Dreadclaw69 wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/29/politics/obamacare-surge/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

(CNN) -- More than 1.1 million people enrolled in health care coverage through the federal marketplace between October 1 and December 24, the government announced Sunday.

The vast majority of them -- 975,000 -- enrolled in December, Marilyn Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said in a blog post.

She called it "a welcome surge in enrollment" due in part to improvements in the notoriously glitch-plagued website healthcare.gov.

It's unclear how many people who visited the site were unable to use it -- a problem shared by millions across the country. On Monday, December 23 alone, the site saw nearly 2 million page views and the call center received more than 250,000 calls, officials said.

The 1.1 million enrollments does not include individuals who signed up for insurance through the state-run marketplaces. Fourteen states and the District of Columbia operate their own exchanges.
Several states also reported a surge in enrollment. California, for example, saw 77,000 people pick a plan in the last days before the deadline.

It also does not include a flood of new enrollees for Medicaid. As of November 30, more than 800,000 were found eligible for the insurance program for the poor.

Individuals who missed last week's deadline for coverage that begins January 1 can still sign up for coverage starting February 1. That deadline is January 15 and open enrollment ends March 31.

The Obama administration's goal is to have 7 million people enroll through both the federal and state exchanges by the end of March.

What was the target that was supposed to have been hit by now?

 whembly wrote:
Um... wat?

O.o

Democrat Representative: "Obamacare enrollment is low 'because people think the law is repealed'"

Spoiler:

I get that some democrats may want to distance themselve from the PPACA... but, this is on par of Baghdad Bob denial.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

But with all those delightful ads for Obamacare (the beer keg bros, the couple desperate to jump in the sack, pajama boy) how could anyone honestly think that the law is repealed?

 dogma wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

But with all those delightful ads for Obamacare (the beer keg bros, the couple desperate to jump in the sack, pajama boy) how could anyone honestly think that the law is repealed?

Wishful thinking.

 whembly wrote:

Evidently by that Democratic Rep

 dogma wrote:
Her argument is not wrong on its face.

 Seaward wrote:

 dogma wrote:
Her argument is not wrong on its face.

Well, aside from all the inaccuracy, sure.

 dogma wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 dogma wrote:
Her argument is not wrong on its face.

Well, aside from all the inaccuracy, sure.

What's inaccurate?

 djones520 wrote:

It's obvious you're trying to say that there is significant numbers out there who feel that the bill has been repealed, and that is why they aren't signing up.

So... where is the evidence?

 djones520 wrote:
It's obvious you're trying to say that there is significant numbers out there who feel that the bill has been repealed, and that is why they aren't signing up.

So... where is the evidence?

 whembly wrote:
Evidently by that Democratic Rep

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo., December 27, 2013 – Next month, the Missouri Senate will consider a bill which would effectively cripple the implementation of the Affordable Care Act within the state.

Following the lead of South Carolina, where lawmakers are fast-tracking House Bill 3101 in 2014, and Georgia, where HB707 was recently introduced by Rep. Jason Spencer, Missouri State Senator John T. Lamping (R-24) pre-filed Senate Bill 546 (SB546) to update the Health Care Freedom Act passed by Missouri voters in 2010. It passed that year with more than 70% support.

SB546 would ban Missouri from taking any action that would “compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system.” That means the state would be banned by law from operating a health care exchange for the federal government.

The bill also proposes suspending the licenses of insurers who accept federal subsidies which result in the “imposition of penalties contrary to the public policy” set forth in the legislation. Since it is unlikely that any insurer would then accept a subsidy, not a single employer in the state could be hit with the employer-mandate penalties those subsidies trigger.

In a press release, Lamping said his goal was make health care better for the people of his state. “These ideas are aimed at improving … health care decisions for Missourians.”

Following significant portions of the Tenth Amendment Center’s four-step plan to nullify Obamacare on a state-level, Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano noted that such actions were not just legal, but effective.

“If enough states do this, it will gut Obamacare because the federal government doesn’t have the resources … to go into each of the states if they start refusing,” he said.

Based on the long-standing principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine, the legislation is on strong legal grounds. In four major cases from 1842 to 2012, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the federal government cannot “commandeer” states, requiring them to enforce or expend resources to participate in federal law or regulatory programs.

Tenth Amendment Center national communications director Mike Maharrey suggested that a large-scale effort against the Act would be coming. “Our sources tell us to expect at least ten states moving in this direction in the coming months. But that will only come true if people start calling their state representatives and senators right now. State lawmakers need to know they should introduce bills to ban the state from participating in any Obamacare programs.”

Now that it has been introduced in the state senate, SB546 will first be assigned to a committee. It will have to pass that committee before the full Senate is given an opportunity to pass the bill on to the House for concurrence.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
No guys! Everyone else is just wrong everywhere! It's working completely as intended!

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
No guys! Everyone else is just wrong everywhere! It's working completely as intended!

Exactly!!

Why else would there be so many exemptions, updates, pushing back enrollment deadlines, and delaying parts of the law?

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
No guys! Everyone else is just wrong everywhere! It's working completely as intended!

Exactly!!

