Providing Access to Insurance for Uninsured Americans with Pre-Existing Conditions
National program established July 1, 2010
A
Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) provides new coverage
options to individuals who have been uninsured for at least six months
because of a pre-existing condition. States have the option of running
this new program in their state. If a state has chosen not to do so, a
plan has been established by the Department of Health and Human Services
in that state.
0
ObamaCare implementations began in 2010
Providing Access to Insurance for Uninsured Americans with Pre-Existing Conditions
National program established July 1, 2010
A
Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) provides new coverage
options to individuals who have been uninsured for at least six months
because of a pre-existing condition. States have the option of running
this new program in their state. If a state has chosen not to do so, a
plan has been established by the Department of Health and Human Services
in that state.
Obamacare is not to blame for any current healthcare issues.
Well, yes it is. And merely asserting this contrary to the volume of evidence that ObamaCare has caused "healthcare issues"
For example, ObamaCare required insurance companies to cover preventive care at no cost, for
example, and allowed parents to keep their kids on their plans up to
age 26.
Those changes are not, free for insurance companies. Adding in those additional benefits caused insurance premiums to increase by just under 5 percent in the individual market.
For example, we have this article: WASHINGTON — Federal and state officials and consumer advocates have
grown worried that companies with relatively young, healthy employees
may opt out of the regular health insurance
market to avoid the minimum coverage standards in President Obama’s
sweeping law, a move that could drive up costs for workers at other
companies.
And note that I'm not making sweeping assertions that can't be referenced with fact or making up lies about Ronald Reagan.
0
Obamacare is not to blame for any current healthcare issues.
Well, yes it is. And merely asserting this contrary to the volume of evidence that ObamaCare has caused "healthcare issues"
For example, ObamaCare required insurance companies to cover preventive care at no cost, for
example, and allowed parents to keep their kids on their plans up to
age 26.
Those changes are not, free for insurance companies. Adding in those additional benefits caused insurance premiums to increase by just under 5 percent in the individual market.
For example, we have this article: WASHINGTON — Federal and state officials and consumer advocates have
grown worried that companies with relatively young, healthy employees
may opt out of the regular health insurance
market to avoid the minimum coverage standards in President Obama’s
sweeping law, a move that could drive up costs for workers at other
companies.
As to the issue on which this thread started, the Washington Post wrote about it the other day:
Tens of thousands of Americans who cannot get health insurance
because of preexisting medical problems will be blocked from a program
designed to help them because funding is running low.
Obama administration officials said Friday that the state-based
“high-risk pools” set up under the 2010 health-care law will be closed
to new applicants as soon as Saturday and no later than March 2,
depending on the state.
...
The program, which was launched in summer 2010, was always intended as a
temporary bridge for the uninsured. But it was supposed to last until
2014. At that point, the health-care law will bar insurers from
rejecting or otherwise discriminating against people who are already
sick, enabling such people to buy plans through the private market.
But let's not blame ObamaCare for a program started under ObamaCare which has failed under ObamaCare.
0
As to the issue on which this thread started, the Washington Post wrote about it the other day:
Tens of thousands of Americans who cannot get health insurance
because of preexisting medical problems will be blocked from a program
designed to help them because funding is running low.
Obama administration officials said Friday that the state-based
“high-risk pools” set up under the 2010 health-care law will be closed
to new applicants as soon as Saturday and no later than March 2,
depending on the state.
...
The program, which was launched in summer 2010, was always intended as a
temporary bridge for the uninsured. But it was supposed to last until
2014. At that point, the health-care law will bar insurers from
rejecting or otherwise discriminating against people who are already
sick, enabling such people to buy plans through the private market.
Your whole post is erroneous. You merely asserting something is an "excuse" isn't responsive nor is it a fact. It is silly.
ObamaCare is indeed to blame for this. You have no clue which parts have been implemented, and which have not.
But I guess it is fun to pretend that 30,000+ pages of regulations already issued, are meaningless and have no impact on current plans. Because you get to falsely assert that the plans haven't been implemented.
