Bill Clinton calls on Obama to change health care law

[littlejerry]

IF a new law were to grandfather provision protect folks so they can keep what Obama promised them; but nothing else changes - seems to me the insurance companies will take a bath with the new coverage they are required to provide; without being able to upsell everyone else. Unintended consequence (or intended by Progressives) might be to cripple the private insurance industry, paving the way for single payer. Anybody have insight into that industry to say yay or nay to that speculation?

I've heard some in the GOP are floating such a grandfathered-in bill. More political engineering of a market.

Health care needs some consumer protection but net net far less regulations and a safety net provision for a very low end LCD group. (Paul Ryan's design and John Mackey's similar ideas seemed to fit the bill)

Intellectually how do you justify grandfathered plans?

this is so bad we need to outlaw it, unless you currently use it and like it. But your grandchildren shouldn't have that choice.

The whole thing is already ridiculous. Let me shop for my plan and voluntarily enter into a contract without an inept politician and 100 lobbyists telling me what I "need".

[RoyGBiv]

Democrats have universally stated for years that the assurances from the president were true.

The democrats wrote the legislation, passed the legislation, and did all of it on the assurance that they knew what they were doing.

The legislation takes effect and people's insurance gets cancelled because it doesn't meet Obama administration standards...standards they knew about all along.

And now, AFTER people's insurance has been cancelled, Clinton says that Obama needs to live up to the promise EVERY ONE OF THEM knew was bogus for years.

So next year when the employer mandate kicks in, and employers, en masse, decide to do away with providing insurance and pay the penalty, then what?

And even bigger.... When my employer "changes" my plan so that it covers the "minimum things the law says it must cover", will Sebelius have written a rule that says my employer plan can no longer be offered because it changed?

[John Ralston]

I have a friend that buys his own insurance...he must now pay more for ACA Minimum Coverage, which includes MATERNITY coverage for him, his 9 YO daughter and his 5 YO son!!!

This thing is so F'ed up nothing is ever going to fix it.

[John Ralston]

I think that an ad, playing the audio track of that and showing that pic should be all that the GOP runs against her...if she still gets elected we can just all pack up our $hit and move to Canada, cause we as a nation are headed down the toilet for sure with no chance to recover.

[ToddG]

So next year when the employer mandate kicks in, and employers, en masse, decide to do away with providing insurance and pay the penalty, then what?

Then we're one step closer to a single-payer system which is what the Dems have wanted from the beginning. Much like gun control, they're going to get there one little chipped-away bit of privacy & freedom at a time.

When my employer "changes" my plan so that it covers the "minimum things the law says it must cover", will Sebelius have written a rule that says my employer plan can no longer be offered because it changed?

That rule already exists and most employers were informed of it before the one year "amnesty" was granted. In order to meet the new law my wife's organization had to change its coverage (and raise deductibles), and because of that change it will probably fail to qualify for grandfathering. It's almost as if the administration did it on purpose...

[JV_]

Hearing Clinton talk about honoring something always give me a laugh ... he's done such a stellar job honoring commitments (err .... vows).

[JConn]

The only reason the employer mandate was delayed was to get through 2014. Imagine right now if virtually everyone in America who has insurance was getting a cancelation notice. Everyone would be lashing out at the government at the same time. As it is this has been carefully planned to spread the outrage out so the law will survive. People only get angry when it directly effects them.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[RoyGBiv]

That rule already exists and most employers were informed of it before the one year "amnesty" was granted. In order to meet the new law my wife's organization had to change its coverage (and raise deductibles), and because of that change it will probably fail to qualify for grandfathering. It's almost as if the administration did it on purpose...

Clear facts around this question are harder to find. Everyones focus is on the individual market right now, but it seemed to me that the employer sponsored market is an even bigger kittenstorm waiting to erupt.

NOT a well written article... but.. FWIW..
"Because so many plans have in fact changed since 2010, millions of Americans do not have the choice of keeping the plans they had in 2009. On the employer side, only 36 percent of plans are grandfathered as of this year, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks changes in health-care markets."

Clearer here, but not well linked to Employer plans.

[Kyle Reese]

[TCinVA]

So next year when the employer mandate kicks in, and employers, en masse, decide to do away with providing insurance and pay the penalty, then what?

Why do you think they delayed it?

This mandate nonsense is the first step of the Obamacare list of idiocy. The first one. Ground zero. First floor. Out of the gate the very first thing it does is eliminate a bunch of insurance policies.

...and now that what was scheduled to happen for YEARS, after it was passed into law, after the .gov spent money hiring people to promote the bloody plan, after lawmakers who passed the damn thing long since knew it would do this, do we see some Democrats making noise about maybe taking action that actually would let people keep the plans they like. Plans that have already been eliminated.

This leads to two possible conclusions.

1. The politicians who passed this thing are complete morons, so smurfing stupid they didn't even grasp what the smurf their own smurfing legislation actually smurfing did
2. The politicians who passed this thing are betting that we're all too smurfing stupid to actually figure out the game

If the Republican party had any sense, and at the moment I'm not convinced that they do, they'd be on every possible outlet waving these cancellation letters, citing the provisions in the law that hammer employer provided insurance, and saying "Today it's your neighbor, but tomorrow it's you. Obama and the democratic party are coming for your healthcare plan. They will take it away just like they've done for all these other people."