Initial attempts to sign up for ObamaCare go about as well as expected

[boutons_deux]

Obama Officials In 2010: 93 Million Americans Will Be Unable To Keep Their Health Plans Under Obamacare

most of the people being CANCELLED by THEIR INSURANCE COMPANY are in the individual market, whose size is:

"The individual insurance market provides coverage to more than 19 million people who purchase health insurance on their own."

http://www.ahip.org/Issues/Individua...Insurance.aspx

... so where does Fox Repug Propaganda lying network get the other 70M+ ??

[boobie4three]

most of the people being CANCELLED by THEIR INSURANCE COMPANY are in the individual market, whose size is:

"The individual insurance market provides coverage to more than 19 million people who purchase health insurance on their own."

http://www.ahip.org/Issues/Individua...Insurance.aspx

... so where does Fox Repug Propaganda lying network get the other 70M+ ??

From the Forbes article.
Read it and weep.

Mid-range estimate: 51% of employer-sponsored plans will get canceled

But Carney’s dismissal of the media’s concerns was wrong, on several fronts. Contrary to the reporting of NBC, the administration’s commentary in the Federal Register did not only refer to the individual market, but also the market for employer-sponsored health insurance.

Section 1251 of the Affordable Care Act contains what’s called a “grandfather” provision that, in theory, allows people to keep their existing plans if they like them. But subsequent regulations from the Obama administration interpreted that provision so narrowly as to prevent most plans from gaining this protection.

“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34,552 of the Register. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and become illegal. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.

Another 25 million people, according to the CBO, have “nongroup and other” forms of insurance; that is to say, they participate in the market for individually-purchased insurance. In this market, the administration projected that “40 to 67 percent” of individually-purchased plans would lose their Obamacare-sanctioned “grandfather status” and become illegal, solely due to the fact that there is a high turnover of participants and insurance arrangements in this market. (Plans purchased after March 23, 2010 do not benefit from the “grandfather” clause.) The real turnover rate would be higher, because plans can lose their grandfather status for a number of other reasons.

How many people are exposed to these problems? 60 percent of Americans have private-sector health insurance—precisely the number that Jay Carney dismissed. As to the number of people facing cancellations, 51 percent of the employer-based market plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.

[boutons_deux]

how will 93M Americans lose their current insurance? and so ing what, if they get the same coverage and price with new policy?

Almost NONE of the employer group plans are being cancelled.

[boobie4three]

how will 93M Americans lose their current insurance? and so ing what, if they get the same coverage and price with new policy?

Almost NONE of the employer group plans are being cancelled.

There are real life stories coming in every day. Unlike pie-in-the-sky projections that you and others here are feeding us.

The UN-Affordable Care Act
Ed Feulner | Nov 02, 2013

So how much more is your health insurance going to cost you?

That’s the question, really, as Obamacare begins taking effect and the stories pour in from around the country: how much your premiums are going up, not if they are.

Rising costs are a fact of life, but the changes Americans are seeing as a result of the president’s signature law are putting the “shock” in “sticker shock.” I recently had lunch with a friend who said his perfectly healthy 28-year old son had just received a notice from Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Illinois that on Jan. 1, his monthly premium will go from $90 to $268.

It’s no coincidence that this is the effective date of the first phase of Obamacare -- whose formal name, the Affordable Care Act, looks increasingly ironic with each passing day.

This 28-year-old is far from alone. Americans everywhere are getting such letters, as insurance companies and employers are forced to explain how the new law is necessitating much higher premiums.

Take Ben Neptun and his wife, Charla. Home health nurses in Mobile, Ala., they each make about $23 an hour, and manage a tight budget for their blended family of five -- a 15-year-old, a 2-year-old, and a 10-month-old. According to Ben, “there’s no room for several hundred dollars extra per month” in their budget.

Unfortunately, that’s exactly what they’re going to need, thanks to Obamacare.

The Neptuns buy their health insurance directly from Blue Cross-Blue Shield. They currently spend about $2,000 a year (not including the monthly premium) on health care for the family. But like so many other Americans, they recently got the dreaded letter -- and learned that their premiums will more than double, from $419 to $899.

“Thousands of Californians are discovering what Obamacare will cost them,” begins an article in the Los Angeles Times, “and many don't like what they see.”