To you Obama is the blame for pretty much any and everything since you look at any topic from a party perspective. I do not and if you did more than the usual cherry picking you might see the real underlying concept.
Healthcare inflation existed before Obama and it will exist after Obama. Blaming Obama for an issue that has existed for multiple decades is erroneous. That is the point.
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Inflation and benefit stripping existed well before Obama was ever in politics..but that does not fit your narrow minded profile of economic problems so how could you understand?
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
Your whole post is erroneous. You merely asserting something is an "excuse" isn't responsive nor is it a fact. It is silly.
ObamaCare is indeed to blame for this. You have no clue which parts have been implemented, and which have not.
But I guess it is fun to pretend that 30,000+ pages of regulations already issued, are meaningless and have no impact on current plans. Because you get to falsely assert that the plans haven't been implemented.
To you Obama is the blame for pretty much any and everything since you look at any topic from a party perspective. I do not and if you did more than the usual cherry picking you might see the real underlying concept.
Healthcare inflation existed before Obama and it will exist after Obama. Blaming Obama for an issue that has existed for multiple decades is erroneous. That is the point.
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Inflation and benefit stripping existed well before Obama was ever in politics..but that does not fit your narrow minded profile of economic problems so how could you understand?
You are wasting your time when it comes to "trying to convince" anyone about rising costs in the healthcare industry.
Libs would rather believe a politician with a "D" behind his or her name as opposed to...
People in the healthcare industry when it comes to Obamacare.
People in the private sector when it comes to raising the min wage.
And to shift gears for a second, you may also remember when gas prices rose under Bush it was Bush's fault. Now that gas prices are rising under Obama it is everyone else's fault.
0
Walter:
You are wasting your time when it comes to "trying to convince" anyone about rising costs in the healthcare industry.
Libs would rather believe a politician with a "D" behind his or her name as opposed to...
People in the healthcare industry when it comes to Obamacare.
People in the private sector when it comes to raising the min wage.
And to shift gears for a second, you may also remember when gas prices rose under Bush it was Bush's fault. Now that gas prices are rising under Obama it is everyone else's fault.
To you Obama is the blame for pretty much any and everything since you look at any topic from a party perspective. I do not and if you did more than the usual cherry picking you might see the real underlying concept.
Healthcare inflation existed before Obama and it will exist after Obama. Blaming Obama for an issue that has existed for multiple decades is erroneous. That is the point.
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Inflation and benefit stripping existed well before Obama was ever in politics..but that does not fit your narrow minded profile of economic problems so how could you understand?
You keep arguing against things I never said.
Want to guess why you're doing that?
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
To you Obama is the blame for pretty much any and everything since you look at any topic from a party perspective. I do not and if you did more than the usual cherry picking you might see the real underlying concept.
Healthcare inflation existed before Obama and it will exist after Obama. Blaming Obama for an issue that has existed for multiple decades is erroneous. That is the point.
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Inflation and benefit stripping existed well before Obama was ever in politics..but that does not fit your narrow minded profile of economic problems so how could you understand?
Large portions of ObamaCare have been implemented. Wall Street said his "plans have not been implemented"
As a point of fact: The specific part of ObamaCare on which this thread was started has failed.
As a point of fact: Nobody, anywhere at all, said Obama is responsible for all healthcare inflation. In fact, I specifically noted in post #27 items on ObamaCare and not general health care inflation.
But hey Wall Street, come back and "cut and paste" as if those things referenced aren't facts or true. It will speak volumes about your position here.
0
As a point of fact:
Large portions of ObamaCare have been implemented. Wall Street said his "plans have not been implemented"
As a point of fact: The specific part of ObamaCare on which this thread was started has failed.
As a point of fact: Nobody, anywhere at all, said Obama is responsible for all healthcare inflation. In fact, I specifically noted in post #27 items on ObamaCare and not general health care inflation.
But hey Wall Street, come back and "cut and paste" as if those things referenced aren't facts or true. It will speak volumes about your position here.
