|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 9, 2013 1:50:13 GMT
One after another....these very sad stories are continuing to pile up:
"A South Carolina cancer patient told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly Thursday night he is being forced to make a life or death decision after his health insurance plan was cancelled due to ObamaCare.
Bill Elliot, who originally reached out to “The Kelly File” on Facebook to share his story, said he can no longer afford to pay his medical bills and does not want to take on the new costs because he does not want to put a “burden” on his family.
“If I make it that long I’ll pay the $95 or whatever fine and I’m just going to let nature take its course,” he said.
Elliot said he feels “misled,” adding he voted for President Obama over former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney because of Obama's repeated promise he could keep his insurance under the new health care law, which has turned out to be untrue for millions of Americans like him.
He also slammed the president's apology over the health care cancellations.
“I believe that was more of an insult to me and other people who have been cancelled,” Elliot said."
www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/08/cancer-patient-says-being-forced-to-make-life-or-death-decision-after-health/?intcmp=latestnews
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 9, 2013 14:34:54 GMT
I've read this story three times and can't figure out what Bill Elliot's "life or death decision" is. Is it that he would have to pay for subsidized health insurance or be covered for free under Medicaid?
But wait, South Carolina refused the expansion of Medicaid under Republican Governor Nikki Haley so perhaps Bill Elliot is one of those that Republicans refused to cover under "Obamacare's" expansion of Medicaid.
Considering the fact that the subsidize health insurance through the exchange would be relatively inexpensive especially when compared to his treatment of cancer it doesn't make any sense for him to not purchase it. He'll spend far more if he doesn't and really create a financial burden for his family. Obviously he doesn't qualify for the pre-expansion Medicaid because that's "free" insurance for him.
Logic dictates that the only "person" that would be facing what Bill Elliot is facing would be one of the 5 million that won't have "insurance" because of Republican States that refused to expand Medicaid. The federal government would pay for Bill Elliot's medical needs but apparently Gov. Haley and the Republican Legislature in South Carolina don't believe he deserves the health care services to treat his cancer.
|
|
|
|
Post by smartmouthwoman on Nov 9, 2013 15:41:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by smartmouthwoman on Nov 9, 2013 15:49:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 9, 2013 16:31:47 GMT
I've read this story three times and can't figure out what Bill Elliot's "life or death decision" is. Is it that he would have to pay for subsidized health insurance or be covered for free under Medicaid?
But wait, South Carolina refused the expansion of Medicaid under Republican Governor Nikki Haley so perhaps Bill Elliot is one of those that Republicans refused to cover under "Obamacare's" expansion of Medicaid.
Considering the fact that the subsidize health insurance through the exchange would be relatively inexpensive especially when compared to his treatment of cancer it doesn't make any sense for him to not purchase it. He'll spend far more if he doesn't and really create a financial burden for his family. Obviously he doesn't qualify for the pre-expansion Medicaid because that's "free" insurance for him.
Logic dictates that the only "person" that would be facing what Bill Elliot is facing would be one of the 5 million that won't have "insurance" because of Republican States that refused to expand Medicaid. The federal government would pay for Bill Elliot's medical needs but apparently Gov. Haley and the Republican Legislature in South Carolina don't believe he deserves the health care services to treat his cancer.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 9, 2013 16:38:51 GMT
MILLIONS, already....and counting. And this doesn't even include all that will start happening once the Employer mandate goes in to effect. At that time, we're going to see Employers either changing their plans to fit the "one-size-fits-all" Obamacare formula which will cost MORE money......OR cancelling providing the option of health benefits altogether, forcing their employees out on to Obamacare exchanges.
Of course, ALL this was PLANNED by the Democrats from the start; they just didn't inform the Sheeples.....because they wanted to get elected. It's TRUE; Obama LIED, and now people will die.
|
|
|
|
Post by smartmouthwoman on Nov 9, 2013 16:47:04 GMT
MILLIONS, already....and counting. And this doesn't even include all that will start happening once the Employer mandate goes in to effect. At that time, we're going to see Employers either changing their plans to fit the "one-size-fits-all" Obamacare formula which will cost MORE money......OR cancelling providing the option of health benefits altogether, forcing their employees out on to Obamacare exchanges.
