AWESOME NEW OBAMACARE SITE SHOWS THE WHITE HOUSE REALLY "GETS" MILLENIALS

Jesse Walker|Mar. 17, 2014 2:07 pm

How can that be?

Simple.

Obamacare has caused insurance companies to cancel the health plans of millions of Americans because of those plans’ non-compliance with Obamacare. But those cancellations are just the tip of the iceberg because persistent malfunctioning of the Obamacare sign-up website, healthcare.gov, led Obama to keep extending the sign-up deadline, as well as a one-year delay in the full enforcement of Obamacare. That one-year delay, in turn, means that there will be more insurance plan cancellations when Obamacare is enforced in full.

To determine how many more Americans will have their health insurance cancelled, Rep. Gardner asked each of the insurance executives this question:

“How many [health insurance] plans do you currently offer that do not meet the [Obamacare] law’s requirement, but you are able to continue offering because of the delay [in Obamacare's full enforcement]?”

All but one of the executives demure, saying they don’t have the exact figures or hard numbers.

One insurance executive, however, Frank Coyne of BlueCross BlueShield Association, did answer Rep. Gardner’s question: “3.2 million.”

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/05/13/health-insurance-executives-say-tens-millions-americans-will-lose-health-plans-2/

The Shocking Truth About Obamacare Will Enrage You

Insurance CEO: Obamacare consumers need to break the “choice habit”

By Kate Randall
16 May 2014

One of the harsh realities of the health care overhaul is becoming clearer as people enrolled under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) begin to utilize their coverage: virtually every policy covers only a narrow range of doctors and hospitals, or charges steep premiums for the right to go to any provider.

Such “narrow networks” have become the norm of Obamacare coverage, and are taking hold as well in employer-sponsored coverage and Medicaid Advantage. They feature a limited group of providers, excluding doctors and hospitals that patients may have relied upon for years.

The private insurance companies that sell policies on the insurance exchanges set up under the ACA are embracing this shift to the leaner and meaner networks, and telling customers that they need to shed their dependence on “lavish” health plans and wake up to the new reality.

“We have to break people away from the choice habit that everyone has,” Marcus Merz, CEO of PreferredOne, an insurer in Golden Valley, Minnesota, told the New York Times. “We’re all trying to break away from this fixation on open access and broad networks.” Mr. Merz and PreferredOne stand to profit handsomely from the cost-savings from shrinking networks, as the insurer has grabbed about 60 percent of the market on the Minnesota Obamacare exchange.

Insurance companies have long sought to restrict patient choices in provider networks, and Obamacare is proving to be the vehicle to make it happen. In the early 1990s, similar attempts to streamline networks and restrict choices ran into resistance. Under the ACA’s individual mandate, however, people who are not insured through their employer or a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid are required to obtain insurance or pay a penalty.

This pool of new customers is a captive audience for the private insurers offering coverage on the exchanges. Many are choosing the least expensive “bronze” plans—which most severely restrict provider networks—because they are the only policies they can afford. The private insurers, however, are presenting the selection and purchase of these cut-rate, narrow network plans as a demonstration of smart patient choice.

Karen Ignagni, chief executive of America’s Health Insurance Plans, an industry trade group, told the Times that people “are weighing affordability and breadth of network.” She said, “What we’re finding is individuals are experiencing a preference for affordability.” It is unlikely that Ms. Ignagni, who took home $1,647,861 in salary in 2011, would have a personal preference for coverage that severely restricts her health care choices.

The size of the Obamacare networks vary from state to state, but many of them exclude at least some large hospitals or doctors’ groups. In New Hampshire, for example, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield is the only insurer offered on the exchange, and Anthem has excluded 10 hospitals in the state from its network.

In an appearance before the American Medical Association in 2009, Barack Obama pledged, “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor.” This is now clearly proving not to be the case. Compounding the problem, it is often unclear to those signing up for coverage precisely which doctors and hospitals are included.

