The nation's biggest health insurers are speed-dating one another, searching for a partner worthy of a multibillion-dollar merger.
Reported by L.A. Times 12 hours ago.
Health insurance giants are in a frenzied search for merger partners
↧
↧
Some Troubling Numbers From The CBO
In its latest long-term budget outlook, the Congressional Budget Office has some troubling numbers.According to the CBO, the long-term budget picture of the US, having seen a modest rebound in recent years, is about to take another big step down driven primarily by the US demographic shift. Specifically, it says that if current laws on taxes and spending remain, "deficits and federal debt held by the public would remain roughly stable in the near term, reflecting the anticipated further strengthening of the economy and constraints on federal spending built into law" however it cautions that "the outlook for the budget would steadily worsen over the long term."
Well, one can debate whether the US economy is strengthening, especially when one considers that in reality quite the opposite is taking place...
... confirmed recently by none other than Goldman which last month cut its long-term potential growth rate for the US by half a percent from 2.25% to 1.75%.
That about covers the persistent upside bias to CBO forecasts. Now the downside.
According to the CBO, "mainly because of the aging of the population and rising health care costs, CBO's projections show a substantial imbalance in the federal budget over the long term, with revenues falling well short of spending. As a result, budget deficits are projected to rise steadily and federal debt held by the public is projected to exceed 100 percent of GDP by 2040, a level seen only one previous time in US history - the final year of World War II and the following year."
There's that World War II reference again.
Visually, this looks as follows:
The projected rise of the debt in question:
And while the CBO expects a gradual, constant increase in the net interest outflows (once again a very optimistic estimate) rising to a little over 4% of GDP from the current level of just about 1%, it is the US health care programs meant to take care of an ever older population that trouble the CBO the most:
Growth in the major health care programs - Medicare, Medicaid and subsidies for health insurance purchased through exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act - and Social Security is projected to exceed the decline in other noninterest spending relative to GDP.
The main drive for the deteriorating US budget picture is a simple one: an ever older population, one which demands increasingly more welfare spending.
The aging of the population will increase the share of the population receiving benefits and also affect the average ago of beneficiaries. Health care costs per beneficiary, adjusted for demographic changes, will grow faster than economic output per capita as they have historically. Finally, enrollment in Medicair under the ACA and the number of people receiving subsidies for health insurance purchased through the exchanges are projected to continue toi increase.
This in chart format:
So what can the government do to put the country on a sustainable path? Simple: enact austerity.
To put the federal budget on a sustainable path for the long term, lawmakers would have to make major changes to tax policies, spending policies, or both - by reducing spending for large benefit programs below the projected amounts, letting revenues rise more than they would under current law, or adopting some combination of those approaches.
And here are the troubling numbers in question, numbers which would put the Greek austerity to shame, because according to the CBO if the US wants to return back to its long-term debt/GDP average of 38% of GDP,* it needs to boost revenues by 14% or slash spending by 13%. Alternatively, if it wants to keep debt/GDP at its current level of 74% of GDP, the US will need to boost revenues by 6% of cut spending by 5.5%.*
*
*
Unfortunately for future US generations none of those will happen, which is why the "worst case" debt/GDP forecast in which the CBO is proven to be optimistic, as it always is, about mortality decline, productivity growth, interest and spending growth on Medicare and Medicaid, and which results in 144% debt/GDP in 2040 will be proven to have been far too low. Reported by Zero Hedge 11 hours ago.
↧
Robert Kuttner Isn't the Only One Who Needs to Hear More Prophetic Voices
At his 50th Oberlin reunion, Robert Kuttner, editor of the American Prospect, reminisced about his own commencement ceremony at which Martin Luther King was the keynote speaker. Three months after the Selma march, King inspired Kuttner and his fellow graduates with a speech titled "Staying Awake Through a Revolution." Alluding to King's characteristic ability to call people to their higher selves, Kuttner rightfully bemoans the fact today that, "People who can address great public questions in convincingly moral terms, with an authentic prophetic voice, who can challenge people and nations to become their best selves, do not come around often enough." He convincingly notes the absence of "prophetic voices" in today's political climate, people on the order of King, Mandela, Ghandi and Havel.
Unfortunately, sometimes high-minded rhetoric is empty. Other times, it dissolves into the cynical compromises of realpolitik. In these cases, cynicism increases; performance trumps substance, and most of us become ever more skeptical about the possibility of real social change. Cynicism is but another way of being asleep. It is based on the fundamentally irrational but powerful belief that the way things are is the way they're supposed to be -- so why bother? Obama broke through this belief and woke many of us up in 2008 with his emphasis on redemption and hope, but sedation soon crept back in when he set about seeking compromises with bomb throwing right-wing ideologues in the Tea Party-run Republican political establishment. Disappointment and cynicism returned, some of which was later evidenced in the terrible Democratic losses incurred in the 2010 and 2014 general elections.
But where Kuttner is spot-on is in his emphasis on our unrequited longing for meaning and purpose, for a sense of connection to something bigger than our narrow selves, a longing that has always animated millions of people to get politically engaged in social change movements. He has put his finger on one of the most powerful motivations in the human psyche, but one that is tragically ignored today by a progressive movement that privileges economic needs above all else and that mistakenly proceeds as if calls for economic justice are enough to motivate people to vote and to otherwise oppose corporate power.
As I argue extensively in my book, More Than Bread and Butter, this misunderstanding of what makes people tick has hoisted our movement -- if you can even call it that -- on its own petard, locking us in to various iterations of the traditional liberal emphasis on redressing economic inequality and expanding the government-sponsored safety net. It is wrong because its understanding of what people really need is wrong. People need economic security, to be sure, and the current era of corporate greed is surely a ghoulish outrage, but the evidence is overwhelming that people also have equally powerful unmet needs for recognition, meaning, connection and agency (encompassing both creativity or learning and self-determination). When organizers tell me that "if we get enough people 'on the doors' and explain to people how the economic power structure is screwing them, they'll want to join our movement," they are deluding themselves. They are proceeding as if a lack of rationality or information is what plagues our organizing efforts and causes, for example, low voter turnout, rather than the fact that we're not connecting with what matters most to people beyond material security.
Consider health care reform. We have been fighting for universal health care coverage for decades. We care deeply, and infer that others do, too, about the fact that there have been tens of millions of people without any coverage at all, one illness away from homelessness and destitution. The Affordable Care Act will, along with Medicare, go down in history as a major accomplishment in our fight. But the fact is that most people do have health insurance; they do have primary care providers and specialists, but they are still often decidedly dissatisfied with their medical care. Why? Because it is alienated, impersonal, uncoordinated, and missing the central ingredient that a mountain of research has shown is the key to good health care outcomes -- namely, a trusting personal connection between patient and doctor. The jury is in when it comes to the importance of this connection and the harmful effects of its absence today within the byzantine economics and logistics that infect contemporary medical care.
Progressives might readily agree with these conclusions, but nowhere do we see a serious and sustained effort to make caring relationships a central demand in our campaigns for better health care. And yet, people need care and they need relationships every bit as much as penicillin or insulin. Too often, they are deprived of both. If progressives continue to speak to people as if they are only consumers and wage-earners and not animated by complicated emotional needs -- needs to which Kuttner's prophetic voices speak and address -- then our appeal will be forever weak and our programs uninspiring. In order to produce more prophetic voices, we need to believe that people are hungering to hear them.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 10 hours ago.
Unfortunately, sometimes high-minded rhetoric is empty. Other times, it dissolves into the cynical compromises of realpolitik. In these cases, cynicism increases; performance trumps substance, and most of us become ever more skeptical about the possibility of real social change. Cynicism is but another way of being asleep. It is based on the fundamentally irrational but powerful belief that the way things are is the way they're supposed to be -- so why bother? Obama broke through this belief and woke many of us up in 2008 with his emphasis on redemption and hope, but sedation soon crept back in when he set about seeking compromises with bomb throwing right-wing ideologues in the Tea Party-run Republican political establishment. Disappointment and cynicism returned, some of which was later evidenced in the terrible Democratic losses incurred in the 2010 and 2014 general elections.
