Obamacare has made health insurance more affordable, Democrats argue. Some 20 million more people now have coverage thanks to the Affordable Care Act. Reported by CNNMoney 12 hours ago.

The Civilian Corps of the U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM) will be exhibiting at two upcoming healthcare conferences in Las Vegas, Nevada: February 16-18 at the 22nd Annual Psychopharmacology Update hosted at Bally’s (Booth #504) and March 13-16 at the Topics in Emergency Medicine Conference hosted at The Westin. During the two events, the Civilian Corps will be hosting two Focus Group Sessions (see below for further information).

Fort Sam Houston, TX (PRWEB) February 07, 2017

The Civilian Corps of the U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM) will be exhibiting at two upcoming healthcare conferences in Las Vegas, Nevada: February 16-18 at the 22nd Annual Psychopharmacology Update hosted at Bally’s (Booth #504) and March 13-16 at the Topics in Emergency Medicine Conference hosted at The Westin. During the two events, the Civilian Corps will be hosting two Focus Group Sessions (see below for further information).

At these two events, the Civilian Corps career consultants will be available to share information about current and future openings within the behavioral health and medical professional fields such as Psychiatrists; Psychologists; Physicians; Physician Assistants; Nurses; & Nurse Practitioners, to include other medical specialty positions. The U.S. Army Medicine Civilian Corps provides rewarding civilian career opportunities to those who serve their country.

To quote, Joseph Harrison Jr. Ph.D., Chief, Recruitment and Retention, Headquarters U.S. Army Medical Command, Civilian Human Resources Division, “By filling these positions with qualified civilian care providers and clinicians, the Civilian Corps can continue their enterprise-wide impact by providing the best quality of care to our uniformed service members, retired service members, their family members, and other eligible beneficiaries.”

Civilians make up approximately 60% of the total Army Medicine workforce. Civilian Corps employees are not subject to military requirements, such as enlistment or deployment. Civilian Corps employees receive excellent benefits, competitive salaries, and extensive health insurance coverage options, to include flexible work schedules.

The Civilian Corps has positions in more than 70 global locations. For more information, search for current job openings at our website: http://www.civilianmedicaljobs.com.

Focus Group Session Information
The Civilian Corps is seeking marketing and recruitment efforts feedback from behavioral health and medical professionals at each of the conferences. The Focus Group Session involves a one-hour working lunch meeting.

The first Focus Group Session is scheduled for Thursday, February 16th alongside the 22nd Annual Psychopharmacology Update. A Civilian Corps career consultant will be available at the conference registration site on Wednesday, February 15.

The second Focus Group Session is scheduled for Wednesday, March 15 alongside the Topics in Emergency Medicine Conference. Visit the Civilian Corps booth on Monday, March 13 or Tuesday, March 14 to register.

Focus Group Session participants will receive complimentary lunch (to be provided during the session) as well as a $75 Visa gift card as a Thank You for your time.

Contact: Colin Gerrity
colin(at)agencymabu(dot)com | (443) 330-5497 Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.

For years, Republicans have promised to repeal the Affordable Care Act, the law better known as Obamacare.

After the election of Donald Trump, Republicans finally have the chance to do just that. Trump, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and a boatload of Republican lawmakers all pledged that a repeal and replacement of Obamacare was on the horizon.

Recently, however, there seems to have been a tonal shift in the way GOP lawmakers are addressing their approach to the law. Instead of leaning on the "repeal and replace" terminology, Republicans have begun to say they are "repairing" the ACA, a softening in their harsh rhetoric.

*Repair, not repeal*

"I think it is more accurate to say repair Obamacare because, for example, in the reconciliation procedure that we have in the Senate, we can't repeal all of Obamacare," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, head of the Senate Health committee last week.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, head of the Senate Finance Committee, told CNN that the GOP wants to "try and repair the law."

Additionally, an increasing number of House Republicans have shifted to the "repair" terminology when referring to the Obamacare issue.

