California is sticking to Monday's health insurance enrollment deadline, but consumers will get extra time to finish their applications.
Reported by Miami Herald 2 hours ago.
Covered California confirms Monday signup deadline
↧
↧
White House defends extension of Obamacare deadline
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Wednesday defended extending some enrollments for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act past a March 31 deadline, saying doing so was comparable to allowing voters who are in line when polls close to cast their ballots.
Reported by ChicagoTribune 1 hour ago.
↧
Extended health care enrollment draws cheers and jeers
The Obama administration’s decision to allow marketplace health insurance enrollments beyond the March 31 deadline could exacerbate a growing credibility gap with insurers and lawmakers who have chafed at the troubled implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
Reported by Miami Herald 56 minutes ago.
↧
Hobby Lobby Is About Much More Than Birth Control
Yesterday the Supreme Court held a double session and heard arguments from Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood. Since both companies filed mirror certiorari petitions, I'm only going to discuss Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.; the outcome will be the same for both cases. At issue is whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993 protects a company from complying with a government mandate that goes against the religious beliefs of the owner or owners. Specifically, Hobby Lobby's David Green and family, who own the closely held corporation, are devout Christians and have set up their business to mirror their religious beliefs, and they claim that the Affordable Care Act's mandate that corporations offer health insurance plans that cover certain kinds of contraception is unduly burdensome to their free exercise of religion. It's important to not get wrapped up in the contraception issue and pretend that this is a women's rights case. It is not. They could be morally opposed to widgets, and the legal argument would be the same. This case will all come down to the applicability of RFRA to corporations and whether the government has a compelling interest in mandating that corporations' health insurance plans cover birth control.
The RFRA was passed in 1993 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in response to what Congress saw as legislation encroaching on the mandatory practices of religious groups. The law specifically cites the outcome of Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith as a justification for its passage. It's important to note that this bill was introduced by then-Rep. (now-Sen.) Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and passed by a House and Senate controlled by Democrats (with the Senate approving it 97-3). This was a bipartisan law with broad support coming head-on against a partisan bill with wavering support. The RFRA came as a direct result of Employment Division v. Smith, which had upheld an Oregon law barring Native Americans from collecting unemployment if their ritual use of peyote had resulted in their termination from a job. The law was broadly against unemployment benefits for anyone dismissed from employment for drug use, and the Supreme Court ruled that such a law could apply even to religious drug use. The decision was split 6-3, with the liberals on the court in the minority, arguing that to win a religious exemption, no second fundamental right needed to be implicated as the majority had said. More recently, Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal held that the government did not have a compelling interest in banning peyote in religious ceremonies. That the justices decided 9-0 in favor of upholding the RFRA protection against the government is very informative regarding how the Supreme Court might be thinking now.
The law's stated purpose is "to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened." Furthermore, the general theme of the law is that "[g]overnment shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section." The law is about burdening the free exercise of religion; it is not concerned with the style that the law takes. It's wholly irrelevant that the contraceptive mandate applies to corporations rather than to people. The question will be whether David Green and his family are being substantially burdened by the contraception mandate. Here I think the Supreme Court recognizes the distinction that this is a closely held corporation rather than a publicly traded company with a discrete number of owners who are easily identified. Their religious beliefs are ascertainable, and a substantial burden can be divined. Judging by the Green family's Christian charitable work, including donating half a billion dollars and disseminating billions of copies of the Gospels, I don't see the court saying that forcing them to provide insurance that covers certain forms of birth control, which no one is contesting is against their faith, is not substantially burdensome to their free exercise of religion. Limiting any decision to a closely held corporation would narrow the scope of the decision and counter the government's correct slippery-slope argument
Assuming that the justices get to the merits of the contraceptives mandate, the real test will be whether the government has a compelling interest in mandating that corporations' health insurance plans cover birth control, and whether this mandate is the least restrictive means. The "least restrictive means" test is a red herring. Outside making birth control available over the counter, which the Supreme Court would never mandate, this seems like the least restrictive way to have birth control access guaranteed to everyone. Like a Tom Brady fourth-quarter Super Bowl drive, it all comes down to this: What is the government's compelling interest? The government argues that employees have a right to comprehensive coverage. I think it's a stretch to say that birth control is the linchpin of "comprehensive." The government also conflates family planning with birth control. While I'm sure birth control makes family planning easier, that's also not the government's greatest argument. The government was also smart to not go down the Marfan's rabbit hole. The government's best argument is that Hobby Lobby chooses to engage in commerce, and this is incidental to commerce. It would be much more compelling if the law hadn't come out after Hobby Lobby had started its business.
The main outcome of this case will be a precedent on the applicability of the RFRA to the owners of closely held corporations. The birth control aspect is great for selling newspapers but is generally a very replaceable cog in this case. So whether or not the government has a compelling interest (and their argument would be a lot better if we were talking chemotherapy instead of birth control), the dicta of this case will be the real precedential value. Reported by Huffington Post 43 minutes ago.
