• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    peep8 on Sniff!
    Em on Sniff!
    Peep9 on Sniff!
    Em on Sniff!
    Em on Sniff!
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Sniff!
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on The Mother of All Debates
    Ga6thDem on The Mother of All Debates
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on The Mother of All Debates
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on The Mother of All Debates
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on The Mother of All Debates
    riverdaughter on The Mother of All Debates
    Liberty Belle Still… on The Mother of All Debates
    Peep9 on Sniff!
    Lady V on The Mother of All Debates

  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women

  • Archives

  • History

    October 2010
    S M T W T F S
    « Sep   Nov »
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
    31  

  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Trump/Clinton Debate Open Thread
      I used to get paid to watch these things. I don’t any more. So…I’m going to go read a nice novel in a coffee shop. Please feel free to talk about the debate in comments. I will, actually, be curious to hear what people have to say, just not willing to sit through so much […]

  • Top Posts

Pre-existing failure

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Myiq2xu

ObamaCare

From FAUX News:

It’s a centerpiece of President Obama’s health care remake, a lifeline available right now to vulnerable people whose medical problems have made them uninsurable.

But the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan started this summer isn’t living up to expectations. Enrollment lags in many parts of the country. People who could benefit may not be able to afford the premiums. Some state officials who run their own “high-risk pools” have pointed out potential problems.

“The federal risk pool has definitely provided critical access, in some cases lifesaving access, to health insurance,” said Amie Goldman, chair of a national association of state high-risk insurance pools. “That said, enrollment so far is lower than we would have expected.”

California, which has money for about 20,000 people, has received fewer than 450 applications, according to a state official. The program in Texas had enrolled about 200 by early September, an official in that state said. Goldman, who runs the pool in Wisconsin, said they’ve received fewer than 300 applications so far, with room for about 8,000 people in the program.

That’s not how it was supposed to work.

Ayup. As Wonk the Vote would say, “Nobody could have foreseen.”

.

Filed under: General, Health Care Reform, Worst President Ever Tagged: |

« »

40 Responses

  1. 1539days, on October 3, 2010 at 4:30 pm said:

    Wow. Thousands of applicants and at a price of only $1 trillion.

    • myiq2xu, on October 3, 2010 at 4:32 pm said:

      Hey, it’s only money.

      • DandyTiger, on October 3, 2010 at 4:35 pm said:

        We can just print more.

      • foxyladi14, on October 3, 2010 at 5:00 pm said:

        and you can’t take it with you :mrgreen:

      • Woman Voter, on October 3, 2010 at 5:48 pm said:

        I personally thing the ‘McDonald’s Threatens to Cut Health Care Plans ‘

        should be illegal as they only cover $2,000 a year and it is very costly at $56.00 or more a month. Mini insurance my foot, they would be better off going to the free clinic.

        I used to volunteer at a Free Clinic and it looks like I may do that again if President Obama’s Administration thinks ‘Mini MED’ insurance provides Health Care under his COSTLY reform.

        Gosh, this reform has really hit me in the pocket book!

        • Woman Voter, on October 3, 2010 at 5:52 pm said:

          I need a nap, this ‘Mini MED INSURANCE’ meme is too much and I am too upset.

          Dr. Mini MED, will see you NOW ,but only up to $2,000 dollars and his visits cost $2,000 dollars.

    • Woman Voter, on October 3, 2010 at 5:41 pm said:

      California, which has money for about 20,000 people, has received fewer than 450 applications, according to a state official.

      OH, really…I say they have a WAITING LIST! To think they wanted to amend the CONSTITUTION to get ARNOLD as president does cause me to want to use the above instructions!

      CA.GOV | Welcome to the Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board
      The expected start of coverage for PCIP has been delayed a week. The state of
      California anticipates that PCIP coverage will begin by October 7, 2010, assuming all final arrangements are concluded.       The program will inform subscribers of their actual beginning dates of coverage when calling to inform them of program eligibility.
      http://www.mrmib.ca.gov/

      What blockquote>assuming all final arrangements are concluded what funeral arrangements of those on the WAITING LIST? They need INSURANCE NOW, not when someone needs to make ‘arrangements’.

  2. DandyTiger, on October 3, 2010 at 4:34 pm said:

    That picture says it all. LOL.

    Yep, who could have ever predicted epic failure? /snark

  3. myiq2xu, on October 3, 2010 at 4:35 pm said:

    This is my favorite part:

    People who could benefit may not be able to afford the premiums.

    No shit? Sick people who don’t have piles of money? Whodathunkit?

  4. RalphB, on October 3, 2010 at 4:37 pm said:

    This is exactly the way it’s supposed to work. Except those horrifically high premiums which people can’t afford are supposed to be paid anyway. Epic fail indeed.

  5. RalphB, on October 3, 2010 at 5:31 pm said:

    Speaking of fail, even in Pravda, they acknowledge financial reform isn’t altogether good. Count on Sequels to TARP

    Consider the claims made last summer that the Dodd-Frank financial reform act reduces the threats that large, interconnected banks pose to taxpayers and the economy when the banks are deemed too big to fail. Indeed, as regulators hammer out the rules governing derivatives transactions, it’s evident that the law has created a new set of institutions that will almost certainly be deemed too important to fail if they ever get into trouble. And that means there won’t really be an effective way to keep those firms from taking big, profitable, short-term risks that are dumped on the taxpayers when the bets fail.

    Our roster of bailout candidates includes the clearinghouses, created under Dodd-Frank, that are meant to increase the oversight of derivatives trading. Because most derivatives transactions are expected to go through these clearinghouses, they will be “systemically important” under the law. As such, Dodd-Frank specifically provides that “in unusual or exigent circumstances,” the Federal Reserve may provide such entities with a financial backstop, including borrowing privileges.

