Obamacare 'Glitch' Allows Some Families To Be Priced Out Of Health Insurance

[blackascoal]

Ironically, Red State governors are going to help us get a public option. By refusing to set up exchanges, these states will have the availability of govt. exchanges. Granted, they'll start off as private ins exchanges, but that's what Medicare is now.


Just out of curiousity...you've stated that more and more doctors will refuse Medicare, creating a shortage.

How can 'Medicare for all' work, if there are no doctors that will accept it?

First, Medicare-for-All proposed paying doctors fair rates for their services. Obamacare does not. The low rates that sometimes doesn't even cover the costs are driving doctors out of Medicare .. and sometimes out of the profession.

Medicare actually funds Grauate Medical Training (GME) training for doctors.

What Does Medicare Have to Do with Graduate Medical Education?

Graduate Medical Education (GME) is the hands-on training phase of physician education that is mandatory in order for doctors to obtain a license for independent practice. After four years of college, physicians-in-training complete another four years of undergraduate medical education (medical school) to earn their M.D. degrees, and then proceed to GME (or residency) training.

This training varies in length but generally lasts at least three to five years for initial specialty training; those in subspecialties may train for up to 11 years after they graduate from medical school. This training is supported by teaching hospitals, though the clinical experience occurs in a variety of settings.

---

Currently, Medicare supports approximately $6.5 billion of these higher patient care costs through the IME adjustment. Yet the actual cost of providing these services that benefit communities and the health and well being of patients is much higher and often unrecognized by private payers. An analysis of 1998 data published in "Health Affairs" (Koenig et al, 2003) found that the mission-related costs of U.S. teaching hospitals are more than $27 billion a year. These costs have only increased over time, yet Medicare’s support has been effectively capped since 1997.

Medicare’s support of GME includes paying its share of the costs of training but also support for the higher costs of patient care that communities rely on when they need care the most. Without adequate support, teaching hospitals’ ability to provide that care would be threatened.
https://www.aamc.org/initiatives/gmefunding/factsheets/253372/medicare-gme.html

Medicare-for-All was real reform that addressed the real issues .. including costs.

It isn't just red state governors who are finding real problems with the exchanges .. that are as poorly defined as they could possibly be.

Only 15 States Opt to Run Obamacare Exchanges
December, 2012
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100311739/Only_15_States_Opt_to_Run_Obamacare_Exchanges

 

[blackascoal]

Right. We're back to the law sucks because it isn't the law I wanted while ignoring its benefits.

No, we're back to Obmacare sucks because it sucks and Dungheap doesn't like that.

The health insurance industry was so evil that health care reform was being demanded by the majority of Americans .. including republicans .. but no one should notice or have issues with that very same health insurance industry writing the legislation.

Got it.

And let's be clear .. your argument does not speak for, nor champion the plight of people without healthcare .. it only champions Obama.

Healthcare reform without doctors.

Brilliant

 

[Howey]

Now you're twisting my words instead of addressing the issue.

ALL Americans should have access to affordable healthcare .. but you aren't going to get that when you rely on corporatists to do that.

Medicare-for-All was the easy solution that stared them in the face .. and OBAMA rejected it.

Now I'm the bad guy because I point out the failures and impending disasters?

BAC...I'm with you on this...but

Obama wanted a single payor system. But, thanks to the current usurping of the filibuster system, it just wouldn't have happened, even if he did have a majority in both houses. The democrats in Congress had to compromise in order to get anything passed.

I wouldn't necessarily say that the bill was written by the insurance companies, either. Although they had some input, as did nearly everyone involved, the bill was a conglomeration of amendments from both sides to a years-old bill already written.

As is my usual disclaimer, don't believe anything written on Infowars. Believe the opposite.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

You're just ignoring the present state of healthcare and health insurance where tens of millions of people are priced out. Obamacare helps a whole hell of a lot of people afford health insurance. That there is a small group that Obamacare doesnt help (what the OP is about) is unfortunate, but Obamacare didn't cause the problem, it just didn't fix it for these folks.

more of your orwellian shit. I am clearly pointing out the failure of obamacare NOT fixing the cost of health insurance, therefore you claim i'm ignoring the present state of the cost of healthcare. and refer to my comments about idiots demanding shitty legislation NOW, and we'll just fix it later.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Yes...try that approach. It makes you look better informed.

yes, it does make me look better informed while it makes you look like a race card throwing moron.

 

[Bonestorm]

No, we're back to Obmacare sucks because it sucks and Dungheap doesn't like that.

The health insurance industry was so evil that health care reform was being demanded by the majority of Americans .. including republicans .. but no one should notice or have issues with that very same health insurance industry writing the legislation.

Got it.

And let's be clear .. your argument does not speak for, nor champion the plight of people without healthcare .. it only champions Obama.

Healthcare reform without doctors.

Brilliant

I guess at some point you'll get around to actually discussing the issues.