Of course, ALL this was PLANNED by the Democrats from the start; they just didn't inform the Sheeples.....because they wanted to get elected. It's TRUE; Obama LIED, and now people will die.
Obama was reelected based on a lie. If the Dims had been honest, we wouldn't even be having this discussion because folks would NOT have voted to give up their current ins. Very sad. Gotta wonder how much more people will take before they start calling for Obamas head on a platter. |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 9, 2013 17:03:34 GMT
MILLIONS, already....and counting. And this doesn't even include all that will start happening once the Employer mandate goes in to effect. At that time, we're going to see Employers either changing their plans to fit the "one-size-fits-all" Obamacare formula which will cost MORE money......OR cancelling providing the option of health benefits altogether, forcing their employees out on to Obamacare exchanges.
Of course, ALL this was PLANNED by the Democrats from the start; they just didn't inform the Sheeples.....because they wanted to get elected. It's TRUE; Obama LIED, and now people will die.
Obama was reelected based on a lie. If the Dims had been honest, we wouldn't even be having this discussion because folks would NOT have voted to give up their current ins. Very sad. Gotta wonder how much more people will take before they start calling for Obamas head on a platter. |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 10, 2013 10:19:25 GMT
I've read this story three times and can't figure out what Bill Elliot's "life or death decision" is. Is it that he would have to pay for subsidized health insurance or be covered for free under Medicaid?
But wait, South Carolina refused the expansion of Medicaid under Republican Governor Nikki Haley so perhaps Bill Elliot is one of those that Republicans refused to cover under "Obamacare's" expansion of Medicaid.
Considering the fact that the subsidize health insurance through the exchange would be relatively inexpensive especially when compared to his treatment of cancer it doesn't make any sense for him to not purchase it. He'll spend far more if he doesn't and really create a financial burden for his family. Obviously he doesn't qualify for the pre-expansion Medicaid because that's "free" insurance for him.
Logic dictates that the only "person" that would be facing what Bill Elliot is facing would be one of the 5 million that won't have "insurance" because of Republican States that refused to expand Medicaid. The federal government would pay for Bill Elliot's medical needs but apparently Gov. Haley and the Republican Legislature in South Carolina don't believe he deserves the health care services to treat his cancer.
The cost of insurance with the Federal Insurance Exchange (when the damn thing is working LOL) isn't cost prohibitive especially for low income families that are highly subsidized. As someone pointed out the federal subsidizes are provided for some families with up to about $90,000 in net income (which is absurd IMHO).
For very low income families they already qualified for pre-expansion Medicaid but many were unaware of that as we've found out in WA. About 1/3rd of the people in WA signing up under Medicaid only learned they were qualified because of our State Health Insurance Exchange.
The only people being "left out of the loop" are individuals living in States that refused the expansion of Medicaid based upon the Supreme Court decision that "Obamacare" didn't anticipate and made no provisions for. Because this man lives in Florida that rejected the expansion of Medicaid it's logical to conclude that he falls into this group because apparently he doesn't qualify for the subsidized private insurance (that makes it affordable) or the pre-expansion Medicaid program.
Once again though the story if void of any substantive information so we're left to logical deduction and logical deduction places him in the 5 million Americans that won't be covered under "Obamacare" because some (Republican) States refused the fully funded expansion of Medicaid.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 10, 2013 10:34:50 GMT
Why do Republicans keep harping on Obama said, "You won't lose your insurance or your doctor" in 2009? What Obama was saying is that "under the law you won't lose your insurance or doctor" because the law contained no provisions that would take away someone's insurance or require them to go to another doctor. The ACA law didn't do either. It didn't cancel anyone's insurance policy nor did it blacklist any doctors.