The RFRA was passed in 1993 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in response to what Congress saw as legislation encroaching on the mandatory practices of religious groups. The law specifically cites the outcome of Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith as a justification for its passage. It's important to note that this bill was introduced by then-Rep. (now-Sen.) Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and passed by a House and Senate controlled by Democrats (with the Senate approving it 97-3). This was a bipartisan law with broad support coming head-on against a partisan bill with wavering support. The RFRA came as a direct result of Employment Division v. Smith, which had upheld an Oregon law barring Native Americans from collecting unemployment if their ritual use of peyote had resulted in their termination from a job. The law was broadly against unemployment benefits for anyone dismissed from employment for drug use, and the Supreme Court ruled that such a law could apply even to religious drug use. The decision was split 6-3, with the liberals on the court in the minority, arguing that to win a religious exemption, no second fundamental right needed to be implicated as the majority had said. More recently, Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal held that the government did not have a compelling interest in banning peyote in religious ceremonies. That the justices decided 9-0 in favor of upholding the RFRA protection against the government is very informative regarding how the Supreme Court might be thinking now.
The law's stated purpose is "to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened." Furthermore, the general theme of the law is that "[g]overnment shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section." The law is about burdening the free exercise of religion; it is not concerned with the style that the law takes. It's wholly irrelevant that the contraceptive mandate applies to corporations rather than to people. The question will be whether David Green and his family are being substantially burdened by the contraception mandate. Here I think the Supreme Court recognizes the distinction that this is a closely held corporation rather than a publicly traded company with a discrete number of owners who are easily identified. Their religious beliefs are ascertainable, and a substantial burden can be divined. Judging by the Green family's Christian charitable work, including donating half a billion dollars and disseminating billions of copies of the Gospels, I don't see the court saying that forcing them to provide insurance that covers certain forms of birth control, which no one is contesting is against their faith, is not substantially burdensome to their free exercise of religion. Limiting any decision to a closely held corporation would narrow the scope of the decision and counter the government's correct slippery-slope argument
Assuming that the justices get to the merits of the contraceptives mandate, the real test will be whether the government has a compelling interest in mandating that corporations' health insurance plans cover birth control, and whether this mandate is the least restrictive means. The "least restrictive means" test is a red herring. Outside making birth control available over the counter, which the Supreme Court would never mandate, this seems like the least restrictive way to have birth control access guaranteed to everyone. Like a Tom Brady fourth-quarter Super Bowl drive, it all comes down to this: What is the government's compelling interest? The government argues that employees have a right to comprehensive coverage. I think it's a stretch to say that birth control is the linchpin of "comprehensive." The government also conflates family planning with birth control. While I'm sure birth control makes family planning easier, that's also not the government's greatest argument. The government was also smart to not go down the Marfan's rabbit hole. The government's best argument is that Hobby Lobby chooses to engage in commerce, and this is incidental to commerce. It would be much more compelling if the law hadn't come out after Hobby Lobby had started its business.
The main outcome of this case will be a precedent on the applicability of the RFRA to the owners of closely held corporations. The birth control aspect is great for selling newspapers but is generally a very replaceable cog in this case. So whether or not the government has a compelling interest (and their argument would be a lot better if we were talking chemotherapy instead of birth control), the dicta of this case will be the real precedential value. Reported by Huffington Post 43 minutes ago.
↧
Hawaii Health Connector joins federal exchange in softening March 31 enrollment deadline
The Obama administration has announced that individuals can take more time finishing their applications for health insurance through the federal exchanges, and Hawaii’s state-run exchange says it has recently made a similar modification. “As long as individuals and families start an application by March 31, the Hawaii Health Connector has the flexibility to work with consumers to help them get coverage. While this means that everyone has a little more time to complete the process, consumers…
Reported by bizjournals 53 minutes ago.
↧
↧
Religion news in brief
Former president: male-dominated religions oppress womenATLANTA (AP) -- Former President Jimmy Carter says male-dominated religions contribute to the oppression and abuse of women by twisting sacred texts to portray females as inferior to men "in the eyes of God."The 89-year-old Carter makes that argument in his new book, "A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence and Power."In an interview broadcast on NBCs "Meet the Press," the former president faulted his former denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the Roman Catholic church for denying women the same opportunities as men to serve as pastors and priests.Carter said some married men who belong to those churches conclude that their wives are inferior and treat them accordingly.The Catholic Catechism and the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message declare that men and women have different roles but are equal in the eyes of God.___High court seems divided over birth control ruleWASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court seems divided over whether companies have religious rights that should exempt them from the health care laws birth control mandate.The case involves family-owned companies that provide health insurance to their employees, but object to covering certain methods of birth control that they say can work after conception, in violation of their religious beliefs.Tuesdays arguments at the court focused mainly on the question of whether profit-making businesses have religious rights.
Reported by MyNorthwest.com 18 minutes ago.
