So when SCOTUS overturns the individual mandate...

[CosmicCowboy]

Is it legal to still force insurance companies to accept pre-existing conditions?

This defies all logic...Healthy people won't need to buy insurance because they can always go out and get it after they get sick.

It will totally destroy the insurance market and drive prices right through the roof for the few that still play by the rules and buy insurance.

[boutons_deux]

the requirement to accept sickos would have to go, in practice, because the insurance vampires were going to use the revenues from 40M+ mandated clients to cover the sickos.

[baseline bum]

Great can of worms the Supreme Court could open up, huh? It's what Obama gets for swinging so far right and pushing the shitty 1990s Republican plan.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yeah, without the mandate the whole thing collapses.

[boutons_deux]

Fix health care after Supreme Court ruling

If the Supreme Court strikes down President Barack Obama’s signature health care reform law, 77 percent of Americans want the president and Congress to work on new legislation overhauling the system

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77624.html#ixzz1ySVOS0YM

[boutons_deux]

U.S. health insurers to pay $1.1 billion in rebates: HHS

U.S. health insurance companies are due to pay out $1.1 billion in rebates to employers and individuals this summer, under a new industry regulation imposed by President Barack Obama's health care law, the administration said on Thursday.

But whether the rebates actually reach those recipients depends on if the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in a ruling expected by the end of next week, experts said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/21/us-usa-healthcare-rebates-idUSBRE85K1DJ20120621?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FhealthNews+%28Reute rs+Health+News%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Health Care Decision Could Boost Seniors' Drug Costs

The spectre of senior citizens choosing between food and prescription drugs has been used by politicians so many times, it's become a cliché.

The law provided $250 rebate checks to Medicare beneficiaries who reached the doughnut hole in 2010, introduced discounts last year and phases out the coverage gap altogether by 2020. Enrollees get 50 percent discounts on brand-name drugs and 14 percent discounts on generic drugs during the doughnut hole in 2012. From March 2010 through April 2012, 5.1 million people on Medicare saved $3.2 billion on their prescription drugs due to these changes, according to the Obama administration.

These enhanced prescription drug coverage for Medicare enrollees would disappear if the Supreme Court overturns the health care reform law on constitutional grounds. A ruling is expected next week.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/supreme-court-health-care_n_1613911.html

[boutons_deux]

What Americans Learned From the Media About the Health Care Debate

When it was a major story, however, most of the coverage focused on the politics of the bill rather than the substance of the legislation. And the language and framing of the issue favored by the bill’s Republican critics was far more prevalent in the news coverage than
the language and framing favored by Democrats supporting the bill,

opponents of the reform won the so-called “messaging war” in the coverage. Terms that were closely associated with opposition arguments, such as “government run,” were far more present in media reports than terms associated with arguments supporting the bill, such as “pre-existing conditions.”

http://www.journalism.org/sites/journalism.org/files/u26/5_table.png

http://www.journalism.org/commentary_backgrounder/how_media_has_covered_health_care_debate

============

Money buys the MSM, etc.

Right-wing playing poilitics and protecting the entrenched corps rather than try to solve America's disastrously dysfunctional health care fiasco.

[boutons_deux]

The Sociopathic Conscience of Repugs

GOP Senate Candidate Says Businesses Should Be Allowed To Deny Health Insurance To Cancer Patients

Of particular interest to the candidate is a mandate that requires an employer to pay for certain services they may be morally opposed to — such as birth control — which Mourdock said he opposes.

Mourdock’s example was an employer who decided to cover everything but cancer.

“Does that employer have the right to do it? I would say yes they do if they want to keep their health care costs down but it also means it’s less likely you’re going to want to work here. If that employer wants to get the best employees coming in the door he’s going to offer the best insurance possible.”

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/18/501654/richard-mourdock-health-insurance-cancer/

If you're sick, fuck you, not hired by Repugs.

[TeyshaBlue]

lol drawing generalizations from hypotheticals.

