Home · Maps · About
Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

First : << [11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20] >> : Last

< Previous Page  

Page 16 of 25

Next Page >  

(1153180)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 8 14:18:13 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 8 13:34:50 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
For what?

For speaking.


From whom?

Same people who tried to boycott Whole Foods when the CEO wrote a letter to WSJ about Obamacare.


This is a free country.

For now. But the Left is changing this country rapidly.

Post a New Response

(1153182)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by bingbong on Sat Feb 8 14:22:57 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 8 13:30:48 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
After all, if one is planning to invest, they have the right to see the prospectus and any other financial information they may find informative in their decision making.

Post a New Response

(1153185)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 8 14:36:10 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 13:17:49 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Leftists think they own everything already.

They control education, entertainment, won last two Presidentials and are gaining ground in employment.

As conservative as people think this country was in the 50's, we'll be as liberal before 2050.

Post a New Response

(1153198)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 15:46:01 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by LuchAAA on Sat Feb 8 14:36:10 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Wrong. There will be a backlash.

Post a New Response

(1153207)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 16:52:52 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by mtk52983 on Sat Feb 8 12:27:34 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
No, that's not what it says in there. Be honest.

Post a New Response

(1153208)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 16:53:10 2014, in response to Another bogus claim debunked.Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 8 13:33:15 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
You didn't read the article, did you?

Post a New Response

(1153222)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 18:42:25 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 8 13:08:43 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
That's due to the UNIPARTY. "GOP" = liberals' Emmanuel Goldstein.

Post a New Response

(1153227)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by italianstallion on Sat Feb 8 18:49:30 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 16:53:10 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Did you?

Post a New Response

(1153300)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Feb 9 00:20:45 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 18:42:25 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well then ... who's stepping up to slap them for it? Teabaggers perhaps?

Post a New Response

(1153380)

view threaded

CEO made a mistake Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 9 13:37:38 2014, in response to AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 8 00:30:16 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
“I made a mistake,” Mr. Armstrong said on Saturday. “I apologize for my comments last week at the town hall when I mentioned specific health care examples in trying to explain our decision-making process around our employee benefit programs.”

Post a New Response

(1153391)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 9 14:24:56 2014, in response to CEO made a mistake Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by AlM on Sun Feb 9 13:37:38 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yeah; his mistake was letting the truth slip and causing a panic, apparently. The real panic's going to come notwithstanding.

If you're going to cite the NYT for the zillionth time, don't be afraid to post the link.

Post a New Response

(1153419)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by AlM on Sun Feb 9 16:57:57 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 9 14:24:56 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
It's a direct quote. There are numerous sources for it.


Post a New Response

(1153655)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by italianstallion on Mon Feb 10 19:55:15 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Feb 9 14:24:56 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
And he reversed the 401k cutbacks. As I said earlier, this was a totally bogus claim that it related to Obamacare.

Post a New Response

(1153675)

view threaded

Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Feb 10 21:10:17 2014, in response to Re: AOL casts blame at ACA for having to cut benefits, posted by italianstallion on Mon Feb 10 19:55:15 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
He even admitted to the latter, not that our righties will ever admit it. :)

Post a New Response

(1154033)

view threaded

ACA creates new "crimes": IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 04:09:22 2014, in response to Universal Health Care is HERE in these USA! Apply Now. www.healthcare.gov, posted by SMAZ on Tue Oct 1 13:19:06 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Washington Post

The Insiders: Obamacare creates new ways to prosecute American business

By Ed Rogers
February 11, 2014 at 3:08 pm
It’s been a bad week for Obamacare. Incredibly, the White House has had to grant yet another delay in the employer mandate. This time, employers with between 50 to 99 employees who don’t already offer health insurance to their employees have until 2016 to comply with the shifting Obamacare requirements. This latest delay represents another political calculation by the White House. They are counting on the fact that the criticism they will face now for bungling incompetence and disregarding their own law is less than the criticism they would receive for damaging American business closer to the elections.