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Thank you for revealing that presenting facts demonstrates you can not respond. By merely asserting that "cut and pasting" is all I did allows you to pretend the things I said are not true.
You operate on the principle that if you have an "opinion" on something - mind you those "opinions" are statements that can be easily demonstrated to be false - that said opinions are somehow valid and responses to them with facts, citations to laws & regulations are meaningless.
Want to guess why you do that?
0
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Thank you for revealing that presenting facts demonstrates you can not respond. By merely asserting that "cut and pasting" is all I did allows you to pretend the things I said are not true.
You operate on the principle that if you have an "opinion" on something - mind you those "opinions" are statements that can be easily demonstrated to be false - that said opinions are somehow valid and responses to them with facts, citations to laws & regulations are meaningless.
You are wasting your time when it comes to "trying to convince" anyone about rising costs in the healthcare industry.
Libs would rather believe a politician with a "D" behind his or her name as opposed to...
People in the healthcare industry when it comes to Obamacare.
People in the private sector when it comes to raising the min wage.
And to shift gears for a second, you may also remember when gas prices rose under Bush it was Bush's fault. Now that gas prices are rising under Obama it is everyone else's fault.
When gas prices rose, it was not Bush's fault. The current increase in price is not Obama's fault.
Whose fault were increases in health insurance costs from 1970-2008.
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
Walter:
You are wasting your time when it comes to "trying to convince" anyone about rising costs in the healthcare industry.
Libs would rather believe a politician with a "D" behind his or her name as opposed to...
People in the healthcare industry when it comes to Obamacare.
People in the private sector when it comes to raising the min wage.
And to shift gears for a second, you may also remember when gas prices rose under Bush it was Bush's fault. Now that gas prices are rising under Obama it is everyone else's fault.
When gas prices rose, it was not Bush's fault. The current increase in price is not Obama's fault.
Whose fault were increases in health insurance costs from 1970-2008.
Cut and paste articles are not fact, they are opinions created by someone maybe using information they found, maybe making conclusions off their experience.
Fact means what to you exactly? Define this word you use so often. Is fact something that cannot be refuted?
Opinion is something anyone can have, you have them I have them everyone has them. My opinions I base off many things and I am entitled to them as you are to yours.
The difference is you mix fact and opinion..when you say it or cut/paste from some website then it is fact..and unless a fact is indisputable then it really isnt fact.
Facts are not conclusions based off selected data, that is opinion..opinions which can be proven differently.
Large portions of Obamacare means what exactly? 5%? 20%?
I love how you toss around generalities and act like you can form conclusions based off generalities.
I said Obamacare has not been implemented and it has not. PIECES of a very large program being introduced are not large portions.
The issue as I said several times here and many times before is you cannot blame ONE politician for decades of healthcare inflation which outstrips general CPI.
Now if Obama came in and healthcare costs were not outpacing general inflation, his SPECIFIC and only his specific measures were implemented and then over a 3-5 yr period of time you can measure that costs went up ONLY because of a specific measure, then you can draw a conclusion.
You like drawing massive general conclusions based off selected erroneous information, that is not fact and that is not accurate.
0
Cut and paste articles are not fact, they are opinions created by someone maybe using information they found, maybe making conclusions off their experience.
Fact means what to you exactly? Define this word you use so often. Is fact something that cannot be refuted?
Opinion is something anyone can have, you have them I have them everyone has them. My opinions I base off many things and I am entitled to them as you are to yours.
The difference is you mix fact and opinion..when you say it or cut/paste from some website then it is fact..and unless a fact is indisputable then it really isnt fact.
Facts are not conclusions based off selected data, that is opinion..opinions which can be proven differently.
Large portions of Obamacare means what exactly? 5%? 20%?
I love how you toss around generalities and act like you can form conclusions based off generalities.
I said Obamacare has not been implemented and it has not. PIECES of a very large program being introduced are not large portions.
The issue as I said several times here and many times before is you cannot blame ONE politician for decades of healthcare inflation which outstrips general CPI.
