And so you now agree that Obama can alter those regulations? Note that your cite doesn’t really address the main issue here, which is millions of people who buy their insurance individually:
Emphasis added.
See Post 32.
The provision in question was interpreted by HHS to prevent the grandfathering of most plans. Since HHS is a cabinet agency Obama has 100% authority to change the interpretation to allow more plans to be grandfathered.
The whole kerfuffle is emblematic of what is wrong with Obamacare. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people are getting kicked off of plans that they were happy with because the ACA deemed those plans not good enough. If they were good enough for the people who bought them, how does the government decide they were not good enough? Does the government care more for people’s health then they do? or is the government listening to special interests who want certain things covered because that is good for business? I think alot of my own intelligence, but I don’t think I am smart enough to tell a complete stranger, whose health, family history, financial situation, and tolerance for risk I do not know which health insurance is best for them. There is an old saying that a fool can put on his coat better than a wise man can do it for him. Unfortunately our superiors in the government think they know better than we do what is good for us and are determined that we get it no matter what the cost.
And they are not offering that plan because it doesn’t comply with the regulations.
It complied with the regulations until they chose to alter it to the degree that it no longer did so.
Obama’s defenders here remind me of a Howard Stern phone call back in the OJ days. He had a woman on the phone who was adamant that OJ was innocent. Stern then asked her about specific evidence in the case, and she hand waved away all of it. But he continued with even more “evidence”, simply made up by him that was increasingly impossible to explain away. I think he even got to the point of asking her about the “newest evidence” something like the murder knife found hidden in his sock drawer and increasingly convincing evidence. She would have none of it. Nope. OJ was innocent and the man was trying to set him up.
Pretty amazing. Just like now.
No, I totally get that part. Like I said, this was all entirely predictable. For instance, Obama could have said something like this: “If you like your plan, you’ll get to keep your plan, as long as you signed up after March 2010, and as long as your insurance company doesn’t change a few things that will negate the grandfathering. Our research indicates that for those of you who are individually insured, this will apply to roughly half of you. The other half of you will get cancellation notices 3 months before full ACA implementation, and by the way our exchange software will be buggy as hell and you’ll have to sweat for a few months while we sort it out.”
But liberals (again, typically my “team”) are now making excuses (Even Apple has buggy releases! Nobody could have predicted that the insurance companies would change their plans slightly year to year!) instead of owning up to the mistakes currently being made.
Wait, what? They altered a plan to have it NOT comply with regulations? Why would they do that?
The opposite is true. The deadlines for the mandates are firm. The grandfathering regulations are entirely within the discretion of HHS.
So the “mistake” being made is what?
That a soundbite from a four-year-old interview isn’t significantly nuanced enough for your tastes?
That Obama underestimated the willingness of Big Insurance to continue to try and screw over the customer?
The company is offering the same plan, just with the usual changes that occur every year. Customers could CHOOSE to not stay with that plan if they don’t like the changes, but the law takes that choice away from them.
Utter bullshit.
Premiums change all the time. Making it so that if a premium is changed, no matter how small a change, the plan is not “granfathered” anymore means there are effectively no “grandfathered” plans. It’s the equivalent of the “I’m not touching you” children’s game.
Well, thank goodness the government was able to prevent people from paying for plans they wanted to keep, but which were screwing them by not giving maternity coverage to 60-year old women.
So the plans are being cancelled because the insurer got greedy and jacked up the prices, not because of Obama.
Thanks for acknowledging that.
So - if the premium changes by $10, is it not the same plan anymore?
Premiums change every year. If the insurer “jacks up the price” by $1, the plan is not grandfathered anymore. Is it not the same plan if the premium is $1 more?
Essentially, yes. You’re trying to downplay those two things but for people who are losing their insurance by the end of the year, your casual dismissal isn’t much help.
Obama isn’t forcing any grandfathered insurers to change their premiums.
“I’m not touching you. I’m not touching you. I’m not touching you.”
It’s a good thing that they’re now able to buy plans with better coverage and lower premiums, in spite of the best attempts of the Republican party.