Think about how changes like this affect the economy. If you suddenly have to come up with an extra $200, $300, $400 a month (or more), what do you do? You economize. You eat out less. You drive that old car even longer. You put off moving. You stop saving what little money you were putting aside. You contribute less to retirement funds.

What if you’re an employer? You have to cope with these skyrocketing costs, too, and in the same way: by economizing. You delay making necessary changes to improve your business. You rely on old equipment for longer. You reluctantly raise prices, knowing it will cost you customers. You cut back on hours for your employees.

Most importantly? You stop hiring.

According to a new Gallup survey, two out of every five small-business owners report that they are holding off on hiring because of Obamacare. They need employees, yes, but they also need to be able to afford them. And the changes brought about by the new health care law have made affordability a thing of the past.

Just ask the Federal Reserve, which regularly collects feedback from businesses and issues reports about the economic outlook. “Many contacts also commented on reluctance to expand due to uncertainty surrounding the Affordable Care Act; some employers cut hours or employees,” the Reserve says in its latest report.

So we see the fallout from Obamacare even before it takes full effect: Workers facing soaring additional costs for health coverage -- even as their hours are cut, leaving them with even smaller paychecks. Employers refusing to hire. And each group feverishly looking for ways to cut costs.

Small wonder that Ben Neptun says he’d “rather file bankruptcy and do without health insurance” because “the fines are less.”

There are financially sound ways to reform health care so that more people get the coverage they need. The UN-Affordable Care Act doesn't come close.

http://townhall.com/columnists/edfeu...1734771/page/2

[boutons_deux]

There are real life stories coming in every day. Unlike pie-in-the-sky projections that you and others here are feeding us.

townhall

there will be winners and losers, but serious observers, not townhall/Fox hired liars, are quite certain the winners will greatly outweigh the losers.

cherry picking anecdotes of losers doesn't . esp since, eg, Hannity's 6 losers were all researched to be fakes, but course Hannity's viewers accept his propaganda as God's own truth. bunch of willfully dumb assholes.

[boobie4three]

1 day ago
Senate Democrats supported rule that led to insurance cancellations
Posted by
CNN Investigative Correspondent Chris Frates

October 31st, 2013
06:38 PM ET

Washington (CNN) - Senate Democrats voted unanimously three years ago to support the Obamacare rule that is largely responsible for some of the health insurance cancellation letters that are going out.

In September 2010, Senate Republicans brought a resolution to the floor to block implementation of the grandfather rule, warning that it would result in canceled policies and violate President Barack Obama’s promise that people could keep their insurance if they liked it.



“The District of Columbia is an island surrounded by reality. Only in the District of Columbia could you get away with telling the people if you like what you have you can keep it, and then pass regulations six months later that do just the opposite and figure that people are going to ignore it. But common sense is eventually going to prevail in this town and common sense is going to have to prevail on this piece of legislation as well,” Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley said at the time.

“The administration's own regulations prove this is not the case. Under the grandfathering regulation, according to the White House's own economic impact analysis, as many as 69 percent of businesses will lose their grandfathered status by 2013 and be forced to buy government-approved plans,” the Iowa Republican said.

On a party line vote, Democrats killed the resolution, which could come back to haunt vulnerable Democrats up for re-election this year.

Senate Democrats like Mary Landrieu, Jeanne Shaheen, Mark Pryor, Kay Hagan and Mark Begich – all of whom voted against stopping the rule from going into effect and have since supported delaying parts of Obamacare.

The rule set up the criteria for what insurance plans would be grandfathered, or exempted, from the new Obamacare requirements. Democrats argued then that the rule was necessary to insure that insurance companies weren’t able to drastically change their plans and still remain exempt from Obamacare.

Republicans are “saying that basically we will grandfather it in, but the insurance companies can change it however they want, and you are stuck with it,” Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa said in 2010.

The rule essentially prevents insurance companies from keeping their grandfathered status if they make changes to their plans. In practice, insurance companies are loath to leave their plans unchanged so grandfathered plans are disappearing, and people are being forced to change their plans to meet Obamacare’s more robust coverage requirements.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...cancellations/


As you can see, Republicans tried to insert language into the ACA three years ago that would have prevented people from having their coverage cancelled, but Dems nixed that idea. Now that their cons uents are calling them up and chewing them out about what a steaming pile of 0bamacare is, the Dems are wanting to delay parts of it.

