2/13/14, "WSJ: Poorer counties facing especially high premiums, few choices, little competition through ObamaCare," Hot Air, E. Johnsen
Pres. Obama, 9/9/2009: "“My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. That’s how the market works. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent is controlled by just one company. And without competition, the price of insurance goes up and quality goes down.”"... (3 parags. after "You lie" in WH transcript)
"On top of the narrower provider networks that many Americans are now facing as insurers scramble to control costs while complying with ObamaCare’s new rules, the WSJ just did an analysis of the healthcare offerings in 36 states that found that hundreds of thousands of Americans in poorer counties are discovering they have limited choices of health insurers and are looking at higher premiums through the online exchanges. For many, in fact, their ObamaCare-offered policy options are going to come from a monopoly of their local insurance market:
Consumers in 515 counties, spread across 15 states, have only one insurer selling coverage through the online marketplaces, the Journal found. In more than 80% of those counties, the sole insurer is a local Blue Cross & Blue Shield plan. Residents of wealthier, more populated counties in the U.S. receive lower-priced choices than those living in counties with a single insurer. …Aetna’s CEO Mark Bertolini has been pretty open about the fact that his company is only participating in ObamaCare in areas with stable levels of employment and income in order to attract profitable customers, although as he mentioned again last week, they’re still considering pulling out of ObamaCare altogether if they don’t feel they can maintain profitability.
Higher participation rates among young adults, as much as 40%, is seen as essential to balance out the higher costs of covering older people for insurers that are already limiting the counties where they offer coverage. …
The average price for a 50-year-old American to obtain the cheapest midlevel “silver plan” through HealthCare.gov—the marketplace operated by the federal government—was $406 in counties with one health insurer, the Journal found. In counties with four insurers, the average price of the cheapest comparable silver plan was $329.
The price differences reflect the strategy of insurers to pick markets where they believe they can turn a profit—and avoid areas of high unemployment and a concentration of unhealthy residents they deem more risky.
Aetna Inc. and UnitedHealth Group Inc., for instance, have limited their participation in the new health-insurance marketplaces, where consumers shop for coverage, to a much smaller map than their traditional business. They offer coverage in more counties outside of the marketplaces, where plans are sold directly to consumers and federal subsidies aren’t available.
So, in many cases, the number of insurers competing in many states’ individual insurance markets via ObamaCare is actually less than the number of carriers that sold individual policies pre-ObamaCare."...via Free Rep.
.
==================================
2/12/14, "For Many, Few Health-Plan Choices, High Premiums on Online Exchanges," Wall St. Journal, by Timothy W. Martin and Christopher Weaver
"Analysis Shows Americans in Poorer Counties Have Limited Options on Health-Care Exchanges"
=========================
The House of Representatives has power over all government funding and can't be vetoed by the Senate or White House:
John Boehner since Jan. 2011 has refused to allow the Constitutionally provided standalone, up or down vote to defund ObamaCare. The whole reason we gave him so many extra people in Nov. 2010 was so he could easily defund ObamaCare but he wouldn't do it. Nor has he allowed a vote to approve O'Care as a tax. ObamaCare is currently illegal. Following two articles cite these facts though they're basic civics:
10/2/13, “Obamacare can be defunded without Senate approval,“ Examiner, Christopher Collins
"Dr. Harold Pease, an expert on the United States Constitution, stated that the authority in dealing with Obamacare funding belongs to the U.S. House, not the U.S. Senate and that the House is doing this all wrong.
Pease said, “Everything hinged upon funding which was given exclusively to the House of Representatives, the only power that they alone had.”
Pease went on to say, “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills. To fund anything, in this case Obamacare, first approval is required by the House of Representatives.”
“If that does not happen taxpayer money cannot be spent. The people, through their representatives to Congress, have determined, after a three-year closer scrutiny of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), that it does not protect the patient, is not affordable and is not even workable; hence in the interests of the vast majority of the people needs to be defunded.”