And the fine print of the latest announcement from the Administration is worse than the terrible headlines. This rule includes a provision that says you have to have the right motives for having a certain number of employees to be in compliance with Obamacare. Bear with me, that’s right: You must certify to the IRS — under the threat of perjury — that the reasons for your employee head count have nothing to do with your opposition to or avoidance of Obamacare. This president doesn’t just selectively enforce the law as he sees fit; now he is actually inventing new crimes. It’s jaw-dropping that if you fall below 100 employees, the burden will be on you to prove that you meant no disrespect to Obamacare. I can’t wait to see the video of the first Democrat who tries to defend this new threat of prosecution within Obamacare. In fact, look for the White House to fix this and somehow drop this provision altogether. It’s completely indefensible.

This comes immediately on the heels of another body blow to Obamacare; specifically, the CBO announced that under Obamacare, the projection of hours worked will represent “a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024.” While this statement got all the attention from the press, another stunning revelation in the CBO report is that in the decade after implementation, there will be still be roughly 31 million uninsured Americans under Obamacare. Why did the Democrats want Obamacare in the first place?

On the one hand, Republicans are blasted for wanting to repeal Obamacare, and the Democrats and their allies routinely remind us it’s the so-called “law of the land.” But the president can amend the law, ignore the law and now even create new ways to prosecute you if you try to avoid its burdens, and the Democrats all fall in line.

In politics, one of the worst things you can do is to deny the obvious and defend the indefensible. Well, the president is putting the Democratic party in the unenviable position of trying to do exactly that. If it were nine days instead of nine months before the next election, maybe they could pull it off. But Obamacare is failing in its original purpose of providing insurance for the uninsured, it unnecessarily burdens American families and businesses, and now the White House has opened the door to prosecuting those they deem to be insufficiently committed to Obamacare. When will the nightmare end?

Post a New Response

(1154039)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 07:23:50 2014, in response to ACA creates new "crimes": IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 04:09:22 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
This is a giant opinion piece, no different from if I linked an op-ed from the New York Times saying how great the ACA is

Here is the Washington Post's bio on Ed Rogers:
Ed Rogers is a contributor to the PostPartisan blog, and a veteran of the White House and several national campaigns. He is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group, which he founded with former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour in 1991. Rogers has been involved with numerous Republican political campaigns, including the presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. In the first Bush White House, he reported to chief of staff John Sununu. In the Reagan White House, he worked in the office of political affairs.

Post a New Response

(1154079)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 13:35:54 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 07:23:50 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
This is a giant opinion piece

Liberals on here post op-eds by people like Krugman and Thomas Friedman as if it were fact. Besides, opinion in certain cases reflects truth; are you scared of that? Never mind the WaPo being on the same side of the fence as the NYT.

Here is the Washington Post's bio on Ed Rogers

Not relevant. If Krugman's bio is not relevant, neither is Rogers'.

Post a New Response

(1154082)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 13:44:19 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 13:35:54 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
That is why I usually ignore the posts where the "articles" are Paul Krugman op-ed's

Post a New Response

(1154085)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 13:48:47 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 13:44:19 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Good for you.

But when an op-ed includes bare facts, then those ought not be ignored. It's not false that the IRS would be instructed to get some kind of affirmation from a business with respect to why they are reducing its number of employees with respect to the ACA; frankly, that's none of the IRS' beeswax.

Post a New Response

(1154091)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 14:11:29 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 13:48:47 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
1) Perjury is not a new crime

2) I fail to see how this is any different than an audit where the IRS asks for proof on the actual number of employees because payroll taxes do not jive with the amount of business being conducted

Post a New Response

(1154093)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 14:14:15 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 14:11:29 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
You're misidentifying. Perjury refers to official court proceedings. This kind of information is none of the IRS' business.

Post a New Response

(1154096)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 14:18:53 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 14:14:15 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Whether or not certain taxes or penalties are due by reason of a business not being compliant with ACA is the IRS's business. Essentially what they are doing is requiring a sworn statement before it conducts its own audit. Also gives another count to the indictment if they are found not to be paying required taxes or penalties

Post a New Response

(1154097)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 14:20:10 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 14:18:53 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
No, it's not the IRS' business. This turns the IRS into an agent of harassment.

And thanks for admitting that the stipulation creates a new crime.