Here may also be a source for the change. Bloomberg reported that conservative pollster Frank Luntz told Republicans at a summit in Philadelphia that the "repair" language was more amenable to Americans and to use it instead of "repeal and replace."

Ryan told Fox News, however, that repair does mean repeal and replace.

"To repair [the] American health care system, you have to repeal and replace this law, and that’s what we’re doing," said in an interview with Fox & Friends. 

Despite the protests of Ryan and whether or not the end result is different, it does appear that there has been a shift in rhetoric from GOP lawmakers.

*A changing timeline*

Not only have Republicans changed the way they talk about the law, but the timeline for the repeal or repair is slowly sliding further into the future as well.

Initially, indications from the GOP were that the repeal would come swiftly. Ryan and McConnell both wanted to get the repeal done within the first 100 days and a replacement soon after.

This timeline began to be extended, with Ryan and McConnell shifting the goal posts back to 200 days and seeming to leave the door open for the possibility of a repeal happening even later.

Trump, for his part, was adamant about swift action. During the transition, Trump said he wanted an Obamacare replacement done within weeks and derided a plan to pass a bill that would delay the repeal for a few years while the replacement was crafted.

In an interview on Sunday with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, however, Trump said that the Obamacare replacement was "in the process and maybe it’ll take till sometime into next year."

There hasn't been a consistent timeline set out by Republicans lawmakers, with the leadership still touting a quick process but other lower-level GOP members doubting the ability to make such a large change so swiftly.

Currently, the repeal process is ongoing, but the coherent and cohesive replacement plan has not been agreed upon by Republicans.

*
The reason behind the shift*

There may be a number of reasons for the shift in tone and timing from Republicans.

One aspect is that many parts of Obamacare are still incredibly popular. Provisions such as the ability for children to stay on their parents until they turn 26 and the inability of insurers to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions are popular with an overwhelming majority of Americans.

The broader law itself is also gaining in popularity with three recent polls showing more Americans in favor of the ACA than against it and record high approval in some polls.

Additionally, Democrats have frequently been touting the over 20 million people that have gained access to health coverage through the law. Concern over the possibility of large losses in coverage has hounded Republicans in recent weeks to the point Trump promised in an interview with ABC that the new plan would cover "everyone."

Thus, the Republicans may be attempting to pivot the messaging away from a blatant repeal to a softer tone. While the plan has always been to replace the law, co-opting the popular parts into their message and pointing out the deficiencies at the same time seems to be a new part of their strategy.

The shift may also be an attempt to appease insurers, who are increasingly getting concerned about the viability of the individual health insurance markets. A large number of insurers said they may roll back their exposure to the individual market given the rhetoric from Republicans.

In the meantime, it appears that the Trump administration has done all it can to undercut the existing structure of the law. Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services on Friday showed that enrollment for the federal exchanges through Healthcare.gov declined by 400,000 from the year before.

The drop came after a sharp fall-off in enrollment following Trump's inauguration as the administration significantly decreased the amount of advertising and promotion of the exchanges. Prior to Trump's inauguration, 800,000 Americans were enrolling per week, but that dropped to 200,000 per week post-inauguration.

*SEE ALSO: The Trump administration has already dealt a blow to Obamacare*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's how to use one of the many apps to buy and trade bitcoin Reported by Business Insider 10 hours ago.

There are so many individual events, from the resume revamp to the post-interview thank you note, you may feel nothing but exhaustion by the time you get that congratulatory call or email. [...] even if you have a single offer, you can still think critically about how to make the best of the opportunity — and whether you want to negotiate for perks you value especially highly, such as health insurance starting on day one. The proposed salary will have a big effect on your day-to-day lifestyle and your future earning power, so make sure you know what you're worth. Rick Sass, a career coach at Lee Hecht Harrison near Seattle, recommends having two numbers ready, ideally before the official offer comes in: the salary you want to make (say, $55,000) and a lower amount you're willing to accept (say, $50,000, which is about the mean wage, or average salary, for 25- to 34-year-olds across all education backgrounds, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics). Turn your attention next to employee benefits, such as health insurance and matching retirement contributions. When Camille Galles was looking for a new sales job in the digital media industry, she had four job offers. [...] Galles, 31, is the CEO of her own three-person digital advertising company. Weighing different job offers based not just on salary but on how much she could learn in each role helped her get where she is, she says. Reported by SeattlePI.com 8 hours ago.