But where Kuttner is spot-on is in his emphasis on our unrequited longing for meaning and purpose, for a sense of connection to something bigger than our narrow selves, a longing that has always animated millions of people to get politically engaged in social change movements. He has put his finger on one of the most powerful motivations in the human psyche, but one that is tragically ignored today by a progressive movement that privileges economic needs above all else and that mistakenly proceeds as if calls for economic justice are enough to motivate people to vote and to otherwise oppose corporate power.
As I argue extensively in my book, More Than Bread and Butter, this misunderstanding of what makes people tick has hoisted our movement -- if you can even call it that -- on its own petard, locking us in to various iterations of the traditional liberal emphasis on redressing economic inequality and expanding the government-sponsored safety net. It is wrong because its understanding of what people really need is wrong. People need economic security, to be sure, and the current era of corporate greed is surely a ghoulish outrage, but the evidence is overwhelming that people also have equally powerful unmet needs for recognition, meaning, connection and agency (encompassing both creativity or learning and self-determination). When organizers tell me that "if we get enough people 'on the doors' and explain to people how the economic power structure is screwing them, they'll want to join our movement," they are deluding themselves. They are proceeding as if a lack of rationality or information is what plagues our organizing efforts and causes, for example, low voter turnout, rather than the fact that we're not connecting with what matters most to people beyond material security.
Consider health care reform. We have been fighting for universal health care coverage for decades. We care deeply, and infer that others do, too, about the fact that there have been tens of millions of people without any coverage at all, one illness away from homelessness and destitution. The Affordable Care Act will, along with Medicare, go down in history as a major accomplishment in our fight. But the fact is that most people do have health insurance; they do have primary care providers and specialists, but they are still often decidedly dissatisfied with their medical care. Why? Because it is alienated, impersonal, uncoordinated, and missing the central ingredient that a mountain of research has shown is the key to good health care outcomes -- namely, a trusting personal connection between patient and doctor. The jury is in when it comes to the importance of this connection and the harmful effects of its absence today within the byzantine economics and logistics that infect contemporary medical care.
Progressives might readily agree with these conclusions, but nowhere do we see a serious and sustained effort to make caring relationships a central demand in our campaigns for better health care. And yet, people need care and they need relationships every bit as much as penicillin or insulin. Too often, they are deprived of both. If progressives continue to speak to people as if they are only consumers and wage-earners and not animated by complicated emotional needs -- needs to which Kuttner's prophetic voices speak and address -- then our appeal will be forever weak and our programs uninspiring. In order to produce more prophetic voices, we need to believe that people are hungering to hear them.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 10 hours ago.
↧
Pacific Prime Hong Kong Releases 2nd Article of Cost of Health Insurance Report
Pacific Prime Hong Kong have released another report on the cost of health insurance, this time looking at the top expatriate destinations.
Hong Kong (PRWEB) June 17, 2015
Pacific Prime Hong Kong has announced that they have launched the second article of a three part report looking at the cost of individual international health insurance. Titled: The Cost of Health Insurance in Top Expat Destinations, Article 2 looks at the cost of health insurance in six top expat destinations, which are also popular business locations.
Focusing on:
Hong Kong
Singapore
China
Thailand
the UAE
the UK
Article 2 presents an in-depth look at the cost of health insurance and highlights information expats and business managers will find useful, including:
Premiums from 11 health insurance providers, each offering three levels of plan.
Premiums for Single plans, plans for Couples, Families, and Retirees.
An overview of the current state of health insurance in each of the countries of the report.
An in-depth analysis of the plan pricing and common outliers present throughout the article.
A ranking of the average cost of health insurance in the six countries included in Article 2.
This article is available now to download for free from here, and stay tuned to the site for Article 3 which looks at regional costs and will be available in June. Reported by PRWeb 10 hours ago.
Hong Kong (PRWEB) June 17, 2015
Pacific Prime Hong Kong has announced that they have launched the second article of a three part report looking at the cost of individual international health insurance. Titled: The Cost of Health Insurance in Top Expat Destinations, Article 2 looks at the cost of health insurance in six top expat destinations, which are also popular business locations.
Focusing on:
Hong Kong
Singapore
China
Thailand
the UAE
the UK
Article 2 presents an in-depth look at the cost of health insurance and highlights information expats and business managers will find useful, including:
Premiums from 11 health insurance providers, each offering three levels of plan.
Premiums for Single plans, plans for Couples, Families, and Retirees.
An overview of the current state of health insurance in each of the countries of the report.
An in-depth analysis of the plan pricing and common outliers present throughout the article.
A ranking of the average cost of health insurance in the six countries included in Article 2.
This article is available now to download for free from here, and stay tuned to the site for Article 3 which looks at regional costs and will be available in June. Reported by PRWeb 10 hours ago.
↧
Economists predict shockwaves if Obamacare subsidies are nixed
NEW YORK (Reuters) - As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to rule on whether people in 34 states can continue to receive Obamacare health insurance subsidies, economists are projecting billions of dollars in lost healthcare spending for hospitals, drugstores and drugmakers if the justices say the payments are illegal.
Reported by Reuters 9 hours ago.
↧
↧
Economists predict catastrophe if Supreme Court kills Obamacare subsidies
As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to rule on whether people in 34 states can continue to receive Obamacare health insurance subsidies, economists are projecting billions of dollars in lost healthcare spending for hospitals, drugstores and drugmakers if the justices say the payments are illegal. The...
Reported by Raw Story 8 hours ago.
↧
Plans, States Prepare for Potential Loss of ACA Subsidies, AIS Newsletter Reports
Industry observers predict in the June 15 issue of Atlantic Information Services’ Health Plan Week what could happen if the Supreme Court rejects Affordable Care Act subsidies in forthcoming King v. Burwell ruling.
Washington, DC (PRWEB) June 17, 2015
With the Supreme Court expected to rule on King v. Burwell (Docket No. 14-114) in the coming weeks, states and insurers are already planning for a potential decision striking down tax subsidies for enrollees on federally facilitated exchanges (FFEs). The June 15 issue of Atlantic Information Services, Inc.’s (AIS) Health Plan Week (HPW) offers an overview of these preparations.
While insurers prepare for a yes or no vote, or some surprise mixed judgment, some states are taking action ahead of time, HPW finds. Both Pennsylvania and Delaware have announced plans to transform their federally facilitated exchanges (FFEs) into state-based entities.
Another idea gaining traction — the leading idea, according to Christopher Condeluci, a principal at CC Law & Policy — is for an FFE state to designate HealthCare.gov and HHS as its “exchange service provider.” “This way, the state can fit into the new designation that HHS has developed — a ‘federally-supported state-based exchange,’” he tells HPW. “Under this designation, HHS will recognize the exchange as one that is state-based, thereby allowing the premium subsidies to continue to flow.” However, this new designation is likely to be challenged in court, Condeluci adds, “where the challengers will suggest that HHS does not have the authority to designate a state as a state-based exchange by simply using HealthCare.gov and HHS to perform all of its exchange functions.”
Health plans, however, don’t possess the power of a state to do much about the situation, except to appeal for immediate guidance on what comes next, according to Thomas Scully, former CMS administrator during the George W. Bush administration and current senior counsel for the law firm Alston & Bird LLP. But, plans have until August to resubmit bids, Anne Phelps, a principal and U.S. health care regulatory leader at Deloitte, tells HPW, which allows for a thorough reexamination of rates, or the Obama administration could extend open enrollment.