↧
LULAC Contributes to Women's History Month by Hosting the 2014 National Women's Conference in Milwaukee, Wisconsin
From Thursday, March 27 through Saturday, March 29, the LULAC National Women's Conference will be in Milwaukee, bringing awareness to key issues which impact women’s lives.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin (PRWEB) March 29, 2014
From Thursday, March 27 through Saturday, March 29 the Women’s Commission of the League of United Latin American Citizens is hosting its annual National Women’s Conference in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
This year’s conference focuses on bringing awareness to key issues which impact women’s lives. The conference includes workshops and seminars that cover issues such as retirement, the Affordable Care Act, domestic violence, human trafficking, and women in government.
“The women’s conference has not always been part of the organization’s 85 year history,” said LULAC National President Margaret Moran. “Throughout the years, the role of women in LULAC has changed to reflect the changing role of women throughout the country. Today, the women’s conference is a critical component of LULAC which offers a woman’s perspective on critical issues.”
Women continue to face a variety of challenges that limit their ability to realize their dreams. According to the Pew Research Center, in 2012 women earned 84 cents for every $1 made by men. Women also face health challenges. Although women make up a little over half of the world's population, they are more likely to go hungry than men. In addition, domestic violence continues to pose a real threat to women. In the U.S., nearly 3 in 10 women (29%) have been victims of rape, physical violence and/or stalking. However, women understand the power of civic participation for effecting change. During the 2012 Presidential elections, 63.7% of women voted to change the social conditions that impact their lives.
Another important issue for women is affordable health insurance. As of Thursday, more than 6 million Americans have enrolled in quality affordable health insurance. LULAC wants to help the Latino community continue to take advantage of this great opportunity. That is why this Saturday, at the exposition hall of the Women’s Conference, Milwaukee area residents can have their questions answered or start the application process with the help of a navigator. Particularly for the Latino community, navigators are an important part of the enrollment process because they provide personalized assistance.
Finally, as part of the 2014 LULAC National Women’s Conference, LULAC and Sherwin Williams will be brightening up the community by painting the UMOS Latina Resource Center. Sherwin Williams has donated their time, manpower, and supplies to help restore a critical asset to the Milwaukee community which brings importance resources for victims of domestic violence.
LULAC is grateful for the support of its Ruby and Pearl sponsors which include the Ford Motor Company, Sherwin Williams, P&G/Orgullosa, Clear Channel, McDonald’s, the National Education Association, Southwest Airlines and Walmart. Their assistance and support are critical to making this conference a success.
###
About LULAC
The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) is the largest and oldest volunteer-based civil rights organization that empowers Hispanic Americans and builds strong Latino communities. Headquartered in Washington, DC, with 1,000 councils around the United States and Puerto Rico, LULAC’s programs, services and advocacy address the most important issues for Latinos, meeting critical needs of today and the future. For more information, visit http://www.lulac.org, http://www.facebook.com/lulac.national.dc, http://www.twitter.com/lulac. Reported by PRWeb 16 hours ago.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin (PRWEB) March 29, 2014
From Thursday, March 27 through Saturday, March 29 the Women’s Commission of the League of United Latin American Citizens is hosting its annual National Women’s Conference in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
This year’s conference focuses on bringing awareness to key issues which impact women’s lives. The conference includes workshops and seminars that cover issues such as retirement, the Affordable Care Act, domestic violence, human trafficking, and women in government.
“The women’s conference has not always been part of the organization’s 85 year history,” said LULAC National President Margaret Moran. “Throughout the years, the role of women in LULAC has changed to reflect the changing role of women throughout the country. Today, the women’s conference is a critical component of LULAC which offers a woman’s perspective on critical issues.”
Women continue to face a variety of challenges that limit their ability to realize their dreams. According to the Pew Research Center, in 2012 women earned 84 cents for every $1 made by men. Women also face health challenges. Although women make up a little over half of the world's population, they are more likely to go hungry than men. In addition, domestic violence continues to pose a real threat to women. In the U.S., nearly 3 in 10 women (29%) have been victims of rape, physical violence and/or stalking. However, women understand the power of civic participation for effecting change. During the 2012 Presidential elections, 63.7% of women voted to change the social conditions that impact their lives.
Another important issue for women is affordable health insurance. As of Thursday, more than 6 million Americans have enrolled in quality affordable health insurance. LULAC wants to help the Latino community continue to take advantage of this great opportunity. That is why this Saturday, at the exposition hall of the Women’s Conference, Milwaukee area residents can have their questions answered or start the application process with the help of a navigator. Particularly for the Latino community, navigators are an important part of the enrollment process because they provide personalized assistance.
Finally, as part of the 2014 LULAC National Women’s Conference, LULAC and Sherwin Williams will be brightening up the community by painting the UMOS Latina Resource Center. Sherwin Williams has donated their time, manpower, and supplies to help restore a critical asset to the Milwaukee community which brings importance resources for victims of domestic violence.
LULAC is grateful for the support of its Ruby and Pearl sponsors which include the Ford Motor Company, Sherwin Williams, P&G/Orgullosa, Clear Channel, McDonald’s, the National Education Association, Southwest Airlines and Walmart. Their assistance and support are critical to making this conference a success.
