OLDWICK, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The rollout of the U.S. health insurance exchanges and related technological issues required health insurers to deploy additional customer service staff to assist new and potential enrollees. Although the time period was extended for applicants to request coverage, enrollment from the exchanges was lower than initial government projections in the initial and second open enrollment periods. According to the latest Best’s Briefing, titled, “U.S. Health Exchange Pla Reported by Business Wire 2 hours ago.

A group of prominent Democratic Party fundraisers on Friday began circulating a letter to encourage a hesitant Vice President Joe Biden to enter the 2016 race for U.S. president.

"We write today to publicly announce our support for Vice President Biden, to urge him to join the Presidential race, and to pledge our support if he does," they write in the letter, a copy of which was seen by Reuters.

It calls the Obama-Biden administration a "spectacular success." It cites job creation, a lower unemployment rate, new health insurance policies for nearly nine million Americans and the end of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"To finish the job, America needs a leader who is respected both home and abroad, and who understands the real challenges facing American families. In our opinion, the next president must be Joe Biden. If he announces he’s running, we’re all in. It’s a campaign we know he will win," the letter says.

The signees are largely party financiers who have yet to throw their support behind Hillary Clinton, the presumptive front-runner for the Democratic nomination to the November 2016 election. Their call is the most provocative yet for Biden to take her on. The letter makes no mention of Clinton.

John Maa, a member of the Democratic National Committee’s national finance committee, was one signee. Maa said he was contacted this week by another finance committee member to see if he would support Biden financially.

Maa replied he would be happy to raise funds for Biden but that donors were becoming impatient as the vice president deliberates. “Time is precious,” Maa said.

“I know many people who will gladly contribute, and I will absolutely try to organize,” he said.

Besides Maa, the letter is signed by nearly 50 donors, Democratic activists and friends of Biden.

The letter's significance goes beyond a simple declaration of support. It appears aimed at pressuring Biden to decide soon. "We are ready if he’s ready," they write.

Biden has sent conflicting signals about his intentions. His public and emotional accounts of his despair in the wake of his eldest son Beau’s death this year have made him sound hesitant about joining the race.

At the same time, he has met with Democratic luminaries such as Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and key party donors. He has also embarked on a travel schedule as vice president that this week takes him to California, Michigan and Ohio, states that could be decisive in the election.

A similar effort by liberal Democrats to encourage Warren to take on Clinton for the party's nomination failed earlier this year. After coming under increasing pressure to run, Warren said she would not seek the presidency in 2016.

TAKING HIS TIME

Biden has been huddling with advisers, trying to determine whether he can mount a credible bid in the face of Clinton’s financial and organizational advantages.

That process will continue, independent of any movement to draft Biden, a source close to the vice president told Reuters.

A former secretary of state, U.S. senator and first lady, Clinton, 67, announced her candidacy in April.

Her front-runner status has taken a beating over her use of a private email server while she was President Barack Obama's secretary of state. She has seen her support in polls tumble, creating a potential opening for Biden, 72, a former U.S. senator who became vice president when Obama became president in January 2009.

A Draft Biden political-action committee was established independently of Biden’s team of advisers to lay the groundwork for a Biden run in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. It has hired operatives in all three states. The Democratic fundraisers initiated the letter but consulted Draft Biden in preparing their appeal.

Even if that organization were to give Biden a leg up in mounting a bid, he would still face considerable obstacles in building a national organization that can compete with Clinton, whose campaign and fund-raising Super PAC have already built formidable war chests.

The letter says Biden's "expertise in foreign affairs is unmatched, and his knowledge of domestic policy is deep and broad. No one is better prepared for the Presidency than Joe Biden."

Much of the letter focuses on Biden's care for his family. "Through this window we see ourselves; and thus so many have come to understand why he really is a different kind of leader. He is the right candidate for these times," it says.

The letter offers some insight into how a Biden campaign might make its appeal to voters, arguing that a Biden run would provide continuity with President Barack Obama’s administration, serving as an unofficial Obama third term.

In a five-day rolling Reuters/Ipsos poll ending on Sept. 15, 46 percent of respondents favored Clinton for the Democratic nomination, versus 27 percent for Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Biden received 16 percent despite having not declared his candidacy. The poll had a credibility interval of 4.7 percent.

*Also on HuffPost:*-- 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 hour ago.

Despite the fact that the majority of Americans back the use of federal funds for Planned Parenthood, the United State House of Representatives voted Friday to pull funding for the healthcare provider for one year -- a move The White House charged "would limit access to health care for men, women, and families across the Nation, and would disproportionately impact low-income individuals." 

And indeed, Planned Parenthood estimates that in 2013 to 2014 alone, its affiliates provided *865,721 Pap tests* *and breast exams*; conducted *704,079 tests for HIV*; and *provided 1,440,495 emergency contraception kits*. Planned Parenthood absolutely does provide access to safe and legal abortion procedures, but they constitute just three percent of the services it offers, because as The New Yorker put it, the organization's far more central goal is helping people avoid unwanted pregnancy altogether.


A photo posted by Planned Parenthood Action (@ppact) on Sep 2, 2015 at 11:00am PDT


 

But statistics are one thing, and real stories are another, so we asked our readers about how Planned Parenthood has made a difference in their lives. We were inundated with powerful responses. Here's what 17 of them said:

 ***

*"I am the only woman in my family who did not have a child under 20 years old."* 

I'm a first generation Mexican-American that comes from a strong Catholic family. I couldn't ask my mom to take me to a gynecologist to get birth control, but Planned Parenthood made it possible for me to afford it and prevent a teen pregnancy. I have now graduated college, I have a great career, and am working on my Master's Degree. I am the only woman in my family who did not have a child under 20 years old. -- Anonymous, 28

***

*"The staff were very caring and professional...which helped me on the journey of recovery from my sexual assault"*

When I was a sophomore in college, I was raped at a friend's house by someone we had both gone to high school with. I was so ashamed of the experience that I never reported it, or told my family. I was relieved that I was not pregnant, but I was afraid I may have contracted something, so I went to Planned Parenthood to discretely have various STI tests run. The staff were very caring and professional, and all of my tests came back negative, which helped me on the journey of recovery from my sexual assault. -- Jessica, 30 

***

*"I was able to find free birth control pills at Planned Parenthood, which ensured that I would not be needing their abortion services." *

As a newly divorced, single mother of two in my 20s, I knew that I could not risk getting pregnant again anytime soon in the event that I became involved with someone. I did not have health insurance, so I could not afford to see a doctor at a traditional clinic. But I was able to find free birth control pills at Planned Parenthood, which ensured that I would not be needing their abortion services. -- Lisa, 41 ****"The only reason I was able to have regular OB-GYN visits for years was because Planned Parenthood made it affordable."* 

When I was in my 20s and 30s. I was self-employed and I had no health benefits -- only catastrophic coverage. Even the most routine doctor visits were outside my financial reach -- I pretty much had to be dragging a broken leg behind me to go to the doctor. The only reason I was able to have regular OB-GYN visits for years was because Planned Parenthood made it affordable. Without them, I would have risked my health, because I simply couldn't afford to see a doctor. -- Tiffany, 47



***

*"Planned Parenthood helped me decide not to have an abortion, and has helped me avoid having to face that choice again for the past 16 years." *

Planned Parenthood helped me decide not to have an abortion, and has helped me avoid having to face that choice again for the past 16 years. I am 39 years old and I still go to Planned Parenthood for all my check-ups and for birth control, because I have a high-deductible health insurance plan. But also, because I feel like they listen to me and don't judge me when I am in that room.I want my daughter to grow up with the same options. --Kerri-Anne, 39

 *** 

*"When I was younger, I couldn't afford a regular doctor's visit and Planned Parenthood was my only option."*

When I was younger, I couldn't afford a regular doctor's visit and Planned Parenthood was my only option, so I used them for several years. When they found cervical cancer, they suggested I go see an OB-GYN, which saved my life. -- Tiffany, 41