Visit http://aishealth.com/archive/nhpw061515-01 to read the article in its entirety, including more commentary from Scully, who identifies the situation in southern states as being especially problematic and politically dire.
About Health Plan Week
Published since 1991, the 8-page weekly newsletter Health Plan Week provides timely, objective business, financial and regulatory news of the health insurance industry. Coverage includes new benefit designs and underwriting practices, new products and marketing strategies, mergers and alliances, financial performance and results, Medicare and Medicaid opportunities, disease management, and the flood of reform-driven regulatory initiatives including medical loss ratios, exchanges, ACOs and myriad benefit design changes that are mandated. Visit http://aishealth.com/marketplace/health-plan-week for more information.
About Atlantic Information Services
Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is a publishing and information company that has been serving the health care industry for more than 25 years. It develops highly targeted news, data and strategic information for managers in hospitals, health plans, medical group practices, pharmaceutical companies and other health care organizations. AIS products include print and electronic newsletters, websites, looseleafs, books, strategic reports, databases, webinars and conferences. Learn more at http://AISHealth.com. Reported by PRWeb 7 hours ago.
Washington, DC (PRWEB) June 17, 2015
With the Supreme Court expected to rule on King v. Burwell (Docket No. 14-114) in the coming weeks, states and insurers are already planning for a potential decision striking down tax subsidies for enrollees on federally facilitated exchanges (FFEs). The June 15 issue of Atlantic Information Services, Inc.’s (AIS) Health Plan Week (HPW) offers an overview of these preparations.
While insurers prepare for a yes or no vote, or some surprise mixed judgment, some states are taking action ahead of time, HPW finds. Both Pennsylvania and Delaware have announced plans to transform their federally facilitated exchanges (FFEs) into state-based entities.
Another idea gaining traction — the leading idea, according to Christopher Condeluci, a principal at CC Law & Policy — is for an FFE state to designate HealthCare.gov and HHS as its “exchange service provider.” “This way, the state can fit into the new designation that HHS has developed — a ‘federally-supported state-based exchange,’” he tells HPW. “Under this designation, HHS will recognize the exchange as one that is state-based, thereby allowing the premium subsidies to continue to flow.” However, this new designation is likely to be challenged in court, Condeluci adds, “where the challengers will suggest that HHS does not have the authority to designate a state as a state-based exchange by simply using HealthCare.gov and HHS to perform all of its exchange functions.”
Health plans, however, don’t possess the power of a state to do much about the situation, except to appeal for immediate guidance on what comes next, according to Thomas Scully, former CMS administrator during the George W. Bush administration and current senior counsel for the law firm Alston & Bird LLP. But, plans have until August to resubmit bids, Anne Phelps, a principal and U.S. health care regulatory leader at Deloitte, tells HPW, which allows for a thorough reexamination of rates, or the Obama administration could extend open enrollment.
Visit http://aishealth.com/archive/nhpw061515-01 to read the article in its entirety, including more commentary from Scully, who identifies the situation in southern states as being especially problematic and politically dire.
About Health Plan Week
Published since 1991, the 8-page weekly newsletter Health Plan Week provides timely, objective business, financial and regulatory news of the health insurance industry. Coverage includes new benefit designs and underwriting practices, new products and marketing strategies, mergers and alliances, financial performance and results, Medicare and Medicaid opportunities, disease management, and the flood of reform-driven regulatory initiatives including medical loss ratios, exchanges, ACOs and myriad benefit design changes that are mandated. Visit http://aishealth.com/marketplace/health-plan-week for more information.
About Atlantic Information Services
Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is a publishing and information company that has been serving the health care industry for more than 25 years. It develops highly targeted news, data and strategic information for managers in hospitals, health plans, medical group practices, pharmaceutical companies and other health care organizations. AIS products include print and electronic newsletters, websites, looseleafs, books, strategic reports, databases, webinars and conferences. Learn more at http://AISHealth.com. Reported by PRWeb 7 hours ago.
↧
Obamacare 101: What happens if Supreme Court rules against federal subsidies?
If the Supreme Court rules against the Obama administration, 8 million Americans will lose their health insurance, two studies find. A decision is expected by the end of June.
Reported by Christian Science Monitor 6 hours ago.
↧
9 over-the-top perks that will make you want to work at these tech companies
There is such a thing as a free lunch, and you can find it at a lot of tech companies. Free food is no longer enough to attract new tech talent or retain the employees you already have.
Tech companies are coming up with new job perks that go above and beyond your traditional health insurance and paid vacation days.
-Apple and Facebook: Egg freezing-
Both Apple and Facebook offer women the opportunity to freeze their eggs and will pay to cover the costs up to $20,000. It's part of Apple's "fertility benefits" and Facebook's "surrogacy benefits" plans, which includes other benefits like access to fertility treatments, surrogate mothers and sperm banks.-Facebook: $4,000 in "Baby Cash"-
If you have a newborn, Facebook will give you an extra $4,000 to in "baby cash" in addition to the four months off both moms and dads get at the company.-Deloitte and Salesforce: Caretakers for aging parents-
Benefits don't have to be limited to newborns, either.
Deloitte and Salesforce are examples of two companies that extend back-up care options to elderly or aging parents since qualified caretakers can sometimes be harder to find than a last-minute babysitter.
See the rest of the story at Business Insider Reported by Business Insider 5 hours ago.
↧
↧
Two-Thirds Of People Who Would Be Affected By Obamacare Ruling Live In Republican Districts
House Republicans have been cheering on the lawsuit currently before the Supreme Court that, if successful, would cut off Affordable Care Act tax credits to more than 6 million people.
Now a new report suggests the impact would fall disproportionately on their own constituents, rather than those in Democratic districts -- by a margin of 2-to-1.
The research comes from FamiliesUSA, an advocacy and consumer support organization that is among the Affordable Care Act's loudest champions. The report's subject is the potential geographic impact of King v. Burwell, the lawsuit that the court heard in March and on which it is likely to rule by the end of the month.
At issue in the case is whether health insurance tax credits should be available in all states, or only in those where officials decided to operate their own marketplaces, or "exchanges," for purchasing coverage. In two-thirds of the states, including Florida and Texas, officials declined do that, leaving management of the exchanges to the federal government.
It's anybody's guess how the justices will rule. But if they side with the plaintiffs, most of the people who now receive tax credits in those states would have no way to pay for their coverage, a historic decline in the number of uninsured would reverse, and the loss of so many customers would likely force insurers to raise premiums.
The disruption would likely prompt a huge political fight over how, if at all, lawmakers should respond. President Barack Obama has already indicated that he'd push Congress to pass a one-sentence bill to clarify that tax credits should be available in all states, so that the money can keep flowing. House Republicans have said no way -- that at most they might pass some kind of temporary assistance, but only in return for drastic changes to the rest of the health care law.
The outcome of that debate would depend to some degree on what kind of pressure members of Congress feel from their constituents. And that's where the FamiliesUSA report offers new insights. Using Affordable Care Act enrollment data from the Department of Health and Human Services, the organization has estimated the number of people in each congressional district who would lose their tax credits from a court decision against the law.
The organization began releasing its data in batches Tuesday, starting with the southeast states. But at the request of The Huffington Post, researchers at FamiliesUSA also tallied up the numbers nationally and divided them by partisan affiliation.
The results? Some 4.2 million of those who would lose tax credits live in congressional districts with Republican representatives, the FamiliesUSA researchers said. Just 2.1 million live in Democratic districts.
It's not at all surprising that Republican districts would have more affected people, since the states where officials wanted nothing to do with Obamacare tend to have more conservative voters. Those are also the states where Republican lawmakers have been able to draw district lines in ways that boost their numbers in Congress. But the ratio of Republican to Democratic voters in these states isn't anywhere near 2-to-1. In the 2012 presidential election, for example, Republican nominee Mitt Romney got 44 million votes in these states, compared to Obama's 41 million votes.