###
About LULAC
The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) is the largest and oldest volunteer-based civil rights organization that empowers Hispanic Americans and builds strong Latino communities. Headquartered in Washington, DC, with 1,000 councils around the United States and Puerto Rico, LULAC’s programs, services and advocacy address the most important issues for Latinos, meeting critical needs of today and the future. For more information, visit http://www.lulac.org, http://www.facebook.com/lulac.national.dc, http://www.twitter.com/lulac. Reported by PRWeb 16 hours ago.
↧
Health law legacy eludes Obama as changes sink in
—As a 6-month-long sign-up season comes to an end Monday the administration's next big challenge is to make 2015 open enrollment more manageable for consumers unaccustomed to dealing with insurance jargon. —Nearly half the states are still opposed to or undecided about the law's expansion of Medicaid, the government's health insurance program for the poor. [...] the "sticks" are just over the horizon: collecting penalties from individuals who remain uninsured and enforcing requirements that medium- to large-sized employers provide affordable coverage. Many basic facts about the ultimate effects of the health insurance program remain unclear. "The No. 1 thing that probably we've all learned from 2014 is that this is hard work," said Gary Cohen, outgoing director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, the agency created to carry out the health care law. Among those consumers is Dan Luke of St. Paul, Minn., the owner of a small video production company who had been uninsured since he was turned down for coverage last year due to a pre-existing condition. [...] those signing up have skewed toward an older crowd. "Instead of just circling the wagons against all the political arrows that are shot against this plan, we need a little more accountability, and we need to ensure the next enrollment period is not handled as poorly as the last one," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas.
Reported by SeattlePI.com 14 hours ago.
↧
Maryland may replace its health-insurance exchange
Reported by MarketWatch 12 hours ago.
↧
↧
Zane Benefits Publishes New Information on ACA Enrollment of 6 Million
Administration Meets Enrollment Expectations
Park City, UT (PRWEB) March 29, 2014
Today, Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, published new information on the health insurance exchange meeting enrollment expectations of 6 million.
According to Zane Benefits’ website, President Obama reported Thursday that approximately 6 million Americans have signed up for coverage through the new "Obamacare" health insurance exchanges.
According to the administration, there were more than 1.5 million visits to HealthCare.gov and more than 430,000 calls to the call centers on Wednesday.
Zane Benefits’ website says that the administration will at least meet their revised enrollment expectations of 6 million, though it will fall short of the Congressional Budget Office's (CBOs) original enrollment projections of 7 million.
Click here to read the full article.
--
About Zane Benefits
Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, was founded in 2006 to revolutionize the way employers provide employee health benefits in America. We empower employees to take control over their own healthcare, while helping employers recruit and retain the best talent. Our online solutions allow small and medium-sized businesses to successfully transition to a health benefits program that creates happier employees, reduces costs and frees up more time to serve their customers. For more information about ZaneHealth, visit http://www.zanebenefits.com. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.
Park City, UT (PRWEB) March 29, 2014
Today, Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, published new information on the health insurance exchange meeting enrollment expectations of 6 million.
According to Zane Benefits’ website, President Obama reported Thursday that approximately 6 million Americans have signed up for coverage through the new "Obamacare" health insurance exchanges.
According to the administration, there were more than 1.5 million visits to HealthCare.gov and more than 430,000 calls to the call centers on Wednesday.
Zane Benefits’ website says that the administration will at least meet their revised enrollment expectations of 6 million, though it will fall short of the Congressional Budget Office's (CBOs) original enrollment projections of 7 million.
Click here to read the full article.
--
About Zane Benefits
Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, was founded in 2006 to revolutionize the way employers provide employee health benefits in America. We empower employees to take control over their own healthcare, while helping employers recruit and retain the best talent. Our online solutions allow small and medium-sized businesses to successfully transition to a health benefits program that creates happier employees, reduces costs and frees up more time to serve their customers. For more information about ZaneHealth, visit http://www.zanebenefits.com. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.
↧
No Title
The Obama Administration's top health official is back in South Florida with just days left to sign up for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
Reported by WEAR ABC 3 13 hours ago.
↧
Monday is the deadline to sign up for health law
Monday is the deadline to sign up for private health insurance in the new online markets created by President Barack Obamas health care law.
Reported by MyNorthwest.com 13 hours ago.
↧
The Haggler: The Health Insurance Answer That Took 3 Months
A couple signed up for insurance at Healthcare.gov, but only the husband’s name made it to the policy. After many unsuccessful calls to fix the problem, they asked the Haggler for help.
Reported by NYTimes.com 11 hours ago.
↧
↧
State: More Than 1 Million Have Applied for Insurance Through Health Exchange
The state says that more than 1 million New Yorkers have applied for health insurance through the state Health Exchange.
Reported by NY1 6 hours ago.
↧
An Interview With Valerie Jarrett Over Her Efforts to Push Pro-ObamaCare Messaging on TV
Valerie Jarrett aka “the Other Side of Obama’s brain” was in Hollywood, this week to ask television writers to write pro-ObamaCare themes into their scripts.