 ***

*"I owe my life and my sanity to them."*

In February of 2013, I was drugged and sexually assaulted by two men in a hotel room during an anime convention. For two weeks after the incident, I bled. I wasn’t menstruating, I wasn’t a virgin, I just f**king bled. I was at school, seven hours and four states away from my doctor, but I could get to a Planned Parenthood, and I did. They took care of me without judgement. They gave me a safe space to contemplate what happened to me, and without them, I don’t know if I would have had to courage to seek physical or psychological treatment. I owe my life and my sanity to them. -- Anonymous, 24

*** 

*"[An abortion] is not what I ever pictured for myself, but it was my best option." *

When I was 19, my very new boyfriend and I found out that I was pregnant. I was depressed, didn't know where I would be in a year, knew I didn't want to be where I was, and had no clue if this relationship would last, so we decided I should get an abortion. It is not what I ever pictured for myself, but it was my best option. And then they provided me with birth control at a discount, so I would never have to go through it again. -- Anonymous, 26  

  ***

*"They found abnormal cells on my cervix, removed them early enough and saved me from cervical cancer." *

I'm 32 and I just welcomed my first child into the world.  This would not have been the case had I not received vital treatments during college at my local Planned Parenthood. I was young, broke and without healthcare, and the doctors there provided my yearly OB-GYN exams. They found abnormal cells on my cervix, removed them early enough and saved me from cervical cancer. -- Maggie, 32

 ***

*"I am an educated, compassionate and progressive Christian. I never thought I'd have to make a decision about what to do with an unintended pregnancy, but, at 25, I did." *

I am an educated, compassionate and progressive Christian. I never thought I'd have to make a decision about what to do with an unintended pregnancy, but, at 25, I did. Unsure what to do, I went to Planned Parenthood as one of many things I did to try and figure out the best course for me, and they let me talk, freak out and come to my own decision about what I wanted to do. I chose to have an abortion, and I don't regret it. I know that I want to be a parent one day and Planned Parenthood is part of my healthy journey to get there. -- Jamie, 28

***

*"We lost our insurance for the year... Planned Parenthood was there to provide me with birth control and gynecology appointments." *

When I was 17, my grandparents passed away within nine days of each other and my mom took a leave of absence from her job to process her loss and deal with the aftermath. Because of that, we lost our insurance for the year and when we tried to apply for private insurance, we were denied because of our history of "menstrual cramps." Planned Parenthood was there to provide me with birth control and gynecology appointments that I otherwise would not have had access to. -- Anonymous, 25 

  ***

*"Because of Planned Parenthood, I can get birth control, which helps me deal with my Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome." *

Because of Planned Parenthood, I can get birth control, which helps me deal with my Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. Without access to birth control, not only would I be missing work regularly (like I did in high school), I would also never have the chance to hopefully one day bring a child that I really want into the world, because it helps control my menstrual cycles. -- Anonymous, 23

***

*"They helped me in so many ways when nobody else would." *

When I was 20, I unknowingly had unprotected sex. I was incoherent and thought my partner used a condom like I asked him to. A month later, I missed my period and took a home pregnancy test, but the results were unclear, so I went to Planned Parenthood for another test and it came back positive. In no way shape or form was I ready to be a mother, and when the physician asked me what options I had considered, I immediately told her I wanted an abortion. She was not judgmental, and helped me set up an appointment. Two weeks later I arrived at the clinic, nervous and unsure and there were a lot of protesters chanting, yelling and coming up to me telling me that I needed to keep my unborn fetus. Planned Parenthood made me feel safe by having escorts near me until I got into the building, and the entire staff was friendly and very helpful. They helped me in so many ways when nobody else would. -- Sheena, 25

 ***

*"I did my monthly self-breast exam, and felt a lump. I couldn't afford to go to the doctor to get it checked out. Instead, I went to Planned Parenthood."*

I ended my job with one company to sign on with another. However, it was a one-month transition period, which meant two months without a paycheck and health insurance. During that time, I had a real scare when I did my monthly self-breast exam, and felt a lump. Money was tight, and I couldn't afford to go to the doctor to get it checked out. Instead, I went to Planned Parenthood and explained my situation. They examined me at no charge, and sent me on my way, never billing me.

I was only in that situation for a few months. There are thousands of people out there who are in that state for much longer, for reasons beyond their control. Thank-you, Planned Parenthood, for understanding that nothing is more important than your health, no matter what your socioeconomic status is. --Anonymous, 30

***

*"Their clinics enabled me to maintain my reproductive health, and control over my body at a time when I could never have afforded to have a child."*



I grew up in poverty, and when I left home at 18 I had no financial support, and no health insurance. I found it necessary to go to Planned Parenthood clinics in order to see a gynecologist, but because of my religious and "pro-life" upbringing, I felt great shame in this. I called the health department, free clinic, and several women's health practices in my town. The health department did not offer gynecological exams; the free clinic did not have a gynecologist on staff; the regular OB-GYNs quoted me upwards of $350, plus additional costs for lab fees, etc. Planned Parenthood was the only place I was able to go, and I paid a flat fee of $250. I was fortunate to be able to take advantage of dramatically cheaper services through Planned Parenthood. Their clinics enabled me to maintain my reproductive health, and control over my body at a time when I could never have afforded to have a child. -- Bethany, 31


 ****"I went to Planned Parenthood because I was having severe pain in my abdomen early on in my pregnancy and I didn't have insurance."* 


I went to Planned Parenthood because I was having severe pain in my abdomen early on in my pregnancy and I didn't have insurance. They were nice and courteous when I was really scared. It ended up being nothing to worry about, but everyone was so caring. For people without insurance, Planned Parenthood is a godsend. -- Erin, 28


 ****"When people go off about Planned Parenthood and how evil they are, I get extremely angry. They helped me decide to keep my son." * I went to Planned Parenthood when my ex left me. I was 15 weeks pregnant and he was pressuring me to get an abortion. I knew in my heart that I didn't want to, but I went, mostly to talk to someone. I was lost and confused and I needed help gathering my thoughts so I could make the decision that would be right for me.

Know what happened? I explained my story, I talked to a counselor and told her everything that was going on and everything I was feeling. And she told me not to get an abortion. From talking to me, she had gathered that I would hold immense guilt because it wasn't what I truly wanted. She was right. She gave me information on groups for single mothers, resources for support groups and therapists, and resources for adoption if I so chose. When people go off about Planned Parenthood and how evil they are, I get extremely angry. They helped me decide to keep my son. -- Amanda, 25

A photo posted by Planned Parenthood (@plannedparenthood) on Aug 18, 2015 at 12:27pm PDT

  *These accounts have been edited and condensed. * *Also on HuffPost:* 
-- 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 23 hours ago.

Do you always follow doctor's orders? What if your doc, health insurance company or even employer could tell if you were taking your medicine? Reported by msnbc.com 22 hours ago.

This was one of those weeks when one event overshadowed pretty much everything else that was going on in the political world. The event, of course, was the second round of Republican presidential debates, which lasted for a grueling five-plus hours.

I've already written two columns on the debates, one composed of my snap reactions just after the conclusion and the second one pointing out how far the discussion of marijuana legal reform has come, since an actual serious discussion of marijuana policy broke out late in the second debate between Rand Paul, Jeb! Bush, and Chris Christie. Or you can always find fact-checking articles pointing out some of the hogwash being touted as fact during the debates. If you really have a lot of time on your hands, you can even read the full transcript of what was said. But for the most part, we're going to focus here on stuff that happened outside the debate hall (known to Republicans as "The Shrine of Saint Ronald of Reagan's Magic Airplane").

Something sneaking up on everyone in the political world is the surprising amount of GOP candidates who are open to ending a massive tax break for hedge fund managers. President Obama has noticed, and is pointing it out. This won't happen overnight, but it cuts to the core of Republican orthodoxy ("no tax hikes ever on anyone for any reason"), so it certainly is an interesting political shift to watch.