    Remember this: Financial backstop is just another term for a taxpayer bailout. And the major banks and brokerage firms are the members of the clearinghouses, so a backstop would essentially be for them.

    According to the Bank for International Settlements, the entire derivatives market had a gross credit exposure of $3.5 trillion at the end of 2009. Obviously, even a small fraction of that amount could represent a sizable call on the taxpayers if a clearinghouse hit the skids.

    So much for eradicating too-big-to-fail.

    • Sophie, on October 3, 2010 at 10:23 pm said:

      It wasn’t supposed to eliminate too big to fail–it was supposed to codify it. The bailout was a gift the American people very reluctantly gave. They’re afraid we’ll say next time so they took away our say.

  6. Woman Voter, on October 3, 2010 at 6:01 pm said:

    Preexisting Conditions: Who is Covered under the Health Care Reform Law? (Video says that after September 23rd the insurance are supposed to cover pre-existing conditions, but THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE NOT! Notice how he says they could pass a LAW tomorrow to fix the problem; INSURANCE REFUSING TO ISSUE INSURANCE TO ADULTS AND CHILDREN WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS!) President Obama needs to do some ‘splaining’!

  7. Teresa, on October 3, 2010 at 9:26 pm said:

    So the latest screw you….Starting in January, health insurance co’s are required to cover “preventive care” on an unlimited basis, not subject to deductible. “Preventive care” means shots, physicals and blood work but only IF YOU HAVEN’T BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH DISEASE. Anything that might be deemed preventive care is not covered if it is also to monitor or treat a disease (like high cholesterol). So basically, if you’re over 50, this is probably a non-benefit.

    In order to fund this non-benefit for people who are actually old enough that they typically get sick, they’re raising rates on individual insurees AND cutting benefits in other areas of plans, increasing co-pays, increasing deductibles. God forbid if your “preventive care” finds something because even if you can afford your soon to be mandated insurance, you may not be able to afford to get sick.

    For me, that means
    –Another 10% rate increase when I just had a 17% rate increase.
    –I will have a huge deductible on prescription drugs, so high that I effectively won’t have prescription drug coverage anymore.
    –MRI’s and other screening will only be covered at 50% (after I meet an increased deductible).
    — The number of office visits not subject to (exhorbitant) deductible have been reduced.

    Oh, and the lifetime caps will be eliminiated — except in the case of transplant, LOL. Does anyone ever meet a 2 million dollar cap if they don’t need a transplant?

    Thanks, Obama, you’ve really fvcked things up bigtime. Even if the Republicans repeal this health insurance fiasco, the tube is now out of the toothpaste (or whatever analogy, LOL), and insurance cos will definitely not go back on the things that they like about this…which is probably all of it, because you know little Baracky would never do anything the insurance cos don’t like.

    I am NEVER. VOTING. FOR. A. DEMOCRAT. AGAIN. I am personally worse off with Democrats in office, easily as bad if not WORSE than when Republicans are in office. It’s third party or nothing.

    Okay, I’m upsetting my dog, she’s under my desk. These little critters are so sensitive, I can’t believe it! I’ll stop now.

    • NWLuna, on October 3, 2010 at 10:37 pm said:

      They made “preventive care” covered w/out deductible because it’s so limited. But you have to be able to afford the insurance premiums in the first place.

  8. Fannie, on October 3, 2010 at 11:10 pm said:

    From talking to my insurance people about open season in November, I am told that my cost has gone up $100 or more, and I will be getting a statement
    soon. That increase is from May until November.

  9. foxyladi14, on October 4, 2010 at 8:34 am said:

    lets hope this mess can be repealed 👿

  10. Woman Voter, on October 4, 2010 at 10:27 am said:

    Health Insurers See Hikes in Coming Weeks

    • Woman Voter, on October 4, 2010 at 10:29 am said:

      17%, 23%, 39%, 40% and 83%

      I called and asked when the increase was 23% in 2009 and I simply am at a loss at 80+%…WHO IS LOOKING OUT FOR US?

  11. Woman Voter, on October 4, 2010 at 10:33 am said:

    Obama Warns Insurance Companies

    (Warn them, his base, but NO LEGISLATION WAS PLACED INTO THE HRC LAW to protect the people! Empty words in my opinion, and President Obama didn’t support HE 676, The Public Option and killed the Medicare Buy In!)

  12. Woman Voter, on October 4, 2010 at 12:49 pm said:

    YES WE CAN 2008

    Single Payer: “NO WE CAN’T” President Obama 2010
    The Public Option:”NO WE CAN’T” President Obama 2010
    Medicare Buy In: “NO WE CAN’T” President Obama 2010

    So, what in was all the “ME TOO” about during the Primaries and then when in office it is President NO WE CAN’T!?!

    Single-Payer Activists Hold Obama Accountable, March on Private Insurance Company (Obama broke campaign promises on Health Care)

    • Woman Voter, on October 4, 2010 at 12:57 pm said:

      YES WE CAN 2008

      Single Payer: “NO WE CAN’T” President Obama 2010
      The Public Option:”NO WE CAN’T” President Obama 2010
      Medicare Buy In: “NO WE CAN’T” President Obama 2010

      Health Care is a CIVIL RIGHTS issue, the only people calling for people to die are in the GOP Party where even the preacher Huckabee will protect insurance companies and let people die, even children. We need to expose EVERYONE that kept Single Payer, The Public Option and The Medicare Buy In so that the American people can see who is NOT WORKING FOR THEM. Why are we the most powerful country in WAR, yet our people don’t have HEALTH CARE?

      Why is the US a THIRD WORLD COUNTRY WHEN IT COMES TO HEALTH CARE FOR ALL IT’S CITIZENS?

      What is Single Payer

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: