Trump begins Obamacare dismantling with executive order

[GMDino]

You know...those things that the GOP/conservative/right lot their mind over Obama using.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/12/politics/trump-obamacare-executive-order/index.html

Quote:President Donald Trump took his first steps Thursday toward fulfilling his vow to dismantle Obamacare, signing an executive order that he says will bring affordable health insurance to millions more people.


The order broadly tasks the administration with developing policies to increase health care competition and choice in order to improve the quality of health care and lower prices.


However, it could also destabilize Obamacare by siphoning out younger and healthier Americans from the exchanges.

The order, Trump said from the Roosevelt Room of the White House, would give "millions of Americans with Obamacare relief." It would "cost the United States government virtually nothing and people will have great great health care. And when I say people, I mean by the millions and millions."

Trump said the measures "should have been done a long time ago, and could have been done a long time ago."

Specifically, the President is directing the Labor Department to study how to make it easier for small businesses, and possibly individuals, to join together and buy health insurance through nationwide association health plans, a senior administration official said Thursday. The department could give employers in the same industries more flexibility to offer group coverage across state lines, providing them with a broader range of policies at lower rates.

Separately, the order would allow consumers to buy short-term policies, which don't have to comply with Obamacare's protections for those with pre-existing conditions. Also, it looks to broaden the ability of employers to give workers money to buy their own coverage through health reimbursement arrangements.


The changes could take six months or more to take effect, a senior administration official said.
Critics, however, worry that the order may free these association health plans from several key Obamacare regulations and from state oversight, allowing them to sell plans with lower premiums but skimpier benefits. That could draw younger and healthier customers away from Obamacare and send premiums skyrocketing for sicker people left in the exchanges.

Still needs Congress
Though Congress has shelved its effort to repeal and replace Obamacare, a signature campaign promise for the President, Trump has not let it go. While he cannot wipe away the health reform law with the stroke of a pen, Trump -- who often blasted former President Barack Obama for using executive orders -- can use those orders to direct agencies to amend guidance and regulations to broaden how the law is implemented.


His plan announced Thursday has drawn backing from lawmakers like Sen. Rand Paul, the Kentucky Republican who has identified specific reforms that could be made by the President alone. Paul, who also criticized Obama on executive orders, was among those present for the signing.


Trump's efforts with congressional Republicans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act have floundered after analyses of the GOP replacement plans showed the number of Americans without insurance would increase by more than 20 million people, as compared to current law.


Democrats railed against Trump's move, saying it would hurt the current health care markets.


"Having failed to repeal the #ACA in Congress, @POTUS is using a wrecking ball to singlehandedly rip apart & sabotage our healthcare system," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, tweeted.

Quote:[/url] Follow
Chuck Schumer 

@SenSchumer
Having failed to repeal the #ACA in Congress, @POTUS is using a wrecking ball to singlehandedly rip apart & sabotage our healthcare system.
11:56 AM - Oct 12, 2017

"This is a case where doing something is worse than doing nothing," Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist and one of the architects of Obamacare, said on CNN. "It's not going to solve the problem at all and remember, it effects a very small number of people."



"It won't do anything for a lot of the people on the exchange who are not members of franchises or trade associations," Emanuel said. "So this is more show than actual reality in terms of making health care affordable for Americans."


What the order may do
Exactly how the agencies would change current regulations remains to be seen.


[url=http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/05/news/economy/trump-insurance-association-health-plans/index.html]Association health plans, which are usually sponsored by trade organizations or interest groups, already exist. Spurred by the executive order, federal agencies could amend the rules governing these plans so they are no longer subject to state regulation, said health policy experts, speaking before the order was issued. Instead, the nationwide plans may come under the same federal oversight as large-employer policies.


Large group plans do not have to adhere to all of Obamacare's provisions, such as the requirement to provide comprehensive policies that cover prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse, according to Kevin Lucia, project director at Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute.


The switch could also allow association plans to deny coverage to the group or set rates based on the medical history of those in the group, so plans with younger, healthier members could offer lower premiums. The administration said that employers participating in these plans would not be allowed to exclude employees or develop premiums based on health conditions.


The President's action also looks to expand the use of short-term insurance plans. These policies are also not subject to Obamacare regulations so they can exclude those with pre-existing conditions or base rates on consumers' health background. Also, they usually offer less comprehensive coverage.


The Obama administration limited these plans' coverage to 90 days. Previously, they had been available for up to a year.

[GMDino]

This one popped up in my FB memories from 2009.

Back in the good old days before healthcare reform ruined it for all of us.

http://www.denverpost.com/2009/10/09/heavy-infant-in-grand-junction-denied-health-insurance/

Quote:GRAND JUNCTION — Alex Lange is a chubby, dimpled, healthy and happy 4-month-old.


But in the cold, calculating numbered charts of insurance companies, he is fat. That’s why he is being turned down for health insurance. And that’s why he is a weighty symbol of a problem in the health care reform debate.

Insurance companies can turn down people with pre-existing conditions who aren’t covered in a group health care plan.

Alex’s pre-existing condition — “obesity” — makes him a financial risk. Health insurance reform measures are trying to do away with such denials that come from a process called “underwriting.”

“If health care reform occurs, underwriting will go away. We do it because everybody else in the industry does it,” said Dr. Doug Speedie, medical director at Rocky Mountain Health Plans, the company that turned down Alex.

By the numbers, Alex is in the 99th percentile for height and weight for babies his age. Insurers don’t take babies above the 95th percentile, no matter how healthy they are otherwise.

“I could understand if we could control what he’s eating. But he’s 4 months old. He’s breast-feeding. We can’t put him on the Atkins diet or on a treadmill,” joked his frustrated father, Bernie Lange, a part-time news anchor at KKCO-TV in Grand Junction. “There is just something absurd about denying an infant.”

Bernie and Kelli Lange tried to get insurance for their growing family with Rocky Mountain Health Plans when their current insurer raised their rates 40 percent after Alex was born. They filled out the paperwork and awaited approval, figuring their family is young and healthy. But the broker who was helping them find new insurance called Thursday with news that shocked them.

” ‘Your baby is too fat,’ she told me,” Bernie said.

Up until then, the Langes had been happy with Alex’s healthy appetite and prodigious weight gain. His pediatrician had never mentioned any weight concerns about the baby they call their “happy little chunky monkey.”

His 2-year-old brother, Vincent, had been a colicky baby who had trouble putting on pounds.

At birth, Alex weighed a normal 8 1/4 pounds. On a diet of strictly breast milk, his weight has more than doubled. He weighs about 17 pounds and is about 25 inches long.

“I’m not going to withhold food to get him down below that number of 95,” Kelli Lange said. “I’m not going to have him screaming because he’s hungry.”

Speedie said not many people seeking individual health insurance are turned down because of weight. But it does happen.
Some babies less hefty than Alex have had to get health endorsements from their pediatricians. Adults who have a body-mass index of 30 and above are turned down because they are considered obese.

The Langes, both slender, don’t know where Alex’s propensity for pounds came from. Their other child is thin. No one in their families has a weight problem.

The Langes are counting on the fact that Alex will start shedding pounds when he starts crawling. He is already a kinetic bundle of arm- and leg-waving energy in a baby suit sized for a 9-month-old.

They joked that when he is ready for solid food, they will start him on Slim-Fast.

Meanwhile, they made Alex’s plight public on KKCO this week. They plan to appeal Rocky Mountain’s denial.

If that doesn’t work, they plan to take their case to the Colorado Division of Insurance.

“My gripe is not with Rocky Mountain,” Bernie said. “It’s with the general state of the health care system.”

[StLucieBengal]

Not a fan of EO. But Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan have failed the voters.

Should have been a clean repeal. Then lessen regulations on the insurance industry.

[*Nately120*]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the right-wing pushing for reducing mental health coverage a week after the right-wing assured us mass shootings were to due mental issues?

[*michaelsean*]

(10-12-2017, 02:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the right-wing pushing for reducing mental health coverage a week after the right-wing assured us mass shootings were to due mental issues?

And we had Obamacare and a guy who could have afforded it on his own, and he still did it.  I think it's much bigger than insurance paying for mental health.  We are talking about identifying people and  figuring out what to do with them, and that's something that's going to have to be paid on the governmental level.  I don't think these arfe generally people who voluntarily go to see someone.

[*jason*]

(10-12-2017, 02:04 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Not a fan of EO. But Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan have failed the voters.