In non-debate Republican presidential campaign news, Bobby Jindal wrote an extraordinary opinion piece for CNN, which begins:



President Trump today announced that the first season of "The Apprentice: White House Edition" will air on CBS this fall. Contestants, including Gary Busey, Ted Cruz and Kanye West, will vie for Cabinet positions. The announcement came as the newly renamed "Hair Force One" touched down in South Dakota for the unveiling of President Trump's face on Mount Rushmore. Meanwhile, first lady Melania had reason to celebrate as her White House-branded perfume, Trump, by Trump, hit Macy's shelves...

No, this is not a story from The Onion. It's a vision of our future. The only people who would enjoy a Trump presidency are Jimmy Fallon and Stephen Colbert. The jokes write themselves.

But this is no laughing matter. Our country is slipping away. The liberalism and incompetence of the Obama administration have pushed us to the edge of a socialist abyss.



Oh no! Not the dreaded socialist abyss! Ahhhh! Jindal's tone is either apoplectic or apocalyptic (take your choice) throughout the entire piece. He minces no words when it comes to the threat of The Donald, warning darkly:



Meanwhile, Ted Cruz is clinging to Trump like a limpet to an oil tanker, hoping to suck up his votes when Trump eventually sinks.

Conservatives need to say what we are thinking: Donald Trump is a madman who must be stopped. Failure to speak out against Trump is an endorsement of Clinton.



C'mon, Bobby, tell us what you really think! Jindal's getting pretty desperate these days, and in normal times we'd be speculating about when he'll be exiting the race. However, these are not exactly normal times, so maybe he'll stick around to be the Trump attack dog for a while longer. "A madman who must be stopped" -- wonder what Jindal will do if Trump gets the nomination. Think he'll stick to that R.N.C. pledge to support the eventual nominee?

Speaking of people possibly about to exit the race, Scott Walker has just pulled all his forces back to Iowa. He can't afford to concentrate on any other states, and his donors are reportedly getting pretty nervous. He's banking on a big win in Iowa, which doesn't appear very likely to happen, so he may become the second Republican to exit the race (leaving us with "only" 15 candidates).

Bad news for Carly Fiorina (if anybody actually notices, that is): Hewlett-Packard is about to lay off another 30,000 employees. It's bad for Carly because it reminds people of that time that she was in charge and also laid off 30,000 people. Which might just appear in some ads, if Fiorina climbs in the polls after her first "big table" debate. The ironic thing is that while Carly isn't leading HP anymore (after being fired, of course), the woman who is currently leading it was also trounced in the same California election that Carly lost: Meg Whitman.

But the weirdest news of the week was the breaking story (watch for this video on tonight's news!) of a Marco Rubio top aide sucker-punching a Rand Paul top aide in the face in a barroom. Seriously, no matter how much Democrats squabble, at least they're not engaging in fisticuffs in public.

Speaking of Democrats squabbling, it seems that with his recent rise in the polling, Bernie Sanders is starting to appear to be a threat to the Hillary coronation process. This week alone, Sanders was the target of a hit piece in the New York Times and a bizarre throwback to the days of "red-baiting" from a Hillary Clinton political action committee (more on this last one in the awards section). The Washington Post ran a pretty good rebuttal of the Times piece, which points out the gaping flaws in the story, for anyone truly interested.

Meanwhile, Bernie gave a speech this week to the ultra-conservative Liberty University. The speech was praised by many for opening a dialog with people progressives normally don't even bother talking to. Bernie's argument was a moral one, pointing out that while the audience might disagree with him on hot-button issues like abortion, "family values" should also have an economic component to it. The Bible actually has plenty to say about how we should treat the poor and less fortunate than ourselves, which the Pope is also about to remind America of, in his upcoming visit.

Hillary's team is swearing that they're sticking to her original campaign plan, which is rather unbelievable since this was the first week of dramatic changes in her campaign style. I guess we're supposed to believe that she planned this all along, or something. Hillary's been everywhere this week, on Ellen's show, on the Tonight Show, and this Sunday she'll do her first sit-down interview of her entire campaign on a Sunday-morning political show (Face The Nation on CBS). Hillary is making herself much more accessible to the press of late, and trying to show a more human side as well. We personally don't watch daytime television (although we heard Clinton danced on Ellen's show), but we do think that Hillary was pretty funny and relaxed on her appearance on Jimmy Fallon's show. Hillary Clinton could never have a second career as a stand-up comic (we still cringe when we recall how she blew the "Live from New York, it's Saturday Night" line, the last time she ran), but she is indeed making a concerted effort to appear much more human and much less scripted these days -- which is a welcome change and should be encouraged.

Let's see, what else is going on? Dee Snider reminded us all of the farce that was the "P.M.R.C." -- which happened 30 years ago and still stands out as one of the stupidest wastes of time Congress has ever been involved in (right up there with the 50's demonization of comic books). I wrote about this many years ago, and included Frank Zappa's entire written condemnation of the proceedings, but Dee Snider also testified next to Zappa, so his take is also an excellent one to read. Remember, without eternal vigilance, senators' wives get up to all sorts of nonsense!

Speaking of poking government noses where they don't belong, the F.B.I. abruptly yanked a "wax-like, life-size figure of J. Edgar Hoover" from a historical display. It seems the agency is finally realizing that Hoover is not a figure worth looking up to. From the article:



Current FBI Director James B. Comey has invoked Hoover's toxic legacy to warn new agents about the exercise of their powers.

In a speech at Georgetown University in February, Comey said he makes new agents and analysts study the F.B.I.'s relationship with [Martin Luther] King and visit his memorial so they can ponder the mistakes of the past. Comey also said that he keeps a letter on his desk from then-Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy approving Hoover's baseless request to wiretap King's telephone calls.

"The reason I do those things is to ensure that we remember our mistakes and that we learn from them," Comey said. "So we must talk about our history. It is a hard truth that lives on."

F.B.I. officials said that sending the Hoover figure to New York seemed to be a harmless idea at first. The figure -- a jowly, stern-faced Hoover dressed in a dark suit -- was originally on display in Washington at the F.B.I. headquarters building, which is named after Hoover, but the figure had been in storage for years.



To completely end the legacy, that last bit needs addressing as well -- the part about the headquarters "named after Hoover." When the building is renamed, we'll believe the F.B.I. is serious about disavowing Hoover's legacy.

In marijuana news, Colorado heard the actual discussion about federal marijuana policy during the Republican debate, and immediately declared a one-day "tax holiday" on marijuana sales. Well, no, that's not really how it happened (the truth is far more mundane), but it sure would have been amusing if it had been a celebration of Rand Paul speaking sense to millions of Republican voters.

And a warning is necessary to introduce our final introductory paragraph, because it contains some unseemly language. If that sort of thing offends you, then just quickly skip to the awards section. Fair warning. A man in New York was just vindicated on First Amendment grounds for insulting a town. He got a speeding ticket, and while attempting to pay the ticket by mail, wrote his own political opinion of the town on it, thus exercising his right to free political speech. He crossed out the town's name (ironically enough, "Liberty, New York") and wrote in "Tyranny" instead. Then he went free-form, expressing the opinion: "Fuck your shitty town bitches" on the form, before mailing it in with his guilty plea and payment. The town then refused his payment and forced him to appear before a judge, where he was promptly arrested for "aggravated harassment." A federal judge just agreed with his case that his First Amendment rights were violated, leaving us all free to express whatever opinion we wish -- no matter how profane -- on any speeding tickets we get in the future. Another win for free speech!

 

Before we get to the main prize, we've got two *Honorable Mentions* to hand out. The first goes to Hillary Clinton. For months now, we've seen a tightly-controlled campaign from a tightly-wound candidate. Press access to her was severely restricted, and she seemed to be reinforcing the image of an over-calculating, over-cautious campaigner. This week, the floodgates were opened. Hillary's now appearing on television, giving serious sit-down interviews, and working hard to put the email questions to rest. She's also attempting to get outside her own comfort zone and show off her human side better. Her appearance on Jimmy Fallon's show was pretty well done all around (it appeared the night of the debate, so it wasn't noticed by everyone), and it should boost her confidence for making these sorts of appearances in the future. She'll be appearing on CBS Sunday morning, which was another noticeable hole in her campaign strategy (she hasn't done any Sunday morning shows yet). For attempting to steer her campaign in a new and better direction, Clinton gets some credit.

