“I’m Not Pulling the Cat’s Tail”

President Barack Obama had this to say, through his Press Secretary Jay Carney, about the Obama lie that “if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance.  Period.”

Insurers pulled those plans away from them.  The law [Obamacare] could not order insurers not to cancel that plan.

His…spokeswoman…Valerie Jarrett had much the same thing to say.

Never mind that those plans no longer were legal under Obamacare and that Obama knew it.

“I’m just hanging on to the tail.  The cat’s doing the pulling.”

Where to Cut

As the recent government shutdown demonstrated, there’s a lot of fat that can be cut in the personnel department.  This is no fault of the personnel, but the fact is, we don’t need that many in Federal employ.

Here are a couple more items on that score.

The Department of Agriculture is fairly typical of most agencies in its sometimes incongruous responsibilities and huge some say too huge workforce.  It employs roughly 99,000 people to service the roughly 1.4 million Americans employed in farming.

That’s 14 farmers for every DA employee.

And this on the states being absolved, more and more, of their responsibilities by the Federal government:

“Ronald Reagan had a yellow book test,” said Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste.  “If something could be found in the Yellow Book, it should be done by the private sector.  Unfortunately, the administration now is taking the opposite view, claiming many services are inherently governmental, and therefore not subject to competition.”

Which feeds back into the bloat in Departments like the DA and those listed on the other side of the first link above.

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.

The Worst Is Still To Come?

Senator Tim Scott (R, SC), whose business experience is in the insurance industry, thinks so.

After 15 years in the insurance industry I will tell you that the reality of it is this: if it’s hard on the front end, it’s going to be really painful when we get to paying, having to take care of claims, having to take care of people.  This is a real challenge and if it’s this bad now, I fear the worst is still to come.

Indeed.  If the system is unable to convey accurate information about an applicant for an insurance policy to the company actually handling the insurance, how can it be expected to convey accurate information about an insuree when he files a claim?  Or when his doctor files the claim for him?  Or make payments to the doctor or hospital based on that (potentially inaccurate) claim from that (potentially inaccurate) policy?

Keep in mind that, at the time the insuree files his claim, he’s just undergone an expensive procedure, and he needs the money.  Or the doctor/hospital who’s fronting the patient needs the reimbursement.

The filing to payment/reimbursement process usually was long and dragged-out, even before the advent of Obamacare.  How many of you have had an expensive trip to the hospital, or an expensive procedure done in your doctor’s or dentist’s office, and seen the bills come trickling in over the ensuing weeks or months—the initial bill, then what the insurance company covered, and a subsequent bill?  Then a final settling-up?  But at least then, it was accurate.

This government-generated software that fronts for Obamacare is a disaster now.  This same government-generated software also does that backend system of claim process and payment for Obamacare.

Heads up.