A Thought on Foreign Policy

The Obama administration’s…naiveté…would be cute if it weren’t so dangerous.

Against the backdrop of an Institute for Science and International Security report acknowledging that Iran is within weeks, not months, of being able to produce enough weapons-grade uranium to build a nuclear bomb, and Israel’s repeat of their widespread statement that they cannot allow Iran to get nuclear weapons—Israel’s own existence depends on it—the Obama administration

is asking Congress to hold off on enacting new sanctions against Iran, arguing that a pause in the push to impose new penalties would give negotiators flexibility in talks now underway to get Iran to comply with demands it prove its nuclear program is peaceful.

No, that would simply play into Iran’s standard use of “negotiations” to stall and to gain time.  It’s a major contributor to the progress the Iranians already have made toward getting nuclear weapons.

More to the point, this request for retreat lessens our flexibility.  What this would do would be to leave us, after the talks have failed, in the position of threatening to increase sanctions if the Iranians don’t comply.  The much stronger position—and strength is the only place from which flexibility can come—is to be able to offer to ease sanctions, to offer to not take military action, on concrete evidence of actual compliance.

In Which I Revisit HealthCare.gov

A bit ago I wrote about a…fix…to Healthcare.gov that purported to let me browse Obamacare “insurance” policies before creating an account and giving up all those personal data first.  The new button that was supposed to let me do that didn’t entirely work.

Today (27 Oct) I tried the button again, and I can report “progress.”  Now, after clicking the SEE PLANS NOW button, I’m invited to answer a few reasonable questions—do I want personal or employee coverage, health or dental, that sort of thing—I’m taken to a page where two things immediately become apparent—and from them that Obamacare and Obamacare’s software remain abject failures.

All plans must cover maternity and newborn care, for instance—whether I need that or not.  As a 62-yr-old man married to a 60-yr-old woman whose tubes have been tied for 35 years, we don’t want this coverage, and we’re unlikely to need it.  Yet we have to pay for it.

Other victims customers of this program might, or might not, want all of these other items, or subsets of them, but that’s not up to them.  So much for choice.

And there’s this note, right there on the first page that actually starts talking about policies, and it’s repeated on every subsequent page:

Yep, the following pages still won’t give me the real premiums for the policies, only notional ones, nor will they tell me the subsidy and tax credit values available based on income ranges, which would be a simple table to set up and present.  The IRS, which is handling much of the information for this program, is fully checked out on presenting this sort of table in its publications and instructions; see irs.gov.

Healthcare.gov does offer to shunt me off to the Kaiser Family Foundation for “calculated” estimates, though….

But wait!  There’s more!

I get five categories of policies from which to choose.  In case that blue field is hard to read, here they are in table form (which I created all by myself…):

Category

Amount of Coverage

Catastrophic Less than 60% of the total average cost of care
Bronze 60% of the total average cost of care
Silver 70% of the total average cost of care
Gold 80% of the total average cost of care
Platinum 90% of the total average cost of care

Two things are of interest here.  One is that catastrophic “coverage” Obamacare policy.  How am I covering a medical catastrophe if I’m still expected to pay for nearly half of it?  What am I getting for my premiums (more on that in a bit)?  I want catastrophic coverage because I’m reasonably healthy, I’ll take care of the routine stuff (those preventive care thingies for which I’m required to pay whether I want the coverage or not), but I anticipate needing help for the disasters.

Four years ago, I had a minor medical emergency, a heart attack that necessitated two visits to the hospital, including one over-nighter (I was released at the end of the day on the first visit).  The hospital bill alone for that was in the neighborhood of $7,000.  Imagine if that had been a serious heart event, or some other body failure, or a serious injury, that necessitated several days or a couple of weeks in the hospital.  Add in the doctor’s and lab fees associated with such a stay.

How is a family on the lower end of the economic scale, or a family on a fixed income, supposed to cover 40% or more of that out of their personal resources?  What are their, even subsidized (and the rest of us through those subsidies), premiums buying?

Now look at those Bronze “plans.”  These were designed explicitly for people on the lower end of the economic scale or on a fixed income.  Leaving subsidized premiums aside, where are they to get the scratch to cover the rest of the 40%?

This is crap.  This is government-run health insurance welfare, and not a free market.