Whether people affected by a ruling would actually blame their members of Congress is, obviously, an entirely different question. Smart observers, such as New Yorker legal writer Jeffrey Toobin, have argued that "the political pain will fall almost exclusively on the President and his Party" because, ultimately, the health care law is theirs -- a point Republicans are already emphasizing. Supporters of the lawsuit also note that a ruling in their favor would mean many more people are exempt from the individual mandate, the requirement that people pay a fine if they decline to purchase insurance.
But polling suggests the vast majority of people support the law's features, such as "guaranteed issue" for people with pre-existing conditions, which is enabled by the individual mandate. Polling also shows that strong majorities of people who actually have insurance through the ACA like it. In a potential showdown with Congress, Obama would promote his simple, one-sentence fix, while reminding voters that it was Republican appointees on the court who have taken away the tax credits (as it almost certainly would be) because of a lawsuit promoted by Republicans and their supporters.
That may explain why some Republican lawmakers are stressing their desire to find some way of keeping the tax credits flowing, at least for a little while. According to the FamiliesUSA report, the two congressional districts with the most people who could lose subsidies are both in southern Florida. Their representatives in Congress are the Republicans Mario Diaz-Balart (with an estimated 91,000 affected people in his district) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (with an estimated 86,000 affected people in hers). The two veteran lawmakers have consistently supported repeal of the Affordable Care Act.
When contacted by The Huffington Post for comment Tuesday, their offices replied with a joint statement: "We are working on legislation that will serve as a transition, allowing individuals to keep their premiums while House Republicans work on a solution to a possible adverse King v. Burwell ruling. We are also working with the jurisdiction on a long-term fix to our health care system. We believe our constituents should not be punished for wrongdoing committed by Congressional Democrats and the President -- providing American subsidies that are illegal."
Of course, Republicans have been vowing to unveil such a transitional plan for many months. The promise to create a long-term Obamacare alternative dates back years. They've yet to deliver either -- and even their "transitional" plans would undermine the law, causing premiums to increase and depriving many millions of health insurance they could get with the law fully in place. Republicans might act differently if they start hearing from millions of angry constituents, but for the moment, such pressure -- like a court ruling against the law -- remains purely hypothetical.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.
Now a new report suggests the impact would fall disproportionately on their own constituents, rather than those in Democratic districts -- by a margin of 2-to-1.
The research comes from FamiliesUSA, an advocacy and consumer support organization that is among the Affordable Care Act's loudest champions. The report's subject is the potential geographic impact of King v. Burwell, the lawsuit that the court heard in March and on which it is likely to rule by the end of the month.
At issue in the case is whether health insurance tax credits should be available in all states, or only in those where officials decided to operate their own marketplaces, or "exchanges," for purchasing coverage. In two-thirds of the states, including Florida and Texas, officials declined do that, leaving management of the exchanges to the federal government.
It's anybody's guess how the justices will rule. But if they side with the plaintiffs, most of the people who now receive tax credits in those states would have no way to pay for their coverage, a historic decline in the number of uninsured would reverse, and the loss of so many customers would likely force insurers to raise premiums.
The disruption would likely prompt a huge political fight over how, if at all, lawmakers should respond. President Barack Obama has already indicated that he'd push Congress to pass a one-sentence bill to clarify that tax credits should be available in all states, so that the money can keep flowing. House Republicans have said no way -- that at most they might pass some kind of temporary assistance, but only in return for drastic changes to the rest of the health care law.
The outcome of that debate would depend to some degree on what kind of pressure members of Congress feel from their constituents. And that's where the FamiliesUSA report offers new insights. Using Affordable Care Act enrollment data from the Department of Health and Human Services, the organization has estimated the number of people in each congressional district who would lose their tax credits from a court decision against the law.
The organization began releasing its data in batches Tuesday, starting with the southeast states. But at the request of The Huffington Post, researchers at FamiliesUSA also tallied up the numbers nationally and divided them by partisan affiliation.
The results? Some 4.2 million of those who would lose tax credits live in congressional districts with Republican representatives, the FamiliesUSA researchers said. Just 2.1 million live in Democratic districts.
It's not at all surprising that Republican districts would have more affected people, since the states where officials wanted nothing to do with Obamacare tend to have more conservative voters. Those are also the states where Republican lawmakers have been able to draw district lines in ways that boost their numbers in Congress. But the ratio of Republican to Democratic voters in these states isn't anywhere near 2-to-1. In the 2012 presidential election, for example, Republican nominee Mitt Romney got 44 million votes in these states, compared to Obama's 41 million votes.
Whether people affected by a ruling would actually blame their members of Congress is, obviously, an entirely different question. Smart observers, such as New Yorker legal writer Jeffrey Toobin, have argued that "the political pain will fall almost exclusively on the President and his Party" because, ultimately, the health care law is theirs -- a point Republicans are already emphasizing. Supporters of the lawsuit also note that a ruling in their favor would mean many more people are exempt from the individual mandate, the requirement that people pay a fine if they decline to purchase insurance.
But polling suggests the vast majority of people support the law's features, such as "guaranteed issue" for people with pre-existing conditions, which is enabled by the individual mandate. Polling also shows that strong majorities of people who actually have insurance through the ACA like it. In a potential showdown with Congress, Obama would promote his simple, one-sentence fix, while reminding voters that it was Republican appointees on the court who have taken away the tax credits (as it almost certainly would be) because of a lawsuit promoted by Republicans and their supporters.
That may explain why some Republican lawmakers are stressing their desire to find some way of keeping the tax credits flowing, at least for a little while. According to the FamiliesUSA report, the two congressional districts with the most people who could lose subsidies are both in southern Florida. Their representatives in Congress are the Republicans Mario Diaz-Balart (with an estimated 91,000 affected people in his district) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (with an estimated 86,000 affected people in hers). The two veteran lawmakers have consistently supported repeal of the Affordable Care Act.
When contacted by The Huffington Post for comment Tuesday, their offices replied with a joint statement: "We are working on legislation that will serve as a transition, allowing individuals to keep their premiums while House Republicans work on a solution to a possible adverse King v. Burwell ruling. We are also working with the jurisdiction on a long-term fix to our health care system. We believe our constituents should not be punished for wrongdoing committed by Congressional Democrats and the President -- providing American subsidies that are illegal."
Of course, Republicans have been vowing to unveil such a transitional plan for many months. The promise to create a long-term Obamacare alternative dates back years. They've yet to deliver either -- and even their "transitional" plans would undermine the law, causing premiums to increase and depriving many millions of health insurance they could get with the law fully in place. Republicans might act differently if they start hearing from millions of angry constituents, but for the moment, such pressure -- like a court ruling against the law -- remains purely hypothetical.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.
↧
America's Biggest Health Insurance Providers
Reported by Forbes.com 3 hours ago.
↧
Experts: No Ready Fix If Obamacare Subsidies Are Lost
U.S. lawmakers and governors are unlikely to act to restore Obamacare health insurance subsidies in at least 34 states should the Supreme Court rule them illegal, health policy experts said on Wednesday. The influence of elections in 2016 as well as restrictions already put...
Reported by Newsmax 3 hours ago.
↧
Gap's tale of 2 brands shows that Americans are strapped for cash
A disparity between two brands owned by Gap Inc. shows that American consumers are feeling strapped for cash. Gap is closing a quarter of its namesake brand stores as sales decline. Meanwhile, Old Navy's sales are thriving.
The company's namesake Gap stores and its Old Navy brand target two different groups of consumers. Gap uses trendy ad campaigns to attract cool, trend-conscious shoppers. Old Navy sells to value-seeking families.
The company blames supply-chain issues and off-trend fashions for the decline at Gap stores.
But the economy also seems like a likely factor.