[boutons_deux]

Chris Wallace: ‘One of the problems’ with Obamacare is too many poor people getting Medicaid

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/11/0...ting-medicaid/

One of the key objectives of ACA was to provide insurance for poor people.

[boutons_deux]

As you can see, Republicans tried to insert language into the ACA three years ago that would have prevented people from having their coverage cancelled, but Dems nixed that idea. Now that their cons uents are calling them up and chewing them out about what a steaming pile of 0bamacare is, the Dems are wanting to delay parts of it.

Quite natural that the Repugs would want ty coverage rip-off insurance policies to be protected, while the Dems wanted them, and got them, killed, replaced by policies only with minimum coverage that better protected people from medical bankruptcy.

[AntiChrist]

Tennesee state senator, Brian Kelsey (R.), gave Sebelius this book as a gift

[AntiChrist]

A better healthcare.gov, built by three guys

http://www.thehealthsherpa.com/

[boutons_deux]

A better healthcare.gov, built by three guys

http://www.thehealthsherpa.com/

Looks, clean, a little too much white space, but does actually connect to providers, giving them the client data, or does it just list plans?

I have read that healthcare.gov should have been implemented in steps, first just for viewing available plans, but no customer data other than zip and age. healthcare.gov sucks, ACA doesn't suck totally. It's a kludegocracy, what you would expect when ACA was written by a health insurance industry exec/lobbyist, a Obama was naive to trust.

[boutons_deux]

Under Health Care Act, Millions Eligible for Free Policies

Millions of people could qualify for federal subsidies that will pay the entire monthly cost of some health care plans being offered in the online marketplaces set up under President Obama’s health care law, a surprising figure that has not garnered much attention, in part because the zero-premium plans come with serious trade-offs.

Three independent estimates by Wall Street analysts and a consulting firm say up to seven million people could qualify for the plans, but federal officials and insurers are reluctant to push them too hard because they are concerned about encouraging people to sign up for something that might ultimately not fit their needs.

The bulk of these plans are so-called bronze policies, the least expensive available. They require people to pay the most in out-of-pocket costs, for doctor visits and other benefits like hospital stays.

Supporters of the Affordable Care Act say that the availability of free-premium plans — as well as inexpensive policies that cover more — shows that it is achieving its goal of making health insurance widely available. A large number of those who qualify have incomes that fall just above the threshold for Medicaid, the government program for the poor, according to an analysis by the consulting firm McKinsey and Company.

“The whole point of the law was not only to cover the uninsured, but so people didn’t have to make choices between food or drugs, or going to the doctor or dentist,” said Karen Davis, a health policy expert at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “It’s what it is designed to do.”

Many insurers tried to price their least expensive plans so they would become free or nearly free with the addition of subsidies that are set based on a person’s income and the cost of a midlevel, or silver, plan.

The analysis found that five million to six million people who are uninsured will qualify for subsidies that will be greater than the cost of the cheapest bronze or silver plan. A million more people with individual insurance could also be eligible, according to McKinsey, although estimates of the size of the market for private individual insurance vary widely. None of the people in the analysis qualify for Medicaid.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/11/04...?from=homepage

[boutons_deux]

Poll: More Americans Want To Keep Or Expand Obamacare Than Repeal It

More Americans want to keep the Affordable Care Act as it is or expand it than want to get rid of it, according to a new poll released Friday.

The Kaiser Family Foundation found that 47 percent of Americans want to expand (22 percent) or keep the law (25 percent). Conversely, 37 percent said they wanted to either repeal the law and replace it with some Republican alternative (13 percent) or repeal it without replacing it (24 percent).

That's despite the fact that more Americans have an unfavorable view of the law (44 percent) than a favorable view (38 percent), according to Kaiser.

The poll surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,513 Americans ages 18 and over. It was conducted from Oct. 17 to 23.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...than-repeal-it

looks like VRWC/Repug/tea bagger/hate media LIES and propaganda ain't work so well

[SA210]

[boutons_deux]

For all you "free market" adulators of MegaCorps

Special Investigation: How Insurers Are Hiding Obamacare Benefits From Customers

Donna received the letter canceling her insurance plan on Sept. 16. Her insurance company, LifeWise of Washington, told her that they'd identified a new plan for her. If she did nothing, she'd be covered.

