Insurer payments flouted plain text of Obamacare: Gov’t report


#1

I wonder what other shady things the administration is doing to hide how big a failure Obamacare is. How do Obamacare supporters feel about the administration funneling taxpayer dollars to big insurance companies instead of taxpayers, as the law called for?

washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/29/insurer-payments-flouted-plain-text-obamacare-govt/


#2

What the article left out is that this is the result of Congress cutting the reimbursements the insurance companies were suppose to get.

So, in the end, there was nothing for those companies to pay back to the Treasury Department.

The GOP members, not being able to repeal Obamacare, just cut funding in areas that would make if fail.

Of course the one’s to suffer are not members of Congress, but the people who need affordable health insurance,

So what’s the GOP alternative ? Chirp Chirp Chirp !

Jim


#3

I realize I’m not a Constitutional scholar, but I seem to remember that the President has sign off on spending. Checks and balances and whatnot. It’s funny how Obama gets to sign the cuts in reimbursement into law and then ignore the law he signed, and his supporters will blame Congress. It’s almost like Obama has been the President in Waiting all these years and can’t be held responsible for anything.


#4

In light of this, you might want to review how the budget process actually works, especially after 1974.


#5

Actually, on the issue of Congress not funding subsidies to insurance companies which was part of the ACA. Obama tried to put the spending in place by bringing it to the court, but the court ruled against Obama.

Only Congress can appropriate spending.

Jim


#6

Of course Obamacare is failing. The people who wanted it to fail (insurance companies) are making it fail. The best thing we can do is to repeal Obamacare and go with a full fledged national socialized medicine program.


#7

No thanks. I care about people too much to make them suffer under such a hideous program. Wishing that much evil on people is terrible.


#8

These are false statements you have made.

The risk corridors which were to reimburse insurers were to be funded by monies collected from other insurers who had lower claims. They were explicitly supposed to be revenue neutral and NOT funded through taxpayer funds.

Of course, Obamacare is such a steaming pile of mess that virtually NONE of the insurers have had lower claims. Virtually all have had MUCH higher claims than expected. So there is no money for the bailout. The President doesn’t like this and wants to take taxpayer money and fund his bailout without getting Congressional approval. This is illegal.

So the President and DNC who forced this catastrophe on the American public now want the GOP to save their law by giving hundreds of billions in bailouts because it is failing so badly. The GOP thinks the DNC and President who forced this on people should receive the full consequences for their actions. If the President wants to fix this problem, then he should actually work with the GOP and be willing to repeal such a bad law and implement their proposed alternatives.

And your repeated claims to be ignorant of GOP alternatives after I’ve informed you of them multiple times is an unbecoming falsehood.


#9

This is one of the many inherent flaws in a poor piece of legislation. You can’t blame congress for doing legally what they are allowed to do. If the program was contingent on support it could not account for, it simply highlights how bad the legislation was.

It is as if the law, which was decried before its passage by many on the right as a disastrous piece of legislation, is now fulfilling those predictions, and the defenders now want to blame people for not supporting it. This was predicted, among the many other debacles we have seen. The fault lies with the President, the architects of the bill, and the democrats who passed it without knowing the details of the bill. None of its failed expectations should surprise anyone.


#10

Pretty much every other developed nation looks on our health care system with pity and wouldn’t dream of changing their cheaper and more affordable system of care for ours.


#11

So if Congress slashed military spending to $1,000,000 a year, would you blame Congress or the military for its poor performance? Such limitations affect any and every law that exists. If Congress won’t appropriate money for it, if will not work as intended. Essentially nothing is immune from that.


#12

:thumbsup:

The “for profit,” system we have is what’s causing the failure in the American healthcare system.

All we have to do is look at who runs the hospitals, pharmaceuticals and medical groups.

People with MBA’s who’s job is to make as much money for their institution as possible.

The EpiPen scandal is just part of it.

Heather Bresch and Martin Shkreli just two of the names in the scandal of putting profit before lives in a system which serves the rich as they gouge the people.

Yeah, it’s going to break, thanks to the GOP members of Congress who fought against the ACA since it’s conception, but they also fought against Hillarycare back in the 90’s.

So what do they want instead ? Nothing that doesn’t serve their own greed.

And all the while, the same members of Congress voted to give an additional $1.5 billion over the $3 billion which Israel already gets.

