# What is your ongoing opinion of the Affordable Care Act? (Title Edited) **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 17, 2013, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561 "2013-01-17T23:21:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 78
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1542 "2014-02-20T10:26:45Z")
I do hope they get to the bottom of it… on the face of the matter, they have 300 hospitals and about 30,000 physicians in-network… So you really have to wonder what the issue is. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1543 "2014-02-20T15:13:06Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > You’d also have to have to do a tort system similar to what single payer countries have. If your doctor kills you, your family doesn’t get million-dollar settlements, they get an apology. You’re describing a system where the government employs the doctors and runs the hospitals, like the UK. That’s different from a single-payer system where the government pays private providers. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1544 "2014-02-20T16:48:27Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > You’d also have to have to do a tort system similar to what single payer countries have. If your doctor kills you, your family doesn’t get million-dollar settlements, they get an apology. Apparently you aren’t very up on current medical malpractice laws. For instance, here in Nevada, your life is worth $350,000, excluding economic damages. [ > [@Nevada Revised Statutes](#): > > NRS 41A.035  Limitation on amount of award for noneconomic damages.  In an action for injury or death against a provider of health care based upon professional negligence, the injured plaintiff may recover noneconomic damages, but the amount of noneconomic damages awarded in such an action must not exceed $350,000. ]([NRS: CHAPTER 41A - ACTIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE](http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-041A.html)) Nevada isn’t the only state with a cap on medical malpractice awards, either. AFAIK, today they are the norm. The days of million dollar settlements, if they ever existed, are gone the way of the Dodo thanks to lobbying efforts by doctors and their insurance cxompanies. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1545 "2014-02-20T17:00:12Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Apparently you aren’t very up on current medical malpractice laws. > > For instance, here in Nevada, your life is worth $350,000, excluding economic damages. [url=[NRS: CHAPTER 41A - ACTIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE](http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-041A.html)] > Nevada isn’t the only state with a cap on medical malpractice awards, either. AFAIK, today they are the norm. The days of million dollar settlements, if they ever existed, are gone the way of the Dodo thanks to lobbying efforts by doctors and their insurance cxompanies. Thanks. Now that I think of it, it is kinda funny hearing a conservative like Adaher bemoan the potential loss of big settlements. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1546 "2014-02-20T17:57:50Z")
The Pubbies haven’t been bashing the trial lawyers lately, have they? ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1547 "2014-02-20T23:03:26Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > THe individual mandate will last exactly as long as it takes for the administration to find out it’s bad for Democrats’ electoral chances. That’s what they did with the employer mandate. I doubt that the individual mandate will actually be that much of problem - not that the opponents of it won’t try. At the end of the day, the individual mandate affects vey few people. This (PDF) [analysis](http://www.scholarsstrategynetwork.org/sites/default/files/ssn_basic_facts_skocpol_on_the_individual_mandate_0.pdf) says 1-2%. > [@](#): > > These claims are not true. Most Americans already have health insurance coverage through employment, Medicare, or Medicaid – and about thirty million more will gain coverage through the new reforms starting in 2014. The vast majority of Americans – 98% to 99% – will not be affected by the mandate rule at all. Only about one or two people out of every 100 will be subject to a small tax fine – and they will have to pay the fine only if they can afford private insurance but refuse to buy it. Also, eliminating the mandate would effectively eliminate the gains the ACA has made in the individual insurance market. Several tries were made in the 1990’s and failed. Take your pick of articles in this [search](https://www.google.com/search?q=health+care+reform+without+mandate). Few good stories about reform without a mandate. I lived through one example of a Republican legislature eliminating the Washington State individual mandate in 1994. By 1999, the three largest insurers had withdrawn from the market and it was almost impossible to buy a policy. I hope someone learns from the past… ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2014, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1548 "2014-02-20T23:16:33Z")
It affects very few people if you assume people sign up at the expected rates. If 5 million sign up as opposed to 7 million, then that’s 2 million more subject to the mandate. Sure, the employer mandate is more disruptive, but this administration will not allow ACA to mess with Democrats’ political fortunes any more than is necessary. They will alter the law as needed to protect vulnerable Democrats to the greatest extent possible. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1549 "2014-02-21T03:51:09Z")
Looks like some of the losses aren’t coming by employees’ choices, but by the public sector reducing their hours to keep them under 30: > **[Public Sector Cuts Part-Time Shifts to Bypass Insurance Law (Published 2014)](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/us/public-sector-cuts-part-time-shifts-to-duck-insurance-law.html?_r=0)** > > Cities, counties and public schools, lacking the option of passing along increased costs to consumers, are drawing a line at 30 hours. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1550 "2014-02-21T15:01:05Z")
