States resist, build nascent insuranc...

States resist, build nascent insurance markets

There are 10 comments on the Bellingham Herald story from Sep 29, 2013, titled States resist, build nascent insurance markets. In it, Bellingham Herald reports that:

In Republican-led states that oppose the federal Affordable Care Act, the strategy has ranged from largely ignoring the health overhaul to encouraging residents not to sign up and even making it harder for nonprofit organizations to provide information about the exchanges.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Bellingham Herald.

Lance Winslow

San Jose, CA

#1 Sep 29, 2013
Health care costs are rising in states resisting implementing reform and falling in those adopting exchanges and facilitating enrollment.

Since: Dec 07

Spring, TX

#2 Sep 29, 2013
Lance Winslow wrote:
Health care costs are rising in states resisting implementing reform and falling in those adopting exchanges and facilitating enrollment.
Congrats....you win.

http://wackyshackaustralia.com/images/bullshi...

Since: Dec 07

Spring, TX

#3 Sep 29, 2013
Lance Winslow wrote:
Health care costs are rising in states resisting implementing reform and falling in those adopting exchanges and facilitating enrollment.
Under the law, states that do not set up their own exchanges will simply default to a federal exchange operated by the Department of Health and Human Services based in Washington, D.C. It will make no difference in actually implementing the law. Insurance subsidies will still be dispensed via the federal exchanges, just not with the state’s assistance.

Apparently, like many members of Congress, you and obama did not read the law either.

They haven't even started yet, so your usual propaganda is false. companies are moving people to part time and will pay the tax. Therefore.....people are losing income.

Higher health-insurance costs create an incentive for firms to produce their products and services with fewer workers. Therefore, it is no shock that some small-business owners have responded to higher expected insurance costs by reducing employment. An International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans survey found that 7.2 percent of small businesses have already reduced the size of their labor force in response to costs associated with the new law, while a July 2013 Gallup poll of small-business owners reveals that 19 percent have already cut headcount because of the new law.

An even higher fraction of the respondents to the Gallup poll -- 41 percent -- indicated that they "have held off on plans to hire new employees," and 38 percent "have pulled back on plans to grow their business" because of Obamacare.

Lies on top of lies..........the democrat party.
conservative crapola

Whitehall, PA

#4 Sep 29, 2013
After the teabagging cons voted to take away food stamps, which will overwhelming affect the red states, let 'em pay the fine. Then when their hog bellies are sticking out from being starved by the teabagging cons, blushitzle can open a soup kitchen and ask for ID.

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Since: Dec 07

Humble, TX

#6 Sep 29, 2013
conservative crapola wrote:
After the teabagging cons voted to take away food stamps, which will overwhelming affect the red states, let 'em pay the fine. Then when their hog bellies are sticking out from being starved by the teabagging cons, blushitzle can open a soup kitchen and ask for ID.
hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Bluebonnets has private retirement, along with precious metal bought since 69 each year.........and income from a working part time job now at a major country club with playing privlages!!! Don't need a soup kitchen, and I only eat steak..not hog bellies, dumbass. I'm not opening one when the liberal shit hits the fan and all those who voted for obama run out. hahahahahahahahaha including you. The highest welfare states 13 of which a blue (yours in the top 15) will be hit the hardest. Texas is the nations fastest growing economy...so wipe yourself with foodstamts for all we care, boy. hahahahahahahaha
Eleanor

Vernon Hills, IL

#8 Sep 30, 2013
"At least $684 million will be spent on publicity explaining what people need to do next and persuading the doubtful to sign up for coverage."

Millions of taxpayer dollars that could have been better spent on actually PROVIDING healthcare, rather than 'promoting' the purchase of insurance.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#9 Sep 30, 2013
Eleanor wrote:
"At least $684 million will be spent on publicity explaining what people need to do next and persuading the doubtful to sign up for coverage."
Millions of taxpayer dollars that could have been better spent on actually PROVIDING healthcare, rather than 'promoting' the purchase of insurance.
Do you think it would be more efficient to go back to providing health care to people via emergency rooms? that could possibly be the most inefficient way of doing it and that is what we have been doing for a long time now.
Eleanor

Vernon Hills, IL

#10 Sep 30, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Do you think it would be more efficient to go back to providing health care to people via emergency rooms? that could possibly be the most inefficient way of doing it and that is what we have been doing for a long time now.
And what is going to stop people from continuing to go to the emergency room and using ambulances for a free ride??

Those people who use emergency rooms and didn't pay their bills aren't going to worry about not paying whatever deductibles will be required for the visit.

Mandating insurance is no magic bullet!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#11 Sep 30, 2013
Eleanor wrote:
<quoted text>
And what is going to stop people from continuing to go to the emergency room and using ambulances for a free ride??
Those people who use emergency rooms and didn't pay their bills aren't going to worry about not paying whatever deductibles will be required for the visit.
Mandating insurance is no magic bullet!
they can actually get treatment for any problems they have before it becomes an emergency room necessity.

prevention and early treatment are proven money savers when it comes to health care.
Eleanor

Vernon Hills, IL

#12 Sep 30, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>they can actually get treatment for any problems they have before it becomes an emergency room necessity.
prevention and early treatment are proven money savers when it comes to health care.
Old habits die hard.

But hope burns eternal.

I hope you are right and people do go see a doctor because of a reasonable co-pay. That would be ideal.

One question, though.

When people in poorer neighborhoods do get insurance are there going to be enough medical professionals to tend to their needs?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News California Gov. Jerry Brown hasn't decided yet ... 2 min YouDidntBuildThat 7
Outpatients and the Ward or Unit 24 min PrinterBench Tech 1
News COLUMN-Latest Republican assault on healthcare ... 1 hr Pat Robertson s F... 1
News Michigan sued after gay couples are rejected fo... 2 hr Pat Robertson s F... 18
News Government seeks prison time for Weiner in sext... 2 hr Lawrence Wolf 16
News Trump pardons former Sheriff Joe Arpaio 2 hr INFIDEL 1,263
News Late-night TV show host Kimmel blasts senator o... 2 hr Pat Robertson s F... 9
More from around the web