We've had all kinds of stories. We've had corporations that changed their group insurance to obtain equal or better employee benefits while citing that cost wasn't a factor. We've had some corporations decide to exclude a working spouse from coverage where the spouse's employer provided group insurance for them. We've had insurance comp anies that were very small players in private health insurance in a state decide to withdraw from the private insurance business in that state because they didn't have enough policy holders to keep their prices low. We've even had medical providers decide to not accept some of the new insurance companies that are involved in the Insurance Exchanges.
What we haven't seen is one case of where "Obamacare" actually caused the loss of insurance or a person not being able to keep their own doctor. All of the cases I've read deal with decisions made by private enterprise and were not a result of the law itself because the law didn't mandate any of the above happening.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 10, 2013 10:45:31 GMT
When did a politician not misrepresent the truth? Try naming even one. Even Ted Cruz misrepresents the truth.
He could pour gasoline over himself and light himself on fire in front of the White House in protest but I haven't even seen him offer to do that. On the flipside though he does show a willingness to destroy America in his campaign against Obamacare.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 10, 2013 21:08:07 GMT
When did a politician not misrepresent the truth? Try naming even one. Even Ted Cruz misrepresents the truth.
He could pour gasoline over himself and light himself on fire in front of the White House in protest but I haven't even seen him offer to do that. On the flipside though he does show a willingness to destroy America in his campaign against Obamacare.
You don't expect much of this president, do you? I mean.....it's the president who LIED to the people in order to get a massive multi-TRILLION federal program through.....and in a 100% PARTISAN manner. And now he's been caught in his lies. Cruz had absolutely NOTHING to do with Obamacare; wasn't even here as a Senator when it was shoved down the throats of American on a 100% PARTISAN basis. Ted Cruz want sent to D.C. because his constituents said...."we don't like what was done to the country and we want someone who will at least TRY to get it changed." Cruz has vowed to do that......and I expect him to keep trying.
He and all the millions of others who believe Obamcare is bad for our country are simply trying to SAVE America; not destroy it. Now that we are finding out what's in the law, we are realizing just how badly the country got screwed. |
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 11, 2013 9:25:21 GMT
I'm going to repeat myself real sloooooooowly in the hope I will be understood.
Under the ACA there are no provisions that would take someone's private insurance away from them or require someone to go to another doctor that I'm aware of. If those provisions exist then please point them out to me.
The anecdotal stories of people losing their insurance or losing their medical service provider (doctor) presented so far have all related to either a business decision by the insurance company or a decision by the medical service provider or by the individual that had nothing to do with the Affordable Care Act.
Of the two health care proposals to address the problem of tens of millions of Americans without insurance and that couldn't afford insurance and that couldn't afford health care services in 2009 (i.e. the 'uninsured') the Affordable Care Act from the Senate was the lesser of two evils. The worst of the two evils was the single-payer plan originally passed by the House. These were the only two proposals in Congress to address the problem and both were proposals by Democrats.
There wasn't a single Republican proposal that addressed the problem of the tens of millions of uninsured that couldn't afford insurance and that couldn't pay for health care services and never has been historically that I have been able to find.
A quick history lesson from what I know.
The problem of the tens of millions of "uninsured" in America was first identified in 1948 under the Truman (Democratic) administration but nothing, to my knowledge, was done at that time.
The problem was basically ignored during the Eisenhower (Republican) administration as no laws were passed to address it.
The problem was re-addressed under the Johnson (Democratic) administration that created Medicare for retirees and Medicaid for those that were pre-retirement age. Both programs sucked (and I can address why they sucked) but had they both been properly funded would have provided health insurance for all of the tens of millions of uninsured Americans. The Medicare/Medicaid programs were created by Democrats and Republicans offered no alternative plans. Medicare was fully funded but Medicaid, a voluntary federal-state partnership, was not so we still had tens of millions of uninsured even after all of the states eventually joined the Medicaid program.
