ACA - Expanded Medicaid Is Working in Arkansas

No I am afraid we didn't get to Iraq because of a mistake George Bush made. We got to Iraq because it was planned for us to get there just like in Viet Nam. Wars don't just happen they are planned. Incidentally Obama isn't doing squat to remedy are involvement in Afghanistan, because that's not on the agenda either.


Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin
Really?
Really? Originally Posted by UnderConstruction
Yeah really, read between the lines a little bit.


Jim
LexusLover's Avatar
FYI, If your employer offers you a health insurance plan, then you CANNOT purchase health insurance on the government exchanges. The health insurance being sold on the government exchanges is only for people who Can't get health insurance from their employer or you have retired and you are not yet 65 years old. Yes, it shows you don't keep up with it much. You don't even understand the basic rules. Originally Posted by flghtr65
The beauty of the United States is that one doesn't have to use a government exchange to acquire health care coverage. Unless, of course, they don't have enough sense to do their own "shopping" for coverage. Then it's not "mandatory," it is simply "necessary." The ACA was never intended to focus on people with health insurance coverage through employers or other sources. It was "intended" to assure those who didn't have coverage COULD GET IT.

There is NO REQUIREMENT in the ACA that one have health care coverage, because one can simply pay $700 and not have any. Texas has alternatives via conservatives!

But the United States Supreme Court will be addressing those issues very soon.
flghtr65's Avatar
The beauty of the United States is that one doesn't have to use a government exchange to acquire health care coverage. Unless, of course, they don't have enough sense to do their own "shopping" for coverage. Then it's not "mandatory," it is simply "necessary." The ACA was never intended to focus on people with health insurance coverage through employers or other sources. It was "intended" to assure those who didn't have coverage COULD GET IT.

Texas has alternatives via conservatives!
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Before the ACA was implemented people who had a pre-existing condition could "shop" for health insurance in the individual market, however, no health insurance company was going to sell a policy to someone with a pre-existing condition. Go back and look at J.D's life boat example. If you had high blood sugar or high cholesterol, you were denied the opportunity to purchase a health insurance policy, regardless of your ability to pay. Not all states had high risk, risk pools. For some that did, you had to wait 6 months before you could purchase a policy if you could afford it.

Why do you think the new ACA law has a rule that people with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied the opportunity to purchase health insurance. The individual market old system, simply did not work.

Texas is different than most states. In Texas there are counties that collect a county tax for the county hospital, this allows the county hospital to see POOR uninsured people for FREE. Ask Jackie S. the oilman about that tax.
LexusLover's Avatar
Why do you think the new ACA law has a rule that people with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied the opportunity to purchase health insurance. The individual market old system, simply did not work.

Texas is different than most states. In Texas there are counties that collect a county tax for the county hospital, this allows the county hospital to see POOR uninsured people for FREE. Originally Posted by flghtr65
You're in Wisconsin, right? Just asking. Gruber has done a good job on you.

What contributed to raised rates of health care coverage is exactly what you described .. i.e. coverage for "pre-existing" conditions. The option is for people to obtain their coverage through employment or other group plans (there are associations that have negotiated for group plans that historically accepted "pre-existing" conditions). In addition, Texas has participated in the "medicaid" program as well as insurance for kids, both of which have partial federal funding .. The "hospital" system about which you reference is not statewide and was only implemented in larger metro areas, like Harris County.

But thanks for making my point.

States can take care of the problem without ACA.

IMO the "real reason" for ACA was California's failed employee coverage issue. Once all the "back channel" communications/memoes finally surface, you can come back and reread this post. It is no secret why Pelosi jumped on board the ACA ... it was the answer for California, which was going broke providing "benefits" for retired state/local employees, not only from "retirement income," but "disability" and insurance coverage.

Then came along a migration from South of the border, which had been ongoing for years due to the agricultural business, with more illegal aliens seeking medical treatment in the facilities in California, which were mandated by the California legislature to have a minimum number of RN's per patients for which California medical facilities began a national recruiting campaign.

California's health care industry was driving the state into bankruptcy.

Many Texans became aware of another California blight when Reliant Energy filed for a rate increase before the Texas Utility Commission that included a component to cover the losses of Reliant in California when businesses shut down and customers fled California leaving behind their unpaid utility bills.

The ACA is simply business as usual for California. Pushing their liberal bullshit on the rest of the country. Nancy didn't give a shit what was in it, except to cover California's butt with "expanded medicare"???

Covering 10 to 15 million uninsured U.S. citizens doesn't require "re-inventing the wheel" ... you recognize that by recognizing what Texas does.

You, and others focus on "enrollments" ... you ignore those who never get coverage and those losing coverage for various reasons from nonpayment of premiums to inability to prove citizenship. You also ignore the "costs' of supplements and grants for those who need assistance in paying premiums.