Obama's decision today to extend policies

[modhatter]

into 2014 - allowing people to keep their insurance policies that they had after the enactment of the ACA law. (this year's policy)

He looks very tired and worn down in his speech today, so I feel he is getting pretty beat up by members of Congress who are getting blasted by the unhappy side of their constituents.

Maybe, I'm missing something, but why would delaying this change in plans be beneficial? What's one more year going to do? I wonder how this is going to sit with the insurance companies and if it will have any effect of the new policies out there now?

[easysurfer]

I think when the website if fixed and folks can compare the old vs new policies, that would take care of itself.

[Marc]

It didn't sit well with at least one state insurance commissioner:

State insurance commissioner rejects Obama’s proposal to extend canceled policies | HealthCare Checkup | Seattle Times

Marc

[ls99]

Seems like a method to circumvent a law by fiat.

[samclem]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ls99 Seems like a method to circumvent a law by fiat.

There have been several similar instances within the last year I would have thought should have been put before the SCOTUS. I'm not sure why that's not happening. The Executive Branch clearly has some flexibility in how laws are implemented, but that flexibility is not unlimited.

[RetiredAndFree]

Well, I for one am continuing to hold my breath that this reprieval gets implemented in my state. After several years of 3-5% rate increases, we received our new California ACA bronze policy renewal offer which included a rate increase of 125%. And no, we do not qualify for any subsidies, which is a good thing in the grand scheme of things I understand. However, I'm having a hard time 'getting' how this is good for me in that the new bronze ACA policy comes with higher co-pays, higher deductibles and higher out-of-pocket maximums compared to the policy I currently have.

The hope of course, is that we'll ultimately be allowed to keep what we have beyond 2014 and not be forced to switch to a more expensive, less robust ACA policy.

I am currently glued to the news for our California insurance commissioner to see what now plays out.

[NW-Bound]

My pre-ACA grandfathered HI will be offered through 2014 (prior to this recent news). It is lower than what I saw on ehealthinsurance.com. From what I have seen, I would not buy an ACA plan without trying to get a subsidy because it would be more expensive.

[modhatter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetiredAndFree Well, I for one am continuing to hold my breath that this reprieval gets implemented in my state. After several years of 3-5% rate increases, we received our new California ACA bronze policy renewal offer which included a rate increase of 125%. And no, we do not qualify for any subsidies, which is a good thing in the grand scheme of things I understand. However, I'm having a hard time 'getting' how this is good for me in that the new bronze ACA policy comes with higher co-pays, higher deductibles and higher out-of-pocket maximums compared to the policy I currently have. The hope of course, is that we'll ultimately be allowed to keep what we have beyond 2014 and not be forced to switch to a more expensive, less robust ACA policy. I am currently glued to the news for our California insurance commissioner to see what now plays out.

Do you currently have a catastrophic plan? It seems that people with those have been most effected (cost % wise) with all the added new preventative care health screening exams, added new coverage and laws added to policies.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetiredAndFree Well, I for one am continuing to hold my breath that this reprieval gets implemented in my state. After several years of 3-5% rate increases, we received our new California ACA bronze policy renewal offer which included a rate increase of 125%. And no, we do not qualify for any subsidies, which is a good thing in the grand scheme of things I understand. However, I'm having a hard time 'getting' how this is good for me in that the new bronze ACA policy comes with higher co-pays, higher deductibles and higher out-of-pocket maximums compared to the policy I currently have. The hope of course, is that we'll ultimately be allowed to keep what we have beyond 2014 and not be forced to switch to a more expensive, less robust ACA policy. I am currently glued to the news for our California insurance commissioner to see what now plays out.

If the premium for the lowest cost plan is more than 8% of your MAGI you may qualify to buy a catastrophic plan, which might be a more affordable alternative to your bronze plan with the 125% increase, albeit with slightly higher deductibles.

[Mike10]

Quote:

Originally Posted by samclem There have been several similar instances within the last year I would have thought should have been put before the SCOTUS. I'm not sure why that's not happening. The Executive Branch clearly has some flexibility in how laws are implemented, but that flexibility is not unlimited.

While it appears the president is skirting the law, I am not so sure. When this law was being debated I attempted to read the bill. I did not make it very far before it became evident the proposed law was lacking in detail. I was surprised at how much was being left for this commission or that commission to determine what the parameters would be.