Moving on….  On clicking NEXT on the page summarizing my coverage categories, I’m taken (after a refreshingly brief pause) to a page that lists the “policies” available to me, together with the notional monthly premiums for my demographic (those questions I answered at the top).  I’m offered 38 different “policies” available for my county in Texas, but they’re from only three players in this Exchange.

There are two catastrophic plans available to me, but no Platinum.  Imagine that.  I’m not good enough, under Obamacare to have a Platinum.  Or the insurance companies can’t afford to offer me one under Obamacare’s terms in this county.  Withal, for a mere $5,700 per year, I can buy the privilege of paying 40% or more of my catastrophe.

There are 11 Gold plans available to me; based on per centage of total coverage (which is all I have to go on; I’m still blocked from perusing an actual policy), these are the ones closest to the plan I have now, courtesy of my wife’s employer.  The cheapest of these will cost me nearly $7,800 per year.  The plan provided by my wife’s employer costs me all of $1,700.  Fortunately, this year, I’m able to keep this plan.  What about those who are not?

To see the plans, maybe, I still have to create that account.

I have to give my personal data to the door greeter at Walmart as a precondition to going in and poking the shelves?  Really!?

I say again: this is crap.  The software is crap, and Obamacare itself, with its enormously expensive “plans,” is crap.

And So It Begins Anew

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D, NV) is at it again.  Interrupting his Nevada NPR host, he demanding that all talk of cutting taxes be stopped.  This Progressive does not approve of such speech, and so we have no right to hear it.  He also

said Republicans would have to agree on tax-revenue increases for Congress to achieve a large-scale agreement, but they instead have their mind set on “nothing more on revenue.”

“And until they get off that kick, there’s not going to be a grand bargain.  There’s not going to be a small bargain.

Straight from the horse’s mouth.  Never mind the $600 billion in tax rate increases he got earlier this year.  He wants more, with no spending cuts (that’s just “happy talk,” he says), or he’s perfectly willing to, once again, blow up negotiations and to threaten the viability of our economy.

All for Progressive ego.

Some of the Worst Is Arriving

Earlier, I wrote about Senator Tim Scott’s (R, SC) concerns about the broader picture of the Obamacare failure.  It seems Scott was optimistic in some respects.  Jerry Markon, in The Washington Post, has written about the already ongoing failure Obamacare’s insurance co-ops, which are different from the exchanges that some states have set up and which the Federal government, under the auspices of Obamacare, has set up in 36 states and set loose on an unsuspecting public (that HealthCare.gov thingie).

These co-ops are

a network of nonprofit insurance companies aimed at bringing competition to the marketplace, long dominated by major insurers.

But these co-ops, started as a great hope for lowering insurance costs, are already in danger.

The danger is clear and present:

One co-op, however, has closed, another is struggling, and at least nine more have been projected to have financial problems, according to internal government reviews and a federal audit.

Their failure would leave taxpayers potentially on the hook for nearly $1 billion in defaulted loans and rob the marketplace of the kind of competition they were supposed to create.  And if they become insolvent, policyholders in at least half the states where the co-ops operate could be stuck with medical bills.

That’s out of roughly 24 in 24 states.

Worse, these operations were designed to fail: the then-Democrat dominated Congress loaded these entities with restrictions that, individually, elevated the risks for their survival, and in the aggregate, made their survival nearly impossible.

  • Federal grants for the co-ops were converted to loans with tight repayment schedules
  • co-ops were barred from using federal money for marketing
  • co-ops were severely limited from selling insurance to large employers…the most lucrative market

And so on.  This is one of the outcomes of central control of an economy—or even one-sixth of one.

The Obama Infomercial

Here’s another installment in President Barack Obama’s late night cable shill Rose Garden 800 number pitch (Operators are standing by!):

The online chat functionality turns out to be as dysfunctional as his 800 number—although, in fairness to the pitchman, he didn’t push the chat bit.  In an example excerpted on YouTube, you can see agent “Dean” advising a customer, “Adrian:”

Don’t lose your sanity over this website.  Try it.  If it doesn’t work, walk away.  Try it tomorrow.

and

Don’t run with scissors.

The transcript of the complete 12-minute chat is here (scroll down).  As you read it, notice two things: one is the admission of using canned answers, together with their near-irrelevance to the questions being asked.  The other is Agent Dean hanging up on Adrian in mid-chat.

This is government customer service, government medicine style.