Very few people are sold on Obamacare: enrollments pathetically low

Did they want them? Or was it the only thing they could afford?

 

It's as true as any of the bull**** the good Doctor spews around here.

 

He's a doctor?

 

what bull**** would you be talking about?

Mark you do realize that if these people had wanted more coverage they could of gotten more coverage before? It is not progress for the government to make the decision for them.

 

More numbers:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/obamacare-10-numbers-to-know-99830.html?hp=l4_b1


846,184 – The number of completed applications through the marketplaces in that first month.

1.5 million – The number of individuals those applications account for.

396,261 – The number of those individuals who were determined eligible for Medicaid or Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

7 million – The number of marketplace enrollees the administration is hoping to get by March 31, 2014.

22 – The percent of that goal that has been reached by individuals applying through the marketplaces between Oct. 1 and Nov. 2 2013 .

26.9 million – The number of unique visitors on the state-based and federally facilitated marketplaces.

3 million – The number of calls placed to state-based and federally facilitated marketplaces.

53 percent – The percent of adults who are aware that financial support is available for marketplace coverage, as indicated by a Commonwealth Fund survey. Of those, according to the survey, 17 percent have visited the marketplace, and 58 percent said they are very likely or somewhat likely to go or go back to enroll in a plan or to apply for Medicaid/CHIP before the open enrollment period ends.

502,446 – The number of Americans who signed up in the first month who are positioned to have health coverage in 2014 through the marketplace, Medicaid and CHIP.



It seems to me between this and the state vs federal numbers, there's a lot of evidence that demand is high but technical issues are the primary problem. That would suggest a bigger problem with implementation than with the concept of the law itself. And that's only accounting for the marketplaces, rather than non-subsidy people buying through insurers or on sites like EHealthInsurance that simply weren't eligible before.

December 15th will be an interesting day to look at the numbers, as well as March 31st. And the bigger data may be the earnings reports from Humana, etc to see how their total members numbers look.

 

OK I see what you meant about prison time.

I haven't seen statistics yet regarding how many young adults have been able to remain on their parent's insurance who otherwise wouldn't without ACA but I think that needs to be considered if we are looking at how the ACA is doing. We also need to look at how many have insurance now who couldn't because of preexisting conditions. I don't know what that is either but my suspicion is that that isn't an insignificant number either.

One part of the ACA, a very big part, the Federal exchange has performed terribly but that isn't the whole ACA.

 

The young adult thing is going to blow up in their faces as well because of the new community rating rules.

Right now parents love the idea of keeping their kids on the plan to age 26 because they probably have other kids already on the plan. It's basically free for them to keep the extra kid or kids on there.

For small groups in 2014 that will no longer be the case. Each child will have their own individual rate, and if they are over 18 it will be the full employee rate at that age.

So mom and dad may not be so happy to keep their 26 year old on their plan if it is costing them an extra $300!

That happens to large group as well in 2015.

 

That age group tends to be not expensive to insure. If they are charging 300 bucks the insurance companies are just making straight profit.

 

You don't understand the law. It's ok, most people don't.

The price is fixed basically. The oldest person on the plan can only be charged 3x the price of the youngest person. (65 to 21 spread) In order to make the actuarial values work across the board you have to set the youngest price higher.

As employer plans tend to be better plans than an individual would purchase on his own, the price will likely be higher.

You significantly underrate the price that people will be paying now. I just plugged in someone born in 1990 for BCBS and the Gold plans are around $300.

 

Agree. I never understood why actuaries don't care how many kids or how old because it obviously makes a difference in claims. Maybe because enrollment and billing would be too complex...nah...I've seen what they done on those sides and they obviously don't care about complex.

But if they did, youth would cost in my family because my wife and kids someone is in the Dr office every month while I have been to a Dr 1 time in 15+ years.

 

Not trying to be a jerk, but you really should get check-ups more frequently than that. Probably a blood test at least every 2 years.

 

Not a jerk and your probably right. I work in the insurance industry and they have a free on-sight nurse as well as good employer coverage. I do go to the nurse every other year...ok maybe not that much...but everything checks out ok. I have longevity in my genes but even if The Lord says you're done, then I'm ready. I'm 54 and I don't wear glasses...even to read...a freak of nature. But you're right, I should get a checkup every once in a while.

 

If it was all they could afford, and the ACA takes those plans away, wouldn't they be unable to afford health care? Having the AFFORDABLE Care Act remove affordability from people seems to be bad PR if I'm being honest.

 

expanding subsidies and Medicaid would seem to assuage your fears.

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/

of course, blame it on the STTTTAAAAATTTESSS that decided against doing so

I do agree with you though: the only affordable option in the long run is single-payer. The sooner people realize it, the better.

 

You mean the six weeks between Franken getting seated and Kennedy dying?

Big window there, eh?

 

via TPM --

A memo circulated among House Republicans this week details the GOP's plan to relentlessly attack the Affordable Care Act over the course of the next several months, the New York Times reported.

The memo contains a number of talking points that echo some of the GOP's most dire warnings about the health care law.

"Because of Obamacare, I Lost My Insurance.” reads one.

“The Exchanges May Not Be Secure, Putting Personal Information at Risk,” reads another.

According to the Times, GOP strategists intend to use the next several months to "gather stories of people affected by the health care law — through social media, letters from constituents, or meetings during visits back home — and use them to open a line of attack, keep it going until it enters the public discourse and forces a response, then quickly pivot to the next topic."

Read the memo here.

 

Party over country.

Grand Old Trolling.

 

B-Bob, the Obama fumbles and stumbles are priceless ammunition for the primary season that already is under way. I am finding that small business Democrats are ripe for revolt from their former precinct leaders. Here in the Democratic Party we call these newly aware moderates the Grand Old Pals.

 

hum.....

Poll: Majority Optimistic That Obamacare Problems Will Be Fixed

A majority of Americans believes it's too soon to label the Affordable Care Act a failure and that the problems that have plagued the law's rollout will eventually be fixed, according to a poll released Wednesday.

The latest CNN/ORC International poll showed that 53 percent of Americans think it's too early to characterize the health care law as a failure, while 54 percent expressed optimism that the problems currently plaguing Obamacare be resolved.