(AP) — She tugged 13 envelopes from a cabinet above the stove, each one labeled with a different debt: the house payment, the student loans, the vacuum cleaner she bought on credit. [...] last year she chose a presidential candidate unlike any she'd ever seen, the billionaire businessman who promised to help America, and people like her, win again. Pickup trucks crowd parking lots at the 3M plant and Cabela's distribution center where hundreds work. In this place that astonished America when it helped hand Trump the White House, many of those who chose him greeted the frenetic opening acts of his presidency with a shrug. Immigration is not their top concern, and so they watched with some trepidation as Trump signed orders to build a wall on the Mexican border and bar immigrants from seven Muslim countries, sowing chaos around the world. Among them is a woman who works for $10.50 an hour in a sewing factory, who still admires Obama, bristles at Trump's bluster, but can't afford health insurance. [...] the dairy farmer who thinks Trump is a jerk — "somebody needs to get some Gorilla Glue and glue his lips shut"— but has watched his profits plummet and was willing to take the risk. There's a man who owns an engine repair shop and struggles to keep the lights on, and a bartender who cringes when he sees "Made in China" printed on American goods. Katherine Cramer, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, coined a name for what's happened in her state's rural pockets: the politics of resentment. She spent years traveling to small towns and talking to people at diners and gas stations. [...] when she asked which political party best represented them, their answers almost always sounded something like, Are you crazy lady? [...] much of the economic anxiety is based not on measurable decay, but rather a perception that life is decaying, said Jim Bowman, director of the county's E Reported by SeattlePI.com 9 hours ago.

Harmony Consulting Solutions (HCS) implements project management-based solutions for healthcare facilities, delivering specific and measurable value through improving the quality of patient care, revenue enhancements and cost savings.

Tampa, Florida (PRWEB) February 07, 2017

February 7, 2017

Harmony Healthcare, a leader in human capital management solutions, has announced the formation of a new division, Harmony Consulting Solutions.

Harmony Consulting Solutions (HCS) implements project management-based solutions for healthcare facilities, delivering specific and measurable value through improving the quality of patient care, revenue enhancements and cost savings. HCS will provide leadership in key areas including Revenue Cycle Management performance improvement, data analytics, clinical documentation improvement, reimbursement optimization, and TeleExpert services for coding and documentation.

Harmony Healthcare founder and CEO Christopher Brown noted: “Harmony Consulting Solutions, a leader in healthcare revenue cycle innovation, will deliver value-added returns on investment for our client organizations and facilities.”

Brown added “Harmony Consulting Solutions is committed to achieving three benefits for each project undertaken. A measurable increase in the quality of patient care, guaranteed financial return on investment, and increased organizational efficiency and effectiveness.”

Industry veteran John Pitsikoulis is leading Harmony Consulting Solutions as Director. John has over 30 years of Revenue Cycle Performance management and consulting experience. A coding, clinical documentation and compliance expert, John has integrated his regulatory subject matter expertise and operational improvement experience with healthcare emerging technologies. Per Mr. Brown, “His technical skills and operational insight made him the perfect choice to lead the Harmony Consulting Solutions division.”

About Harmony Healthcare
Harmony Healthcare provides interim, outsourcing, project management and reviews, as well as direct-to-hire solutions for clients. The company specializes in hiring Revenue Cycle and Health Information professionals for client facilities. The company’s experts are highly trained, can spot problems and lead a client organization through the best processes, procedures and solutions.