:facepalm

lol thinkprogress

[TeyshaBlue]

lol thinkprogress, of course, crops the interview. Here's the next couple of paragraphs:

So is there anything to like about Obamacare?

Mourdock concedes that he has heard support from people on the pre-existing condition coverage that the bill allows. Further, he said, health insurance companies are also embracing a provision in the law which allows parents to keep their children on their plans until they reach age 26.

“Those types of reforms are good ones that we need to continue to build on,” he said.

[TeyshaBlue]

fucking hacks.

[boutons_deux]

No other group of Americans faces higher stakes in the impending Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act than those with pre-existing conditions. The law, once its major provisions take effect, would prohibit insurance companies from turning people away or charging them more because they are sick. In exchange, most Americans would be required to have insurance, broadening the base of paying customers with an infusion of healthy people. Those who did not buy insurance would be subject to financial penalties.

The Government Accountability Office estimates that 36 million to 122 million adults under 65 have a pre-existing condition. As many as 17 million do not have insurance. Many try to buy coverage on the individual market, but in most states that is either impossible or too costly.

Experts are divided on what the ruling will bring for this group of Americans. If the mandate that everyone buy coverage is struck down, the Obama administration and the insurance industry say that the protections for people with pre-existing conditions should be, too. If the ailing pile in without the larger pool of healthy people, premiums would skyrocket, insurers say.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/health/policy/those-already-ill-have-huge-stake-in-health-ruling.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

[boutons_deux]

fucking hacks.

fukcking stalker GFY

[CosmicCowboy]

lol thinkprogress, of course, crops the interview. Here's the next couple of paragraphs:

So is there anything to like about Obamacare?

Mourdock concedes that he has heard support from people on the pre-existing condition coverage that the bill allows. Further, he said, health insurance companies are also embracing a provision in the law which allows parents to keep their children on their plans until they reach age 26.

“Those types of reforms are good ones that we need to continue to build on,” he said.

Naturally those insurers want those healthy age bracket kids to buy insurance.

[TeyshaBlue]

fukcking stalker GFY

Fucking hack getting bitch slapped. GFY.:lmao

[Wild Cobra Kai]

Lots of big business money to be lost on overturn, therefor, SCOTUS won't do it.

[Wild Cobra]

Fix health care after Supreme Court ruling

If the Supreme Court strikes down President Barack Obama’s signature health care reform law, 77 percent of Americans want the president and Congress to work on new legislation overhauling the system

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77624.html#ixzz1ySVOS0YM
LOL.... Shazbot, did you actually read the linked pole?

[boutons_deux]

licked pole?

I leave that to you barracks bunnies.

Most Americans know they are getting raped, RAPED, by the docs, hospital, insurance companies, BigPharma, and want it stopped. But they have no say in the matter. They exist just to be sucked dry.

[Wild Cobra]

licked pole?

I leave that to you barracks bunnies.

Most Americans know they are getting raped, RAPED, by the docs, hospital, insurance companies, BigPharma, and want it stopped. But they have no say in the matter. They exist just to be sucked dry.

That's right. be a good Huff~n~Puff post lemming.

[boutons_deux]

go lick a pole

[Wild Cobra]

go lick a pole
Hmmmmm......

I guess I need to ask my girl if she has any Polish in her.

[boutons_deux]

Health insurers foresee rising premiums if court nixes 'individual mandate'

In principle, millions of Americans who could not otherwise afford insurance would be covered, while the influx of healthy purchasers of insurance would help pay the costs. Any day now, in a ruling by the US Supreme Court, this central bargain in Mr. Obama's Affordable Care Act could unravel.

It's not hard to see why the health insurance industry doesn't like that idea. The Supreme Court could rule that the "individual mandate" in the law is unconstitutional, thus removing a big expected stream of revenue, while leaving in place the law's guaranteed-access provisions, which impose big costs on insurers.

But outside experts say the negative consequences also would ripple beyond the insurance business to affect the pocketbooks of millions of Americans, who would face a rising price for their health insurance.