We got a hint of what was coming last October when I reported on the $500,000 grant an organization called the California Endowment, gave Hollywood Health & Society, an association of The Norman Lear Center, to "help TV writers tell better stories about the new health insurance law."
Enter Val-Jal, playing the part of the "nagging" but o-so-caring mom in an appearance with the two precious hosts of Top That! on PopSugar.com, where they talked about her efforts to get television writers to work Obama's gift to the nation into their scripts.
“That’s the cool thing,” one of the hosts said to the presidential advisor as he sat indian-style on his chair. “You’ve been reaching out to people that are, you know, outside of the norm of what the president might work with. Who else are you working with? Like celebrities, personalities, things like that?”
“You name it,” said Jarrett. “That’s part of why I’m in L.A. I’m meeting with writers of various TV shows and movies to try to get it into the scripts.” When Jarrett says “it into the scripts,” she’s referring to getting references to Obamacare, the president’s signature legislation, into the scripts of TV shows and movies.
Here is where my imagination went into overdrive. Oh, if only I were 25 years younger, and hosting a pop culture show aimed at millennials and I had a chance to interview Valerie Jarrett about her propaganda efforts instead of those two woefully obsequious children.
Here is how it would go.
Jarrett: “That’s part of why I’m in L.A. I’m meeting with writers of various TV shows and movies to try to get it into the scripts.”
Me: Whoa, hang on there champ...
Jarrett: ...“We’re talking to celebrities. We’re talking to athletes, because obviously they get injured a lot and many of them are the same age as the market we’re going after. And what they can say is, ‘Look, you never know when life is going to throw you a curve ball. You’re walking down the street, you’re a little clumsy, you trip, you fall — where do you end up? Emergency room. A couple grand just to walk in the door.”
Me: Wait a minute.... Wait a minute. Aren't you the same folks who said, "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan?" and "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor?" and "Every family will save an average of 2,500 on premiums?" Why on earth would we want people who engaged in that kind of deceptive messaging to...
Jarrett: (interrupting) The basic premise of the president's promise, which was that everyone including millions of people with pre-existing conditions would for the first time, have access to affordable quality healthcare, was true...
Me: No it wasn't.
(crosstalk)
Jarrett: We are only trying to help you --what do moms do? We try to take care of our children. Even when they’re grown. And what we want to do here is like nag. We’re really good at nagging. I’m a mom so I know. I’m a really good nag. And I can come at the same issue like 20 different ways until my daughter goes, ‘Ok, I’m cool, I’ll just do it.’”
Me: What? No... I'm talking about all of the deceitful misinformation and outright lies you guys told in order to get your health care law passed, and continue to tell even to this day - like your bogus Obamacare signup numbers.
Jarrett: Prove we're wrong.
Me: You know I can't do that just sitting here. But you told another whopper earlier this week on a Los Angeles CBS affiliate: (whips out piece of paper with quote) “what we’ve seen over the last four years as our health care plan was passed, is we’ve seen less increase in premiums than we’ve seen in 50 years.”
That is a straight up lie, Val.
Jarrett: Prove we're wrong.
Me: Premiums have shot up from 39% to 56% under ObamaCare.
Jarrett: You mean the Affordable Care Act.
Me: The UN-Affordable Care Act.
Jarrett: I think I'm through here.
Me: Yes Ma'am you sure are.
Well, we can dream. Here's how it really went:
Reported by Breitbart 7 hours ago.
We got a hint of what was coming last October when I reported on the $500,000 grant an organization called the California Endowment, gave Hollywood Health & Society, an association of The Norman Lear Center, to "help TV writers tell better stories about the new health insurance law."
Enter Val-Jal, playing the part of the "nagging" but o-so-caring mom in an appearance with the two precious hosts of Top That! on PopSugar.com, where they talked about her efforts to get television writers to work Obama's gift to the nation into their scripts.
“That’s the cool thing,” one of the hosts said to the presidential advisor as he sat indian-style on his chair. “You’ve been reaching out to people that are, you know, outside of the norm of what the president might work with. Who else are you working with? Like celebrities, personalities, things like that?”
“You name it,” said Jarrett. “That’s part of why I’m in L.A. I’m meeting with writers of various TV shows and movies to try to get it into the scripts.” When Jarrett says “it into the scripts,” she’s referring to getting references to Obamacare, the president’s signature legislation, into the scripts of TV shows and movies.
Here is where my imagination went into overdrive. Oh, if only I were 25 years younger, and hosting a pop culture show aimed at millennials and I had a chance to interview Valerie Jarrett about her propaganda efforts instead of those two woefully obsequious children.
Here is how it would go.
Jarrett: “That’s part of why I’m in L.A. I’m meeting with writers of various TV shows and movies to try to get it into the scripts.”
Me: Whoa, hang on there champ...
Jarrett: ...“We’re talking to celebrities. We’re talking to athletes, because obviously they get injured a lot and many of them are the same age as the market we’re going after. And what they can say is, ‘Look, you never know when life is going to throw you a curve ball. You’re walking down the street, you’re a little clumsy, you trip, you fall — where do you end up? Emergency room. A couple grand just to walk in the door.”