Post a New Response

(1154113)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 14:53:55 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 14:20:10 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Tax Fraud is an existing crime. Requiring an Affidavit sworn under penalties of perjury is not limited to court proceedings. Lying at a Congressional hearings can subject you to perjury. Perjury is "the willful act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding." A tax filing could be deemed an official proceeding

Post a New Response

(1154121)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 15:13:05 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Feb 12 14:53:55 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
This is not tax fraud (i.e. evasion); it's tax avoidance, which is supposed to be legal. And tax avoidance is none of the IRS' business.

Post a New Response

(1154124)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Feb 12 15:16:38 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 15:13:05 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
No problem ... let's hit up the middle class to pay even more so they don't have to.

Post a New Response

(1154126)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 15:23:46 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Feb 12 15:16:38 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
That's the plan with ACA. Assuming there's a middle class afterwards.

Post a New Response

(1154129)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Feb 12 15:27:30 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 15:23:46 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well gee whiz ... if the rich paid their taxes, then the middle class would catch a break. But we don't want that, do we?

Post a New Response

(1154142)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 12 17:01:06 2014, in response to ACA creates new "crimes": IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Feb 12 04:09:22 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Until I get a citation to the supposed requirement that businesses have to certify their motive for having < 100 people I won't believe it.

Post a New Response

(1154143)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Feb 12 17:03:36 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 12 17:01:06 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Rush Limbaugh confirmed it today.

Post a New Response

(1154149)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 12 17:27:23 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Feb 12 17:03:36 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, I actually read the rule just now. There will have to be a certification that any reduction of employees during 2014 to below 100 was done for "bonafide business reasons." Seems like a reasonable requirement to determine whether people are getting fired just so the employer can get a one-year delay in the mandate to provide insurance.

Post a New Response

(1154150)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by cortelyounext on Wed Feb 12 17:28:04 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Feb 12 17:03:36 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I feel the extremely dangerous South Passaic Gunners which is Crips will not be intimidated by the approaching storm. The Gunners, who as you know came over from East Cleveland by way of Detroit and South LA, are scary. I expect to hear of running gun battles though the Newark and Irvington corridor particularly in the areas surrounding Rosa Parks Boulevard and the Irvine Turner Projects. Please monitor this thread periodically over the course of the next 36 hours for time critical updates.

Post a New Response

(1154151)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Feb 12 17:30:44 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by cortelyounext on Wed Feb 12 17:28:04 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
A movie NON-STOP is coming out next week. I'm afraid to go to the movies here in Florida so I'll wait until I can see it at home.

Post a New Response

(1154152)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Feb 12 17:32:28 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by cortelyounext on Wed Feb 12 17:28:04 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
did you read what that sick fuck Tanaka did? rented a Dreamliner to JFK so he poodle would not be in the storage compartment.

Post a New Response

(1154158)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by cortelyounext on Wed Feb 12 17:43:58 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Feb 12 17:32:28 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yeah. This guy was his manager I think.

Post a New Response

(1154196)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Sand Box John on Thu Feb 13 00:30:25 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by SelkirkTMO on Wed Feb 12 15:27:30 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well gee whiz ... if the rich paid their taxes, then the middle class would catch a break. But we don't want that, do we?

"The Top 50 Percent of All Taxpayers Paid 97 Percent of All Income Taxes; the Top 5 Percent Paid 57 Percent of All Income Taxes; and the Top 1 Percent Paid 35 Percent of All Income Taxes in 2011"

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data
12 18 2013

John in the sand box of Maryland's eastern shore.

Post a New Response

(1154343)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by orange blossom special on Thu Feb 13 14:11:30 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by italianstallion on Wed Feb 12 17:01:06 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
their "motive"
that's a real lmao dumbass post of 2014. We finally have it!

Post a New Response

(1154345)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 13 14:12:45 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by orange blossom special on Thu Feb 13 14:11:30 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, if the libs want to make themselves look crazed, they don't spare any effort.

Post a New Response

(1154351)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Feb 13 14:28:03 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 13 14:12:45 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
We need effort to look crazed. It comes naturally to you and OBS.

Post a New Response

(1154355)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by italianstallion on Thu Feb 13 14:38:49 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by orange blossom special on Thu Feb 13 14:11:30 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Hey asshole. I am just quoting the article on "motive."

" This rule includes a provision that says you have to have the right MOTIVE for having a certain number of employees to be in compliance with Obamacare. "

You win the new dumbass post of 2014 prize!