When the United States Supreme Court ruled on Obamacare in 2012, Chief Justice Roberts stance on Obamacare coincides with the intent of the U.S. Constitution, explained by Pease, and the powers between the House and Senate.
According to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Obamacare cannot be implemented and is not considered the law of the land....
"Because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax,” said Atkinson....
When the House attached Obamacare to the legislation in funding the government, it made a mistake in doing so and the funding of Obamacare should have been separate, thereby giving the Senate no power in denying the Houses’ request to defund Obamacare.
Pease said, “House opposition to funding Obamacare would have been far more powerful if made a “stand alone” bill not attached to general funding, but it is not. “Stand alone,” having no other parts, would have left the Senate no wiggle or compromise room once it went to them, nor would there be for the Joint Conference Committee thereafter that reconciles any differences between the two houses. There would be nothing to reconcile, Obamacare is merely defunded.”
“Still, the intent of the Founding Fathers was to give the people, through their House of Representatives, the power collectively to say no to any proposed federal tax, which she is decidedly doing.”
[Edited for clarity] If Obamacare is removed from the government budget, presented, and voted on as a separate bill, Obamacare can be defunded by the House. "...
=============================
9/17/13, "The Obama-Boehner Project," Angelo M. Codevilla, libertylawsite.org
"The Republican Party owes its majority in the House of Representatives – and John Boehner his speakership thereof – to the American people’s dislike of Obamacare. Because the US Constitution is explicit that the US government may expend only funds appropriated by Congress, Obamacare has existed strictly at the sufferance of the House leadership since that majority took office in January 2011. But John Boehner and his chosen band have thwarted the majority of Republican congressmen’s desire to use the constitutional power they have to refuse to appropriate money for Obamacare. In this, Boehner &co. have worked in bipartisan coordination with the ruling class, including the media, including Fox News.
By September 2013, spurred by the Party’s constituent groups, Republican congressmen and senators had vowed to exclude Obamacare from the omnibus spending bill that funds government operations. (the existence of such bills, which neuter Congress’ constitutional authority over spending, will be the subject of another column).
Boehner and his band responded with a proposal to vote on the omnibus spending bill, twice: once without Obamacare, so as to allow Congressmen to feign evidence of faithfulness to the principles for which they were elected, and another with Obamacare. The latter would pass with the votes of all Democrats and just enough of the Republican leadership to put it over the top. It would become law, and satisfy the ruling class’ constituent groups: the insurance companies, the hospital lobby, as well as left wing ideologues....
Support for Obamacare was dwindling daily to the ruling class’ inner core as the membership of organizations whose leaders had supported its passage now demanded that these leaders lobby for exemptions from it. The labor movement, one of the ruling class’ key constituencies, was turning against it as vehemently as the Republican rank-and-file. Hence Boehner’s continued fidelity to Obamacare was especially boneheaded.
The ruling class’ foolishness and insincerity, its willingness to insult the American people’s intelligence, are no joke. But we can take comfort in its transparent ineptitude."
================================
GOP House 'leadership' loves ObamaCare, has never had any intention of defunding or repealing it. They even put an ObamaCare defunding measure in the GOP controlled House Appropriations Committee and made sure it was "deadlocked" for an indefinite period:
.
9/29/11, "Draft spending bill would defund Obama healthcare law," The Hill, Sam Baker
"House Republicans released a draft spending bill Thursday that would cut off funding for many parts of the healthcare reform law, though the bill remains deadlocked in the Appropriations Committee."...
===================
Confused Sen. Ron Johnson (R) claims ObamaCare is "mandatory spending:"
9/26/13, "Sen. Ron Johnson: 'Stop Relying on the Federal Government to solve your problems,'" CNS News, via Fox News
Senator Ron Johnson: ""Obamacare is permanent law. It's part of that mandatory spending."" (quote at end of article)
.
No comments:
Post a Comment