Now if Obama came in and healthcare costs were not outpacing general inflation, his SPECIFIC and only his specific measures were implemented and then over a 3-5 yr period of time you can measure that costs went up ONLY because of a specific measure, then you can draw a conclusion.
You like drawing massive general conclusions based off selected erroneous information, that is not fact and that is not accurate.
Cut and paste articles are not fact, they are opinions created by someone maybe using information they found, maybe making conclusions off their experience.
Uh, except there is no disputing the fact that the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan is not accepting new applications.
I linked to that. It is not an opinion.
You couldn't provide an example of me linking to anything that drawining any conclusions.
At all.
0
Cut and paste articles are not fact, they are opinions created by someone maybe using information they found, maybe making conclusions off their experience.
Uh, except there is no disputing the fact that the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan is not accepting new applications.
I linked to that. It is not an opinion.
You couldn't provide an example of me linking to anything that drawining any conclusions.
When gas prices rose, it was not Bush's fault. The current increase in price is not Obama's fault.
Whose fault were increases in health insurance costs from 1970-2008.
I'm sure this is just coincidence:
In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
When gas prices rose, it was not Bush's fault. The current increase in price is not Obama's fault.
Whose fault were increases in health insurance costs from 1970-2008.
I'm sure this is just coincidence:
In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
Rate increases are not only because of the expansion of benefit (which is a good thing), that would imply had Obamacare not came into existence then general inflation would not exist.
How much of the increase is due ONLY to the ANTICIPATION of future events? Notice the term anticipation..they are forecasting a change..and planning for this change. It does not mean that the increase they make will be needed, nor does it mean that it is enough.
Forecasting is a tricky game, it is rarely correct..nor does having these organizations raise premiums or find ways to mess around with benefits mean they are going to be necessary.
Ten years are needed to determine if a long term event like this has impact and what that impact is.
The plan you listed as not accepting new applicants is not solely due to some future event that has not happened yet. There are MANY variables as to why things happen..are you suggesting that this plan has not experienced cost increases prior to this year?
Generalizing based on expectation of future events is rarely accurate, nor is of any value in the present.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
I'm sure this is just coincidence:
In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
Rate increases are not only because of the expansion of benefit (which is a good thing), that would imply had Obamacare not came into existence then general inflation would not exist.
How much of the increase is due ONLY to the ANTICIPATION of future events? Notice the term anticipation..they are forecasting a change..and planning for this change. It does not mean that the increase they make will be needed, nor does it mean that it is enough.
Forecasting is a tricky game, it is rarely correct..nor does having these organizations raise premiums or find ways to mess around with benefits mean they are going to be necessary.
Ten years are needed to determine if a long term event like this has impact and what that impact is.
The plan you listed as not accepting new applicants is not solely due to some future event that has not happened yet. There are MANY variables as to why things happen..are you suggesting that this plan has not experienced cost increases prior to this year?
Generalizing based on expectation of future events is rarely accurate, nor is of any value in the present.
Rate increases are not only because of the expansion of benefit (which is a good thing),
I think you should tell these people that the expansion of a benefit is a good thing.
The Wall Street Journal noted the trend
Friday, saying a handful of smaller schools in Ohio and Pennsylvania
have begun to cap the number of courses adjunct professors can teach, so
that they don't end up working more than 30 hours per week.
The
healthcare law requires employers to offer coverage to all employees who
work more than 30 hours, or pay a penalty to the IRS.
Also, it would be fun for you to explain to people who are losing their employer sponsored health insurance that the expansion of a benefit is a good thing.
0
Rate increases are not only because of the expansion of benefit (which is a good thing),
I think you should tell these people that the expansion of a benefit is a good thing.
The Wall Street Journal noted the trend
Friday, saying a handful of smaller schools in Ohio and Pennsylvania
have begun to cap the number of courses adjunct professors can teach, so
that they don't end up working more than 30 hours per week.
The
healthcare law requires employers to offer coverage to all employees who
work more than 30 hours, or pay a penalty to the IRS.