Our second *Honorable Mention* goes this week to Senator Elizabeth Warren. Warren just introduced a bill to ban prospective employers from performing credit checks on job applicants for most jobs. There is no evidence that having something bad on your credit history (oftentimes, erroneously) has anything to do with job performance at all. Having such a bad mark is like a modern-day scarlet letter, because it perpetuates a vicious cycle (can't pay your bills, but can't get a good job so that you can pay your bills). The bill probably won't pass right away, but this is precisely the reason so many progressives love Warren -- for identifying issues that need fixing, and then pushing changes to fix the problems.

But our *Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week* this week is Senator Bernie Sanders. Sanders introduced a bill of his own this week, already fulfilling a campaign promise, which would ban private prisons. The private prison industry has completely skewed the way governments view incarceration, and it is rather sickening to think about people making millions of dollars off of keeping people locked up. This was all the fallout of the Republican-led "privatization" frenzy, decades ago, and it's great to see Sanders attacking the root of the problem.

But this would have earned him no more than an *Honorable Mention* (the bill hasn't been passed or anything, in other words). Instead, this week Bernie gets his twelfth *MIDOTW* (passing up Hillary Clinton's 11) for immediately raising over a million dollars off the Clinton camp's pathetic red-baiting attack. Bernie correctly pointed out that it "was the kind of onslaught I expected to see from the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson."

But we've covered all that below in the next section, so we'll just move right along to explain what happened.

[Congratulate Senator Bernie Sanders on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

We're not going to give the *Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week* award to Hillary Clinton, tempting though it may be. Instead, we're awarding it to the "Correct The Record" super PAC, which is supporting Clinton's campaign. This hair-splitting is necessary to preserve the fiction that PACs never "coordinate" with the campaigns, meaning the entire mess can't directly be laid at Hillary's door.

Huffington Post broke the story, when Correct The Record sent them an email which they tried to place "off the record" (in other words, filed under "anonymous rumors to report on"). The reporter hadn't agreed to this, so the email's contents were reported on.

The case is downright bizarre, because it is such a flimsy and ham-fisted attempt at politically smearing Bernie Sanders. This is a case study in innuendo and red-baiting (and what might be called terrorism-baiting). Here's the tortured logic of Correct The Record:

Jeremy Corbyn just became Britain's new Labour Party leader. Corbyn is a socialist (and not just the way the word is tossed around here across the pond -- he's the real thing). Sanders and Corbyn have said nice things about each other. Corbyn has also made some "extreme comments" about Osama Bin Laden, Hezbollah, NATO, Russia, and Hugo Chavez. Therefore, Bernie Sanders loves terrorists and communist leaders. Ergo, Sanders is probably a commie himself.

Think that's an exaggeration? Read the whole story for yourself and decide.

Sanders immediately used this smear attempt in fundraising, stating not only that this was reminiscent of the Koch brothers but also that Team Hillary "suggested I'd be friendly with Middle East terrorist organizations, and even tried to link me to a dead communist dictator." He's raised $1.2 million so far, which might just give Correct The Record a few second thoughts about trying such mudslinging again -- or at the very least, perhaps try to come up with a smear that's even remotely believable and doesn't involve such transparent attempts of calling Bernie a commie.

For bringing us all back to the red-baiting era, for trying to push a downright laughable "six degrees from Kevin Bacon" linkage, and for all-around incompetence, Correct The Record is indeed our *Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week*.

The most amusing thing in this whole sorry episode is that Bernie faced smear attempts from the mainstream media this week as well as from Team Hillary. Sounds like some folks are getting just a wee bit worried about the success of Bernie's campaign, doesn't it?

[Correct The Record is part of a political campaign (whether they admit it to the I.R.S. or not), and we have a blanket policy of not linking to such sites, so you'll have to do your own web search to let them know what you think of their actions.]

 

*Volume 362* (9/18/15)

We have some debate-themed talking points this week, and some from the rest of the political world. There's actually only one about Donald Trump this week, and it even comes from a Republican. As always, these talking points are provided for Democrats to use everywhere, from the Sunday morning chatfests to talking with coworkers around the water cooler.

 *   More good Obamacare data is in*Democrats need to point out every single time good stats like these come in.

"Once again, I see new figures are out showing the success of the Affordable Care Act in getting more and more Americans insured. Last year alone, nine million more people had health insurance coverage than in 2013. The percentage of people uninsured dropped from 13.3 percent to 10.4 percent. Over and over again, the numbers prove that the sky has not fallen and Obamacare is doing precisely what it was intended to do. The naysayers don't want to even talk about Obamacare at all anymore -- I barely even heard it mentioned in the debates -- because all their horror stories simply have not come true. As the data show, over and over again."

 *   Republicans coming to their senses on weed*A big tectonic shift just happened in the Republican Party. So point it out!

"I was fascinated to hear Republicans debate reforming federal laws on marijuana the other night. Things Republicans used to fight hard against are now actually being bragged about, as positive accomplishments! Republicans fought hard against the idea of drug courts -- and now they all seem to agree that the "tough on crime" and "mandatory minimums" policies they all pushed back in the 1980s have been proven to be disastrous. Drug courts are now something Republicans not only support but brag about! Likewise, the concept of medical marijuana was denounced by just about all Republicans just a few short years ago, and now even Chris Christie -- who promises to crack down on legal recreational use -- touts New Jersey's acceptance of medical marijuana as a political plus. After pushing policies that don't work ever since Nancy Reagan's time, Republicans are finally beginning to see the light on marijuana reform. It's about time, and I look forward to hearing what the Democratic candidates have to say on the issue as well."

 *   Pope actually reads all of the Bible*The Pope's coming to town, and many Republicans are getting nervous.

"Pope Francis will be coming to America soon, and it seems that some Republicans are running away from the Pope in fear of what he'll say. It seems they want to use religious leaders' statements when politically convenient, but then ignore statements that they don't want to hear. Sounds like a pretty thin grasp of Christianity, to me. Unlike many of these religiously-choosy Republicans, the Pope has actually read all the Bible -- even those parts about being a good shepherd of the Earth and helping the poor whenever possible. There are in fact many things in the Bible that many politicians just conveniently omit, and the Pope's about to remind them of a few. Should be interesting!"

 *   Shutdown ahead!*There isn't just one issue, there are actually many ways a shutdown could happen soon.

"Once again, America faces the consequences of John Boehner's absolute lack of the ability to lead or control his own party. Although Republicans control both houses of Congress, they have not done what they promised they would do -- pass a budget on time, the way it is supposed to happen. Because of this, we need a short-term extension while they do the job they should have been doing all year long. Everyone knows how this will end -- Republicans and Democrats will have to strike some sort of spending deal, since a bill can't pass the Senate without Democratic support. But over in the House, Boehner can't even manage to pass a bill with a clear majority of Republicans because the Tea Partiers want to throw another conniption fit and shut down the federal government. This shutdown will not gain them anything, and a deal will inevitably be struck in the end. But due to Boehner's weakness as a leader, we may see the shutdown happen anyway. As Ronald Reagan might have said, 'there they go again...'."

 *   That leaves 47 percent, doesn't it?*Jeb! Bush wants to cut taxes on rich folks. Surprise, surprise!

"I see Jeb Bush released his tax plan this week. It calls for lots of tax cuts, but the proportions are guaranteed to increase income inequality in America. This is because a whopping 53 percent of these tax cuts would go to the top one percent of earners. That's Bush's idea of 'middle-class tax cuts,' I guess. What I found amusing is that if you do the math, that means the other 99 percent of workers would get 47 percent of the Bush tax cuts. Now where have I heard the figure '47 percent' on the campaign trail before? Hmmm...."

 *   Republican-on-Republican violence*Don't even need to come up with a Trump talking point this week. Bobby Jindal already did a fine job of doing so!