The Nixon (Republican), Ford (Republican), Carter (Democratic), Reagan (Republican), and George GW Bush (Republican) administrations all ignored the problem of the tens of millions of "uninsured" with no Democratic or Republican proposals to fix the problem.
The problem was re-addressed under the Clinton (Democratic) administration in 1993 and the proposal, created by a Democrat (H. Clinton) was rejected by the Congress. There were no alternative Republican proposal to address the problem of the tens of millions of uninsured in America.
The problem of tens of millions of "uninsured" was ignored again during the George W Bush (Republican) administration and no proposals were made.
In 2009 under the Obama (Democratic) administration two proposals, one from the House Democrats for a single-payer system, and one by the Senate for a "private insurance & expanded Medicaid" (ACA) proposal by Senate Democrats were proposed. The Republicans offered no proposals in either the House or Senate that would have addressed the problem of the tens of millions of "uninsured" in America. As mentioned above both sucked but the single-payer proposal was the worst of the two. The ACA proposal also sucked but it was based upon prior "conservative" proposals predominately from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. Both the House and Senate proposals addressed the problem of the tens of millions of "uninsured" in America with the "single-payer" being the "simplest" (and worst solution) and the "ACA" solution based predominately upon prior "conservative" proposals outside of Congress was the most complex (and lessor of two evils). The Republicans took the "No solution" position at the time and that wasn't a viable option.
Lacking any other proposal, and after trying to obtain Republican support with the Senate ACA proposal based upon prior "conservative" proposals, the Congress voted down "party lines" and eventually passed the ACA over the single-payer option.
The real choice for Congress in 2009, was whether to provide for the millions of "uninsured" under one of two Democratic proposals or to ignore them once again. To summarize the effect of the vote in 2009 it would be best phrased as follows:
Yes vote = provide quality health care for all Americans based upon one of the two lousy proposals by Democrats.
No vote = let tens of millions of Americans go without quality health care based upon no plan at all.
The Republicans, along party-lines, voted against providing quality health care for all Americans. The proposals by the Democrats both sucked but they would provide for that quality health care but there was no alternative to the proposals by Republicans.
Bottom line the choice was really "Bad solution, Worse solution, & No solution" and Republicans selected "No solution" and that was the only unacceptable choice for Americans if the problem was to be addressed. Republicans had their chance in 2009 and simply refused to address the real problem.
Today the Republicans are trying to re-instate the "No solution" option by repealing and/or defunding "Obamacare" and that still remains an unacceptable choice for Americans today. As bad as "Obamacare" is it is still superior to the "No solution" option by Republicans.
"Obamacare" will succeed in it's intended goal of providing quality health care for all Americans eventually. Yes, some Republican states have rejected the expansion of Medicaid for now but just like the original Medicaid it will be eventually adopted by all states. Republicans can howl all they want, they can provide anecdotal stories, they can point to implementation problems, they can do all of these things but it won't stop "Obamacare" from achieving its actual goal of providing quality health care to all Americans. It's a crappy program that is complex, intrusive, and costly but it's going to succeed in achieving the goal eventually.
Americans are never going to back-track from having all Americans receiving quality health care. The "No solution" Republican option has been removed from the table completely because once these Americans start receiving quality health care services in 2014 no one is going to take it away from them.
There is only one political option still on the table and that's to transition "Obamacare" into something better by passing laws to improve it perhaps to the point that it's almost unrecognizable because of all the improvements. The "repeal/defund" option does not exist politically in the United States and it's time for Republicans, especially Tea Party Republicans, to face this political reality.
By analogy "Obamacare" is like a serious "fixer-upper" home where the roof leaks and the windows are broken and the family can live in it the way it is or they can start to renovate it to make it habitable. I believe that the Republican Party has the best chance of coming up with a renovation plan but they're not going to allowed to evict the family from the home during renovation.
Republicans need to break their historical refusal to address the problem of tens of millions of "uninsured" because "Obamacare" (as bad as it is) solved that problem. Republicans need to come up with a plan to ensure that all Americans will continue to receive quality health care and it will have to be a transitional plan from "Obamacare" to something better. That is the Republican's only option politically in America today because "Obamacare" with all of it's faults can costs actually fixed the problem.