The bold is hilarious.

Tens of millions of Americans are better of as a result of Obamacare. It's not the legislation I would have written. It's certainly not my ideal for healthcare reform, but it does some good. I don't see how it is "championing Obama" to recognize that.

Your criticims about expanding access to health insurance (and therefore health care) is that there aren't enough doctors to treat them. Well, that may be the case, but I don't see that as a good reason to prevent low income people from having access to doctors just the same as the current insureds.

Also, you complain that Obamacare did nothing to address costs (which isn't true, but let's set that aside for the moment) while at the same time complaining that Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates are too low. That makes no sense. So costs are too high but Medicare and Medicaid, which do a far better job reigning in costs than any private insurer, should pay more? I don't get it.

I'm more than willing to discuss the issues. I'm having trouble understanding your cricisms of what Obamacare is. You're just complaining about what it is not (and that's fine).

 

[Bonestorm]

more of your orwellian shit. I am clearly pointing out the failure of obamacare NOT fixing the cost of health insurance, therefore you claim i'm ignoring the present state of the cost of healthcare. and refer to my comments about idiots demanding shitty legislation NOW, and we'll just fix it later.

But it does fix the cost of health insurance for tens of millions of people that will be able to afford health insurance. It's just that certain people in unique circumstances aren't getting the benefit of it. And that sucks. I'm with you. But they're priced out because health insurance is expensive and Obamacare doesn't help them pay for it, not because Obamacare priced them out.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

But it does fix the cost of health insurance for tens of millions of people that will be able to afford health insurance. It's just that certain people in unique circumstances aren't getting the benefit of it. And that sucks. I'm with you. But they're priced out because health insurance is expensive and Obamacare doesn't help them pay for it, not because Obamacare priced them out.

again, orwell, I told you before and after this passed that this would happen because obamacare would create a class of people who fall in to specific ranges of income that would not be able to afford health insurance. THAT is the fault of obamacare. spin it however you think it will work, but you fail because logic and facts prevail.

 

[blackascoal]

The bold is hilarious.

Tens of millions of Americans are better of as a result of Obamacare. It's not the legislation I would have written. It's certainly not my ideal for healthcare reform, but it does some good. I don't see how it is "championing Obama" to recognize that.

Your criticims about expanding access to health insurance (and therefore health care) is that there aren't enough doctors to treat them. Well, that may be the case, but I don't see that as a good reason to prevent low income people from having access to doctors just the same as the current insureds.

Also, you complain that Obamacare did nothing to address costs (which isn't true, but let's set that aside for the moment) while at the same time complaining that Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates are too low. That makes no sense. So costs are too high but Medicare and Medicaid, which do a far better job reigning in costs than any private insurer, should pay more? I don't get it.

I'm more than willing to discuss the issues. I'm having trouble understanding your cricisms of what Obamacare is. You're just complaining about what it is not (and that's fine).

Not sure where your confusion comes from, but I've been real clear about what the problems are and the facts behind them. You've yet to address any of them.

Obamacare invites tens of millions of people into an already broken system. A system that it was supposed to fix .. but didn't.

The vast majority of the tens of millions of people that you're talking about are going to be on Medicaid.

Report: Obamacare Patients Likely To Struggle To Find Doctors

The big selling point of the Affordable Care Act — "Obamacare" to you and I — has been the extension of health-plan coverage to uninsured Americans. The implicit promise was that extending coverage would extend actual care. But yet another study suggests that these new medical customers, many of whom would be accommodated by expanding Medicaid, may not be able to find physicians willing to take them on.

Published October 12 in the American Journal of Medical Quality, the study with the patience-trying title, "Characteristics of Primary Care Safety-Net Providers and Their Quality Improvement Attitudes and Activities: Results of a National Survey of Physician Professionalism" surveyed "safety-net" physicians, so-called because they handle the bulk of uninsured and Medicaid patients, What the authors found is that these health-care providers are already reaching their limits even before expansion takes place.

The full text of the report is behind a paid firewall, but a handy press release about the study from Massachusetts General Hospital hits the high points:

The authors note that the concentration of care for Medicaid and uninsured patients among a limited number of safety-net physicians and the fact that 28 and 39 percent, respectively, of those physicians are not accepting new Medicaid and uninsured patients indicate that the current health care safety net may have reached its capacity. In addition, they note, safety-net physicians' interest in quality improvement and attention to health care disparities suggests that reported differences in the quality of care they provide probably reflect limited resources available to their practices or barriers to care within the local communities.

The authors of the study draw logical inferences for the expansion of demand for safety-net physicians — and even for insured patients who may already be running into difficulties finding doctors as some physicians become demoralized and even cut back or leave the field.

more
http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/05/report-obamacare-patients-likely-to-stru

Any idea what those patients are going to do when they can't find a doctor?

They will flood the emergency rooms.