Why else would there be so many exemptions, updates, pushing back enrollment deadlines, and delaying parts of the law?

We're just not smart enough to see the true genius behind it all! The Obama works in mysterious ways.

Jesse J. Holland wrote:Justice delays health law's birth control mandate

WASHINGTON (AP) — Only hours before the law was to take effect, a Supreme Court justice on Tuesday blocked implementation of part of President Barack Obama's health care law that would have forced some religion-affiliated organizations to provide health insurance for employees that includes birth control.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor's decision came after a flurry of efforts by Catholic-affiliated groups from around the nation. Those groups had rushed to the federal courts to stop Wednesday's start of portions of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Sotomayor acted on a request from an organization of Catholic nuns in Denver, the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged. Its request for an emergency stay had been denied earlier in the day by a federal appeals court.

The government is "temporarily enjoined from enforcing against applicants the contraceptive coverage requirements imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," Sotomayor said in the order.

Sotomayor, who was in New York Tuesday night to lead the final 60-second countdown and push the ceremonial button to signal the descent of the Times Square New Year's Eve ball, gave government officials until 10 a.m. EST Friday to respond to her order.

The law requires employers to provide insurance that covers a range of preventive care, free of charge, including contraception. The Catholic Church prohibits the use of contraceptives.

The Obama administration crafted a compromise, or accommodation, that attempted to create a buffer for religiously affiliated hospitals, universities and social service groups that oppose birth control. The law requires insurers or the health plan's outside administrator to pay for birth control coverage and creates a way to reimburse them.

But for that to work, the nuns would have to sign a form authorizing their insurance company to provide contraceptive coverage, which would still violate their beliefs, argued their attorney, Mark Rienzi.

"Without an emergency injunction, Mother Provincial Loraine Marie Maguire has to decide between two courses of action: (a) sign and submit a self-certification form, thereby violating her religious beliefs; or (b) refuse to sign the form and pay ruinous fines," Rienzi said.

The White House did not comment on the order Tuesday night. In a statement Tuesday night, Rienzi said he was delighted by Sotomayor's order. "The government has lots of ways to deliver contraceptives to people," he said. "It doesn't need to force nuns to participate."

Sotomayor's decision to delay the contraceptive portion of the law was joined by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which also issued an emergency stay for Catholic-affiliated groups challenging the contraceptive provision, including the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., and Catholic University. But one judge on the three-judge panel that made the decision, Judge David S. Tatel, said he would have denied their motion.

"Because I believe that appellants are unlikely to prevail on their claim that the challenged provision imposes a 'substantial burden' under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, I would deny their application for an injunction pending appeal," Tatel said.

The archdiocese praised the appeals court's action in a statement.

"This action by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is in line with the rulings of courts all across the country which have held that the HHS mandate imposes a substantial and impermissible burden on the free exercise of religion," the archdiocese said. "These decisions also vindicate the pledge of the U.S. Catholic bishops to stand united in resolute defense of the first and most sacred freedom - religious liberty."

The Supreme Court already has decided to rule on whether businesses may use religious objections to escape a requirement to cover birth control for employees. That case, which involves Hobby Lobby Inc., an Oklahoma City-based arts and crafts chain with 13,000 full-time employees, is expected to be argued in March and decided by summer.

 whembly wrote:
I get that some democrats may want to distance themselve from the PPACA... but, this is on par of Baghdad Bob denial.

Millions of Americans who buy their own health insurance were informed this fall that their policies would no longer be offered starting in 2014 because they do not meet the higher standards of the federal Affordable Care Act. The actual number of people receiving the notices is unclear, in part because officials in nearly 20 states say they do not have the information or are not tracking it.

Some states tracked the policy notifications through their insurance departments or health care exchanges. In other states, the largest private insurers released the number of discontinuation notices they issued.

President Barack Obama then said insurance companies could allow the older policies to continue, but left that decision to the states and individual insurers. The response has been mixed.

This chart shows that at least 4.7 million Americans received the cancellation notices. It also provides details about what decision has been made in each state since Obama's announcement (some states had previously decided to allow insurers to continue older policies for a limited time).

It reflects reporting by AP staffers in every state and the District of Columbia and does not include policy cancelations in the small-business insurance market.

 djones520 wrote:
So 4.7 million confirmed cancellations, and 20 states aren't tracking the stats? So could be millions more who lost it over all...

And 1 million people have signed up for the new plan?

 djones520 wrote:
So 4.7 million confirmed cancellations, and 20 states aren't tracking the stats? So could be millions more who lost it over all...

And 1 million people have signed up for the new plan?

David Martosko wrote:'They had no idea if my insurance was active or not!': Obamacare confusion reigns as frustrated patients walk out of hospitals without treatment

MailOnline spoke with patients who were told they would have to pay their bills in full if they couldn't prove they had insurance
One was faced with a $3,000 hospital room charge and opted to leave the hospital after experiencing chest pains
'Should I be in the hospital? Probably,' she said
Another, coughing in the cold, walked out without receiving a needed chest x-ray
Consumers face sticker-shock from medical costs under the new Obamacare system, made worse if they can't prove they're insured
As many as one-third of new enrollees' applications have seen problems when the government transmits them to insurance companies

Hospital staff in Northern Virginia are turning away sick people on a frigid Thursday morning because they can't determine whether their Obamacare insurance plans are in effect.