Oh and Obama isn’t clean on this either. He’s the one who committed $3 billion per year to the Afghan security forces annually, going to 2020. Where do you suppose that money will actually end up ? Do you think Afghan will become a free democratic nation ?

No it will not, but we merely add to the national debt for causes which do not benefit Americans.

Yeah, its a great government we have and it will only get better when either Trump or Hillary take over, and I’m sad to say that it will probably be Hillary.

Color me skeptical this morning.

Jim


#13

So Congress is expected to give a blank check to the President for his pet projects that passed via straight party line vote, and led to a takeover of Congress by the party that opposed this piece of garbage? It doesn’t work that way.

The ACA was predicated on a serious of necessary ifs and conditions, more so than other large piece of legislation. Anyone who seeks to overhaul a healthcare system in such a manner is rolling the dice with citizens healthcare and lives. It literally had to have every “if” statement met in order to have a chance, which in and of itself should tell you how terrible it was. it was doomed from the outset, and perhaps if our Congress people had read it (is that too much to ask if you are going to vote on something this massive), they’d know how ludicrous it was to think it could succeed. This was al predicted by those who opposed it, so I find little desire to save something that was predicted to be disastrous and opposed from the outset. That’s not my job or Congress’s job.

Crafting a better piece of legislation with mutual support is always good advice.


#14

Before a spending can be approved, it either has to be signed by the President, or his veto must be overridden. In this case, it was the former. The President shouldn’t get a pass on this, but he will, which illustrates one of the most important reasons for electing Trump. It’s the only way to return accountability to the Office of the President.


#15

Generally, spending bills get approved in Congress then sent to the president. It takes 2/3rds approval to over-ride a presidential veto. In other words, it’s rarely done, however we just saw the 9/11 bill passed with was passed with enough votes to prevent the president’s veto.

Occasionally, the president presents a budget to Congress, but it’s rarely approved as submitted.

In fact, when people complain about Reagan’s spending, you can remind them that out of eight years as president, only two budgets were Reagan’s, the rest were congressional budgets.

Jim


#16

Right and I don’t see the evil in everyone having at least some access to adequate regular healthcare compared to in the US where there are still people who do not qualify for Medicaid nor for a subsidy and go without any.


#17

:thumbsup: We have the most expensive healthcare system in the world. And somehow we don’t have the longest life expectancy or the lowest infant mortality rate. What are we paying for? EpiPens, I guess.


#18

Because you believe in the promises of socialized medicine but ignore the reality. In those socialist utopias, patients are literally wait-listed to death because of rationing. And their outcomes and treatments are far more awful than the US.

Our life expectancy is not the fault of our medical system. In fact it would be much worse if we had a socialized system. Of the first-world countries that the US is compared to, we are the only one with a 3rd world country on our border, and also the only one with tens of millions of people from that country flooding into the country. They bring along with them 3rd world disease, poverty and bad health.

Additionally, the infant mortality statistic is the most ridiculous stat to even use against the US. The reason the infant mortality rate is lower than other in the US is not because infants die more here, it’s because other countries simply DON’T COUNT babies who have died. All of the other countries, even 1st world ones, if the baby doesn’t survive a certain amount of time (a few hours, a few days, a few months etc) then the government of that country counts it as a stillborn. They simply REMOVE the baby from the official stat to prop up their statistics.

So you are promoting a system which has great “numbers”, but the actual care of patients is very poor.

Because they are ignorant. They buy the lies of their country about the costs (they hide most of their costs) and ignore or aren’t told about the heavy rationing of their “free” system.

There is a very real reason that Canadian snowbirds who come down here, they wait until they get to Florida so they can pay to see a US doctor, instead of seeing a “free” Canadian doctor. There’s also a reason our offices are packed in early fall and late spring as they rush to see US doctors. They want to be seen and treated, not given some aspirin and told to wait 3 months for an appointment.


#19

Speaking as an “ignorant” resident of one these countries, I can assure you that there are no lies or covering up of costs, we know the system may be expensive but if that’s the price to pay to ensure all people can afford adequate medical care, then so be it.


#20

Have you ever lived in a country with socialized medicine? I have and was very seriously ill while there. Because of how the system works, I ended up spending three weeks in the hospital, one of them in ICU and darn near died. It would not have happened here and I don’t want that for our country. There were ways to help those who had no insurance without turning the whole delivery system of care in this country on its head.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.