With a large breadth of expertise, the company is able to provide support in areas ranging from clinical documentation improvement and coding to auditing and GSA government compliance at Veterans Administration hospitals and U.S. military bases.

Harmony employs more than 500 people and has staff at client sites across the United States. The company maintains low turnover by providing 100 percent covered health insurance, paid time off, paid travel expenses and keeping the back-office operation inexpensive.

Harmony Healthcare also boasts a #418 ranking, with a three-year sales growth of 922 percent, on the 2016 Inc. 500 list.

“Harmony Healthcare was founded on the principals of integrity, character, hard work and discipline.”

Learn more about Harmony Healthcare https://harmony.solutions/about/

Learn more about Harmony Consulting Solutions https://harmony.solutions/harmony-consulting-solutions/

About Christopher Brown
With a career marked by a sharp entrepreneurial eye and the love of a good challenge, Brown founded Harmony Healthcare in 2010 after recognizing just how revolutionary the change from paper to digital medical records would be for healthcare facilities. His company helps clients solve problems associated with digital medical records and health information management that have coincided with the change in the way healthcare facilities collect patient information, code it, communicate with insurance companies and collect revenue in a timely manner.

Brown learned some of his best leadership lessons from the well-known, much-loved, and highly successful UCLA Basketball Coach John Wooden. Many of Wooden’s words of wisdom apply both on and off the basketball court. “It’s not what you do, but how you do it,” is one of Brown’s favorite quotes from Wooden.

His 2001 book, “Insights, A guide to Successful Recruitment Strategies and Training” is a comprehensive guide to recruitment, staffing and human resources training. Learn more about Christopher Brown https://harmony.solutions/revenue_cycle/cbrown/        

About John Pitsikoulis
John is an RHIA certified, results-driven leader with 30 years of management and consulting experience earned while working for Nuance Communications, PricewaterhouseCoopers and The Cleveland Clinic Health System. His technical skills and operational insight made him the perfect choice to lead the Harmony Consulting Solutions division. Learn more about John Pitsikoulis https://harmony.solutions/revenue_cycle/john-pitsikoulis-director-harmony-consulting-services-hcs/ Reported by PRWeb 3 hours ago.

It's no secret that Congress is debating whether to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and if so, whether and how to replace it.

NAMI's position is non-partisan and simple. We want to keep what works and make the mental health care system even better than it is today. Significant progress was made when Congress overwhelmingly passed mental health reform in 2016, but health coverage is fundamental to helping individuals and families affected by mental health conditions

The debate is not just a political one. It is a moral one. Lives are at stake. NAMI hears from people every day about its importance. Many Americans fear what may happen if they are forced to return to the days when they couldn't pay for needed medications, visits to psychiatrists and therapists or when a single hospitalization could wipe out a family's savings.

"I don't want to get to the point where I have to be hospitalized again," one man from Michigan told us. A man in Pennsylvania would lose services that have helped him get and keep a job. He says repealing the ACA would reverse progress in the state at a time when "we came so far ahead of many states in treatment."

Losing jobs and losing one's home are major fears.

A California woman wants to keep her independence and avoid becoming a major burden to the state. Without medication and other preventive support, she will have to rely on emergency rooms when she experiences psychosis and probably be hospitalized -- or end up living on the street.

"Why incur more expenses in ERs when we could have cheaper, easier access to care?" she asked. Medicaid expansion, which 31 states and the District of Columbia adopted under the ACA, "has given me life, literally." It has allowed her to participate in activities and maintain relationships. "Without coverage, I would not be able to be a stable, participating member of society."

Lack of necessary health care not only causes carnage in people's lives, it shifts costs elsewhere -- such as schools and the criminal justice system. Businesses also lose productivity; one measure of that cost is the $193 billion in lost earnings alone that results from mental illness each year, hurting the country's economic competitiveness.