Obamacare “navigators” are also receiving complaints that insurers are dropping doctors and hospitals from their networks outside of the open enrollment period, stranding people who thought their preferred providers were included in their plans.

The Georgetown University Center on Health Insurance Reforms noted a case in Georgia where an individual selected a plan because it covered local doctors and a hospital. But when he tried to use his coverage, he discovered that his preferred provider was no longer in the network. “In fact,” the center noted, “the community hospital that acquired all the medical practices in the county withdrew from the network. Now he has a plan that he cannot use without traveling a long distance to see a provider.”

Proponents of President Obama’s signature domestic policy have often hyped as a selling point the guarantee that those suddenly stricken with cancer or another serious disease will not be caught unprepared if they have ACA coverage. As it turns out, many of the most prestigious cancer care centers are excluded from states’ Obamacare insurance networks.

An Associated Press survey found that only four of the nation’s 19 top comprehensive cancer centers are included in the Obamacare networks in the states where they are located. In Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance is not covered by the networks of five of the eight insurance companies participating in the state’s exchange. MD Anderson Cancer Center reported that it was included in less than half of the Houston-area exchange plans.

In New York, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center is only fully covered by two of nine New York City insurers. While in Buffalo, the Roswell Park Cancer Institute is only covered by five of the 16 statewide insurance plans.

The case of a cancer patient in New Jersey highlights the nightmares awaiting many as they navigate the Obamacare system. After some careful consideration, Fred Rosamilia and his wife Lynn signed up on January 1 for a “gold” plan with Horizon Blue Cross and Blue Shield for $800 a month. They also qualified for an $800 a month government subsidy due to their low income.

The couple believed they would qualify for low co-pays for the many doctor’s visits Fred would be making. He told WPIX, “When we told our doctors we were going to be sticking with the Horizon plan through Obamacare they said, ‘great,’ we participate with Horizon.” So we said ‘home run!’”

But as Fred was recovering post-transplant, Lynn found out that Horizon only participated with her husband’s doctors on the less expensive, higher co-pay “silver plan.” Lynn said, “I overheard nurses say to each other they can’t touch Fred till we talk to billing. That put me in tears,” she recounted.

The Rosamilias were facing bills for two months of cancer treatment with virtually no coverage. After petitioning through the Affordable Care Act hotline, the couple was finally allowed to switch to the “silver” coverage. Other Obamacare policyholders facing similar predicaments may not be so “lucky.”

Critics call Obama funding plan for health insurer losses a 'bailout'