Post a New Response

(1154494)

view threaded

Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Feb 13 19:02:56 2014, in response to Re: ACA creates new ''crimes'': IRS will punish if going below 100 full-timers has aught to do with law, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 13 14:12:45 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Because your side is the benchmark of sanity. LOL!

Post a New Response

(1154626)

view threaded

ACA: Backlog makes Massachusetts marketplace head weep (literally)

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Feb 13 21:48:05 2014, in response to Universal Health Care is HERE in these USA! Apply Now. www.healthcare.gov, posted by SMAZ on Tue Oct 1 13:19:06 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Boston Globe

Facing 50,000-application backlog, insurance marketplace chief breaks down in tears

By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff
02/13/2014 | 8:40 PM
The head of the state’s beleaguered health insurance marketplace, which was once a national model, broke down in tears Thursday, as she described how demoralizing it has been for her staff to struggle with a broken website that has left an unknown number of people without coverage.

Jean Yang, the executive director of the Massachusetts Health Connector, wept at a board meeting, where it was disclosed that 50,000 applications for health insurance are sitting in a pile, and have yet to be entered into a computer system.

Each one of those applications requires two hours to process, adding to a mountain of work facing Connector staff as they scramble to prevent people from losing insurance, officials said.

“These people came here to lead and innovate, and instead they’re doing manual workarounds, and they are embarrassed to tell friends and family that they work for the Health Connector,” Yang said at the board meeting.

Yang made clear she was not looking for sympathy.

“We have to work harder,” she said. “That means I need tell the staff members they’re not doing a good enough job and I’m telling them that, even though they have been doing this tirelessly for months, and they’re exhausted.”

The state’s health insurance website was working smoothly until October, when it was revamped to comply with the more complicated requirements of the federal health care law. Since then, it has been bedeviled by error messages and is often very sluggish or crashes entirely, officials said. That prompted the state to resort to old-fashioned paper applications, and to put many people in to temporary health plans. But an unknown number of others may be uninsured because of the paperwork backlog.

Sarah Iselin, a health insurance executive charged with fixing the state’s broken website, said the first ordre of business is winnowing that pile of 50,000 applications. She said the state may bring as many as 300 people from an outside company hired by the state. The state is also working on developing a faster data-entry system, though that task alone could take threre weeks, she said.

“We’ve got to catch up,” Iselin said. “That’s priority number one. We have to get those people into the system.”

Yang’s unusual display of emotion at a meeting normally focused on dry policy discussions came a day after she and other state health insurance officials were grilled by angry legislators, who complained bitterly that many of their constituents have been unable to find coverage.

Yang said those concerns have been driving her and her staff to lose sleep. “The market cannot wait and people need help,” she said. “That’s what keeps me up at night.”

Dolores L. Mitchell, a Connector board member, thanked Yang. “A shaky voice every now and then sends a powerful message about how much you care,” Mitchell told Yang. “You’re going to get it right. I know you are.”

Despite the many problems, officials said they had received some encouraging news: On Wednesday night, federal officials granted a 3-month extension for 124,000 people with subsidized health insurance who were set to lose their coverage on March 31 because it didn’t comply with the federal law. The state had requested a six-month extension, but Iselin said the three months will give the state extra time to enroll those people in plans of their choosing.

Post a New Response

(1158106)

view threaded

Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 22 11:12:14 2014, in response to Universal Health Care is HERE in these USA! Apply Now. www.healthcare.gov, posted by SMAZ on Tue Oct 1 13:19:06 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Associated Press
Feb 22, 2014 3:52 AM EST

Medicare Advantage plans may face cuts

By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar
Associated Press
Cuts are on the table next year for Medicare Advantage plans, the Obama administration says. The politically dicey move affecting a private insurance alternative highly popular with seniors immediately touched off an election-year fight.

The announcement gave new ammunition to Republican critics of President Barack Obama's health care law, while disappointing some Democratic senators who had called on the administration to hold rates steady. Insurers are still hoping to whittle back the cuts or dodge them altogether.

Late Friday after financial markets closed, Medicare issued a 148-page assessment of cost factors for the private plans next year. It included multiple variables, some moving in different directions, but analyst Matthew Eyles of Avalere Health estimated it would translate to a cut of 1.9 percent for 2015, a figure also cited by congressional staffers briefed on the proposal.