Old Navy's prices are much lower than those at Gap or Banana Republic, the company's higher-end label. A pair of Gap men's jeans retails at $69.95, while the Old Navy version costs $29.94.
American consumers are moving away from brand names in favor of value, a trend that is also hurting retailers like Macy's, JCPenney, and Target.
Macy's CFO Karen Hoguet told analysts that consumers today have priorities other than clothing and housewares.
"Shoppers are spending more of their disposable dollars on categories we don’t sell, like cars, healthcare, electronics and home improvement," Hoguet said in a recent call with investors.
Macy's and Target have both reported disappointing sales recently.
While lower gas prices means Americans theoretically have more disposable income, they aren't choosing to spend it on clothing at middle-market retailers, industry expert Robin Lewis writes on his blog.
It's also possible that Americans have come to expect promotions on items like clothing, and would rather invest in other categories.
"With coupons, discounts, loyalty points and gifts-with-purchase more the rule than the exception today, consumers are spending less because they can," Lewis writes.
Many Americans are watching their spending despite lower gas prices, writes Lindsey Piegza, chief economist at Sterne Agee.
"Consumers are increasingly familiar with energy price reprieve from summer gas prices and no longer adjust their long-term spending habits as much, or at all, based on short-term price fluctuations," Piegza writes.
And while gas prices are lower, the benefit is offset by higher housing and utility costs, according to Piegza.
Health insurance premiums have increased between 39% and 56% since early 2013, meaning additional costs of $230 per month for the average family.
The lackluster job market is also contributing to poor sales at middle-market retailers, Piegza writes.
"With uncertainty lingering and patience wearing thin after five-plus years of still lackluster wage growth, consumers are increasing saving for the future, hedging against a continuation of 'more of the same,'" Piegza said.
*SEE ALSO: It's official: Michael Kors isn't cool anymore*
*Follow Us: On Facebook*
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: It's official: Michael Kors isn't cool anymore Reported by Business Insider 2 hours ago.
↧
↧
Doctor on Demand diagnosed with $50M in new funding
The company is getting some traction with self-insured enterprises, which are offering the Doctor on Demand service to their employees as an add-on to their health insurance benefits.
Reported by VentureBeat 3 hours ago.
↧
Health insurance mergers don't benefit consumers, California regulator warns
California's top insurance regulator expressed alarm Wednesday at the prospect of further consolidation in the health insurance industry.
Reported by L.A. Times 2 hours ago.
↧
HUFFPOST HILL - More Like T-T-Tedious
Chuck Grassley’s daughter hit a deer with her car, making the animal even less popular than History Channel in the Grassley household. Mark Penn is leaving Microsoft, marking the end of the company’s worst hiring decision since that talking paper clip. And Congress couldn’t pass a bill to fund a bridge if its life depended on it, but Donald Trump can run for president to drum up interest in a reality TV show, so just remember that everything is pointless and we’re all stardust. This is HUFFPOST HILL for Wednesday, June 17th, 2015:
*OBAMA'S SECRET PEACE DEAL* - Akbar Ahmed: "Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, two U.S. allies that have been fighting a proxy war in Libya since shortly after the 2011 overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, have agreed in principle to resolve their differences, The Huffington Post has learned. *This previously unreported commitment, made between top leaders under pressure from President Barack Obama during talks at Camp David on May 14*, suggests that peace negotiations in Berlin between the Gulf states' Libyan proxies may yet bear fruit." [HuffPost]
*HOUSE VOTE THURSDAY ON TPA* - But will there be opportunities for more three-part initialisms? "House Republicans are breathing new life into President Barack Obama's trade agenda by bringing up a stand-alone bill to give the president expedited authority to speed major trade deals through Congress…*Now, Republicans plan to bring stand-alone legislation to the House floor on Thursday that will grant Obama so-called fast-track authority while excluding the controversial TAA funding*. The fast-track legislation, also known as trade promotion authority, allows Obama to funnel trade deals, like the one he is currently negotiating with 11 Pacific nations, through Congress with a simple up-or-down vote, giving lawmakers no chance to filibuster or attach amendments...Boehner's plan, according to Democratic and Republican aides, is to pass the clean TPA bill and send it to the Senate, where lawmakers will then attach TAA to a separate trade bill involving African countries, the African Growth and Opportunity Act. *Once the clean TPA is sent back to the Senate, it will be up to the upper chamber to handle TAA*." Whoa, trust fall moment for Democrats. [HuffPost]
*Flashback to June 3rd*: "White House’s secret weapon on trade: Nancy Pelosi" [Politico]
*THE PATH FORWARD IS A GAME THEORY JUMBLE* - Ryan Grim: "Republicans are confident all 28 Democrats who backed fast track last week will stick around. With 219 votes, they can only stand to lose two, if everybody shows up. One of those 28 told HuffPost he doesn't see 'how I can support TPA without TAA.' But even if some of the 28 drop off, Boehner may have had some votes in reserve he could call on in a pinch. If TPA passes the House, it goes to the Senate…. *In a clever move, the Senate will then vote on the House version of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, or AGOA, which boosts trade from some sub-Saharan African countries and is a priority of many Democrats*, including those in the Congressional Black Caucus. *Adding TAA only makes it that much more of a Democratic bill*. Absent tactical plays from Senate Democrats, it will pass easily." [HuffPost]
Mike McAuliff reports: Senate Democratic aides predicted there might be some bumps in the road, but suspected McConnell would be able to muster enough votes to pass the worker assistance.
*Anxiety amongst House Dems*: "[P]ro-trade House Democrats want to be sure that if they back a fast-track bill without the worker aid measure, like-minded Senate Democrats will also vote for it. 'We’re trying to make sure House and Senate Democrats are on the same page. That is crucial,' Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) said as he left a meeting of the New Democrat Coalition Wednesday. The group, which Kind leads, consists largely of moderate Democrats who back free trade. Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said Boehner has assured him and other pro-trade Democrats that the House will vote again on worker assistance. 'He even stated declaratively that TAA will pass,' Connolly said. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, want a similar promise that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Boehner will agree to amend the preferences bill with an extension of the expiring TAA program, a key Democratic priority." [Politico]
*DAILY DELANEY DOWNER* - The Federal Reserve has opted against raising interest rates and lowered its range of economic growth projections from between 2.3 and 2.7 percent to between 1.8 and 2 percent. The good news: "On balance, a range of labor market indicators suggests that underutilization of labor resources diminished somewhat." Congrats on your utilization, human beings who work in jobs. [FederalReserve.gov]
Does somebody keep forwarding you this newsletter? Get your own copy. It's free! Sign up here. Send tips/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to huffposthill@huffingtonpost.com. Follow us on Twitter - @HuffPostHill
*DEMOCRATS ANGLING FOR SHOWDOWN OVER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING* - Damn on-ramp huggers. Laura Barron-Lopez: "*Senate Democrats are threatening to filibuster any short-term extension of the federal fund that pays for the nation’s highways, bridges, roads and mass transit when the clock runs out at the end of July*. Last month, Congress passed a short-term extension of the Highway Trust Fund, ensuring that the Transportation Department can use the rest of its reserves until July 31. Lawmakers have talked of passing a second short-term patch in six weeks after the current one runs out, giving Congress time to work out the details of a multiyear bill by the end of 2015. But Democrats want a long-term fix for the highway fund, which has been limping along with a series of short-term patches for the past few years. And they want it now...Democrats have subscribed to the proposal offered by President Barack Obama, which looks to international tax reforms for funding. Within that is a controversial plan to offset funding by allowing companies to return overseas profit to the U.S. Tax revenue from those repatriated profits would go toward the highway fund. A number of lawmakers argue that this would only be a temporary solution, and would not provide adequate funding." [HuffPost]
*KING V. BURWELL RULING COULD BE BAD POLITICS FOR GOP* -
Jonathan Cohn: "House Republicans have been cheering on the lawsuit currently before the Supreme Court that, if successful, would cut off Affordable Care Act tax credits to more than 6 million people. *Now a new report suggests the impact would fall disproportionately on their own constituents, rather than those in Democratic districts -- by a margin of 2-to-1.* The research comes from FamiliesUSA, an advocacy and consumer support organization that is among the Affordable Care Act's loudest champions. The report's subject is the potential geographic impact of King v. Burwell, the lawsuit that the court heard in March and on which it is likely to rule by the end of the month. At issue in the case is whether health insurance tax credits should be available in all states, or only in those where officials decided to operate their own marketplaces, or 'exchanges,' for purchasing coverage. In two-thirds of the states, including Florida and Texas, officials declined do that, leaving management of the exchanges to the federal government." [HuffPost]
A reader tinkered with our Donald Trump/Rachel Dolezal image from yesterday.