Healthcare reform specialists help people select insurance plans at an Affordable Care Act enrollment fair at Pasadena City College in 2013. (David McNew / Getty Images / November 19, 2013) Noam N. Levey 5:00 a.m. CDT, May 21, 2014 Reporting from WASHINGTON— The Obama administration has quietly adjusted key provisions of its signature healthcare law to potentially make billions of additional taxpayer dollars available to the insurance industry if companies providing coverage through the Affordable Care Act lose money. The move was buried in hundreds of pages of new regulations issued late last week. It comes as part of an intensive administration effort to hold down premium increases for next year, a top priority for the White House as the rates will be announced ahead of this fall's congressional elections. Administration officials for months have denied charges by opponents that they plan a "bailout" for insurance companies providing coverage under the healthcare law. They continue to argue that most insurers shouldn't need to substantially increase premiums because safeguards in the healthcare law will protect them over the next several years. But the change in regulations essentially provides insurers with another backup: If they keep rate increases modest over the next couple of years but lose money, the administration will tap federal funds as needed to cover shortfalls. Although little noticed so far, the plan was already beginning to fuel a new round of attacks Tuesday from the healthcare law's critics. "If conservatives want to stop the illegal Obamacare insurance bailout before it starts they must start planning now," wrote Conn Carroll, an editor of the right-leaning news site Townhall.com. On Capitol Hill, Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee began circulating a memo on the issue and urging colleagues to fight what they are calling "another end-run around Congress." Obama administration officials said the new regulations would not put taxpayers at risk. "We are confident this three-year program will not create a shortfall," Health and Human Services spokeswoman Erin Shields Britt said in a statement. "However, we want to be clear that in the highly unlikely event of a shortfall, HHS will use appropriations as available to fill it." The stakes are high for President Obama and the healthcare law. Although more than 8 million people signed up for health coverage under the law, exceeding expectations, insurance companies in several states have been eyeing significant rate increases for next year amid concerns that their new customers are older and sicker than anticipated. Insurers around the country have started to file proposed 2015 premiums, just as the midterm campaigns are heating up. Obamacare, as the law is often called, remains a top campaign issue, and big premium increases in states with tightly contested races could prove politically disastrous for Democrats. If rates go up dramatically, consumers may also turn away from insurance marketplaces in some states, leading to their collapse. Proposed increases in a few states where insurers have already filed 2015 rates have been relatively low, with several major carriers seeking just single-digit hikes. But insurers in closely watched states, such as Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Arkansas, are still preparing their filings. "It's absolutely paramount to keep premiums in check," said Len Nichols, a health economist at George Mason University who has advised officials working on the law. The state-based marketplaces, which opened last year, allow consumers who do not get health coverage at work to shop among plans that meet basic standards. Sick consumers cannot be turned away, and low- and moderate-income Americans qualify for government subsidies to offset their premiums. To stabilize this new system, the law set up a complex system of funds, including one known as the Temporary Risk Corridors Program, that collect money from insurers and transfer it from companies with healthier, less expensive consumers to those with sicker, more costly consumers. This system was supposed to pay for itself, as does a similar one used to shift money between drug plans in the Medicare Part D program. But insurance industry officials have grown increasingly anxious about the new system's adequacy. Pressure is most acute on insurers in states where healthy consumers were allowed to remain in old plans that are not sold on the new online marketplaces, an option Obama offered to states amid a political firestorm over plan cancellations last year. The president had promised people would be able to stick with their plans. The renewal temporarily solved a political problem for the White House, but created a new one. Maintaining these old plans kept many healthy consumers out of the marketplaces, making the pool of new customers less healthy and therefore potentially more expensive for insurers, according to experts. In a series of White House meetings over the last several months, Obama and other senior administration officials have sought to persuade insurance company CEOs to nonetheless hold rates in check, arguing that the marketplaces would stabilize over time. But with proposed 2015 rates beginning to come in, the administration acceded to industry demands for a clear guarantee that more money would be available to cover potential losses. RELATED Democrats should run on Obamacare, Bill Clinton says MAPS Washington, DC, USA "In the unlikely event of a shortfall for the 2015 program year, HHS recognizes that the Affordable Care Act requires the secretary to make full payments to issuers," the regulation published Friday notes. "In that event, HHS will use other sources of funding for the risk corridor payments, subject to the availability of appropriations." That language allows the administration to tap funds appropriated for other health programs to supplement payments to insurers, according to administration and industry officials. Among congressional Republicans, the decision has raised concerns. "If the program costs more than it brings in, the secretary would be able to divert money intended for other programs," Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee warned. Whether the new regulations will be sufficient to control rates remains unclear. America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's Washington-based lobbying arm, welcomed the administration's move, saying in a statement that the regulations "provide important clarity about how these insurer-financed programs will work as health plans prepare their rates for 2015." In a note to investors this week, J.P. Morgan also noted that the new rules "should improve stability of the exchange market." But some insurers continue to warn of bigger increases. Larry Levitt, an insurance expert at the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, cautioned that some consumers may still be in for sticker shock. "Premium hikes will likely be modest in much of the country," he said. "But probably not everywhere." noam.levey@latimes.com http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-na-insurance-bailout-20140521,0,6987064.story?page=2 Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times