CBS News

[Keroseneuser]

I have not finished the enrollment process (somewhat lengthy) but SS# is optional. I put wage info in. No other personal info so far.

My understanding is that no personal medical info is provided or needed as pre-existing conditikns are covered. The ACA site just matches the user with individual plans offered by various providers. The provideres will be the ones with your medical info not the Fed.

I was under the impression that you had coverage through your work from previous posts. Are you one of the ones affected by the ACA cancellations of coverage? If so I would like to see how your aca rates compare to what you previously had. I have a friend that lost his policy due to ACA and his new rates are going to be double. (Lost his policy due to the prenatal care section of the law etc. he is single and had a policy that reflected that a male had no need for gyno exams etc, but now he has to pay for that in a policy for himself since under aca all must have such coverage. At least that is the way it was explained to him) I have seen articles about the growing number of people losing their existing coverage due to the law and the much higher premiums required to replace it. Absent a major rewrite of parts of the ACA that is where I see it imploding on it's self. Only asking due to your quote above talking about trying to get signed up for ACA. Again I was under the impression that you were covered by your work policy. So far my policy is still good though I did get a letter saying that some of the medical facilities and Doctors in the state that currently are part of my coverage will not be available come January due to the ACA. So while not a complete loss of coverage, it is not "If you like your coverage you can keep it" as we were led to believe by Obama's speeches. Best I can figure from what I have seen my level of coverage that I have for my family that I pay around $600 a month for would be the highest level in the ACA and would run me about $1500 a month. though difficult to tell since apparently the actual price and the calculated price are very different from what various news reports are saying. If that is the case it might be north of $1500 a month. As it is I am incurring an 11% rise in coverage cost for next year. More than double the highest cost increase I have seen in the past 10 years.

 

[Knotbuyinit]

But the right-wing media's fearmongering about privacy concerns is unfounded. The Atlantic Wire pointed out that the phrase is part of standard legal language for similar "Terms and Conditions" pages and is only "hidden" because it was removed by developers, making the phrase not legally enforceable. The article adds that "[t]here are several ways in which" the analysis "is incorrect" (emphasis added):

The first is that Barton says the language is "hidden" -- because it's in the source code. "Source code," for those who don't know, is the tagged language that tells a browser how to display a website. It's "hidden" only because it's information about the web page, not the content of the page itself. Meaning it doesn't show up on the page, meaning that there's no way it could even be legally enforceable.

Not only that, but the language, as detailed by the conservative Weekly Standard, is itself commented out. Developers will occasionally put marks around lines of code telling the computer, in essence, "ignore this." (Why? Often developers will leave notes like "// Section two begins here" to make code easier to scan.) In this case, the language was likely commented out because the document, a fairly standard "Terms and Conditions" page, was repurposed form another project. Take standard legal language, comment out the parts you won't use, and done.

[...]

Barton is also confusing two types of privacy: the privacy afforded under HIPAA (discussed below) and the privacy that is necessary for online communication. Earlier this year, Google came under fire when it was reported that its attorneys argued that GMail users didn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy. As The Verge pointed out, this is a fairly common legal stipulation that allows online companies to process information submitted online. When you send your emails to Google, you acknowledge that Google has a right to see who sent the message and where it's going, and so on. It would be hard to maintain that information privately and have your email get to its destination!

As William & Lee Law Professor Timothy S. Jost explained to ThinkProgress in an email, "HIPAA only applies to health care providers, clearinghouses (and this is a narrowly defined term) health plans, and their business associates." "Even so, access is available to data without consent for health care operations, which this would be." Deven McGraw, of the Health Privacy Project at the Center for Democracy & Technology, agreed, adding, "It does not violate HIPAA - it's not even covered by HIPAA."

[...]

Jost adds that "even if the rule applies to the information and to the exchange, sharing information with a contractor would be a routine operation, and HIPAA allows disclosure of information without consent for operations. Surely a health plan that contracted with a company to build its software would not be violating HIPAA as long as the computer company also observed HIPAA protections. The exchange is subject to the privacy rule, but the HHS privacy rule permits disclosure to contractors."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/10/24/right-wing-media-pushes-misleading-attack-on-ac/196579

At this juncture, what difference does it make?! It really doesn't matter if you think there is or isn't a privacy issue, you either agree with the privacy statements and get health benefits or disagree and face the music.

 

[Ms Tree]

I was under the impression that you had coverage through your work from previous posts. Are you one of the ones affected by the ACA cancellations of coverage? If so I would like to see how your aca rates compare to what you previously had. I have a friend that lost his policy due to ACA and his new rates are going to be double. (Lost his policy due to the prenatal care section of the law etc. he is single and had a policy that reflected that a male had no need for gyno exams etc, but now he has to pay for that in a policy for himself since under aca all must have such coverage. At least that is the way it was explained to him) I have seen articles about the growing number of people losing their existing coverage due to the law and the much higher premiums required to replace it. Absent a major rewrite of parts of the ACA that is where I see it imploding on it's self. Only asking due to your quote above talking about trying to get signed up for ACA. Again I was under the impression that you were covered by your work policy. So far my policy is still good though I did get a letter saying that some of the medical facilities and Doctors in the state that currently are part of my coverage will not be available come January due to the ACA. So while not a complete loss of coverage, it is not "If you like your coverage you can keep it" as we were led to believe by Obama's speeches. Best I can figure from what I have seen my level of coverage that I have for my family that I pay around $600 a month for would be the highest level in the ACA and would run me about $1500 a month. though difficult to tell since apparently the actual price and the calculated price are very different from what various news reports are saying. If that is the case it might be north of $1500 a month. As it is I am incurring an 11% rise in coverage cost for next year. More than double the highest cost increase I have seen in the past 10 years.