*VOTER ID BILL FALTERS IN NEVADA LEGISLATURE* - Samantha Lachman: "Nevada conservatives are disheartened that another attempt to pass a voter identification measure out of the legislature failed this session, even though the GOP has full control of the state government for the first time since 1929. Many expected Nevada to join the list of states that require people to show a government-issued ID in order to vote. Texas, where the GOP also is in control, passed a voter ID law in 2011, but is currently bogged down in litigation over its law's intent and impact. Republican legislators had tried to pass a Nevada voter ID bill in previous sessions, but had more muscle on their side this time, with majorities in both chambers of the state legislature. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval had previously said he would support a voter ID law, though he refused this year to take a stance before any proposal reached his desk. *But, as the session closed June 1, bills in the Senate and Assembly hadn't gotten out of committee, leaving Democrats feeling gleeful and conservatives glum*." [HuffPost]
*LOL MARK PENN* - Nathalie Tadena: "Mark Penn, a Microsoft senior executive who formerly worked at WPP is leaving the technology firm to found a new company that will invest in digital marketing services. Mr. Penn’s new fund, Stagwell Group LLC, has raised $250 million in funding, including from former Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer, who is a core investor in the new company. Stagwell Group also has the capacity to use leverage to make up to $750 million in acquisitions, the company announced Wednesday. Stagwell Group will focus on investing in companies that are 'digital-first' and can use technology and data to inform creative work, Mr. Penn said. In addition to digital marketing services, the fund said it may invest in advertising, research, data analytics and public relations." [WSJ]
*LOW MORALE AT BLOOMBERG DC* - Mark Halperin would give the bureau an A- for content, a D for morale and an F overall. Michael Calderone: "A Bloomberg News reporter on Tuesday sent a memo to high-ranking company executives in New York that outlined numerous concerns among Washington bureau staffers about management, editorial standards, reporting priorities and more. The memo, written by a reporter in the Washington bureau and said to be the product of conversations with colleagues, was obtained by The Huffington Post from a source with the sender's name removed. It described 'low morale,' 'high employee turnover,' a 'leadership void' and an atmosphere that’s less hospitable to female employees. Recent layoffs and demotions in the bureau, it noted, have helped foster a 'climate of fear and mistrust.' It is the latest evidence of a news operation plagued by infighting and still grappling with how to grow a flashy political presence on the Web after years of focusing on business and financial news through its highly profitable terminals." [HuffPost]
@ChuckGrassley: Just got word that my daughter Wendy totaled car She is ok She hit deer Deer dead. No presumption I'm told
*BECAUSE YOU'VE READ THIS FAR* - Here's a dog battling a hairdryer.
*CHILD DESERVES BETTER THAN THIS* - Donald Trump is the worst thing to infect our children's minds since Joe Camel ads. Samantha Jo-Roth: "*Meet 10-year-old Shay Doyle from Waverly, Iowa. He’s a kid on a mission -- to get Donald Trump elected president*. This rising fifth grader isn’t old enough to vote or caucus, but he’s trying to recruit support for Trump’s campaign in Iowa, starting with introducing him at an event in Des Moines on Tuesday night following Trump’s announcement of his bid for the presidency earlier in the day in New York City. Not even tall enough to stand behind the podium, Shay, standing on a box, explained what a Trump White House might look like. 'I think that he’s one of those people, instead of going out and telling everyone what he will do, he’ll just go and do it,' Shay told a crowd at Hoyt Sherman Place. Shay said he’s been studying Wall Street, politics and law, in an effort to help Iowans decide which candidate would best represent them." [HuffPost]
*COMFORT FOOD*
- Ramsay Bolton: nice guy.
- Pouring molten metals into water.
- The waterslide that simulates traveling through a wormhole.
*TWITTERAMA*
@JennyPentland: I want Donald Trump to win so Jesus comes back.
@delrayser: oh god it just occurred to me how many rachel dolezal costumes there are going to be this halloween & how mortifyingly racist it'll be
@maggieserota: I will vote for any candidate who outlaws acoustic covers of rap songs. #2016
*Got something to add? Send tips/quotes/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to Eliot Nelson (eliot@huffingtonpost.com) or Arthur Delaney (arthur@huffingtonpost.com). Follow us on Twitter @HuffPostHill (twitter.com/HuffPostHill). Sign up here: http://huff.to/an2k2e*-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.
*OBAMA'S SECRET PEACE DEAL* - Akbar Ahmed: "Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, two U.S. allies that have been fighting a proxy war in Libya since shortly after the 2011 overthrow of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, have agreed in principle to resolve their differences, The Huffington Post has learned. *This previously unreported commitment, made between top leaders under pressure from President Barack Obama during talks at Camp David on May 14*, suggests that peace negotiations in Berlin between the Gulf states' Libyan proxies may yet bear fruit." [HuffPost]
*HOUSE VOTE THURSDAY ON TPA* - But will there be opportunities for more three-part initialisms? "House Republicans are breathing new life into President Barack Obama's trade agenda by bringing up a stand-alone bill to give the president expedited authority to speed major trade deals through Congress…*Now, Republicans plan to bring stand-alone legislation to the House floor on Thursday that will grant Obama so-called fast-track authority while excluding the controversial TAA funding*. The fast-track legislation, also known as trade promotion authority, allows Obama to funnel trade deals, like the one he is currently negotiating with 11 Pacific nations, through Congress with a simple up-or-down vote, giving lawmakers no chance to filibuster or attach amendments...Boehner's plan, according to Democratic and Republican aides, is to pass the clean TPA bill and send it to the Senate, where lawmakers will then attach TAA to a separate trade bill involving African countries, the African Growth and Opportunity Act. *Once the clean TPA is sent back to the Senate, it will be up to the upper chamber to handle TAA*." Whoa, trust fall moment for Democrats. [HuffPost]
*Flashback to June 3rd*: "White House’s secret weapon on trade: Nancy Pelosi" [Politico]
*THE PATH FORWARD IS A GAME THEORY JUMBLE* - Ryan Grim: "Republicans are confident all 28 Democrats who backed fast track last week will stick around. With 219 votes, they can only stand to lose two, if everybody shows up. One of those 28 told HuffPost he doesn't see 'how I can support TPA without TAA.' But even if some of the 28 drop off, Boehner may have had some votes in reserve he could call on in a pinch. If TPA passes the House, it goes to the Senate…. *In a clever move, the Senate will then vote on the House version of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, or AGOA, which boosts trade from some sub-Saharan African countries and is a priority of many Democrats*, including those in the Congressional Black Caucus. *Adding TAA only makes it that much more of a Democratic bill*. Absent tactical plays from Senate Democrats, it will pass easily." [HuffPost]
Mike McAuliff reports: Senate Democratic aides predicted there might be some bumps in the road, but suspected McConnell would be able to muster enough votes to pass the worker assistance.