"Right after the second debate, Bobby Jindal -- desperate for attention, obviously -- wrote an anti-Trump rant for CNN. It contains all sorts of hilarious bits, including Gary Busey as a Trump cabinet member, Trump's face on Mount Rushmore, and renaming his airplane 'Hair Force One.' Pretty funny stuff, and as Jindal points out, 'the jokes write themselves.' But later on, Jindal became almost unhinged in his Trump-hating, stating 'Donald Trump is a madman who must be stopped.' Think Jindal will be supporting Trump if he wins the GOP nomination? Hope Reince Priebus has Jindal's sworn loyalty oath on file, looks like he might need it!"

 *   Still no occupation of Texas*Likely the last time we'll be using this one. One would like to hope, at any rate.

"As Salon just helpfully pointed out, the 'Jade Helm 15' military exercise just wrapped up, and Texas is still somehow not occupied by the American military. Instead of the wild-eyed expectation that troops would be 'marching through your town, implementing Obamacare, pardoning undocumented workers and replacing the Constitution with Sharia law,' absolutely nothing happened instead. I'm still waiting for Texas Governor Greg Abbott to admit he was 'horribly wrong about the whole thing,' but I'm not exactly holding my breath."

 

Chris Weigant blogs at:Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Become a fan of Chris on Huffington Post
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank

 

-- 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 18 hours ago.

A patient reads his Fitbit Surge data on his iPhone while waiting in the doctor's office. (AP Photo/Mel Evans) CSS wants people to walk more. In July, the Swiss health insurance company launched a pilot program with 2,000 volunteers to collect data on how far each person walks in an average day, [...] Reported by Forbes.com 9 hours ago.

Q: What is the penalty now for not having health insurance? Will it be the same for 2016? Reported by ChicagoTribune 18 hours ago.

Submitted by Dan Doyle via OilPrice.com,

On September 10th the *EIA reported a production decline in the Lower 48* - essentially shale production - of 208,000 BOPD. That is *a staggeringly enormous number, approximately 10 percent of the estimated global over-supply.* Additionally, it was a week-over-week number which makes it all the more impressive. Yet it received little attention through the week. Rather, Goldman Sachs was grabbing all the headlines with its $20 call on oil.

*This week,* I was looking for a possible correction in that number with a zero decline or possibly even a gain (remember, the EIA numbers are estimates). But* instead we got another decline of 35,000 BOPD. *

Back in June I wrote about the coming decline. Shale oil wells lose a lot of production up front, maybe 70 percent in the first year before tapering off at a 5 to 10 percent annual decline over the next few years until leveling off for the life of the well - maybe 20 years or so out. *You can think of it as a slope. Once you crest it, the drop is precipitous and picks up speed before finding a bottom. We are undoubtedly now racing down that slope.*

 

*To date, we have lost about 500,000 BOPD in the Lower 48. *We will lose that again before the year is out. Pundits will claim otherwise, suggesting that oil in the 50’s or 60‘s will spur activity. But if that activity is in drilling, we won’t see any effect for a half a year or so. If it is in fracking drilled but uncompleted wells (“DUC’s”), that won’t mean much either over time. DUC’s have been the story of 2015 though they have had little effect on stopping the declines being put in.

Back when the onslaught began, which I mark as Thanksgiving Day 2014—when OPEC declined to cut—Wall Street began talking of shale as being a switch; as in you can turn it on and off. Well, in the perspective of a remote offshore project and the 10 years that it takes to bear fruit, then the answer is yes. But shale is not a switch when it comes to controlling commodity prices, which are much more impatient. *It took a full 6 to 7 months for the falling rig count to cast a shadow over production declines. And even then the initial declines were shallow, more of a cresting action really. *So, going forward, we may have a new metric. That is, a sudden decline in rigs will take 6 to 9 months to show up in production in any meaningful way.

*We also still have a somewhat uneducated media that continues to shrug off its homework. *We’re about a year into this bear market and oil has been covered to death on the financial news but it is still being misreported. As I mentioned above, the thought that $60 causes a switch to be thrown is wrong.

*Operators are battered and bruised.* Sensible ones like EOG are holding onto their money. Others like Pioneer are thumping their chests claiming they can drill anywhere any time on their better prospects (but what company is going to claim holding mediocre acreage?). Full disclosure: I own stock in both, but should I stumble upon a few bucks (I run a frack company so these days I’m not counting on it) it would go to EOG.

*But, for the most part, very few operators are going to run headlong into a drilling program on a modest recovery. *There is also the matter of their banks. They won’t let them. The shine is officially off shale in the debt markets. There are the private equity folks and other bottom feeders that are finding their way into the market but for the most part they are spending money on distressed assets, not new oil and gas wells.

*Then there are the service companies*. If you imagine your worst enemy, someone that you wanted to see suffer some punishment, then let them run a service company right now.

*When the work stops so does the income.* All of it. That puts you in the position of watching receivables, which you begin staring at very, very closely, waiting for the cracks to develop. Back in the good old days—2012 or so—a single stage on a shale job was being priced at $125,000 or more. The money being made was giddy. In 2014, that same stage was running around $75,000+ because of heightened competition. As of September 2015, that same stage is now down into the $30,000’s. That’s underwater. Smaller pressure pumper’s are quietly accusing the goliaths of dumping. Wall Street pundits would have you believe that there are new efficiencies being uncovered, but the fact is that those who can are jostling for (a) market share and (b) are using their weight to crush and snuff out the newbies that have come on in recent years with all that private equity money.

When prices come back and operators are chomping at the bit to get back to work, idled service equipment will have to be brought back on-line, which is costly and time consuming. You can’t just turn a key to restart a mothballed blender or frac pump. Idled time always translates into repairs. This is when all the weak points in your equipment are suddenly and unexpectedly exposed. New crews will have to be hired and retrained because the old crews have either moved onto other industries under mass layoffs or will move on once their 6 months of unemployment benefits run out. It is time consuming to hire and re-train. And these are only some of the challenges, the biggest being the cost of ramping up without cash flow to rely on.

*Consolidations in service providers are now well underway. *We’ve seen Halliburton and Baker Hughes but that was pre-downturn. There’s a few other M&A deals but for the most part it has been a story of closings and consolidations. North American frack camps are being closed at an alarming rate. Equipment that could only be bought new last year is now plentiful at Richie Brother’s auctions. Frack sand trailers are parked in front yards and lots all across American’s oil and gas plays. Service yards that are normally empty in good times are stuffed right up to the chain link fence with trucks, trailers, pickups and assorted equipment.

*So much has been made of new efficiencies in the media but there really aren’t any “new” efficiencies other than changes in frack designs, which continue to call for more sand per stage, closer spacing’s between stages (meaning more fracks per well), and some changes in additive chemistry. *Sand pricing has come way down as have chemicals, but labor remains where it was. You still need the same number of crew on a well site. No one has come up with robotics to set trucks and hammer in the iron and hoses that connect them. Health insurance is going up. Vehicle, inland marine and general liability insurance are range-bound to up. Taxes don’t go away and then there’s debt. And that’s plentiful and likely increasing. There are some economies these days but the efficiency story should be ignored for the most part.

*That’s just the United States. Then there’s the rest of the world. *Truthfully, I don’t know what the hell is going on in the Saudi oilfields, but I’m assuming Ed Morse at Citibank does. Morse was the analyst who called the top. A few weeks ago he stated that Saudi production could go no higher. That was big and in my mind it likely also marked the bottom. The Saudis chose not to cut last November, restated their 30mm BOPD OPEC objective, then began pumping like hell. They did announce that a 200,000 BOPD increase would be coming and maybe it has, but if they can go no higher, then global production has plateaued. Factor in the States, and other areas in decline, and I can’t see many traders and speculators lining up on the short side when the IEA is seeing oil demand going above 96 MBPD next year and the EIA is throwing out staggering week-over-week declines.

But I’ve been wrong on this count before. I didn’t see the second leg down this summer and Goldman did.* But this $20 bearish position is over-baked. It’s also too reliant on inventory numbers.*

*Inventories will remain high in some parts of the world and will be drawn down in others.* But overall, rising global demand and shrinking U.S. production (and other areas as well) will begin to eat away at inventory. It just requires some patience. And markets won’t wait to adjust pricing until we hit a balance. There will be some foreshadowing in oil prices here.