I still hqve coverage. I just wanted to see what was being offerred. I know when AA fired me and I had to pay for our own insurance for 8 months the cost was sky high.

 

[delldude]

Who gives you a SS#?

Dog, you're too cool....

 

[Keroseneuser]

I still hqve coverage. I just wanted to see what was being offerred. I know when AA fired me and I had to pay for our own insurance for 8 months the cost was sky high.

Ah ok, if you are ever able to complete the process and get to the rates page please post the rates that it quotes you along with the deductible and how it compares with your current coverage. I am reading news reports and seeing posts on all kinds of webboards concerning how high the ACA rates are compared to folks current rates. Would be nice to see how it works out for you. So far the only "affordable" rates I have read or heard about from the ACA has insane high deductibles that no one can be expected to pay( at least the ones that really need the coverage). meaning on a $200 a month insurance policy it has a $10000 deductible for a grand total of $12400 out of pocket per year before the insurance covers a single dime. no way a fast food employee or a quickie mart employee is going to be able to come up with 50% of their total years salary or more before their coverage kicks in.

 

[delldude]

Ah ok, if you are ever able to complete the process and get to the rates page please post the rates that it quotes you along with the deductible and how it compares with your current coverage. I am reading news reports and seeing posts on all kinds of webboards concerning how high the ACA rates are compared to folks current rates. Would be nice to see how it works out for you. So far the only "affordable" rates I have read or heard about from the ACA has insane high deductibles that no one can be expected to pay( at least the ones that really need the coverage). meaning on a $200 a month insurance policy it has a $10000 deductible for a grand total of $12400 out of pocket per year before the insurance covers a single dime. no way a fast food employee or a quickie mart employee is going to be able to come up with 50% of their total years salary or more before their coverage kicks in.

Have you seen this:

http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/

 

[Ms Tree]

If I can figure it out I want to try it three ways. I want to do it with my real house hold salary, a poverty level income and no income. I am curious how the rates will change for those who can afford to pay for insurance as opposed to those who cannot

 

[delldude]

Plug it in and clear it each time starting over.
Zero kicks to medicaid info.

 

[im back..!!]

At this juncture, what difference does it make?! It really doesn't matter if you think there is or isn't a privacy issue, you either agree with the privacy statements and get health benefits or disagree and face the music.

So what your saying is, if your party hadent had your head up there ###, you might have had some constructive input to the ACA process?

 

[Keroseneuser]

Have you seen this:

http://kff.org/inter...idy-calculator/

Played around with it, it's not good. The silver coverage which it gives the info for is worse than the lowest insurance that I can get from my company, so using the numbers for the lowest level from my company available. My company info: lowest level: $4547 yr $378 a month Max out of pocket $3000. ACA Silver plan using same info: $9661 yr $805 a month $12700 max out of pocket (For less coverage) Put in Numbers for a 25 yr old single making 36k a year to see result (basically a new hire at my company) From company lowest plan: $1344 yr $112 a month, $3000 max out of pocket. ACA Silver $2889 yr $240 a month $6350 max out of pocket The 25 yr old newhire did not qualify for any subsidies. The only scenario that I ran that came out decent numbers was for a minimum wage worker 18K a year 21 yrs old: ACA Silver $775 yr $65 a month $2250 out of pocket with a $2103 tax credit. Even after getting their 2103 credit back at end of year that $65 represents a good chunk of their monthly income. I don't see low income people in this bracket bothering to get it, they will still just show up at the hospital like they do now. They say the ACA needs the youth to sign up to make it happen, I don't see that happening based on these results. Especially since the above min wage person would be paying $55 a week out of their paycheck all year long till they hit tax time to get the refund. That's $55 a week out of a $346 check....before taxes.

 

[eolesen]

So what your saying is, if your party hadent had your head up there ###, you might have had some constructive input to the ACA process?

Now *that's* funny....

All the GOP inputs into the PPACA prior to passage were denied, because the Dems were in control.

This was passed by Democrats without a single Republican vote, and without any Republican amendments or inputs because they were locked out of the process.

But please, do try continue to try and frame it as the GOP having their head up their asses instead of trying to participate in the original act's framing.

 

[Knotbuyinit]

So what your saying is, if your party hadent had your head up there ###, you might have had some constructive input to the ACA process?

And what you're saying is that the Democrat party collectively was unable to figure it out. Try to keep up Bears.

 

[Ms Tree]

Now *that's* funny....

All the GOP inputs into the PPACA prior to passage were denied, because the Dems were in control.

This was passed by Democrats without a single Republican vote, and without any Republican amendments or inputs because they were locked out of the process.

But please, do try continue to try and frame it as the GOP having their head up their asses instead of trying to participate in the original act's framing.

How many health care bills were proposed/voted on during the 4 years that republicans had control over the House, Senate and WH?

The GIOP has been trying to happy with the status quo. They have no interest in making sure that those most in need have health care. This is all GOP. They do nothign when in charge and they do every thing they can to do nothign when not in charge.

Actually I take that back. They do make every effort to give tax breaks to the wealthy when we are in two wars and need revenue. That is something. Not sure what but it is.

 

[delldude]

60 minutes tonite......got a British guy, probably spec ops who was called by the Americans while the attack on Benghazi was going down.....

Another CBS Obama suppository tonite.

 

[delldude]

I quit watching Fox News.....
 

 
(CBS News) WASHINGTON - For 31 days now, the Obama administration has been telling us that Americans by the millions are visiting the new health insurance website, despite all its problems.
 
The website launched on a Tuesday. Publicly, the government said there were 4.7 million unique visits in the first 24 hours. But at a meeting Wednesday morning, the war room notes say "six enrollments have occurred so far."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57610328/obamacare-enrollments-got-off-to-very-slow-start-documents-show/