One in 5 Americans are affected by mental health conditions, but more than 50 percent receive no treatment. Three out of four people who live with mental illness have symptoms before age 24. Meanwhile, 42,000 lives are lost to suicide each year -- the second cause of death among young people ages 15-24. During the debate on the future of health coverage, everyone needs to keep these facts in mind and recognize the importance to millions of families.

The ACA benefits everyone in some way, including people who have employer-paid health insurance.

Mental health and substance use coverage are required essential benefits for health insurance plans. Market exchange plans also are required to comply with parity -- treating mental health and substance use conditions the same as physical health needs.

The ACA also allows parents to keep covering young adults on family health plans through age 26 during periods of critical education and work transitions. Given that this is the age of onset for many mental health conditions, the provision is critical for early intervention.

The law also prohibits denial of coverage based on pre-existing conditions. This has allowed people to seek treatment they desperately need without worrying that seeking care will disqualify them from the insurance market.

People who previously found individual health insurance out of reach receive subsidies through market exchanges. And through state Medicaid expansions, more people living below or near the poverty line are able to get the care they need.

Medicaid expansion has been especially important for people with significant mental health conditions. Nearly 1 out of 3 persons covered through the expansion live with mental health or substance abuse conditions. People who are homeless and cannot navigate the disability system receive coverage. Others who are at early stages of psychosis can get care -- without having to wait until they are so ill that they can qualify for disability payments. Early treatment helps set young people on a path to education and jobs, not dependence on the government.

NAMI is part of the current debate. Are you? If you recognize yourself in these concerns, now is the time to let Congress know. Keep what works and make the health care system better. Move forward, not back. You can contact your Senators and Representative by email here.

-- 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 3 hours ago.

*It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair. —Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities (1859)*

*Such is the duplicity of our times.*

 On one hand we have a president who seems hell bent on the destruction of the American Constitution and everything it stands for, whilst on the other and potentially equally as dangerous, is the inability to recognize the reasons as to how and why such a man even had a chance at becoming President of one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world.

It has been said that Trump’s views resonated amongst the “common people”. That it was the blue collar workers and uneducated who voted him in, whereas in fact, it was the biggest anti-establishment vote of all time. Combined with the inability of anyone on the left to foster any serious discussions or debates concerning the difficult issues that we as a country face.

What was it that made people, when all alone in the little voting booth, without fear of reproach, decided to tick the box that allowed him to gain power?

Look back to the second Iraq war, whose legitimacy is still hotly contested today. What is clear now, is that we were all lied to.
 

We were guaranteed that reliable intelligence sources had concluded that Saddam Hussain was attempting to build nuclear weapons, purchasing the tools from his Sub-Saharan neighbors and that it was only a matter of time before he used them. However in 2006, a New York Times report stated that "A high-level intelligence assessment by the Bush administration concluded in early 2002 that the sale of uranium from Niger to Iraq was 'unlikely.' ” Prior to the invasion, we were also told to also expect huge stockpiles of chemical weapons, but absolutely nothing was found.

 

From the Iraq Family Health sources, approximately 110,000 people died as a result of the conflict.  

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

Further investigations in the aftermath of the war also proved that there were people actually within the administration who made huge financial gains from the invasion. A multitude of US firms received at least $138 billion for government contracts for services that included providing private security and rebuilding infrastructure.

 

The main recipient of the allocation of funds was Halliburton, a firm with a history of tax dodging and bribery. Cheney, then vice president, prior to his appointment was CEO of Halliburton. After receiving a $34 million “bonus” just prior to taking his position in office, he still held a significant amount of stock options, effectively creating a loophole that avoided the “conflict of interest” yet still allowing him to own a significant amount of the firm that would be realized once the options were exercised. But while Cheney and Halliburton made millions, instead of building infrastructure and a safer place for Iraqis, we created a place so unstable that it fostered the growth of something as horrifying as ISIS. Since 2004 there have been over 200,000 casualties.