Also, it would be fun for you to explain to people who are losing their employer sponsored health insurance that the expansion of a benefit is a good thing.
In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
I can link as many opinion articles as you saying that ObamaCare will end up leading to lower rates (by reducing the current amount of 60% unpaid medical expenses).
But that wasn't my point. Our insurance rates increases much higher than inflationary numbers from 1970-2008. Obviously, ObamaCare had nothing to do with this.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
I'm sure this is just coincidence:
In California, Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
I can link as many opinion articles as you saying that ObamaCare will end up leading to lower rates (by reducing the current amount of 60% unpaid medical expenses).
But that wasn't my point. Our insurance rates increases much higher than inflationary numbers from 1970-2008. Obviously, ObamaCare had nothing to do with this.
When gas prices rose, it was not Bush's fault. The current increase in price is not Obama's fault.
Whose fault were increases in health insurance costs from 1970-2008.
I wish you would have been around to set those people straight during the Bush years because he was getting the blame for gas prices. I personally don't blame Obama for the prices today but the people that were blaming Bush are predictably silent now. Kinda like "Bush torture" bad and "Obama Drones" silence.
As far as a rise in healthcare costs, there are price increases in everything over time; healthcare, milk, gas, etc, but prices artificially rising because of govt legislation isn't good for the private sector.
Let Supply & Demand and Competition (The Invisible Hand) determine the prices.
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
When gas prices rose, it was not Bush's fault. The current increase in price is not Obama's fault.
Whose fault were increases in health insurance costs from 1970-2008.
I wish you would have been around to set those people straight during the Bush years because he was getting the blame for gas prices. I personally don't blame Obama for the prices today but the people that were blaming Bush are predictably silent now. Kinda like "Bush torture" bad and "Obama Drones" silence.
As far as a rise in healthcare costs, there are price increases in everything over time; healthcare, milk, gas, etc, but prices artificially rising because of govt legislation isn't good for the private sector.
Let Supply & Demand and Competition (The Invisible Hand) determine the prices.
I can link as many opinion articles as you saying that ObamaCare will end up leading to lower rates (by reducing the current amount of 60% unpaid medical expenses).
But that wasn't my point. Our insurance rates increases much higher than inflationary numbers from 1970-2008. Obviously, ObamaCare had nothing to do with this.
not necessarily obvious. he could have had something to do with it. obama was born in 1961. in kenya i might add.
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
I can link as many opinion articles as you saying that ObamaCare will end up leading to lower rates (by reducing the current amount of 60% unpaid medical expenses).
But that wasn't my point. Our insurance rates increases much higher than inflationary numbers from 1970-2008. Obviously, ObamaCare had nothing to do with this.
not necessarily obvious. he could have had something to do with it. obama was born in 1961. in kenya i might add.
I can link as many opinion articles as you saying that ObamaCare will end up leading to lower rates (by reducing the current amount of 60% unpaid medical expenses).
But that wasn't my point. Our insurance rates increases much higher than inflationary numbers from 1970-2008. Obviously, ObamaCare had nothing to do with this.
1. No you can't provide any such links. 2. I didn't link to any "opinion piece" 3. You can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
I can link as many opinion articles as you saying that ObamaCare will end up leading to lower rates (by reducing the current amount of 60% unpaid medical expenses).
But that wasn't my point. Our insurance rates increases much higher than inflationary numbers from 1970-2008. Obviously, ObamaCare had nothing to do with this.
1. No you can't provide any such links. 2. I didn't link to any "opinion piece" 3. You can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
Remember, GW Bush was responsible to Abu Ghraib (and Hurricane Katrina) but Obama is not responsible for the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan not accepting new applications.
0
Remember, GW Bush was responsible to Abu Ghraib (and Hurricane Katrina) but Obama is not responsible for the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan not accepting new applications.
Now there is no doubt insurance premiums have increased in part because of ObamaCare. There is also no doubt people have lost income and insurance plans due to ObamaCare.