Me: Wait a minute.... Wait a minute. Aren't you the same folks who said, "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan?" and "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor?" and "Every family will save an average of 2,500 on premiums?" Why on earth would we want people who engaged in that kind of deceptive messaging to...
Jarrett: (interrupting) The basic premise of the president's promise, which was that everyone including millions of people with pre-existing conditions would for the first time, have access to affordable quality healthcare, was true...
Me: No it wasn't.
(crosstalk)
Jarrett: We are only trying to help you --what do moms do? We try to take care of our children. Even when they’re grown. And what we want to do here is like nag. We’re really good at nagging. I’m a mom so I know. I’m a really good nag. And I can come at the same issue like 20 different ways until my daughter goes, ‘Ok, I’m cool, I’ll just do it.’”
Me: What? No... I'm talking about all of the deceitful misinformation and outright lies you guys told in order to get your health care law passed, and continue to tell even to this day - like your bogus Obamacare signup numbers.
Jarrett: Prove we're wrong.
Me: You know I can't do that just sitting here. But you told another whopper earlier this week on a Los Angeles CBS affiliate: (whips out piece of paper with quote) “what we’ve seen over the last four years as our health care plan was passed, is we’ve seen less increase in premiums than we’ve seen in 50 years.”
That is a straight up lie, Val.
Jarrett: Prove we're wrong.
Me: Premiums have shot up from 39% to 56% under ObamaCare.
Jarrett: You mean the Affordable Care Act.
Me: The UN-Affordable Care Act.
Jarrett: I think I'm through here.
Me: Yes Ma'am you sure are.
Well, we can dream. Here's how it really went:
Reported by Breitbart 7 hours ago.
↧
New Yorkers sign up for health insurance as 2014 deadline nears
[caption id="attachment_397326" align="alignnone" width="614"]Denise West, deputy executive director of Brooklyn Perinatal Network, helps New Yorkers sign up for health insurance before the March 31 deadline.
Credit: Bess Adler/Metro[/caption] On a recent afternoon, the tiny front room at the Brooklyn Perinatal Network in Boerum Hill was packed with New Yorkers eager to enroll for health insurance. "It's been very, very busy," said Denise West, deputy executive director at the network, one of dozens of organizations in the five boroughs with navigators trained to help New Yorkers and businesses use the state's health exchange, mandated by the Affordable Care Act. [related tag = Obamacare] Since the launch of NY State of Health in October, more than 1.1 million people across the state have completed applications on the marketplace and more than 782,000 have enrolled. But as the deadline for 2014 coverage approaches, New Yorkers scramble to sign up before midnight Monday. More than 281,000 people in the state enrolled in just over the last four weeks alone. West said a steady stream of people -- with and without appointments -- have come to the Brooklyn organization for assistance enrolling in the past few weeks. "Because it's so late, people are afraid to try on their own," she said. West said calls to the organization have also increased. On a recent Friday, West helped one man enroll over the phone until about 11 p.m. "Time just moves by so fast," she said, justifying why some put off the application. West also attributed a recent surge in enrollment to confusion following media reports on technical difficulties with the federal exchange website. Michael Wallace, a 37-year-old walk-in client at the network, blamed his own procrastination on laziness. "I need insurance," Wallace said. "I should have done it sooner." Despite having worked longer hours in the last days of open enrollment, West said said it was an "exciting time." One of the goals of the Brooklyn Perinatal Network is to improve community well being by connecting New Yorkers with health services. West stressed the importance of health insurance in bettering New Yorkers' lives. In New York City, one in five adults are uninsured, according to the health department. Until West helped him enroll a few weeks ago, Emroy Caesar, 31, was one of them. A Berkeley College student doing work-study at the network, Caesar said he finally enrolled because he knew his 12-year-old daughter would need shots soon. "It was very last minute," he admitted. "Down to the wire." *Ways to enroll *
· Try enrolling online. Notwithstanding technical difficulties, this can take between 20 and 30 minutes if all the necessary information is on hand.
· Call the NY State of Health help line: 855-355-5777, which operates Monday to Friday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. or Saturday 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. They can connect you with an application counselor, broker or organization with in-person assistance.
· A list of certified navigators, some allowing walk-ins, can also be found online. (West suggests to leave a voicemail message for these groups if they don't immediately answer phone calls.)
· Visit the NYC Health Insurance Link.
* Some tips:*
· There are a number of plans available depending on eligibility, with the four standard tiers: bronze, silver gold and platinum (other plans include silver-cost sharing reduction, catastrophic and American Indian/Alaskan Indian products).
· Qualification for subsidies depends on income, location and immigration status (Here's an estimated subsidy calculator.)
· When enrolling online or with assistance, make sure to have: Social Security numbers (or document numbers for legal immigrants), birth dates, employer and income information for everyone being enrolled, policy numbers for current insurance and information about job-related health insurance available to those being enrolled
· Those uninsured New Yorkers who don't enroll in the exchange are subject to a fee.
