bill quickly, determined doctor was out-of-network, applied “usual and customary rate” of about 80% of doctor’s bill to deductible. However, doctor never billed me. </p>
<p>So I emailed the billing office to inquire about status - where was my bill? what about the network issue?</p>
<p>Today I received this reply: “We are still working on this to find out about Covered CA.”</p>
<p>So this confirms my sense that, at least in some cases, the network kinks are due to doctors not understanding the process, rather than a deliberate decision by doctors and providers about whether to participate in the new networks. So my guess is that at least for myself, my doctor will be in network by the end of the year. Maybe I’ll get lucky and the insurance company will let my doctor sign on retroactively to the first of the year. (With my high deductible policy it doesn’t really matter unless I get really, really sick and have to worry about out-of-pocket maximums - otherwise, it’s just a matter of whether or not I get charged by the doctor for an annual physical.)</p>
<p>I misspoke when I said pedestrian accidents, it sounds like fatalities. Here is the story.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/news/pedestrian-fatalities-are-up-in-texas-while-falling-nationally/”>http://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/news/pedestrian-fatalities-are-up-in-texas-while-falling-nationally/</a></p>
<p>Insurance premiums are going up? Stop the presses! Didn’t insurance premiums go up every single year, sometimes by double-digit percent increases, before the ACA?</p>
<p>Here’s what we can’t do:</p>
<p>Have people whose healthcare is paid for all or in part by the federal government (Medicare, Medicaid, premium subsidies, employer insurance deductible); allow those people to seek any healthcare provider they want; allow the provider to charge anything they want. </p>
<p>People want to go get Cadillac health care? I don’t care. People want me to pay for it? Forget it.</p>
<p>I just read the WSJ article saying that the individual mandate will not be enforced for another 2 years as a practical matter. All one needs to say is that health insurance is unaffordable, ‘documentation only if possible’. All along it was argued that without the individual mandate, the law would fall apart. That was the argument to the Supreme Court. This is even less incentive for the young and healthy to sign up. No extra tax for not having insurance if you say that it is unaffordable for you. </p>
<p>I read premiums went up 80% in the past ten years prior to this new program. Don’t have the link. And I still hope folks aghast at Emmanuel have read every last word. And that other link that took us to CMS and the hardship paperwork. </p>
<p>NY cancer patient, Anette Frey, is going through hell because of Obamacare. You will want to puke after reading this article unless your an unrepentant apologist for Obamacare.</p>
<p>United Healthcare’s statement regarding her unmitigated disaster with the Obamacare exchange is totally unacceptable.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/12/new-york-cancer-survivor-stuck-in-medical-mess-over-obamacare/?intcmp=obnetwork”>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/12/new-york-cancer-survivor-stuck-in-medical-mess-over-obamacare/?intcmp=obnetwork</a></p>
<p>Sorry for this, but it’s been rumbling. I can’t believe her doctor would drop her. I don’t understand why these doctors are . so . heartless. </p>
<p>This seems to be the right place to get an answer or suggestions.
DD will turns 26 December 17 and will be in her 4th year of Med School. So on her birthday, parents insurance will no longer provide coverage base on everything I have read. I believe her residency will not begin until around June 1, 2015 (Match Day is in May) and that is when she will begin to have earned income. No earned income this year, just scholarship and loans. So the question is:
What would be her options for insurance between December 17, 2014 and about June or July 2015 after her residency begins?</p>
<p>Sounds like she should just buy insurance for the six months. She might be eligible for Medicaid for the two weeks at the end of the year, but do you really want to bother with that? OTOH, she’d be buying an insurance policy for two weeks, which may be equally annoying.</p>
<p>Because she is aging out of her insurance, she has a “qualifying event” and can buy insurance that starts Dec. 17. But you might check whether she is covered until the end of the year she turns 26. I’d suggest talking to an insurance agent.</p>
<p>Every dispute between a doctor and a patient or an insurance company and a patient from now until the end of time will be the fault of Obamacare.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Depends on whether she wants regular insurance or medicaid (is she in a state with medicaid?).</p>
<p>The real issue is when she starts making money. If she is going to average 25k (?) next year with a half year of residency money, then the appropriate way is to get a policy that subsidizes her at that income level (200% of poverty line) but pay that for 6 months without any income. OTOH, she may be forced to change her policy if she changes states or even locations because she has to move for residency. I am not certain whether you can cancel one policy and get another or see if the current company will automatically move you to a plan in the new location.</p>
<p>
Not quite. That potential exemption only applies to individuals who previously had insurance which was cancelled due to non-compliance with ACA. See: <a href=“http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Regulations-and-Guidance/Downloads/cancellation-consumer-options-12-19-2013.pdf”>http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Regulations-and-Guidance/Downloads/cancellation-consumer-options-12-19-2013.pdf</a> and <a href=“http://marketplace.cms.gov/getofficialresources/publications-and-articles/hardship-exemption.pdf”>http://marketplace.cms.gov/getofficialresources/publications-and-articles/hardship-exemption.pdf</a></p>
<p>People who were willing to pay for insurance in the past, but had their insurance cancelled due to noncompliance with ACA – and now do not want insurance are a small subset of the overall market --and obviously are not the same as people who had no insurance at all.</p>
<p>I think that those individuals would be far more likely to avail themselves of the option to buy catastrophic insurance rather than go without any insurance at all – by definition, they are all people who thought that insurance was important enough in the past that they bought policies without any mandate. So now you have to postulate a group of previously-insured who now want to choose to be uninsured – not likely.</p>
<p>FWIW, because of the out-of-pocket maximum imposed by ACA, a currently available “catastrophic” policy covers much more than most low-cost policies did in the past… That is, “catastrophic” is now defined anything that costs an individual policy holder more than $6350 for the year. </p>
<p>Of course you also have to postulate that those previously insured, who no longer want to pay for insurance, also understand enough about ACA to submit the forms. (I doubt that many of that group are readers of the WSJ.) It seems to me that most of the “hardship” group in medicaid expansion states will discover that they are available for Medicaid or else for very generous subsidies on the exchange; in the other states, that may very well be what happens to those whose incomes are not high enough to qualify for subsidies. </p>
<p>Of course, that’s assuming they earn enough to even be required to file a federal return. </p>