Heck, I've even made an "off-the-cuff" proposal based upon the simple proposition that the States, not the Federal government, should logically be responsible for ensuring quality health care for the residents of the State. That proposal is in the Healthcare forum but I've received no comments on it yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 12, 2013 4:27:22 GMT
Shiva: "Under the ACA there are no provisions that would take someone's private insurance away from them or require someone to go to another doctor that I'm aware of. If those provisions exist then please point them out to me.
The anecdotal stories of people losing their insurance or losing their medical service provider (doctor) presented so far have all related to either a business decision by the insurance company or a decision by the medical service provider or by the individual that had nothing to do with the Affordable Care Act."
The above two statements are lies. Yes, there are provisions that caused people to lose their health plans....and Obama and the Democrats knew it all along. In fact, their estimate in 2010 was that by 2013 (this year) the low estimate was that 39% would have lost their insurance and the high estimate was that 69% would have lost their insurance. AND yet the Democrats and Obama were lying.....because Obama KNEW what he was telling people in order to get re-elected was a LIE:
ALL the time he was telling the people, "If you like your health plan you could keep your health plan....period," was an outright LIE. They had estimates back in at least 2010 that a large percentage would be lost. Why? Because it's written in the law that any changes in plans.....even minor ones.......that were grandfathered would mean they would be cancelled. Obama and the Dems knew full well how health insurance works. Almost every year co-deductibles change slightly....or something will change slightly in ALL plans. So, they knew it; they expected it. And so, they had estimated a large number would be going in to the exchanges as a result. They PLANNED on it. So, to act like it was unexpected.....or that it was due to insurance companies, was a LIE. Obama knew this would cause insurance plans to be cancelled and end up in the exchanges because it was planned that way. They WANT the people in the exchanges; NOT in the private plans. There's more of this that will happen next year AFTER the corporate mandate goes the same way. And you'll see MANY more unhappy people as a result. The only saving grace is that this will be happening during the 2014 election for Senate.
Obama gave Unions an exemption from this happening to their insurance polices.........but not to every other citizen. So, in July of 2010, Republican proposed legislation to give the rest of the citizens that same exemption to be able to keep their policies....and guess what? ?? Democrats voted 100% AGAINST that proposal.
So, yes, Obama knew; Democrat leadership knew. And he LIED to the people.....and Democrats sat by and LET him LIE as they stayed silent and VOTED DOWN the proposal to change it for them. And that is why he's in deep do-do right now. You're going to be seeing and hearing all this over and over again....in all the ads. In fact, they've already started.
www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/11/lies-of-obamacare-mcclatchy-edition.php
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 12, 2013 5:00:39 GMT
BTW, for those who say Obamacare is settled law and cannot be changed......why do you think Republicans should simply give up, when Democrats never do? After all, the Democrats having been trying to get national health care since the early 90's......despite the people saying, "we don't want it." Again in 2009, the majority was saying, "we don't want it," but it was shoved down our throats anyway.
Democrats never gave up....so again, why should Republicans?? The Democrats can't even successfully design and implement a website...and already wasted $600 MILLLION trying to do so. So, what makes you think they can run national healthcare?? There is NOTHING about this that will be less expensive and cut healthcare costs. And wasn't that the initial plan?
You know, Democrats talking head Kristen Powers said on Fox that she lost her health insurance through Blue Cross Blue Shield. She loved her plan. She was able to get another plan through her exchange and it's $500 more per month. She's one of the young who has to pay for everyone else in order to make this work. How many others do you think will do what Democrat Powers did? She makes good money.....but how many others her age will be able to pay for such an expensive plan? Again, wasn't this supposed to cost people less...and save money???
What a lie that has been thrust upon the American people. Shame on the Democrats who did this to our nation.
|
|
?? Democrats voted 100% AGAINST that proposal.