· While Monday remains the deadline to enroll, "the Marketplace will work with individuals who have made a good faith effort to enroll by the March 31 deadline to complete the enrollment process," according to the NY State of Health.
· The next open enrollment period is Nov. 15 to Feb. 15, 2015.
Follow Anna Sanders on Twitter @AnnaESanders
The post New Yorkers sign up for health insurance as 2014 deadline nears appeared first on Metro.us. Reported by metronews 7 hours ago.
↧
Health insurance enrollment deadline is midnight Monday
Affordable Care Act calls for fines for people who don't have insurance
The deadline to sign up for individual health insurance, as mandated by the Affordable Care Act, is midnight on Monday, March 31. After that, those who qualify for health insurance but have not purchased it will face a fine. Reported by dailypress.com 7 hours ago.
The deadline to sign up for individual health insurance, as mandated by the Affordable Care Act, is midnight on Monday, March 31. After that, those who qualify for health insurance but have not purchased it will face a fine. Reported by dailypress.com 7 hours ago.
↧
↧
Health Care Law Changes Are Challenging The Obamacare Legacy
WASHINGTON (AP) — As a roller-coaster sign-up season winds down, President Barack Obama's health care law has indeed managed to change the country.
Americans are unlikely to go back to a time when people with medical problems could be denied coverage. But Obama's overhaul needs major work of its own if it is to go down in history as a legacy achievement like Medicare or Social Security.
Major elements of the Affordable Care Act face an uncertain future:
—As a 6-month-long sign-up season comes to an end Monday the administration's next big challenge is to make 2015 open enrollment more manageable for consumers unaccustomed to dealing with insurance jargon. There's also concern premiums will rise next year.
—The new insurance markets created by the law are anything but customer friendly. After the HealthCare.gov website finally got fixed, more than 6 million people have managed to sign up, allowing the exchanges to stay afloat economically. But many consumers have bought policies with restricted access to top-tier hospitals and the latest medications. The website is seeing heavy traffic this weekend, and consumers may encounter a wait or last-minute glitches.
—Nearly half the states are still opposed to or undecided about the law's expansion of Medicaid, the government's health insurance program for the poor. As a result, millions of low-income people who otherwise would have been covered remain uninsured.
—This year's pitch has been about the "carrots" in the law: subsidies and guaranteed coverage. But the "sticks" are just over the horizon: collecting penalties from individuals who remain uninsured and enforcing requirements that medium- to large-sized employers provide affordable coverage.
Many basic facts about the ultimate effects of the health insurance program remain unclear. It's not known how many of those who have gotten coverage were previously uninsured — the ultimate test of the law. Independent measurements by Gallup do show fewer uninsured Americans, but such progress hasn't won hearts and minds. The public remains deeply divided, with opponents of the law outnumbering supporters.
At a recent insurance industry conference, a top administration official acknowledged the huge job still ahead.
"The No. 1 thing that probably we've all learned from 2014 is that this is hard work," said Gary Cohen, outgoing director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, the agency created to carry out the health care law. "It's not a one-year project; it's a multiyear project ... we're asking a lot, frankly, of consumers," he added. "This is new for them."
Among those consumers is Dan Luke of St. Paul, Minn., the owner of a small video production company who had been uninsured since he was turned down for coverage last year due to a pre-existing condition. The condition? Luke was born with one eye due to a birth defect, and he uses a glass eye.
"For 63 years I've had one eye," said Luke. "They had to dig deep to find that."
He's happy with the coverage he and his wife have bought; they're saving $300 a month on premiums compared with the last time they had insurance. But he said he had to endure weeks of website run-arounds.
"There is a lot of bureaucracy involved," said Luke. "It's sort of like taxes, filled with loopholes and pitfalls. They should make it easier for people to get insurance and pay for insurance, rather than have to prove so many things and jump through so many hoops."
Those comments echo sentiments broadly reflected in national opinion polls. Most Americans want lawmakers to fix the problems with the health care law, rather than scrapping it. A new AP-Gfk poll finds that only 13 percent expect the law will be completely repealed. Seventy-two percent say it will be implemented with changes, whether major or minor.
Republicans have again made repeal of "Obamacare" their official battle cry this election season. But even if the GOP wins control of the Senate and Congress were to repeal the law next year, the president would veto it. Opponents would then need a difficult two-thirds majority in both chambers to override Obama's veto.
"It's going to depend on the next couple of elections whether we stick with the current ACA models," said Brookings Institution health policy expert Mark McClellan, who oversaw the rollout of the last major federal coverage expansion, the Medicare prescription drug benefit.
"We are still a long way from a stable market and from completing implementation," he said. But "we're not going back to people with pre-existing conditions having no good options."
The administration will have to get to work quickly on a plan for next year. It is still struggling with such basics as providing consumers with clear information about the process and their options.
Until now, those signing up have skewed toward an older crowd. That could lead to higher premiums next year, making the program a harder sell for younger people.
Some Democratic lawmakers who voted for the law are frustrated.
"Instead of just circling the wagons against all the political arrows that are shot against this plan, we need a little more accountability, and we need to ensure the next enrollment period is not handled as poorly as the last one," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas.