[Wall St. is betting on the success of Obamacare:](http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-02-20/obamacare-investors-bet-billions-the-aca-will-succeed?campaign_id=yhoo) > [@](#): > > A new online broker, Motif Investing, is offering Obamacare’s friends and foes alike a chance to put their money where their mouth is. Co-founded by a former Microsoft (MSFT) executive, Hardeep Walia, and backed by Goldman Sachs (GS) and other investors, Motif allows customers to bet on narrowly tailored concepts. “A lot of people think conceptually about investing,” he says. “We take ideas and translate them to what we call a ‘motif’—an intelligently weighted basket of up to 30 stocks, built around an idea that people can understand.” > > … > > What’s most striking isn’t the performance of the two funds, but where investors are choosing to place their money. “We don’t have convictions or views on the law itself,” says Walia. “We give you both sides of the equation.” But one is clearly more popular: He says Motif investors have bet 45 times more money on Obamacare’s success than on its failure. > > This trend reflects the beliefs of the investment community, where—unlike in Washington—the permanence of the health-care law is taken for granted and the prospect of repeal is given practically no credence. “Investors can’t imagine a scenario where the changes the Affordable Care Act started will be repealed and taken away,” says Bob Kocher, a partner specializing in health care and IT at the venture capital firm Venrock. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1551 "2014-02-21T16:25:44Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Looks like some of the losses aren’t coming by employees’ choices, but by the public sector reducing their hours to keep them under 30: > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/us/public-sector-cuts-part-time-shifts-to-duck-insurance-law.html?\_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/us/public-sector-cuts-part-time-shifts-to-duck-insurance-law.html?_r=0) From the first sentence of your link (bolding mine): > [@](#): > > Cities, counties, public schools and community colleges around the country have limited or reduced the work hours **of part-time employees** to avoid having to provide them with health insurance under the Affordable Care Act, state and local officials say. Oh no! Part time employees aren’t going to get 40 hours per week! The horror! :mad: Sorry, but I have a hard time getting upset that a “part-time job” won’t provide quite 75% or even 87.5% of the pay of a full-time job. Or are you suggesting that all part-time jobs be banished from the land, and employers be forced to only employ people for 40 hours per week or more? I’m sure that the people who are having their hours reduced by 1 or 2 hours per week will miss the $20 from their paycheck, but really, this is all just so much bullshit. But really, this is getting rid of employers ability to call a job “part-time” even tho it requires full-time hours. In other words, the article amounts to little more than scare-mongering. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1552 "2014-02-21T16:42:54Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Sorry, but I have a hard time getting upset that a “part-time job” won’t provide quite 75% or even 87.5% of the pay of a full-time job. You’re not getting it. These are former FULL-TIME employees getting cut to part time. That means not only are they out of luck for health insurance, but possibly for some or all other benefits they already got! That’s on top of the pay cut for going to part time. > [@](#): > > Or are you suggesting that all part-time jobs be banished from the land, and employers be forced to only employ people for 40 hours per week or more? Do you think we’re better off when full-timers are being pushed into part-time jobs, or worse, or the same? > [@](#): > > I’m sure that the people who are having their hours reduced by 1 or 2 hours per week will miss the $20 from their paycheck, but really, this is all just so much bullshit. But really, this is getting rid of employers ability to call a job “part-time” even tho it requires full-time hours. > > In other words, the article amounts to little more than scare-mongering. It depends on whether it’s really just 1 or 2 hours, and whether they lose other benefits too. Read the story - there are many cases where the lost work is a good chunk more than “1 or 2 hours.” Also, you’ll see in the article that some workers have two jobs with the same employer that make up more than a full-time job, but had to give up one of them. That’s a significant reduction in pay. Just denying the unintended, yet real, effects of this law helps nobody. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1553 "2014-02-21T17:20:55Z")
… and more wonderful narrow network news: > **[Another CBS13 Viewer Says Doctors Denying Covered California Plan](https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/another-cbs13-viewer-says-doctors-denying-covered-california-plan/)** > > Some doctors won't accept patients with insurance through Covered California—the state-run implementation of the Affordable Care Act. In some cases, doctors say they reimbursement rates are lower. One viewer said she did months of research before picking the plan that Blue Cross recommended. But it’s still been a nightmare. Katherine Cadman says her emails and calls aren’t getting anywhere. She says she signed up for an Anthem Blue Cross Plan, but doctors keep refusing to see her. “It’s just not right,” she said. “It does make you feel like you’re a second-class citizen.” … We went in search of answers and learned some doctors won’t accept patients with insurance through Covered California—the state-run implementation of the Affordable Care Act. In some cases, doctors say they reimbursement rates are lower. Anthem tells CBS13 it can’t force an in-network doctor to give care, and that the doctor can terminate its contract. This leaves the Dunns and Cadman feeling like they’re left with few options. “Anthem’s a big umbrella, but we’re standing at the edge of the umbrella and we’re getting wet, because we’re not getting what regular subscribers are getting,” Cadman said. “What are we left with as far as being Covered California subscribers?” Cadman asked. “The bottom of the barrel?” ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1554 "2014-02-21T17:25:43Z")