*Each of the 3 stages needed to move to a sustainable price have to be given time to play out. The rig count story has been told with a brutally fast 60 percent drop. Meaningful production declines are on. Next will be inventory draw downs; in that order.* As to the latter, we’re just beginning to see the effects of the rig count. Cushing was down 2 million bbls this week, so no tank topping there. And non-strategic U.S. storage is off 30 million bbls from its high. That’s not even 10 percent but just wait. Large drawdowns will be here sooner than predicted. Reported by Zero Hedge 32 minutes ago.

NEW TECHNOLOGY, which monitors how fast you drive and where you go, as well as your Facebook profile is the future for setting insurance premiums.

A survey by Interim Partners, found that, in addition to tracking technology installed in potential customers’ cars, insurance executives said social media profiling, combined with geographic, political and economic data, was driving the industry forward.

The majority of industry executives expected the biggest developments to come in the car and health insurance sectors.

Developments in data analysis allow for more accurate profiling, from whether you live in a crime-hotspot or an earthquake fault-line, and therefore pricing, and will deliver more reliable policies for insurers.

The survey found that 33 per cent of insurance executives thought technology was the best investment to boost profits, ahead of investing in staff or raising premiums. Reported by City A.M. 17 hours ago.

The Actually Helpful Guide to Picking a Health Insurance Plan Reported by ajc.com 12 hours ago.

Make your way through the Medicare maze with help from the experts at AARP and For Dummies

Hoboken, N.J. (PRWEB) September 21, 2015

America’s Baby Boomers are now turning 65 at the rate of about 10,000 a day, yet very few have any idea about how Medicare works, when they should sign up or how the program fits in with other health insurance they may have. To address these questions and more, Wiley and AARP have published the second edition of Medicare For Dummies® (Wiley, 978-1-119-07942-2, September 2015, US $19.99).

Written by Patricia Barry, features editor of AARP Media as well its online “Ms. Medicare” columnist, Medicare For Dummies, 2nd Edition is the complete guide for navigating Medicare’s often-confusing complexities and helps consumers avoid mistakes that could cost them heavily. The book describes what Medicare covers and what beneficiaries pay, with up-to-date information on the costs of premiums, deductibles and copays—and how to reduce these expenses.

“This book will help anybody with Medicare get the best out of their coverage and save money,” said Barry. “Medicare For Dummies is especially useful for people who are about to become eligible for the program, because that’s when they need to make the right decisions—out of an array of often confusing options—and avoid pitfalls that could cost them dearly.”

This latest edition explains how individuals can:· Qualify for Medicare according to their personal circumstances, including new information on the rights of people in same-sex marriages.
· Sign up at the right time to avoid lifelong late penalties.
· Sort through Medicare’s many options to ensure they’re making the decision that’s best for them.

Covering everything from the basics to more complex problems and where to find help, AARP’s Medicare For Dummies, 2nd Edition helps readers get the most out of Medicare.

Medicare For Dummies, 2nd Edition is now available for purchase online and at retailers nationwide in both print and all e-book formats. For a full list of retailers, visit http://www.dummies.com/buy/9781119079422. To request a review copy or author interview, contact Chantal Kowalski at ckowalski(at)wiley(dot)com.

About the author:

Patricia Barry is features editor of AARP Media as well as its online “Ms. Medicare” columnist. A recognized authority on Medicare and Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage who has written extensively for consumers, Barry has answered thousands of questions sent by Medicare beneficiaries across the nation.

About For Dummies®
After 20 years, more than 250 million copies printed, and millions of e-books downloaded, For Dummies is the world’s bestselling reference series, well known for enriching people’s lives by making knowledge accessible in a fun and easy way. Loyal customers around the globe agree that For Dummies is “more than a publishing phenomenon…[it is] a sign of the times,” [The New York Times]. With more than 1,800 active topics covering everything from health to history, music to math, sports to self-help, technology to travel, For Dummies is dedicated to Making Everything Easier. The For Dummies brand presence continues to expand wherever there is a need to know, including mobile apps, e-learning courses, a corporate custom publishing program, a robust consumer website, and a licensed product line that includes consumer electronics, culinary, crafts, video, software, musical instrument packs, home improvement, automotive, game, and more. For more information, visit Dummies.com. For Dummies is a branded imprint of Wiley.

About AARP
AARP is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, with a membership of nearly 38 million, that helps people turn their goals and dreams into real possibilities, strengthens communities and fights for the issues that matter most to families such as healthcare, employment and income security, retirement planning, affordable utilities and protection from financial abuse. We advocate for individuals in the marketplace by selecting products and services of high quality and value to carry the AARP name as well as help our members obtain discounts on a wide range of products, travel, and services. A trusted source for lifestyle tips, news and educational information, AARP produces AARP The Magazine, the world's largest circulation magazine; AARP Bulletin; http://www.aarp.org; AARP TV & Radio; AARP Books; and AARP en Español, a Spanish-language website addressing the interests and needs of Hispanics. AARP does not endorse candidates for public office or make contributions to political campaigns or candidates. The AARP Foundation is an affiliated charity that provides security, protection, and empowerment to older persons in need with support from thousands of volunteers, donors, and sponsors. AARP has staffed offices in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Learn more at http://www.aarp.org.

Follow us on Twitter @ForDummies and @AARP, and friend us on Facebook.

### Reported by PRWeb 8 hours ago.

Identifying payroll and HR management technology preferences, while gaining an understanding of organizations’ awareness to the Affordable Care Act Employer mandate requirements

Reston, VA (PRWEB) September 21, 2015

A survey and webcast regarding payroll management and ACA readiness is announced by Brittenford Systems, a provider of financial management solutions to growing businesses.

The anonymous and confidential survey will identify payroll and HR management technology preferences, while gaining an understanding of organizations’ awareness to the Affordable Care Act Employer mandate requirements. The results will be shared in a free webcast scheduled for October 14, 2015 at 1:30 pm ET.

Titled “ACA Readiness Checklist: Is Your Organization ACA Compliant?,” this free webcast will feature Ted Trevorrow, Certified Health Insurance Navigator with the Resources for Human Development, an expert in ACA compliance, who will shed light on this topic.

Joining Mr. Trevorrow is Hartmuth Csandi-Schwartz, Director of Business Operations of a Maryland-based nonprofit and Keith Schmidt, Account Executive at Integrity Data, who will discuss this organizations recent implementation of an ACA compliant product within their payroll solution.

“With new requirements under the Affordable Care Act taking place for small and medium employers in less than three months, having the right plan of action is critical to ensure compliance and reduce risk,” said Shereen Mahoney, CEO of Brittenford Systems. “This webcast will help you to understand the road ahead so that you can plan and act accordingly.”

To register for the free ACA Readiness Checklist: Is Your Organization ACA Compliant? Webcast, link to https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/3028053192980277506

To take the Payroll Management and ACA Requirements survey, link to: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PayrollACA

###

About Brittenford Systems
Brittenford Systems is a nationally recognized consulting firm that specializes in delivering financial management and business intelligence solutions as well as CIO Advisory Services to mid-market companies. Based in the Washington, DC area, we help our clients leverage technology solutions to improve business processes and productivity, reduce operational costs, and get timely financial information so they can run their businesses more efficiently.

At Brittenford, we understand that managing financial information effectively is the backbone of a business. With our extensive industry experience and unique approach, we help non-profit, project-based, and international organizations implement and support Microsoft Dynamics GP, Dynamics SL, and cloud-based Intacct and Host Analytics. For more information about Brittenford Systems, please visit http://www.brittenford.com or call 703-860-6945.

About Ted Trevorrow
Ted Trevorrow has 22 years of experience in the life and health insurance industry and, since, 2013 has served as an HHS Certified Navigator and Certified Application Counselor. He also has 19 years of experience in the IT business. He has worked as a systems analyst, computer programmer, a sales specialist and agency branch manager. As a Navigator during 2013 and 2014, Trevorrow specialized in handling state and federal legislator’s constituent calls for Affordable Care Act assistance. He was also versed in the ACA small business exchange, SHOP.