A 56-year-old Seattle resident with a 57-year-old husband and 15-year-old daughter, Donna had been looking forward to the savings that the Affordable Care Act had to offer.

But that's not what she found. Instead, she'd be paying an additional $300 a month for coverage. The letter made no mention of the health insurance marketplace that would soon open in Washington, where she could shop for compe ive plans, and only an oblique reference to financial help that she might qualify for, if she made the effort to call and find out.

RELATED: What Really Happens To People Whose Insurance Is 'Canceled' Because Of Obamacare

Otherwise, she'd be automatically rolled over to a new plan -- and, as the letter said, "If you're happy with this plan, do nothing."

If Donna had done nothing, she would have ended up spending about $1,000 more a month for insurance than she will now that she went to the marketplace, picked the best plan for her family and accessed tax credits at the heart of the health care reform law.

"The info that we were sent by LifeWise was totally bogus. Why the heck did they try to screw us?" Donna said. "People who are afraid of the ACA should be much more afraid of the insurance companies who will exploit their fear and end up overcharging them."

Across the country, insurance companies have sent misleading letters to consumers, trying to lock them into the companies' own, sometimes more expensive health insurance plans rather than let them shop for insurance and tax credits on the Obamacare marketplaces -- which could lead to people like Donna spending thousands more for insurance than the law intended. In some cases, mentions of the marketplace in those letters are relegated to a mere footnote, which can be easily overlooked.

The extreme lengths to which some insurance companies are going to hold on to existing customers at higher price, as the Affordable Care Act fundamentally re-orders the individual insurance market, has caught the attention of state insurance regulators.

The insurance companies argue that it's simply capitalism at work.

(iow, the tiest possible product for the highest possible price, 'CAUSE WE'RE ING LYING TO YOU, PROUDLY!)

By warning customers that their health insurance plans are being canceled as a result of Obamacare and urging them to secure new insurance plans before the Obamacare launched on Oct. 1, these insurers put their customers at risk of enrolling in plans that were not as good or as affordable as what they could buy on the marketplaces.

TPM has confirmed two specific examples where companies contacted their customers prior to the marketplace's Oct. 1 opening and pushed them to renew their health coverage at a higher price than they would pay through the marketplace. State regulators identified the schemes, but they weren't necessarily able to stop them.

Before Obamacare, Donna paid a $724 monthly premium for $10,000 deductible, catastrophic health coverage from LifeWise, a subsidiary of the state's Blue Cross/Blue Shield affiliate. She asked that TPM withhold her last name because she was disclosing personal financial information.

Under the new LifeWise plan, Donna would have to pay more than $1,000 a month, a nearly $300 per month increase and a huge hit for a family with an income around $40,000. It was bare-bones coverage by ACA standards, with a $6,350 deductible.

Donna was able to log onto Washington's marketplace and shop for insurance. And what did she find? Options. A LifeWise plan with the same deductible they offered her outside the exchange was a little cheaper. Plans with a lower deductible had the same or lower premiums as the LifeWise plan. What she ended up buying was a plan through Community Health Plan of Washington with a $250 deductible.

And crucially, she also discovered she would qualify for a federal tax subsidy that would knock her monthly premium to $80. Her daughter could enroll in Medicaid, at no cost to the family.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/insu...ters-obamacare

[Clipper Nation]

I can almost see Boutons' tears through the computer screen when he spams all those articles from liberal blogs trying to pretend like the Obama administration didn't screw up royally, tbh....

[boutons_deux]

I can almost see Boutons' tears through the computer screen when he spams all those articles from liberal blogs trying to pretend like the Obama administration didn't screw up royally, tbh....

where did I "pretend" that, apart from you believing your own slander? healthcare.gov is screw job, but it will be fixed, and then you'll have nothing to laugh about.

Even if ACA was written by health insurance industry exec, it's transforming American health insurance for the better, PROGRESS for Americans, and ACA will get much better.