Admitting that would be a nice first step on the part of ObamaCare supporters.
But as we see, they have to deny that. Mainly because they can't engage in a discussion on whether or not those outcomes are worth some sort of future benefits of the legislation.
0
Now there is no doubt insurance premiums have increased in part because of ObamaCare. There is also no doubt people have lost income and insurance plans due to ObamaCare.
Admitting that would be a nice first step on the part of ObamaCare supporters.
But as we see, they have to deny that. Mainly because they can't engage in a discussion on whether or not those outcomes are worth some sort of future benefits of the legislation.
Reactionary rate increases are not attributable to a future event, so just because companies are forecasting increases and trying to be proactive does not mean they will be correct in EITHER direction.
Reactionary events happen all the time..they happen in the stock market, they happen before a weather event, they happen after a weather event..sometimes reactions dont happen for a long period of time.
You cannot attribute the original article to just the potential of the future..there are other variables involved, nor can you say that the future will hold price increases, benefit phase outs and restrictions.
We try to make forecasts to plan for the future, yet forecasts rarely ever materialize the way they are planned.
You never answered the question..how much of these rate increases would have gone on irregardless of Obamacare? How much of these increases are reactionary and will end up being wrong?
How much of the rate increases/benefit decreases etc etc will end up being directly correlated to Obamacare and wont be revised or modified?
You have no idea..that is the point, nobody has any idea what Obamacare will end up doing to the healthcare mess we are in.
I suppose it is better to take no action like we have over the last multiple decades and act as if people actually have good coverage and costs arent going up/benefits going down.
0
Reactionary rate increases are not attributable to a future event, so just because companies are forecasting increases and trying to be proactive does not mean they will be correct in EITHER direction.
Reactionary events happen all the time..they happen in the stock market, they happen before a weather event, they happen after a weather event..sometimes reactions dont happen for a long period of time.
You cannot attribute the original article to just the potential of the future..there are other variables involved, nor can you say that the future will hold price increases, benefit phase outs and restrictions.
We try to make forecasts to plan for the future, yet forecasts rarely ever materialize the way they are planned.
You never answered the question..how much of these rate increases would have gone on irregardless of Obamacare? How much of these increases are reactionary and will end up being wrong?
How much of the rate increases/benefit decreases etc etc will end up being directly correlated to Obamacare and wont be revised or modified?
You have no idea..that is the point, nobody has any idea what Obamacare will end up doing to the healthcare mess we are in.
I suppose it is better to take no action like we have over the last multiple decades and act as if people actually have good coverage and costs arent going up/benefits going down.
In California,Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
In California,Aetna is proposing rate increases of as much as 22 percent, Anthem Blue Cross 26 percent and Blue Shield of California 20 percent for some of those policy holders, according to the insurers’ filings with the state for 2013.
And, since it is totally coincidence, you can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
1. No you can't provide any such links. 2. I didn't link to any "opinion piece" 3. You can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
1) You are saying I cannot provide any links to opinion pieces that support the premise of ObamaCare? Really? Rather than post them, just google ObamaCare and lower insurance rates.
You may not agree with them, but they are present.
2) Any written piece that predicts the future is opinion.
3) Insurance rates have increased every year since 1970 prior to Obama being in office at a number higher than simple inflation.
The rates increased 3fold every year since EMTALA was enacted (for obvious reasons).
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
1. No you can't provide any such links. 2. I didn't link to any "opinion piece" 3. You can list a year prior to Obama being in office when rates increased so much, right?
1) You are saying I cannot provide any links to opinion pieces that support the premise of ObamaCare? Really? Rather than post them, just google ObamaCare and lower insurance rates.
You may not agree with them, but they are present.
2) Any written piece that predicts the future is opinion.
3) Insurance rates have increased every year since 1970 prior to Obama being in office at a number higher than simple inflation.
The rates increased 3fold every year since EMTALA was enacted (for obvious reasons).
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
The rest of your finger pointing, cut and pasting emoticon fun is nothing more than noise.
Hot Forum Topics