About Hartmuth Csanadi-Schwartz
Hartmuth Csanadi-Schwartz has been with The Arc of South Maryland, a nonprofit organization that creates independence and personal success opportunities for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, for 13 years. There, he is Director of Business Operations, overseeing finance, facility management and IT. Prior to this role, Mr. Csanadi-Schwartz was CFO of The Arc. He moved to the U.S. from Germany in 2001 with a Business Administration and Economics degree. Here, he received his Accounting degree and has experience working at a CPA firm.

About Keith Schmidt
Keith Schmidt has been with Integrity Data for 13 years. He is proficient in the ACA - Affordable Care Act regulations. Prior to his current position as a Senior Account Executive, Keith had been a consultant for 8 years working with ERP software and document management/workflow solutions. For 5 of those years he specialized in human resources and payroll implementations in the public sector and healthcare industries. Keith also has wide ranging experience in project management, gap analysis, software design and functional specifications, quality assurance, programming, configuration, data migration, user acceptance testing, training and customer service. In addition to certifications in Dynamics GP HR and Payroll, Essentials, Financials, Report writer, and Installation, Keith has completed graduate coursework in Project management, Training, Scheduling and Cost Accounting. Reported by PRWeb 8 hours ago.

U.S companies are swiftly adding health insurance benefits for employees who want to transition to another gender, a fairly inexpensive way to show they're serious about a diverse workforce because so few people actually use them.More than 415 of about 780 firms surveyed... Reported by Newsmax 4 hours ago.

Zenefits, a fast-growing startup with cloud software for managing health insurance and other employee benefits, is announcing today the new ACA Compliance Automation feature to ensure that companies provide health care in accord with the rules of the U.S. Affordable Care Act. Zenefits provides its core software free of charge — the startup brings in […] Reported by VentureBeat 4 hours ago.

In a front-page Wall Street Journal article a few days ago, the projection was made that a single-payer national health insurance program (NHI), as part of the presidential campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), would cost $15 trillion over ten years. Accurate though that figure is, this under-researched article conveys disingenuous misinformation to a broad readership that might be inclined to dismiss such a program as too expensive to even consider.

This article is irresponsible in what it doesn't say-- what the savings would be of reining in our current wasteful, overly bureaucratic profit-driven medical industrial complex, and the benefits that NHI would bring to our entire population compared to what we have now or have ever had.

Thanks to a landmark study in 2013 by Gerald Friedman, Professor and Chairman of the Department of Economics at the University of Massachusetts, we have a solid financial analysis of the costs and benefits of a single-payer national health plan. With NHI, $592 billion would be saved annually by cutting the administrative waste of some 1,300 private health insurers ($476 billion) and reducing pharmaceutical prices to European levels ($116 billion). These savings would be enough to cover all of the 44 million uninsured (at the time of his study) and upgrade benefits for all other Americans, even including dental and long-term care. A single-payer public financing system would be established, similar to traditional (not privatized) Medicare, coupled with a private delivery system. Instead of having to pay the increasing costs of private health insurance, so often with unaffordable deductibles and other cost-sharing, patients would present their NHI cards at the point of service without cost-sharing or other out-of-pocket costs. Care would be based on medical need, not ability to pay. (2)

The current single-payer bill in the House of Representatives, H. R. 676, The Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D. MI), includes funding to absorb the costs of converting investor-owned facilities, such as hospitals, nursing homes and ambulatory surgery centers, to non-profit status over a 15-year transition period. Savings would also fund $51 billion in transition costs, such as retraining displaced workers. (3)

When we look at cost controls after NHI is enacted, the argument for it becomes even more compelling. Cost controls would include negotiated annual budgets with hospitals, nursing homes and other facilities, negotiated fees with physicians and other health care professionals, and bulk purchasing for prescription drugs, as the Veterans Administration has done for many years in getting 40 percent discounts.

Health care inflation advances relentlessly, except for some temporary slowing with the depressed economy, despite virtually all efforts to contain costs in recent decades. A growing part of our population is unable to afford necessary care. For those who say that the ACA will redress these problems if we just give it more time, these are some of the markers that show how unaffordable health care still is more than five years after the ACA was enacted:
· According to the Milliman Medical Index (MMI), the typical family of four with employer-sponsored insurance paid23,215 in 2014 for health care, including payroll deductions and out-of-pocket costs. The MMI grew by an average of 7.6 percent a year between 2004 and 2014, about three times the annual growth rate of the consumer· price index (CPI) of 2.3 percent. (4)· The median household income in the U. S. was53,657 in 2014, down from57,357 before the recession and its peak of57,843 in 1999, according to the most recent Census data. (5)· Deductibles for private health insurance grew by 42 percent in 2013 to an average of5,081 a year in 2014. (6)· According to a 2014 report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, one in three Americans have difficulty in paying their medical bills, even when insured, especially as a result of unaffordable premiums, increasing cost-sharing, and health plan coverage limits or exclusions.(7)· New cancer drugs are routinely priced above100,000 a year, about twice the average annual household income.
(8)Back to the $15 trillion ten-year price tag for NHI--those are federal expenditures before almost $5 trillion in savings over ten years are deducted. As Gerald Friedman has written in an open letter to the Huffington Post:

[The Wall Street Journal article] correctly puts the additional federal spending for health care under H. R. 676 (a single-payer health plan) at $15 trillion over ten years. It neglects to add, however, that by spending these vast sums, we would, as a country, save nearly $5 trillion over ten years in reduced administrative waste, lower pharmaceutical and device prices, and by lowering the rate of medical inflation. These financial savings would be felt by businesses and by state and local governments who would no longer be paying for health insurance for their employees; and by retirees and working Americans who would no longer have to pay for their health insurance or for co-payments and deductibles. Beyond these financial savings, H. R. 676 would also save thousands of lives a year by expanding access to health care for the uninsured and underinsured. (9)

In addition to the federal government saving money with NHI, 95 percent of Americans would pay less than they now do for health insurance and medical care. NHI would be funded by a progressive system of taxation, mainly the payroll tax for those with annual incomes less than $225,000--$900 for those with incomes less than $53,000 a year, $6,000 for those earning $100,000 a year, and $12,000 for those with incomes of $200,000. Employers would be relieved of their burden of paying for employer-sponsored health insurance, while gaining a healthier workforce and greater capacity to compete in a global marketplace.

So here's the bottom line--NHI would bring our entire population more protection against the costs of health care, at a lower cost than we now pay, with more efficiency and fairness, while eliminating today's narrow networks that restrict our choice of physicians, other health professionals, and hospitals. Opponents who decry its costs are distorting the issue as they try to perpetuate profit-driven markets at the expense of patients, their families, and taxpayers.

.
References:

1. Meckler, L. Price tag of Sanders proposals: $18 trillion. Wall Street Journal, September 15, 2015: A1.

2. Friedman, G. Funding H. R. 676: The Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act. How We Can Afford a National Single-Payer Health Plan. Physicians for a National Health Program. Chicago, IL, July 31, 2013.

3. Ibid # 2.

4. Armour, S. Health costs hinge on Supreme Court's ruling. Wall Street Journal, May 25, 2015.

5. http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf

6. Scism, L, Martin, TW. Deductibles fuel new worries of health-law sticker shock. Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2013.

7. Pollitz, K, Cox, C, Lucia, K et al. Medical debt among people with health insurance. Kaiser Family Foundation, January 2014.

8. Szalso, Z. Skyrocketing drug prices leave cures out of reach for some patients. USA Today, June 15, 2015.

9. Friedman, G. An open letter to the Wall Street Journal on its Bernie Sanders hit piece. Huffington Post, September 15, 2015.

-- 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.

Before you start salivating at the mouth, hoping this blog is gonna show you to the pearly gates of free laser hair removal, let me be real with you:

Getting insurance to pay for laser hair removal is damn near impossible.

Because the procedure is considered cosmetic and medically unnecessary, you will very likely be left with a hefty bill.