  

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

For the Libya war, our reasoning once again turned to the fear of what Gadhafi was capable of and the horrors he was inflicting upon his own people and that we had a duty to intervene purely for humanitarian reasons.  

 As it transpired, with the release of confidential emails from Hillary Clinton, it became clear that the primary reason was not humanitarian, but financial.

 “According to sensitive information available to this source, Qaddafi’s government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver…This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar.  This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French (CFA).”  — declassified email from Sidney Blumenthal to Hillary Clinton, 2 April 2011

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12659 

We were informed that Gadhafi was giving Viagra to his troops so they could conduct mass rapes, propaganda that turned out to be completely fabricated by our own government. One of the driving forces behind the invasion was concern over Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves threatening European currency and the other being the strategic oil fields that were to be divvied up between the major oil companies even before we even made public the desire to act.   

There were atrocities both alleged and proven that were from the actions of rebel fighters we were backing. Then there was Benghazi, where warning by security forces were left unheeded, which resulted in military support arriving too late. The instability we created in the Middle East can be attributed to our own foreign policies that historians may look back on and believe that it was mostly motivated by greed and financial gain as opposed to peace and security.

If that war was really about saving the Libyan people then it was a catastrophic failure. Without taking into account the deaths from the preceding civil war it is estimated that there were 80,000 casualties as a direct result of the conflict.

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

How is it still possible that members of Congress are immune to insider trading?   

Congress recently voted that any investigations by the SEC, “should be blocked on principle, because lawmakers and their staff are constitutionally protected from such inquiries given the nature of their work.” Back in 2011, an investigative report by 60 Minutes, they revealed that the majority of the members of Congress were profiting by selling stocks and bonds using inside information. A crime when done by anyone else would have guaranteed imprisonment. If you look at the amount of money that member of Congress make annually from trading their percentage returns would make them all the best traders in the world, amassing millions in trading revenues.  

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

In a final adjudication at the beginning of this year, it was ruled that Jon Corzine, the former New Jersey governor who led the collapsed brokerage firm, MF Global, should pay a $5 million penalty for his role in the firm's blatant illegal use of almost $1 billion in customer funds to pay for trading losses.     

This is something that in our industry is about the worse thing imaginable. To put it into perspective, Jon Corzine has an estimated net worth of $300 million and as brazen as it was, a $5 million penalty is laughable.

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

Then we have the invasion of privacy and various nefarious spy programs run by our own government agencies that were discovered when John Snowden leaked all the information onto the internet via Wikileaks.  

 

With Snowden’s leaks we now know the existence of “XKeyscore”, an NSA tool which collects nearly everything a user does on the internet. “Prism” which collects internet communications from at least nine major US internet companies.  “Boundless Informant” is a system deployed by the National Security Agency to analyze global electronic information. In March 2013, Boundless Informant gathered 14 billion data reports from Iran, 6.3 billion from India, and 2.8 billion from the United States. “Special Collection Service (SCS)” is a black budget program that is responsible for close surveillance, burglary, wiretapping, breaking and entering. It employs covert listening device technologies to bug foreign embassies, communications centers, computer facilities, fiber-optic networks, and government installations.

http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2014/05/e-is-for-espionage-and-edward-sno...

 

 An investigation by Der Spiegel, reported that Chancellor Merkel's mobile was targeted by the NSA and it was only after lengthy chats between Merkel and Obama that German authorities decided to take no further action. 

Bullrun, Carnivore, CNCI, DCSnet, Fairview, FCEN,ICREACH, Magic Lantern, Main Core, Mainway, Muscular, Mystic, NSARI, NSA Ant, Room641A, Sentry Eagle, Stellar Wind, Turbulance, the list of, now publicly accessible, spy programs is endless and as much as we accuse Russia or China of hacking we are far more advanced than they are in  “covert operations”. 

We used this newfound technology to spy on our allies and unconstitutionally spied on people in our own country.