"There's nothing to like here if you're one of the plans," said Eyles.

Administration officials say the plans don't need to be paid as much to turn a profit, because the growth of health care spending has slowed dramatically. They see the cuts as a dividend for taxpayers.

But the political clout of the plans is growing as seniors flock to them seeking better health care value. Medicare Advantage plans now serve nearly 16 million people, or about 30 percent of Medicare beneficiaries. They can offer lower out-of-pocket costs and broader benefits than traditional Medicare, but often restrict choice.

Insurers say they will be forced to pass on higher costs to seniors or cut benefits if their rates are reduced, and some plans may drop out altogether. The impact could vary significantly around the country.

The industry says the cuts come as Medicare Advantage reductions programmed under the health care law are ramping up. The law sought to compensate for prior years in which the plans were overpaid. But it also includes a new tax on insurers, so industry officials fear the combined impact will be much higher.

The largest insurer trade group, America's Health Insurance Plans, is sparing no effort to head off cuts, with an extensive advertising and lobbying campaign.

It has won the support of 40 senators from both parties who, in a Feb. 14 letter, called on the administration to essentially hold Medicare Advantage rates steady. Among the signers were six Democratic senators in contested races whose outcome will determine whether Obama faces a Congress next year that's completely controlled by Republicans.

Final rates won't be released until April 7, so the lobbying will get even more intense. In prior years, Medicare has sometimes pulled back from proposed cuts.

Friday's announcement will help the government decide basic rates for the Medicare Advantage plans. But the actual change individual plans and customers eventually see will vary, depending on factors like a plan's quality rating or where the plan is located.

The plans have become a key source of revenue growth for insurers who sell and administer the subsidized coverage. They offer basic Medicare coverage topped with extras like vision or dental coverage or premiums lower than standard Medicare rates. There are hundreds of different plans around the country, each with its own set of variables like different deductibles, premiums and co-insurance.

UnitedHealth Group Inc. and Humana Inc. are the two largest Medicare Advantage providers. Health insurance stocks that soared in 2013 slipped at the start of this year after Humana Inc., the second-largest in the market, said rate cuts could be deeper than expected.

Post a New Response

(1158130)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 13:40:48 2014, in response to Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 22 11:12:14 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Well gee ... may be the republicans can put the funding back in the budget bill for it.

Post a New Response

(1158134)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by bingbong on Sat Feb 22 14:08:55 2014, in response to Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 13:40:48 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
It was their idea. (Came along with Medicare D) It also mushroomed the cost of Medicare, yet only covers a third of all seniors?

Post a New Response

(1158135)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 14:10:03 2014, in response to Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by bingbong on Sat Feb 22 14:08:55 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yet another step towards single payer for all ... gotta love them republicans - working hard to bring us what they insist they don't want. :)

Post a New Response

(1158136)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 22 14:10:09 2014, in response to Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 13:40:48 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
It wasn't the Republicans that took it out. Forgot that Obamacare is fully funded?

Post a New Response

(1158138)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 14:12:01 2014, in response to Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 22 14:10:09 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Ummm ... medicare is a separate thing. You see? Teddy Kennedy wanted healthcare to be integrated into a larger medicare, but the republicans insisted on giving us Obamacare instead. And no, Obamacare wasn't fully funded either.

Post a New Response

(1158139)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Feb 22 14:18:24 2014, in response to Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 14:12:01 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Of course it's a separate thing, but that doesn't stop the POTUS from doing as he intended in terms of defunding it to help Obamacare. This is an old story rearing its ugly head once more. Nobody can say that the GOP "insisted" on anything when not a single one voted for the ACA; this is all on the "perfect" Democratic Party.

And of course "single-payer" Ted wanted to merge something like ACA and Medicare, just like Hillary still does.

Post a New Response

(1158144)

view threaded

Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA

Posted by Train Dude on Sat Feb 22 14:48:47 2014, in response to Re: Medicare Advantage now under threat of attack by ACA, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Feb 22 13:40:48 2014.

fiogf49gjkf0d
All together now. "its the Republicans fault!"

Post a New Response

First : << [11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20] >> : Last

< Previous Page  

Page 16 of 25

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]