*Anxiety amongst House Dems*: "[P]ro-trade House Democrats want to be sure that if they back a fast-track bill without the worker aid measure, like-minded Senate Democrats will also vote for it. 'We’re trying to make sure House and Senate Democrats are on the same page. That is crucial,' Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) said as he left a meeting of the New Democrat Coalition Wednesday. The group, which Kind leads, consists largely of moderate Democrats who back free trade. Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said Boehner has assured him and other pro-trade Democrats that the House will vote again on worker assistance. 'He even stated declaratively that TAA will pass,' Connolly said. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, want a similar promise that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Boehner will agree to amend the preferences bill with an extension of the expiring TAA program, a key Democratic priority." [Politico]
*DAILY DELANEY DOWNER* - The Federal Reserve has opted against raising interest rates and lowered its range of economic growth projections from between 2.3 and 2.7 percent to between 1.8 and 2 percent. The good news: "On balance, a range of labor market indicators suggests that underutilization of labor resources diminished somewhat." Congrats on your utilization, human beings who work in jobs. [FederalReserve.gov]
Does somebody keep forwarding you this newsletter? Get your own copy. It's free! Sign up here. Send tips/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to huffposthill@huffingtonpost.com. Follow us on Twitter - @HuffPostHill
*DEMOCRATS ANGLING FOR SHOWDOWN OVER INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING* - Damn on-ramp huggers. Laura Barron-Lopez: "*Senate Democrats are threatening to filibuster any short-term extension of the federal fund that pays for the nation’s highways, bridges, roads and mass transit when the clock runs out at the end of July*. Last month, Congress passed a short-term extension of the Highway Trust Fund, ensuring that the Transportation Department can use the rest of its reserves until July 31. Lawmakers have talked of passing a second short-term patch in six weeks after the current one runs out, giving Congress time to work out the details of a multiyear bill by the end of 2015. But Democrats want a long-term fix for the highway fund, which has been limping along with a series of short-term patches for the past few years. And they want it now...Democrats have subscribed to the proposal offered by President Barack Obama, which looks to international tax reforms for funding. Within that is a controversial plan to offset funding by allowing companies to return overseas profit to the U.S. Tax revenue from those repatriated profits would go toward the highway fund. A number of lawmakers argue that this would only be a temporary solution, and would not provide adequate funding." [HuffPost]
*KING V. BURWELL RULING COULD BE BAD POLITICS FOR GOP* -
Jonathan Cohn: "House Republicans have been cheering on the lawsuit currently before the Supreme Court that, if successful, would cut off Affordable Care Act tax credits to more than 6 million people. *Now a new report suggests the impact would fall disproportionately on their own constituents, rather than those in Democratic districts -- by a margin of 2-to-1.* The research comes from FamiliesUSA, an advocacy and consumer support organization that is among the Affordable Care Act's loudest champions. The report's subject is the potential geographic impact of King v. Burwell, the lawsuit that the court heard in March and on which it is likely to rule by the end of the month. At issue in the case is whether health insurance tax credits should be available in all states, or only in those where officials decided to operate their own marketplaces, or 'exchanges,' for purchasing coverage. In two-thirds of the states, including Florida and Texas, officials declined do that, leaving management of the exchanges to the federal government." [HuffPost]
A reader tinkered with our Donald Trump/Rachel Dolezal image from yesterday.
*VOTER ID BILL FALTERS IN NEVADA LEGISLATURE* - Samantha Lachman: "Nevada conservatives are disheartened that another attempt to pass a voter identification measure out of the legislature failed this session, even though the GOP has full control of the state government for the first time since 1929. Many expected Nevada to join the list of states that require people to show a government-issued ID in order to vote. Texas, where the GOP also is in control, passed a voter ID law in 2011, but is currently bogged down in litigation over its law's intent and impact. Republican legislators had tried to pass a Nevada voter ID bill in previous sessions, but had more muscle on their side this time, with majorities in both chambers of the state legislature. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval had previously said he would support a voter ID law, though he refused this year to take a stance before any proposal reached his desk. *But, as the session closed June 1, bills in the Senate and Assembly hadn't gotten out of committee, leaving Democrats feeling gleeful and conservatives glum*." [HuffPost]
*LOL MARK PENN* - Nathalie Tadena: "Mark Penn, a Microsoft senior executive who formerly worked at WPP is leaving the technology firm to found a new company that will invest in digital marketing services. Mr. Penn’s new fund, Stagwell Group LLC, has raised $250 million in funding, including from former Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer, who is a core investor in the new company. Stagwell Group also has the capacity to use leverage to make up to $750 million in acquisitions, the company announced Wednesday. Stagwell Group will focus on investing in companies that are 'digital-first' and can use technology and data to inform creative work, Mr. Penn said. In addition to digital marketing services, the fund said it may invest in advertising, research, data analytics and public relations." [WSJ]
*LOW MORALE AT BLOOMBERG DC* - Mark Halperin would give the bureau an A- for content, a D for morale and an F overall. Michael Calderone: "A Bloomberg News reporter on Tuesday sent a memo to high-ranking company executives in New York that outlined numerous concerns among Washington bureau staffers about management, editorial standards, reporting priorities and more. The memo, written by a reporter in the Washington bureau and said to be the product of conversations with colleagues, was obtained by The Huffington Post from a source with the sender's name removed. It described 'low morale,' 'high employee turnover,' a 'leadership void' and an atmosphere that’s less hospitable to female employees. Recent layoffs and demotions in the bureau, it noted, have helped foster a 'climate of fear and mistrust.' It is the latest evidence of a news operation plagued by infighting and still grappling with how to grow a flashy political presence on the Web after years of focusing on business and financial news through its highly profitable terminals." [HuffPost]
@ChuckGrassley: Just got word that my daughter Wendy totaled car She is ok She hit deer Deer dead. No presumption I'm told
*BECAUSE YOU'VE READ THIS FAR* - Here's a dog battling a hairdryer.
*CHILD DESERVES BETTER THAN THIS* - Donald Trump is the worst thing to infect our children's minds since Joe Camel ads. Samantha Jo-Roth: "*Meet 10-year-old Shay Doyle from Waverly, Iowa. He’s a kid on a mission -- to get Donald Trump elected president*. This rising fifth grader isn’t old enough to vote or caucus, but he’s trying to recruit support for Trump’s campaign in Iowa, starting with introducing him at an event in Des Moines on Tuesday night following Trump’s announcement of his bid for the presidency earlier in the day in New York City. Not even tall enough to stand behind the podium, Shay, standing on a box, explained what a Trump White House might look like. 'I think that he’s one of those people, instead of going out and telling everyone what he will do, he’ll just go and do it,' Shay told a crowd at Hoyt Sherman Place. Shay said he’s been studying Wall Street, politics and law, in an effort to help Iowans decide which candidate would best represent them." [HuffPost]
*COMFORT FOOD*
- Ramsay Bolton: nice guy.
- Pouring molten metals into water.
- The waterslide that simulates traveling through a wormhole.
*TWITTERAMA*
@JennyPentland: I want Donald Trump to win so Jesus comes back.
@delrayser: oh god it just occurred to me how many rachel dolezal costumes there are going to be this halloween & how mortifyingly racist it'll be
@maggieserota: I will vote for any candidate who outlaws acoustic covers of rap songs. #2016
*Got something to add? Send tips/quotes/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to Eliot Nelson (eliot@huffingtonpost.com) or Arthur Delaney (arthur@huffingtonpost.com). Follow us on Twitter @HuffPostHill (twitter.com/HuffPostHill). Sign up here: http://huff.to/an2k2e*-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.
↧
Health insurance mergers don't benefit consumers, California regulator warns
California's top insurance regulator expressed alarm Wednesday at the prospect of further consolidation in the health insurance industry.
Reported by L.A. Times 17 hours ago.
↧
↧
Republicans Mull Extending Subsidies If Court Deals Obamacare Blow
U.S. congressional Republicans on Wednesday discussed extending subsidies to Americans who may otherwise be unable to afford their health insurance if the Supreme Court rules soon against President Barack Obama's healthcare law, Republican lawmakers and aides...