… and some more “narrow networks” stories. Obamacare is a roaring success! > **[Covered California Enrollees Complain About Limited Doctor Choices Nearby](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/covered-california-enrollees-complain-about-limited-doctor-choices-nearby/)** > > California's health care exchange promised potential customers they would have enough physicians to choose from. But some new enrollees, including an Alameda County woman, are discovering that their doctor choices are extremely limited. Julia Turner is surprised that she even has to search for a doctor. When she signed up for a policy through Covered California late last year, her long-time physician was listed as participating in her Blue Shield plan. When she tried to make an appointment last week, however, he told her he was not accepting patients with her Blue Shield policy, purchased on the Covered California exchange. … When KPIX 5 contacted all of the 41 doctors on the list Blue Shield provided to Julia, it found only four of the doctors were actually accepting new adult patients, and only one of them was board certified. … The California Department of Managed Health Care said there is no law that requires the insurer’s provider list to be accurate. However, state law does require insurers to have an “adequate” network of doctors. That means there must be at least one doctor for every 1,200 enrollees within 15 miles of their home. But many enrollees, in both Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans purchased on the exchange said they are struggling to find even one doctor willing to take new patients due to what are now being call “narrow networks.” … “This is not what we were promised. I see those (Covered California) commercials now and I want to scream,” Turner said. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1555 "2014-02-21T18:12:08Z")
You could have posted this article BEFORE ACA was passed, and it would sound just as timely. Dealing with health insurance has always been a nightmare for some people. The difference is, lots of people avoided the nightmare by simply going without it, because they had no access or were excluded for pre-existing conditions. > [@Terr](#): > > … and more wonderful narrow network news: > > [Another CBS13 Viewer Says Doctors Denying Covered California Plan - CBS Sacramento](http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2014/02/19/another-cbs13-viewer-says-doctors-denying-covered-california-plan/) > > One viewer said she did months of research before picking the plan that Blue Cross recommended. But it’s still been a nightmare. > > Katherine Cadman says her emails and calls aren’t getting anywhere. She says she signed up for an Anthem Blue Cross Plan, but doctors keep refusing to see her. > > “It’s just not right,” she said. “It does make you feel like you’re a second-class citizen.” > … > We went in search of answers and learned some doctors won’t accept patients with insurance through Covered California—the state-run implementation of the Affordable Care Act. In some cases, doctors say they reimbursement rates are lower. > > Anthem tells CBS13 it can’t force an in-network doctor to give care, and that the doctor can terminate its contract. > > This leaves the Dunns and Cadman feeling like they’re left with few options. > > “Anthem’s a big umbrella, but we’re standing at the edge of the umbrella and we’re getting wet, because we’re not getting what regular subscribers are getting,” Cadman said. > > “What are we left with as far as being Covered California subscribers?” Cadman asked. “The bottom of the barrel?” ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1556 "2014-02-21T18:20:00Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > You could have posted this article BEFORE ACA was passed, and it would sound just as timely. Dealing with health insurance has always been a nightmare for some people. The difference is, lots of people avoided the nightmare by simply going without it, because they had no access or were excluded for pre-existing conditions. I already posted studies that are showing that Obamacare policies’ networks are much narrower than before. And if you read the articles, you will see that the people profiled in the articles had insurance before Obamacare but were forced off it and into Obamacare policies. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1557 "2014-02-21T18:28:53Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > I already posted studies that are showing that Obamacare policies’ networks are much narrower than before. My point was that overall, we have more people with insurance though. > [@](#): > > And if you read the articles, you will see that the people profiled in the articles had insurance before Obamacare but were forced off it and into Obamacare policies. Before ACA, people could lose their jobs and then be forced into narrower, or no, coverage too. And anyone who was forced out by ACA likely had a crappy policy anyway, which is why it didn’t qualify. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1558 "2014-02-21T18:32:23Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > My point was that overall, we have more people with insurance though. Would you describe a policy where you cannot find a doctor to treat you as “crappy”? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1559 "2014-02-21T18:50:13Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Would you describe a policy where you cannot find a doctor to treat you as “crappy”? Sure. Are you saying the policy they had before was teeming with doctors waiting to treat them, and benefits that made it financially possible to obtain the treatment? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1560 "2014-02-21T18:51:44Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Sure. > > Are you saying the policy they had before was teeming with doctors waiting to treat them, and benefits that made it financially possible to obtain the treatment? Did you read the article I posted? The answer is yes. But it’s nice that at least one proponent admits that Obamacare policies are “crappy”. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2014, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561/1561 "2014-02-21T18:55:54Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Did you read the article I posted? The answer is yes. > > But it’s nice that at least one proponent admits that Obamacare policies are “crappy”. I didn’t not say Obamacare polices are crappy. I said some are. Just like some non-Obamacare policies are, or were, crappy. And some Obamacare polices are excellent. I remember what it was like having a daughter with a pre-existing condition and not being able to get insurance, and dealing with the insurance company when I got it later (for an outrageous price) and all their denials and appeals and in-network vs. out-of-network and having zero specialists in-network crap before ACA. I’m just saying that overall, it’s not ACA that caused this all, it’s just how insurance works sometimes. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561.md?page=77) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-your-ongoing-opinion-of-the-affordable-care-act-title-edited/647561.md?page=79)