Patients in a close-in DC suburb who think they've signed up for new insurance plans are struggling to show their December enrollments are in force, and health care administrators aren't taking their word for it.

In place of quick service and painless billing, these Virginians are now facing the threat of sticker-shock that comes with bills they can't afford.

'They had no idea if my insurance was active or not!' a coughing Maria Galvez told MailOnline outside the Inova Healthplex facility in the town of Springfield.

She was leaving the building without getting a needed chest x-ray.

'The people in there told me that since I didn't have an insurance card, I would be billed for the whole cost of the x-ray,' Galvez said, her young daughter in tow. 'It's not fair – you know, I signed up last week like I was supposed to.'

The x-ray's cost, she was told, would likely be more than $500.


Going home: One patient left the hospital without being admitted for chest pains after she was warned she might have to pay full-price. She asked MailOnline not to publish a photograph of her face


MailOnline spoke to patients outside hospitals in Virginia's Washington, D.C. suburbs, many of them confused about the state of their insurance coverage

Galvez said she enrolled in a Carefirst Blue Cross bronze plan at a cost of about $450 per month through healthcare.gov, three days before Christmas.

'No one has sent me a bill,' she said.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testified in a December 11 congressional hearing that the federal government can't say how many new enrollees have written checks for their first month's premiums.

'Some may have paid, some may have not,' she conceded.

It's unlikely that a valid insurance card would have changed Galvez' fortunes, however.

Her Carefirst plan, identified on the Obamacare website as BlueChoice Plus Bronze, carries a $5,500 per-person deductible for 2014 – an amount she would have to pay out-of-pocket before her coverage would apply to medical expenses.

The Inova radiology department wouldn't speak with MailOnline, and Carefirst did not respond to a request for comment.

A similar situation frustrated Mary, an African-American small businesswoman who asked MailOnline not to publish her last name. She was leaving the Inova Alexandria Hospital in Alexandria, Virginia with two family members.

'I had chest pains last night, and they took me in the emergency room,' Mary said. 'They told me they were going to admit me, but when I told them I hadn't heard from my insurance company since I signed up, they changed their tune.'

She told MailOnline that a nurse advised her that her bill would go up by at least $3,000 if she were admitted for a day, and her doctor told her the decision was up to her.


No x-ray for you: This patient left a Virginia medical facility without receiving a test her doctor recommended

'Should I be in the hospital? Probably,' she said. 'Maybe it's one of those borderline cases. I have to think that if I were really in danger, they wouldn't give me the choice. But what if I think I'm covered and I'm really not?'

'The emergency room bill is going to be bad enough.'

The Obamacare system has suffered from a long list of setbacks since its October 1 rollout, starting with an inoperable website and ending with rampant uncertainty about whether Americans who enrolled are actually covered.

'We're telling consumers if they're not sure if they're enrolled they should call the insurer directly,' White House Press Secretary Jay Carney old reporters on December 2.

The Washington Post reported that day that because of computer glitches in the 'back end' of healthcare.gov, enrollment records for as many as one-third of new insurance customers were corrupted or otherwise contain errors.

Given the Obama administration's latest claim that 2.1 million have signed up nationwide, that means as many as 700,000 Americans might falsely believe they have a current health insurance policy.

Mary and others like her, who took the time to enroll but may not follow the daily flood of news about Obamacare, likely don't know one way or the other.

'Why is this so complicated?' she asked. 'I had my own private insurance last year, but they cancelled me in November. I'm not sure which end is up.'

Private industry estimates put the number of policy cancellations as high as 4.7 million in the last quarter of 2013, mostly involving health care plans that didn't meet the Affordable Care Act's strict minimum standards.

Democrats serving on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce dispute that number, saying in a new report that no more than 10,000 will wind up without affordable insurance options after losing their old policies.


The Inova Healthplex in Springfield, Virginia offers free valet parking, but if you want to see a doctor you'll need proof that you've paid your Obamacare premium


Still working: Emergency services are still being provided at Northern Virginia hospitals, whether or not patients can prove they're covered -- but getting a bed in a hospital ward could come with a tremendous sticker-shock

President Obama has attracted widespread criticism, and a 'lie of the year' award from one newspaper's fact-checker, for promising that Americans who liked their health plans would be allowed to keep them.

Dr. John Venetos, a Chicago gastroenterologist, told the Associated Press on Thursday that he is seeing 'tremendous uncertainty and anxiety' among his patients who signed up for Obamacare plans but don't have insurance cards.

'They’re not sure if they have coverage,' Venetos said. 'It puts the heavy work on the physician.'

'At some point, every practice is going to make a decision about how long can they continue to see these patients for free if they are not getting paid.'

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
No guys! Everyone else is just wrong everywhere! It's working completely as intended!

Exactly!!

Why else would there be so many exemptions, updates, pushing back enrollment deadlines, and delaying parts of the law?

We're just not smart enough to see the true genius behind it all! The Obama works in mysterious ways.