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

We have constantly used the invasion of Ukraine as a reason for not trusting Putin and Russia that Putin is crazy and has an expansionist policy. But when looking further into the details it is not that difficult to find evidence that in 2011 the Ukrainian president was replaced by a US-selected administration, in an entirely unconstitutional takeover.    

The imposition of a pro-Western government was followed by an attempt to enlist Ukraine into NATO a placing a missile defense system directly on Russia's border, specifically against a previous EU-Moscow association agreement.

 

Russia’s reaction was as a direct result of our own prior interference. Yet this was one of the main reasons cited as an excuse to start a new cold war with Russia, which could have easily escalated into something far more serious. Something that the prior administration seemed to be inexorably heading towards.

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable.* 

Now onto the healthcare system of this country. Although Obamacare has expanded coverage (the US uninsured rate has fallen to 9.1%, the lowest ever) the cost of health insurance across the country has skyrocketed. In 2016, we saw increases of up to 60% in premiums with the same happening again for 2017. 

During the election campaign, when confronted with the question of why a family’s insurance bill had gone up from $500 per month to $1100 per month, Hillary Clinton’s response was, “Keep shopping on the exchange. You might find a better deal!” but when there is no competition on these platforms, there is no other deal, just big pharmaceutical companies making more and more money.

Collectively $2.4 billion was spent on this election by both parties. Yet we cannot find a way to fund health insurance for the 20 million people that still cannot afford it in this country.  

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable.*

With the email leaks which started coming out in July of 2016 not just a few days beforehand, it is ironic that we accused Russia, without ANY substantial evidence, of influencing the election when it was shown that the Democratic National Committee DID in fact, very undemocratically, influence the outcome of the primaries by having a distinct bias against Bernie Sanders.  

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

In Flint, children were poisoned and still their water supply is still tainted 3 years later,   

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable.* 

The fact that the average salary for the middle class is lower than it was 40 years ago   

*But we didn’t amass on the streets in our thousands and nobody was held accountable. *

For better or worse, the voracity of views do seem to have finally motivated people to become more interested in the politics of this country. 

The middle class has been destroyed and left dejected from the actions of our government over the last 10 years. The United States has the most unequal distribution of the wealth of any OECD member country, we have a political system that relies too much on the political lobbyists in Washington, who work to change the rules and then, in turn, the politicians who change positions in return for favours. It is wrong that presidential candidates have historically received more and more financial donations which effectively “buys” their support.  How different is this to the type of corruption in FIFA, where officials were given gifts to garner their influence in deciding where to next host the World Cup? These people now face jail time. 

*We have also lost the ability to debate*

The pure hated and vilification of anyone who considered voting (NOT necessarily even supporting) for Trump has been as shocking as some of the feared Trump policies themselves. Anyone who may have a view that is not “extreme left” is immediately labeled a racist or misogynist, often with violent repercussions. It is that type of extreme political correctness that has reached the point where people have become the exact thing they set out to fight against.   

You do not convince someone to change his mind by hurling insults at him. Claiming to be “offended” is NOT a tactic that should be used when someone on the left disagrees with positions of anyone on the right positions. It is this type of attitude tied to the inability to foster any type of sensible discussion that put Trump here to begin with.  And we do only have ourselves to blame.   

Although the new administration has already shown that it has no problem blatantly lying or using “alternative facts”, it doesn’t help when some of the media coverage is so clearly spun to be negative and is content with over dramatization and its very own version of alternative facts. That “headline grabbing” alarmist coverage does not help the argument but just inflames an already volatile situation.  

We can go back to the much publicized  poll numbers leading up to the election that were covered by many media outlets that were used, with a largely Democratic sample set.  

The recent headlines that Trump was defunding Planned Parenthood were also misleading as the executive order he did sign was for the defunding of International Planned Parenthood otherwise known as the “Mexico City Policy”, a policy that was first put in place during the Reagan administration, then rescinded during the Clinton administration, put back in during Bush, one then once again ended during the Obama administration, so not exactly unexpected. To imply that this is a new turn of events is very misleading.  