[boutons_deux]

Consumer Reports destroys 'rate shock' horror story

Consumer Reports, which also destroys that story. They take a look at the Florida woman's cancelled health policy and compare it to what she could—affordably—get by shopping on the exchange.

Barrette’s expiring policy is a textbook example of a junk plan that isn’t real health insurance at all. If she had ever tried to use it for anything more than an occasional doctor visit or inexpensive prescription, she would have ended up with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical debt. [...]"She's paying $650 a year to be uninsured," Karen Pollitz, an insurance expert at the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, said. "I have to assume that she never really had to make much of a claim under this policy. She would have lost the house she's sitting in if something serious had happened. I don't know if she knows that." [...]

Okay, but can't we be outraged that Ms. Barrette will have to fork over $591 a month for a replacement plan? Actually, no, because she has other and better options than the costly plan Blue Cross Blue Shield wants to put her in. She [can] get real insurance that covers all essential health benefits for well under $200 a month. [...]

To put these two plans in perspective, let's imagine that Ms. Barrette's luck runs out and she receives a diagnosis of breast cancer that will cost $120,000 to treat.

Under her current junk plan, she would probably receive no more than a few hundred dollars of benefits for doctor visits and drugs. It wouldn't cover her surgery, her chemotherapy, her many expensive medications, or the repeated diagnostic tests she'd likely require. She would end up with probably $119,000 of unpaid medical bills. With the Humana plan, those bills top out at $6,300 a year, no matter what.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1...?detail=email#

[TSA]

lying piece of . How anyone defends this liar after this is beyond me.

[Jacob1983]

The people in those pics are so sad. Helpless weak minded sheep.

[boutons_deux]

keep it up while it lasts, right-wingers, ACA's gonna kick butt in those adult, serious, pro-99% states that adopt it, in spite of the blatant sabotage by the Repugs at federal and state level.

Repugs tried to kill SS in 1930s, and they lessly failed miserably.

[boobie4three]

keep it up while it lasts, right-wingers, ACA's gonna kick butt in those adult, serious, pro-99% states that adopt it, in spite of the blatant sabotage by the Repugs at federal and state level.

Repugs tried to kill SS in 1930s, and they lessly failed miserably.

Looks like it's the Dems who are trying to sabotage 0bamacare.

Sen. Mary Landrieu says she'll offer a bill to allow Americans to keep existing health insurance

By Bruce Alpert, NOLA.com | Times-Picayune
on October 30, 2013 at 2:58 PM, updated October 30, 2013 at 11:31 PM


WASHINGTON -- Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she will propose legislation to ensure Americans can keep their current insurance even if it may not comply with minimum standards under the Affordable Care Act.

Landrieu's comments Wednesday came after reports that insurance companies have sent out hundreds of thousands of letters telling people with individual policies -- not obtained under a group, or through employers -- that they must seek other insurance because theirs doesn't comply with the health law's mandated coverage.

Republicans said those actions contradict numerous statements by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats, including Landrieu, that people could keep their policies if they were satisfied with them, even after the Affordable Care Act was implemented.

"The promise was made and it should be kept," Landrieu said Wednesday. "And it was our understanding when we voted for that, that people when they have insurance, could keep what they had. So, I'm going to be working on that fix."

Landrieu's "Keeping the Affordable Care Act Promise" legislation would allow people to hold on to policies that don't meet the "essential benefits" coverage provisions mandated by the Affordable Care Act. But it would require insurers who offer such plans to inform consumers of the "essential benefits" their policies don't provide.

Landrieu believes consumers should be fully informed on what they are getting and not getting from their health insurance, her aides said.

They expect Landrieu to introduce her bill on Thursday.

On Tuesday, the conservative Weekly Standard quoted Landrieu as saying that the assurance to Americans was that, "if you had insurance that was good insurance that you wanted to keep it, you could keep it."

Since then, aides said, the senator learned of a bill being drafted by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., and decided to offer her own, with more consumer disclosures.

Obama defended the administration's policy on individual plans in a speech in Boston: "One of the things health reform was designed to do was to help not only the uninsured but also the underinsured," the president said. "And there are a number of Americans, fewer than 5 percent of Americans, who've got cut-rate plans that don't offer real financial protection in the event of a serious illness or an accident."

