Obamacare's Biggest Losers
Sarah Kliff writes at the WaPo about how the government's loser of a healthcare website is jeopardizing the financial future -- and maybe the lives -- of many who were dumped from their health plans and are now forced to sign up for Obamacare:
After three months and more than 50 phone calls, John Gisler gave up on buying coverage through HealthCare.gov.Gisler wanted to purchase a plan for his 45-year-old son, who has a rare degenerative condition affecting his coordination and speech. His current coverage through Utah's high-risk insurance pool plan ends Dec. 31. By that time, the Obama administration expects enrollees to transition into health plans sold through the new health-care law.
But so far, Gisler hasn't succeeded in purchasing coverage -- but not for a lack of effort.
"We've had three separate applications that failed to make it through," Gisler says. "I have a notebook with all the calls I've made, maybe 50 or 100. It just goes on and on."Earlier this week, Gisler quit trying. Worried about a potential gap in coverage, he decided to forgo his son's $3,000 tax credit and buy outside of the exchange from a local insurance broker.
"We have a son who is critically ill," he says. "We cannot take any chances. Not having insurance would, in no short order, lead our family to bankruptcy."
The Affordable Care Act is designed to expand health insurance coverage. But the law's insurance cancellations mixed with the Web site's problems might leave some people who have coverage now uninsured in the new year.
These are Obamacare's biggest losers: People whose current plans have been canceled but who are having trouble getting through HealthCare.Gov to purchase coverage by Dec. 23 -- the deadline for buying insurance that begins Jan. 1.
The concern is particularly acute for patients with expensive medical conditions, who rely on their coverage for doctor visits and drug refills that would otherwise break the bank.
We're from the government, and we're here to "help."
via @ezraklein
I lived in five countries with nationalized health care: Venezuela, the Netherlands, Norway, Britain, and Japan.
Given the huge range in cultures, how come none of them were able to make it work? How come the Canadians can't make it work?
How often does something have to fail before the rational among us admit that the concept itself is fatally flawed?
When my father had a nasal hemorrhage in Norway, they shoved a balloon up his nose and then took a hollow needle and pounded it with a hammer through the bone above his right eye.
That was so they could irrigate his frontal sinus.
The hospital was filthy, and they gave him one gown for the week he was there.
If you ever go to Europe, don't get sick or have an accident. You might not come home.
Thomas Wictor at December 12, 2013 12:48 AM
How often does something have to fail before the rational among us admit that the concept itself is fatally flawed?
Once, unfortunately the vast majority of voters are greed morons with a short attention span and no long term memory and vote for people who not only have no idea how to spell rational let alone know what it means, but have never in their lives had a moment of rationality.
lujlp at December 12, 2013 2:07 AM
Wait until January and February, when people who thought they'd purchased insurance through the exchanges need medical care and discover they don't have insurance after all because the back end of the websites don't work. That's when the real fun will begin.
DrMaturin at December 12, 2013 5:44 AM
@ Thomas : I believe Obamacare is insurance, not nationalized health care. There is a big difference. And certainly in the UK, one can also buy health insurance if one feels the need to bypass the National Health System to have the same doctors treat one in a nicer hospital, that means supposedly cleaner rooms, better food, better auxiliary staff, etc. I remember the two operations I have had, one on nationalized care, no issues with operation, but after care sucked. the private insurance one had them mark up the wrong shoulder for the operation, but the after care for the wrong shoulder was superb!
Mark at December 12, 2013 6:04 AM
So 10 weeks into signing up and 10 days to go, Wondering what the numbers are 1% signed?
Joe J at December 12, 2013 8:00 AM
I do have to wonder about the ego of the people involved. Remember 2 months ago when it first started at that point it was obvious to those involved the web site had monstrous problems, which would take months or years to fix.
They had themselves an easy out, Republicans were using delaying it's roll out to "shut down" 15% of the gov't.
They could have gone the easy out of taking that deal delayed it till it worked better, and blamed the delay on the Republicans. The Dems would have been seen as mediators, covered up their disaster, But their egos wouldn't let them.
I still say the Republicans should have said sure roll it out but no business or union exceptions as their threat, instead of trying to delay it.
Joe J at December 12, 2013 8:11 AM
"all the calls I've made, maybe 50 or 100"
Well, which is it, Governor? 50 or 100?
Either number of failed attempts sucks donkey tail - but they are nowhere near the same amount.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at December 12, 2013 11:20 AM
To paraphrase LBJ, when you've lost Sarah Kliff, you've lost America.
Grey Ghost at December 12, 2013 12:24 PM
Actually the [un]ACA is the worst of both worlds. The law demands that a minimum level of insurance, whether needed or not, is forced down the throat of everyone. The issue is that in nationalized health care they generally control the reimbursement rates for the professionals that work in the system as well.
So the way it works is that Acme Insurance company has to charge males and females for female care, even if it is not needed. So a 50 year old female that would have a policy written for her that has the minimum genital costs (i.e. almost no maternity and ovarian cancer) and maybe a medium level breast cost in it now has to be written with medium genital costs. That means more cost for the consumer.
Then the private insurance companies now face underwriting more costs that they can't eliminate. (I.e. the 50 year old that suddenly pops up with ovarian cancer they didn't expect.) So they are forced to lower the rates they offer to ob/gyns.
The rest of the medical system is still a free market and and doesn't have to accept the revised rates. So Springfield Hospital won't provide in-service rates for Acme customers because they want more money per patient. So that leaves the the Acme insured to pay at Springfield Hospital uninsured costs or go 75 miles away to Metropolis hospital where the Acme rates are acceptable.
Does any of this sound like a good thing?
Jim P. at December 12, 2013 8:21 PM
Leave a comment