However, I've come across forums, blogs and stories of folks getting their laser hair removal covered by insurance. And they had one factor in common:

"Their excessive unwanted hair is caused by a medical condition that is effecting them physically, meaning, their daily, normal functions are compromised."

And I came across several instances of folks asking if having laser hair removal can be covered as a tax write off was possible even if it was medically allowed but still not covered by health insurance.

According to the IRS, folks (living in the U.S.) cannot write off these services (or many medical services) either if these expenses are *not* more than 10% of your annual income. Get more information on that on the IRS website.

So, you're still left in the hairy dust.

However, miracles do happen! Doctors who truly understand the struggle of not feeling or looking feminine are more likely to help you correct your appearance.

Now, I can guarantee you they won't help if you're lazy and just don't want to shave your legs. But they may be willing to bend the rules if you have some serious tested and proven hormonal problems.

Ultimately, getting your laser hair removal covered by insurance will depend very much on your doctor and how understanding they are with your appearance issues.

Here are some tips folks have taken to get the elusive procedure covered by insurance.

*Have your doctor argue the case.* Unwanted hair can be a bane for many women, especially teenage girls still trying to understand their hormones. Excessive hair can begin due to hormonal imbalance from conditions like PCOS, diabetes, weight gain, thyroid problems, or even certain types of cancers. In addition to excessive hair, these conditions could truly cause more physical problems for you that a doctor could argue much better than you. He or she could bill the right code to the insurance company and provide reasoning for their decision as oppose to you simply being sick of shaving every other day. So, if you're in good graces with your doc, ask them to fight the good fight with insurance for you. It could happen in your favor!

*Visit doctors who perform laser hair removal in their offices. *I've found that doctors who perform cosmetic procedures in their office are far more sympathetic of their patients' self-image issues. They may be more likely to fight your case more effectively. And even if they are unable to get your laser hair removal covered by insurance, they're more likely to offer generous discounts and payment plans for you.

*Get to a doctor while you're a kid!* I want to apologize to the 30+ crowd of ladies who are pulling at their chin hairs write now, cursing me over that subtitle. But it's true. If a teenage loved one is experiencing excessive body hair, a doctor would be more willing to correct the issue. Teenagers are very prone to self-esteem problems because of their looks. Mental disorders like depression and anxiety are to be expected if a doctor notices a young girl with a 5 'o clock shadow and they may be more willing to bend the insurance rules to help that kid out.

*Is a necessary medication causing your excessive body hair?* It's not impossible that a medication is causing the testosterone in your body to start raging. Some steroidal medications and hormonal therapies could adversely cause you to start looking like a bear cub. And if the medication is necessary, and stopping the regimen could put your health at risk, a doctor could order for the laser hair removal to be performed on you pro bono. But it's more likely he or she'll try to find an alternative medication that does not cause the adverse side effects.

*If all else fails, get special financing.* The first time I got laser hair removal, I was broke and still in college. But I was bound and determined not to spend another day as a hairy beast! The medical spa where I got my treatments offered special financing through CareCredit. This company is premiere in offering lines of credit for cosmetic medical procedures. Another credit company I currently use is Comenity, which offers financing on everything, but is very popular with laser hair removal companies like Premier Laser Spa. And if the interest rates or contracts of CareCredit or Comenity are not to your liking, considering opening a credit card strictly for funding and paying off your laser hair removal treatments. It would be a crying shame have flawless skin but hella debt!

For more information on hair removal tips, visit Oh Pluck This, my blog about all things hair removal!

-- 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.

Per capita spending on medicines is up sharply, and even people with health insurance are finding themselves paying more. Reported by NYTimes.com 9 minutes ago.

The US national healthcare reform law has extended health insurance coverage to 17.6 million Americans, according to a new government report on Tuesday, up from its previous estimate of 16.4 million. The number of uninsured has decreased because of changes in the law that allowed young people to sta... Reported by Raw Story 5 hours ago.

Ask a typical economist about what’s happening to health insurance, and you’ll hear about a historic slowdown in inflation. For roughly a decade, the economist will explain, the year-to-year increases in premiums have been surprisingly low.

But ask a typical consumer the same question, and you’re likely to hear a different story. It will be all about how expensive health care is getting -- particularly the out-of-pocket costs, which are getting so high that many people have to think twice before going to the doctor, filling a prescription or getting a procedure.

Who’s right? Both, actually, and a new report shows why.

The report, released Tuesday, is the annual survey of employer health insurance by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust. The survey is one of the best indicators available for trends in U.S. health insurance costs.

This year’s report actually looks a lot like last year’s -- and, in one sense, that’s good news. According to the data, the average premium for a single person's coverage is $6,251, with workers directly contributing $1,071 and the rest coming invisibly out of their paychecks. The average family premium is $17,545, of which workers directly pay an average of $4,955.

That’s obviously a lot of money, particularly by international standards. But this year’s premiums are just 4 percent higher than last year’s. And that’s consistent with the trend going back a decade. Since 2005, premiums have risen by an average of 5 percent. In the six years prior to that, the Kaiser/HRET report notes, they were rising by 11 percent. This is the news economists love to celebrate.

*But consumers may feel differently. Most people don't consider historical counterfactuals. When they get their paychecks, they don’t stop and calculate how much higher their premiums would be -- and how much lower their take-home pay would be -- if health care costs were rising as quickly as they were at the end of the 1990s.*In addition, wages have been rising even more slowly than premiums for the last decade. As a result, even these modest increases in health insurance premiums feel like they are imposing an added burden.

The real pain most workers feel these days, though, isn’t the premiums. It’s the out-of-pocket costs -- the co-payments, co-insurance and deductibles they must hand over at the pharmacy or doctor’s office or after a hospital stay. Unlike premiums, these out-of-pocket costs are rising quickly. Since 2010, according to the Kaiser/HRET study, the cumulative increase in deductibles has been more than twice the cumulative increase in premiums.  

Higher cost-sharing can have upsides. By making individual consumers more sensitive to the price of individual services and treatments, these out-of-pocket expenses can cause people to think twice about medications or procedures that might not be worthwhile. And in those cases when consumers can’t avoid getting some kind of medical care, higher cost-sharing might prod them to shop around for providers that charge less money.

Economists and business leaders like to call this giving people “skin in the game.” A large body of research has shown that, on the whole, it reduces the consumption of health care services, which reduces total health care spending, eventually leading to lower premiums. But consumers can't always distinguish worthwhile care from the wasteful kind. And when employers shift costs onto individual workers, it ends up pushing the burden of medical spending onto those with the worst conditions. In a given firm, the majority of employees who are in relatively good health may end up saving money as premiums rise more slowly. Meanwhile, the minority with serious problems will find themselves owing much more through all the co-payments and deductibles.

The burden can be particularly crippling for workers with lower incomes, since they may not have the disposable income or the savings to cover chemotherapy drugs or weeks of rehabilitation after an injury.

“The good news is that we’re in the tenth year of moderate premium increases, but it’s not at all a good thing for consumers that cost-sharing and deductibles keep going up and up this way,” Drew Altman, president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, told The Huffington Post. “And what’s really significant here is that these costs are going up quickly at a time when wages are flat. If wages were rising more quickly, it wouldn’t be so painful for consumers.”

Addressing the rise in out-of-pocket spending may become a focus of health care policy in the coming years, starting with the presidential campaign. The Affordable Care Act already imposed limits on out-of-pocket spending. On Tuesday, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton proposed placing separate, tighter limits on out-of-pocket spending for certain kinds of prescription drugs. But imposing measures like these is tricky business, given the relationship between out-of-pocket spending and premiums. Push one down and, absent other actions to control the cost of health care, the other will go up.

Constructing the political coalition necessary to pass measures like Clinton’s could be difficult as well. Conservatives have attacked higher cost-sharing recently, saying it’s a consequence of the Affordable Care Act and the pressure it has put on employers. However, they have traditionally been enthusiastic about cost-sharing, and their preferred health care reforms usually call for more of it, not less. 

-- 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.

Employers are leaving a bigger chunk of the bill for care to workers who use their health insurance, and benefits experts see few signs of this trend slowing. Reported by Newsmax 5 hours ago.