Should have been a clean repeal. Then lessen regulations on the insurance industry.

I hate them as well. Sadly our federal government is so broken that EOs are the only way anything gets done. It'd be a breathe if fresh air to see a lil compromise here and there instead of each party taking turns being "the Party of No".

[Belsnickel]

(10-12-2017, 02:04 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Not a fan of EO. But Mitch McConnel and Paul Ryan have failed the voters.

Should have been a clean repeal. Then lessen regulations on the insurance industry.

Just throwing this out there, but this was the reasoning behind DACA. The EO was signed because the DREAM Act, which was a popular piece of legislation, failed in Congress.

[GreenDragon]

He who complained about executive orders.

[Aquapod770]

More competition is bad for the healthcare market? Lolz

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 03:14 PM)jason Wrote: I hate them as well. Sadly our federal government is so broken that EOs are the only way anything gets done. It'd be a breathe if fresh air to see a lil compromise here and there instead of each party taking turns being "the Party of No".

Congress has given away power to the executive branch for so long so they don't have to pass any controversial legislation and hurt re-elections.

It's just crap. Stand up and make a compromise. This is why I wish regulations had a sunset so they would need to be voted on again. And get rid of all the departments who are writing regulations and never elected.

[GMDino]

What the POTUS is doing is like me holding a plastic bag over someone's head and suffocating them and then telling the cops that the person died because they were sick and forgot how to breath.

It's sad.

[BmorePat87]

He's going to run out of Obama things to undo. Congress better give him some fluff bills to sign into law.

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 08:57 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: He's going to run out of Obama things to undo. Congress better give him some fluff bills to sign into law.

They did with the Russian sanctions.  He screwed that up too.

[GMDino]

Trump forgot why he was even there speaking. pic.twitter.com/x2r1Hsjtlc

— Zack Ford (@ZackFord) October 12, 2017

Honest-to-God transcript. Trump (again) forgot to sign an EO before going to leave a signing ceremony, and Pence had to hold him up. pic.twitter.com/CR1mTFAMuT

— Eric Schmeltzer (@JustSchmeltzer) October 12, 2017

[*Nately120*]

(10-12-2017, 03:05 PM)michaelsean Wrote: And we had Obamacare and a guy who could have afforded it on his own, and he still did it.  I think it's much bigger than insurance paying for mental health.  We are talking about identifying people and  figuring out what to do with them, and that's something that's going to have to be paid on the governmental level.  I don't think these arfe generally people who voluntarily go to see someone.

That would explain why we're reducing to sending hopes/thoughts/prayers every time a shooting happens.  

[GodFather]

(10-12-2017, 07:10 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: More competition is bad for the healthcare market? Lolz

That whole thing is a joke, prices are going to be determined in other ways. This would be a very small part of it.


I wonder how the people who voted for him in rural states are going to feel when he eliminates subsides and they won't afford healthcare? Will they still be happy they voted for him?

[Aquapod770]

(10-13-2017, 12:48 PM)GodFather Wrote: That whole thing is a joke, prices are going to be determined in other ways. This would be a very small part of it.


I wonder how the people who voted for him in rural states are going to feel when he eliminates subsides and they won't afford healthcare? Will they still be happy they voted for him?

It's one of the simplest things that can be done to potentially decrease prices. Yet it's taken until now to even get started implementing it. The only legitimate reason someone could say this is bad is because it is an executive order (which admittedly I'm not a fan of). 

[GodFather]

(10-13-2017, 01:17 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: It's one of the simplest things that can be done to potentially decrease prices. Yet it's taken until now to even get started implementing it. The only legitimate reason someone could say this is bad is because it is an executive order (which admittedly I'm not a fan of). 

You don't think its bad that 6 million people could be without healthcare as a result of this executive action? I would say its horrible..

[StLucieBengal]

(10-13-2017, 01:58 PM)GodFather Wrote: You don't think its bad that 6 million people could be without healthcare as a result of this executive action? I would say its horrible..

We will be able to form associations and buy from every state. It's a win win

[Aquapod770]

(10-13-2017, 01:58 PM)GodFather Wrote: You don't think its bad that 6 million people could be without healthcare as a result of this executive action? I would say its horrible..

Source please.