DeAnn Friedholm, health reform team leader for Consumers Union, said her group still supports Obama's overhaul, but with concerns.
"The jury is out in terms of its long-term success," she said. "We still think it's better than the old way, which left a lot of people out because they were sick." Reported by Huffington Post 6 hours ago.
Americans are unlikely to go back to a time when people with medical problems could be denied coverage. But Obama's overhaul needs major work of its own if it is to go down in history as a legacy achievement like Medicare or Social Security.
Major elements of the Affordable Care Act face an uncertain future:
—As a 6-month-long sign-up season comes to an end Monday the administration's next big challenge is to make 2015 open enrollment more manageable for consumers unaccustomed to dealing with insurance jargon. There's also concern premiums will rise next year.
—The new insurance markets created by the law are anything but customer friendly. After the HealthCare.gov website finally got fixed, more than 6 million people have managed to sign up, allowing the exchanges to stay afloat economically. But many consumers have bought policies with restricted access to top-tier hospitals and the latest medications. The website is seeing heavy traffic this weekend, and consumers may encounter a wait or last-minute glitches.
—Nearly half the states are still opposed to or undecided about the law's expansion of Medicaid, the government's health insurance program for the poor. As a result, millions of low-income people who otherwise would have been covered remain uninsured.
—This year's pitch has been about the "carrots" in the law: subsidies and guaranteed coverage. But the "sticks" are just over the horizon: collecting penalties from individuals who remain uninsured and enforcing requirements that medium- to large-sized employers provide affordable coverage.
Many basic facts about the ultimate effects of the health insurance program remain unclear. It's not known how many of those who have gotten coverage were previously uninsured — the ultimate test of the law. Independent measurements by Gallup do show fewer uninsured Americans, but such progress hasn't won hearts and minds. The public remains deeply divided, with opponents of the law outnumbering supporters.
At a recent insurance industry conference, a top administration official acknowledged the huge job still ahead.
"The No. 1 thing that probably we've all learned from 2014 is that this is hard work," said Gary Cohen, outgoing director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, the agency created to carry out the health care law. "It's not a one-year project; it's a multiyear project ... we're asking a lot, frankly, of consumers," he added. "This is new for them."
Among those consumers is Dan Luke of St. Paul, Minn., the owner of a small video production company who had been uninsured since he was turned down for coverage last year due to a pre-existing condition. The condition? Luke was born with one eye due to a birth defect, and he uses a glass eye.
"For 63 years I've had one eye," said Luke. "They had to dig deep to find that."
He's happy with the coverage he and his wife have bought; they're saving $300 a month on premiums compared with the last time they had insurance. But he said he had to endure weeks of website run-arounds.
"There is a lot of bureaucracy involved," said Luke. "It's sort of like taxes, filled with loopholes and pitfalls. They should make it easier for people to get insurance and pay for insurance, rather than have to prove so many things and jump through so many hoops."
Those comments echo sentiments broadly reflected in national opinion polls. Most Americans want lawmakers to fix the problems with the health care law, rather than scrapping it. A new AP-Gfk poll finds that only 13 percent expect the law will be completely repealed. Seventy-two percent say it will be implemented with changes, whether major or minor.
Republicans have again made repeal of "Obamacare" their official battle cry this election season. But even if the GOP wins control of the Senate and Congress were to repeal the law next year, the president would veto it. Opponents would then need a difficult two-thirds majority in both chambers to override Obama's veto.
"It's going to depend on the next couple of elections whether we stick with the current ACA models," said Brookings Institution health policy expert Mark McClellan, who oversaw the rollout of the last major federal coverage expansion, the Medicare prescription drug benefit.
"We are still a long way from a stable market and from completing implementation," he said. But "we're not going back to people with pre-existing conditions having no good options."
The administration will have to get to work quickly on a plan for next year. It is still struggling with such basics as providing consumers with clear information about the process and their options.
Until now, those signing up have skewed toward an older crowd. That could lead to higher premiums next year, making the program a harder sell for younger people.
Some Democratic lawmakers who voted for the law are frustrated.
"Instead of just circling the wagons against all the political arrows that are shot against this plan, we need a little more accountability, and we need to ensure the next enrollment period is not handled as poorly as the last one," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas.
DeAnn Friedholm, health reform team leader for Consumers Union, said her group still supports Obama's overhaul, but with concerns.
"The jury is out in terms of its long-term success," she said. "We still think it's better than the old way, which left a lot of people out because they were sick." Reported by Huffington Post 6 hours ago.
↧
NY's insurance exchange gets mixed reviews at sign-up deadline
Assessing the success of the state's health insurance exchange is a relative thing as Monday's 2014 enrollment deadline for coverage approaches.
Reported by Newsday 6 hours ago.
↧
Sebelius Visits S.Fla. For ACA Sign Up Event
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Kathleen Sebelius visited South Florida on Saturday to help kick off an event meant to help those wanting to sign up for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
Reported by cbs4.com 6 hours ago.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