This has been a known problem for at least a decade and Obamacare ignores it .. and so do you.

 

[Althea]

Report: Obamacare Patients Likely To Struggle To Find Doctors

Likely?

Report: Obamacare patients likely to find quality care.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I predicted this very outcome. you idiot obamacare supporters told me I didn't know what I was talking about.

While I believe BAC believes in the concept of universal care, he has been very critical of obamacare (and Obama), so I wouldn't call him a supporter.

 

[NOVA]

Exactly WHO is going to administer it to them?

Let me repeat this again .. THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH DOCTORS .. and, there are fewer and fewer who will even accept Medicare let alone Medicaid.

This isn't bashing .. it's the truth
.
Ignoring the truths is why we got a corporatist bill disguised as reform in the first place, and it's why America is in the situation that it is.

Ignoring the truth is what some people do best.....

This thread reminds me of Pelosi saying,"Well, ya gotta pass the bill to know whats in it"......and what we don't know is more than what we do know.

The wonder of it all....

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

If Americans want to truly take back government, they have to get the money out of politics - at every level.

If I hear that "money is speech" one more time, I'll lose my friggin' mind. Money is not speech; it is influence and power. There shouldn't be lobbyists in Washington, or campaign spending beyond a set limit. There should be no corporate money to be found anywhere near any politician.

I would modify that slightly... there should always be lobbyists. The problem is that we have allowed bribes to be worked into the term 'lobby'. Otherwise I agree with your comments.

 

[NOVA]

Now you're twisting my words instead of addressing the issue.

ALL Americans should have access to affordable healthcare .. but you aren't going to get that when you rely on corporatists to do that.

Medicare-for-All was the easy solution that stared them in the face .. and OBAMA rejected it.

Now I'm the bad guy because I point out the failures and impending disasters?

Welcome aboard.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Now you're twisting my words instead of addressing the issue.

That is Dung's specialty. He is a master at straw man creations.

 

[blackascoal]

Ignoring the truth is what some people do best.....

This thread reminds me of Pelosi saying,"Well, ya gotta pass the bill to know whats in it"......and what we don't know is more than what we do know.

The wonder of it all....

Couldn't agree with you more.

Absolutely.

 

[blackascoal]

Welcome aboard.

Thank you .. but it's more like welcome back. :0)

I'm one of the ancients around here.

 

[blackascoal]

One more time .. if you can't even get a glitch fixed .. if that's what it is .. how in the hell does Obamacare lead to single-payer or anything else?

Any takers?

 

[Bonestorm]

One more time .. if you can't even get a glitch fixed .. if that's what it is .. how in the hell does Obamacare lead to single-payer or anything else?

Any takers?

I don't think anyone suggested that Obamacare would lead to single-payer in 2013. At least not to my memory.

 

[Bonestorm]

Not sure where your confusion comes from, but I've been real clear about what the problems are and the facts behind them. You've yet to address any of them.

Obamacare invites tens of millions of people into an already broken system. A system that it was supposed to fix .. but didn't.

The vast majority of the tens of millions of people that you're talking about are going to be on Medicaid.

Report: Obamacare Patients Likely To Struggle To Find Doctors

The big selling point of the Affordable Care Act — "Obamacare" to you and I — has been the extension of health-plan coverage to uninsured Americans. The implicit promise was that extending coverage would extend actual care. But yet another study suggests that these new medical customers, many of whom would be accommodated by expanding Medicaid, may not be able to find physicians willing to take them on.

Published October 12 in the American Journal of Medical Quality, the study with the patience-trying title, "Characteristics of Primary Care Safety-Net Providers and Their Quality Improvement Attitudes and Activities: Results of a National Survey of Physician Professionalism" surveyed "safety-net" physicians, so-called because they handle the bulk of uninsured and Medicaid patients, What the authors found is that these health-care providers are already reaching their limits even before expansion takes place.

The full text of the report is behind a paid firewall, but a handy press release about the study from Massachusetts General Hospital hits the high points:

The authors note that the concentration of care for Medicaid and uninsured patients among a limited number of safety-net physicians and the fact that 28 and 39 percent, respectively, of those physicians are not accepting new Medicaid and uninsured patients indicate that the current health care safety net may have reached its capacity. In addition, they note, safety-net physicians' interest in quality improvement and attention to health care disparities suggests that reported differences in the quality of care they provide probably reflect limited resources available to their practices or barriers to care within the local communities.

The authors of the study draw logical inferences for the expansion of demand for safety-net physicians — and even for insured patients who may already be running into difficulties finding doctors as some physicians become demoralized and even cut back or leave the field.

more
http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/05/report-obamacare-patients-likely-to-stru

Any idea what those patients are going to do when they can't find a doctor?

They will flood the emergency rooms.

This has been a known problem for at least a decade and Obamacare ignores it .. and so do you.

I'm not ignoring it. I just don't understand how these people would be better off with no health insurance.