"We have the worst possible outcome" in this scenario, says J.D. Kleinke, a health-policy expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Yet this outcome appears quite probable, he says, because the Supreme Court is tasked with considering questions of law and the Constitution, not what would be optimal for America's health-care system.

"They're thinking about it legally.... They've got pressure not to be activist," says Mr. Kleinke. He predicts that "their tendency is going to be to do as little as possible but still do what they believe is legally correct. You do the math on that, you end up with: They take away the mandate, they leave the rest."

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0622/Health-insurers-foresee-rising-premiums-if-court-nixes-individual-mandate?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fcsm+%28Christian+Scie nce+Monitor+|+All+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

"do as little as possible but still do what they believe is legally correct."

LEGAL?? :lol :lol

The extremist, activist right-wing pro-corp/anti-citizen REPUG SCOTUS fake judges overturned 100 years of stare decisis to rule for the 1% in C-U.

aka "we jest callin dem balls n strikes"

[ElNono]

crofl

[CavsSuperFan]

http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/UR551TOSajSPFkJWE4a2Pw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theticket/obama-truman-garyhe.jpg

[cheguevara]

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/contents/full/2009/12/16/8969.jpg

[coyotes_geek]

http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/UR551TOSajSPFkJWE4a2Pw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theticket/obama-truman-garyhe.jpg

Pretty good, but should have used Fox instead of CNN. I rate :lol:lol:lol:lol out of 5.

[baseline bum]

http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/UR551TOSajSPFkJWE4a2Pw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theticket/obama-truman-garyhe.jpg

:rollin

[fraga]

Pretty good, but should have used Fox instead of CNN. I rate :lol:lol:lol:lol out of 5.

Well I'm pretty sure the joke was that CNN fucked up their headline and actually reported this..so I'm guessing that's why Obama's holding it up and laughing...

[coyotes_geek]

Well I'm pretty sure the joke was that CNN fucked up their headline and actually reported this..so I'm guessing that's why Obama's holding it up and laughing...

I'm sure too, now, but I didn't know about CNN's gaff at the time. Either way, pretty damn funny.

[Sportcamper]

Dude…It has an uncanny resemblance to the old Dewey defeats Truman photo…Pretty weird if you ask me....

http://www.sqlservercentral.com/blogs/blogs/michael_coles/dewey_defeats_truman.jpg

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Is it legal to still force insurance companies to accept pre-existing conditions?

This defies all logic...Healthy people won't need to buy insurance because they can always go out and get it after they get sick.

It will totally destroy the insurance market and drive prices right through the roof for the few that still play by the rules and buy insurance.

If you do not have insurance you get 'taxed.' I will also say that you really do not understand risk management. That was the entire point of the individual mandate. Everyone goes into the pool. The insurance industry was just legislated a whole lot of customers.

I know nurses who are in a panic because there are not going to be enough doctors and nurses to handle the demand. As an industry however having too may customers seems an oxymoron.

The people that are getting hosed are young males. They are the 'relatively healthy' individuals and now they are required to subsidize the fucking baby boomers. How typical.

[fraga]

I'm sure too, now, but I didn't know about CNN's gaff at the time. Either way, pretty damn funny.
Oh shit...just heard that Fox News actually did the same...so yes...they should have used Fox News...would have been waaaaay funnier...but yes funny either way...

[DMX7]

lol @ that Obama-Truman pic.

[DMX7]

Hey! At least no one has compared this ruling to 9/11!

[rascal]

Scotus
Sounds like something you heard on conservative talk radio.

[Nbadan]

Has anyone tried the Wa Po calculator?

View profile
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/what-health-bill-means-for-you/?hpid=z2


I would suggest estimating the adjusted income for some of your employees and plug it in. Then compare that to what they are paying now.

You may be surprised.

[Nbadan]

Just the facts...


The law prohibits the IRS from seeking to put anybody in jail or seizing their property for simple refusal to pay the tax. The law says specifically that taxpayers “shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty” for failure to pay, and also that the IRS cannot file a tax lien (a legal claim against such things as homes, cars, wages and bank accounts) or a “levy” (seizure of property or bank accounts).