"Before the Affordable Care Act, the worst of these plans routinely dropped thousands of Americans every single year," the president said. "And on average, premiums for folks who stayed in their plans for more than a year shot up about 15 percent a year. This wasn't just bad for those folks who were, had these policies; it was bad for all of us, because, again, when tragedy strikes, and folks can't pay their medical bills, everybody else picks up the tab."

At a contentious House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said the Obama administration is carrying out the law that says Americans could keep polices that were in effect before the Affordable Care Act became law in 2010. Americans can keep individual plans bought after that date if the polices comply with minimum coverage requirements, according to the law.

Many of the 5 percent of Americans with individual coverage have been denied basic consumer protection or adequate coverage for serious illness, she said. Companies regularly cancel individual policies and have done so well before the Affordable Care Act became law and are doing so now, the secretary said.

"This market has always been the Wild West," Sebelius said.

Those losing coverage, Sebelius said, can buy more comprehensive coverage, often at the same or lower prices, through the exchanges, the marketplaces set up under the law to purchase coverage and qualify for income-based subsidies.

But Republicans said many Americans looking for replacements for their canceled individual policies are either finding "sticker shock" in terms of higher prices at the Affordable Care exchanges, or finding they can't access the troubled Affordable Care Act website, Healthcare.gov. It was down at least part of the day Wednesday.

Reps. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, and Bill Cassidy, R-Baton Rouge, were among a host of House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans who read from emails and letters sent to them from cons uents.

"People are sharing stories with me," Scalise said. "Shawn from Covington said: 'My current plan through United Health is no longer being offered in 2014 due to Obamacare.'"

"Madam Secretary," Scalise said, "what would you tell Shawn who liked his plan and now has lost it? He was promised by you and the president he would be able to keep that plan."

Sebelius said she would tell "Shawn to shop the (Affordable Care Act) marketplace." She also said United Health didn't have to cancel the plan if the policyholder had a plan issued before the law's 2010 enactment, or one that met the minimum criteria for health insurance.

Cassidy read a letter from a woman he identified as Adrienne: "She lost her coverage because spousal coverage is gone. She's gone on the exchange, doesn't qualify for a subsidy, but that her premium and out-of-pocket costs under any plan is $10,000 a year. She writes us. She feels betrayed by her government."

Under the Affordable Care Act, large businesses, starting in 2015, must provide coverage to employees, but not necessarily for their spouses and families.

Cassidy said he is supporting a new House bill to require the administration to allow Americans to keep their existing insurance.

The Affordable Care Act, which Landrieu supported and Cassidy opposed, is already a contentious issue as the two prepare to face each other and other candidates in the 2014 Louisiana Senate race.

The Kaiser Family Foundation said 15.4 million people had individual health coverage in 2011, or about 5 percent of the U.S. population. Most Americans obtain their policies through their employers, or Medicaid or Medicaid, and aren't being affected by the Affordable Care Act, the Kaiser report said.

During the hearing, Sebelius apologized for problems with the website. "In these early weeks, access to HealthCare.gov has been a miserably frustrating experience for way too many Americans, including many who have waited years, in some cases their entire lives, for the security of health insurance," Sebelius said.

"You deserve better," she said, speaking directly to Americans unable to enroll for insurance under the Affordable Care Act's exchanges. "I'm accountable to you for fixing these problems."

She predicted it would be fully operational by the end of November.

On Wednesday, Landrieu said she doesn't believe the president was intentionally trying to misrepresent the law when he told Americans they could keep their current insurance plan if they were satisfied with it once the Affordable Care Act was operational.

But she said the nation would be better off if Republicans tried to improve the law, rather than continually trying to defund or repeal it.


http://www.nola.com/politics/index.s...ll_suppor.html

[boutons_deux]

Landrieu, BigOil Louisiana DINO .

you can always keep your existing health insurance if it meets ACA minimum coverage, otherwise it's junk sucking down and wasting your premiums. Good luck when you have big medical bills or a real medical catastrophe, because you effectively AREN'T INSURED.

[boobie4three]

[boutons_deux]

Cruz is excellent at dishonest rhetoric.

Try this:

If Americans didn't want TO BE ED forever by their for-profit, wealth-sucking health care racket, they would seek an alternative.