More affordable as compared to what it would be without the ACA. Not sure if that context is clear from that speech alone, but it is clear from the hundreds of other speeches he gave on this topic. He’s talking about the reform future vs. the future in which medical costs continue rapid increases.
ETA: But the point I was making is simply that he has often talked about how the ACA will affect all insurance, including existing policies. No one should have understood grandfathering to mean that the consumer protections (anti-caps, anti-rescission, primarily) would not apply to those policies.
No plan is being cancelled as a consequence of it having lifetime limits. The plans have to drop that requirement, but they can still be grandfathered, and they are allowed to increase their premium commensurately. Cancellation, in that situation, is the choice of the insurance company presumably made based on whether they think they can continue to sell the plan at a higher premium. You’re welcome to lay that at the feet of Obamacare, and I’m not saying you don’t have an argument. I’m just trying to correct the misinformation about how grandfathering works.
I didn’t think it was obvious from the context, but of course we’ll never be able to know what the costs would have been w/o the ACA. I guess we’ll at least see if the trend is significantly different.
Yeah, I can pretty much agree with that. I think Obama could have made it more clear, but there was enough stuff out there telling us about the changes and what they would mean.
But I think more importantly is that it’s kind of crazy to be making all these pronouncements about the ACA at this point. The web site is still a disaster, and all the aspects still haven’t kicked in. I’m guessing we’ll have a much better idea by mid 2014. I’ll withhold judgement at least until then.
Apparently removing that limit made the plane unfeasible in the eyes of the insurance company.
Grandfathering doesn’t mean “change it the way we want, then we will allow it”. In fact, let me quote you from your liar-in-charge’s statements just recently:
"Now, if you have or had one of these plans before the Affordable Care Act came into law and you really liked that plan, what we said was** you can keep it if it hasn’t changed since the law passed**.”
See that “if it hasn’t changed”? I cannot keep my plan although it has not changed. Does this make Obama’s lies clearer now?
Yeah, I don’t know how to say it more clearly, but I still think you don’t get it.
Cancellations resulting from the change in lifetime limits have zero to do with grandfathering. You can blame them on the ACA’s requirements and the insurance company’s cost decisions, but you cannot blame them on the grandfathering provisions.
Terr: No one is going to be convinced by your anonymous MB claim. We’re going to have to wait for this to shake out in the public sphere, and see what the press reports about peoples’ experiences.
I don’t know how to say it more clearly, but I still think you don’t get it.
Obama said, just a couple of days ago, that if the plan has not changed, I can keep it. I gave you the exact quote.
The plan didn’t change. Yet, under Obamacare, I cannot keep it. It is against the law for me to keep it and it is illegal for the company to continue selling it to me.
Combine (1) and (2) together - Obama is a liar. It’s about as clear as it gets.
We got that. What actions are you urging? You could ask for impeachment, I suppose. The House Pubbies would probably move to impeach on a charge of aggravated littering.
Are you thinking you will shatter the illusions of lefties who think Obama slid down the rainbow? Well, OK, shatter away, who cares? I know maybe one of those, but she was 19 at the time, and isn’t 19 any more. Overall, I find Obama to be pretty good, but no virgin is ever elected Queen of the Whores.
And what good would it do to elect a saint? He’d be helpless, a goldfish in a shark cage. How can he advance the rise of Progressivism to world domination if he can’t scratch a back or grease a skid? Hell, if anything, he damaged himself by being too good! I think he genuinely believed in reaching across and forging bi-partisan bridges. Look what he got for that!
But OK. if it will make your day…Woe is me! Me Golden Idol is tarnished, Obama is human! I only hope I can blink back the tears long enough to fill out the Republican registration form. Alas! Alack! Aaaaack!
The first thing the public should do is not trust anything the President says on immigration, his next big push. He has proven that he will say anything to sell wha the wants. The second thing is not to trust that he can implement a complicated immigration overhaul.
Whatever the President has said about health care, he’s far, far more trustworthy than his opponents. The Republicans (especially in the House) have set the bar so low for honesty that they’d make Nixon look like Honest Abe.
That’s a pretty harsh statement you’ve made Terr … look at the Obamacare/ACA health care program like his other explanations, perhaps this is just an initial offering with the real program coming March 31st, 2014. Then again it could be explained as just talking points and the real story will come out later.
Seriously though I’ve been thinking about the ACA and how it does make a lot of sense … especially for people with real needs. It’s called mercy in some circles.
Perhaps like we use to do in the Navy we should form an all hands working party to help one another understand and implement obamacare/ACA. Employers take the time to explain the program to their employees, moms and dads explain to their children, real grown ups helping one another understand how to get the insurance and how to make it work for all Americans.
The republican party would be well advised to get behind the obamacare/ACA health care program instead of lying, chuckling, being haughty and hoping the plan will fail.
The only way obamacare is going to get better is if we all care … I care and it’s called mercy.
That’s debateable, but also not particularly relevant. The public shouldn’t trust the Republicans either. They should trust people actually in a position to know, and trust what they already know. So far, the public has been a better predictor of ACA’s strengths and weaknesses than the politicians.
Agreed. I can’t make heads nor tails out of what it’s supposed to mean. The only thing I understood was that the public, supposedly, has been a good predictor of Obamacare. But I didn’t see any predictions from “the public” that the web site was going to have problems.
Well, no one could have predicted that level of incompetence. Not even the law’s most vociferous enemies.
What I meant was whether the law would make things better or worse, cheaper or more expensive, that sort of thing. The public did a pretty good job of sifting through the competing lies and exaggerations.
When you care and reach into your pocket and give to the needy, that’s called mercy. When you care and reach into other people’s pockets and give to the needy, that can be called a lot of things, but “mercy” is not one of them.
Well, one thing the public has predicted overwhelmingly is that the bill will add to the deficit, which is at odds with what the CBO says(although the CBO figures include caveats).
of course, if few sign up, that’s few subsidies to give out, so that’s something.