The law says that the IRS will collect the tax “in the same manner as an assessable penalty under subchapter B of chapter 68” of the tax code. That part of the tax code provides for imposing an additional penalty “equal to the total amount of the tax evaded, or not collected.” It also requires written notices to the taxpayer, and provides for court proceedings.

So it may turn out that the IRS will be suing those who fail to pay the tax for double the amount. But so far, the IRS has not spelled out exactly how it will enforce the new penalty with the limited power the law gives it.

http://factcheck.org/2012/06/how-much-is-the-obamacare-tax/

a couple with $100,000 of income might pay a tax of $2,025 if they choose to go without coverage or choose to pay for the bronze plan which the CBO averages to about $9k per year for singles and $12k per year for individuals.

Still way cheaper than my family pays for way less than any cadillac plan

[maverick1948]

If you do not have insurance you get 'taxed.' I will also say that you really do not understand risk management. That was the entire point of the individual mandate. Everyone goes into the pool. The insurance industry was just legislated a whole lot of customers.

I know nurses who are in a panic because there are not going to be enough doctors and nurses to handle the demand. As an industry however having too may customers seems an oxymoron.

The people that are getting hosed are young males. They are the 'relatively healthy' individuals and now they are required to subsidize the fucking baby boomers. How typical.

Dont think you are subsidizing the "fucking" baby boomers. Most of us have had insurance for years. I started working full time in 1966 and had insurance on my family and I for all the years I worked. I didnt ask anyone to foot the medical bills of my wife, my children or me. I am now retired and have a good pension but still pay over $5000 a year and the people I worked for pay a portion greater than that for me to continue my coverage. Did I earn it? You bet I did. I gave almost 44 years of continuous work for my employer and in return got the coverage. I dont know as many nurses as you but I do know the ones I do know say it will be nice to be able filing on each patient and getting paid instead of charging SENIORS the bulk of the costs because the young dont have insurance and only pay if they decide they need more medical attention.

In Texas, 6.1 million people do NOT have medical insurance. That is 1 in 4. Think being part of the 3 who do have insurance is fun? Trying going to the hospital and paying your bill and covering someone else who wont get insurance and cant pay because they have to spend their money on beer and cigarettes.

[EVAY]

Dont think you are subsidizing the "fucking" baby boomers. Most of us have had insurance for years. I started working full time in 1966 and had insurance on my family and I for all the years I worked. I didnt ask anyone to foot the medical bills of my wife, my children or me. I am now retired and have a good pension but still pay over $5000 a year and the people I worked for pay a portion greater than that for me to continue my coverage. Did I earn it? You bet I did. I gave almost 44 years of continuous work for my employer and in return got the coverage. I dont know as many nurses as you but I do know the ones I do know say it will be nice to be able filing on each patient and getting paid instead of charging SENIORS the bulk of the costs because the young dont have insurance and only pay if they decide they need more medical attention.

In Texas, 6.1 million people do NOT have medical insurance. That is 1 in 4. Think being part of the 3 who do have insurance is fun? Trying going to the hospital and paying your bill and covering someone else who wont get insurance and cant pay because they have to spend their money on beer and cigarettes.

This is pretty much where I am. I started buying insurance on myself in 1970 when I got my undergraduate degree and went to work full time. I have been paying ever since.

When I was in private industry my insurance coverage was fully paid by my employer. Since I retired, for my spouse and I, we pay over $600 per month, plus what my former employer paid. We have excellent coverage, but for what it is costing us, it should be excellent.

I am now of Medicare age, so my former employer insists that Medicare pay first, even though my premiums don't go down one penny because of Medicare picking up some of the cost.

So whether or not I want Medicare, my private industry employer insists that I have it (because it is cheaper for them), and my earned retirement benefit still costs me over $7500 per year.

Not all baby-boomers are drags on all the self-righteous uninsured gen X ers and Millenials out there.

Go find somebody else to blame your troubles on, Fuzzy.