The president's announcement today will be problematic. In order for the insurance companies to offer the same policies to those cancelled, the insurance companies must first apply to each state's insurance department for approval. It would appear the insurance companies have put all their effort in supporting the new law and I can not see them rushing to change course now. If the public is allowed to keep their policies and the only people signing up for the ACA are the higher risk people, then the insurance companies stand to loose big bucks. I could care less about the insurance companies profits since they sold their souls to get this wished for gravy train. All today's announcement will do is make the insurance companies the boogey man for the president when the cancelled people can not get their old plan back.

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike10 While it appears the president is skirting the law, I am not so sure. When this law was being debated I attempted to read the bill. I did not make it very far before it became evident the proposed law was lacking in detail. I was surprised at how much was being left for this commission or that commission to determine what the parameters would be. The president's announcement today will be problematic. In order for the insurance companies to offer the same policies to those cancelled, the insurance companies must first apply to each state's insurance department for approval. It would appear the insurance companies have put all their effort in supporting the new law and I can not see them rushing to change course now. If the public is allowed to keep their policies and the only people signing up for the ACA are the higher risk people, then the insurance companies stand to loose big bucks. I could care less about the insurance companies profits since they sold their souls to get this wished for gravy train. All today's announcement will do is make the insurance companies the boogey man for the president when the cancelled people can not get their old plan back.

A news program today said government had $10 billion available in reinsurance money for insurers getting walloped with the unhealthy. Of course I have no idea if that will be enough to take care of the problem. The reinsurance amount drops considerably the second and third year... If I understood correctly this money is coming from a head tax on insured people.

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ls99 Seems like a method to circumvent a law by fiat.

+1 I find it fascinating that when there were threats to defund Obamacare a short month ago we were told that it was the "law of the land" (I agree) - and now that the going is getting tough, the insurance commissioners and insurers are being told - "oh, never mind - for 2014".... oh, well that's politics!

[M Paquette]

I am shocked, shocked to see the insurance industry reaction to this...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ersal/3536321/

Gosh. It's almost like they don't want to sell those old policies any more. (20% of a big number is bigger than 20% of a little number...)

[NW-Bound]

Can insurance companies reprice and reinstate the old policies and get it out to their old customers in the short period that we have left before the end of the year.

There are only 30 working days between 11/15/2013 and 12/31/2013.

Suppose some of them have signed up with a new ACA policy, but prefer their old plan because of the lower cost (e.g. poster Mulligan), can they cancel and go back?

[Mulligan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Can insurance companies reprice and reinstate the old policies and get it out to their old customers in the short period that we have left before the end of the year. There are only 30 working days between 11/15/2013 and 12/31/2013.

What I find interesting is in some states such as mine, the carriers went out of their way to sign you up for an extension through next year, or even recruited people to sign up with them to avoid Obamacare for a year. Yet other states this did not happen, and thus the cancellations.

[Mulligan]

[QUOTE="NW-Bound;1379774"]Can insurance companies reprice and reinstate the old policies and get it out to their old customers in the short period that we have left before the end of the year. There are only 30 working days between 11/15/2013 and 12/31/2013. Suppose some of them have signed up with a new ACA policy, but prefer their old plan because of the lower cost (e.g. poster Mulligan), can they cancel and go back?[/QUOTE

You know, I am worried about that, NW if the bills every gained traction. Various bills have various dates. Although I an not signed up for ACA, I did switch carriers 2 months ago, though the previous one was not grandfathered. If they pass say a January 1 2013 date, I screwed myself! Some have policies bought by the end of the year. I truly doubt any will make it through both houses and of course the President would get his say on the matter at that point. A one year extension which I already have is as far as this gets in IMHO.

[NW-Bound]

My grandfathered pre-ACA HSA plan is with Golden Rule, a division of United HealthCare.

I've read that United completely pulls out of California market for individual plans, and only provides group insurance for corporations as I understand. GoldenRule still offers continuation in AZ and probably other states, but it has no participation in ACA exchanges.

[easysurfer]

I did like the "old car" analogy during the news conference. That some are not ready or can't afford yet to let go the old stuff.

[golftrek]

And then there are some like me who really want to buy on the exchange (much cheaper policy) but cannot get the darned site to work no matter how hard they try. My old policy is cancelled but I cannot get the exchange to work, I am trapped.

Jo Ann

[pb4uski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by easysurfer I did like the "old car" analogy during the news conference. That some are not ready or can't afford yet to let go the old stuff.

I liked the fumble description - but actually it seems more like they threw pick-sixes on the first two offensive possessions.