Reported by Newsmax 1 day ago.
↧
Republicans' Post-Supreme-Court Plan For Obamacare: Just Repeal It
WASHINGTON-- Congressional Republican leaders have promised for months they would be ready if the Supreme Court wipes out Obamacare subsidies for millions of consumers. At separate closed-door meetings in the House and Senate Wednesday, those leaders laid out a framework for their response, and totally repealing the law is the key feature, as it has been for more than five years.
The Supreme Court is likely to rule this month -- as soon as Thursday morning -- in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit engineered by conservative and libertarian activists that seeks to invalidate health insurance subsidies for 6.4 million low- and moderate-income people. The plaintiffs claim the law only permits subsidies to residents of states that operate health insurance exchanges under the law, not the 34 states where the federal government does so.
Republican lawmakers have been cheerleaders for the lawsuit, but may soon be confronted with pressure to help those who would suffer if the GOP wins the case. A disproportionate number of them live in Republican-led states and in congressional districts represented by the GOP. Most Americans, and almost 40 percent of Republicans, want Congress to restore subsidies if the high court takes them away, according to a poll by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
House lawmakers emerged from their meeting outlining a plan that would allow people to keep their subsidies for the rest of this year. Next year, states could maintain those subsidies for their residents or opt to convert the federal funding for them into so-called block grants to states, which would be used to erect some hypothetical alternative system to Obamacare, Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.) told reporters. Senate Republicans are considering a similar approach that also would unwind the law over time, Politico reported.
But the House plans would undo the entire Affordable Care Act in 2017, Boustany said. Not coincidentally, that's after the next round of congressional elections, and when the U.S. could have a Republican president. That commander in chief would get to unveil the long-awaited GOP plan to replace Obamacare, a mere seven years after the Affordable Care Act became law and the first promises were made of a replacement plan.
"We're taking care of people who are going to get hurt, initially," Boustany said. "Secondly, we're creating a bridge to help the states deal with the fiasco. And we have a sunset provision for Obamacare so that the American people get to have that say again after the presidential election. You tee it up for the next president."
Given that Republicans generally oppose the amount of taxation, spending and regulation required for a major expansion of health coverage -- such as the one achieved by Obamacare -- it seems those aided by a transitional policy this year and next wouldn't be able to count on help from the federal government in 2017 and beyond if Republicans get their way.
Don't expect any details yet, however, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told reporters the GOP wouldn't release its real plan until after the Supreme Court rules. "We'll put out paper in due time," Ryan said. Republican leaders in both chambers also have to face contingents of their memberships that want to do nothing about a Supreme Court ruling that erases subsidies.
Although preventing the subsidies from disappearing would alleviate some of the disruption a Supreme Court decision for the plaintiffs would bring by making it easier for Obamacare enrollees to remain covered by health insurance, these proposals don't merely leave the status quo in place and would only delay the loss of coverage for some portion of those affected by a high court decision against their subsidies.
These GOP plans also would erase key aspects of the Affordable Care Act that are crucial to its structure, which would damage its functioning even as people hold on to their subsidies. For instance, Republicans aim to get rid of the the law's requirement that most Americans obtain health coverage before repealing the rest of the law. President Barack Obama has been clear he won't support any bill that seriously undermines his health care law, a position Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell reiterated on Capitol Hill last week.
The individual mandate is unpopular, but it serves a key purpose in the insurance market as constructed by the Affordable Care Act. Under these Republican proposals to scrap it, health insurance companies would still be required to cover anyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions. Without a mechanism to nudge healthy people with less need for coverage to enroll, sick people would dominate the insurance pool, driving up costs for everyone in it. These plans also would eliminate Obamacare rules guaranteeing basic benefits. And if the final GOP proposals repeal those Affordable Care Act mandates and benefits nationwide, it would extend the reach of the Supreme Court ruling to states that set up their own exchanges, not just those using federal exchanges.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 day ago.
The Supreme Court is likely to rule this month -- as soon as Thursday morning -- in King v. Burwell, a lawsuit engineered by conservative and libertarian activists that seeks to invalidate health insurance subsidies for 6.4 million low- and moderate-income people. The plaintiffs claim the law only permits subsidies to residents of states that operate health insurance exchanges under the law, not the 34 states where the federal government does so.
Republican lawmakers have been cheerleaders for the lawsuit, but may soon be confronted with pressure to help those who would suffer if the GOP wins the case. A disproportionate number of them live in Republican-led states and in congressional districts represented by the GOP. Most Americans, and almost 40 percent of Republicans, want Congress to restore subsidies if the high court takes them away, according to a poll by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
House lawmakers emerged from their meeting outlining a plan that would allow people to keep their subsidies for the rest of this year. Next year, states could maintain those subsidies for their residents or opt to convert the federal funding for them into so-called block grants to states, which would be used to erect some hypothetical alternative system to Obamacare, Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.) told reporters. Senate Republicans are considering a similar approach that also would unwind the law over time, Politico reported.
But the House plans would undo the entire Affordable Care Act in 2017, Boustany said. Not coincidentally, that's after the next round of congressional elections, and when the U.S. could have a Republican president. That commander in chief would get to unveil the long-awaited GOP plan to replace Obamacare, a mere seven years after the Affordable Care Act became law and the first promises were made of a replacement plan.
"We're taking care of people who are going to get hurt, initially," Boustany said. "Secondly, we're creating a bridge to help the states deal with the fiasco. And we have a sunset provision for Obamacare so that the American people get to have that say again after the presidential election. You tee it up for the next president."
Given that Republicans generally oppose the amount of taxation, spending and regulation required for a major expansion of health coverage -- such as the one achieved by Obamacare -- it seems those aided by a transitional policy this year and next wouldn't be able to count on help from the federal government in 2017 and beyond if Republicans get their way.
Don't expect any details yet, however, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told reporters the GOP wouldn't release its real plan until after the Supreme Court rules. "We'll put out paper in due time," Ryan said. Republican leaders in both chambers also have to face contingents of their memberships that want to do nothing about a Supreme Court ruling that erases subsidies.
Although preventing the subsidies from disappearing would alleviate some of the disruption a Supreme Court decision for the plaintiffs would bring by making it easier for Obamacare enrollees to remain covered by health insurance, these proposals don't merely leave the status quo in place and would only delay the loss of coverage for some portion of those affected by a high court decision against their subsidies.
These GOP plans also would erase key aspects of the Affordable Care Act that are crucial to its structure, which would damage its functioning even as people hold on to their subsidies. For instance, Republicans aim to get rid of the the law's requirement that most Americans obtain health coverage before repealing the rest of the law. President Barack Obama has been clear he won't support any bill that seriously undermines his health care law, a position Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell reiterated on Capitol Hill last week.
The individual mandate is unpopular, but it serves a key purpose in the insurance market as constructed by the Affordable Care Act. Under these Republican proposals to scrap it, health insurance companies would still be required to cover anyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions. Without a mechanism to nudge healthy people with less need for coverage to enroll, sick people would dominate the insurance pool, driving up costs for everyone in it. These plans also would eliminate Obamacare rules guaranteeing basic benefits. And if the final GOP proposals repeal those Affordable Care Act mandates and benefits nationwide, it would extend the reach of the Supreme Court ruling to states that set up their own exchanges, not just those using federal exchanges.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 day ago.
↧
Republican lawmakers discuss extending Obamacare subsidies in case of Supreme Court defeat
U.S. congressional Republicans on Wednesday discussed extending subsidies to Americans who may otherwise be unable to afford their health insurance if the Supreme Court rules soon against President Barack Obama’s healthcare law, Republican lawmakers and aides said. Republicans met behind close...
Reported by Raw Story 23 hours ago.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