To run a headline stating that the “designated survivor” is a person placed in position by Obama, so to imply that should someone bomb the inauguration ceremony, a representative of the previous administration would take power, is totally irresponsible.

  

 The coverage about the Trump administration putting a gag order on several government agencies could be considered a horrific turn of events, until you find out that it is in fact a perfectly normal thing for a new administration to do, in order to ensure that all government agencies are aligned after the handover. The original email, sent January 23 to the Department of Agriculture said, "Starting immediately and until further notice, ARS will not release any public-facing documents. This includes, but is not limited to, news releases, photos, fact sheets, news feeds, and social media content." The same notification provision was also sent out in 2009 by the then Agricultural Secretary; Tom Vilsack under president Obama and at the time of writing had already lapsed. 

Another example of misleading headlines is that of CNN running a headline of Steve Bannon saying, ”The media should keep its mouth shut,” which implies that the entire media should be gagged. However, once again when seeing the entire quote as, “The media should keep its mouth shut and just listen for a while, they don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.” The context of the quote becomes completely different.

 Misleading headlines and “fake” news do not help any of the arguments and are just playing into Trump’s hands when the validity of the news they report can be brought into question. 

Last week NBC tweeted, “US Treasury Department easing Obama admin sanctions to allow companies to transact business with Russia’s FSB, successor org to KGB.”  Implying, as did Vanity Fair, that “Comrade Trump Eases Relations With Vlad.”, however later the same international correspondent for NBC  wrote, “Source familiar with sanctions says it’s a technical fix, planned under Obama, to avoid unintended consequences of cyber-sanctions.”, but did not remove the original article.

The New York Times upon the release of Trumps immigration ban reported the following,” Gen. John F. Kelly, the secretary of homeland security, had dialed in from a Coast Guard plane as he headed back to Washington from Miami. Along with other top officials, he needed guidance from the White House, which had not asked his department for a legal review of the order. Halfway into the briefing, someone on the call looked up at a television in his office. ‘The president is signing the executive order that we’re discussing,’ the official said, stunned.”

Secretary Kelly, later strongly denied this report during a press conference Tuesday. “We knew it was coming. It wasn’t a surprise, I don’t know where they got this idea from” and then few days later, CNN reported that an internal memo showed that the DOJ had in fact approved Trump’s executive order.

The Washington Post reported that White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon wanted to stop Kelly in his tracks.” Only to later retract the statement.

The Atlantic’s Washington editor Steve Clemons tweeted that Secret Service management level personnel were forced to resign Thursday night and escorted out of the Eisenhower executive office building when in fact it was a completely false statement but still received thousands of tweets.

The associated press reported that Trump had threatened to send troops into Mexico actually quoting “You have a bunch of bad hombres down there,” Trump told Peña Nieto in the excerpt, “You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.” 

It turned out to be a completely false quote and with the release of the actual transcript, Trump had actually said, “You have some pretty tough hombres in Mexico that you may need help with. We are willing to help with that big-league, but they have been knocked out and you have not done a good job knocking them out.” 

Then we had the most controversial of Trump’s policies, the “Muslim ban”.

(another misleading headline)

Now although the administration has already flipped and flopped over what the executive order actually meant, they have repeatedly stated that it is not a Muslim ban and that the countries were chosen on the basis of their unwillingness to share information in the vetting process. Personally, I think we should be a beacon of light in this tumultuous planet of ours.  I’m reminded of the position this country took in 1939 with the transatlantic liner St. Louis, when we denied Jewish refugees entry into the US.  Something historically shameful, that resulted in the death of 620 of the 908 passengers that were redistributed to mainland Europe as opposed to England.

However, I can also see other people’s point of view, which justifiably fears the small majority who may wish to do us harm. It is also a fair point to ask why aren’t we protesting the likes of Algeria,Malaysia,Bangladesh,Oman,Brunei,Pakistan,Iran,Iraq,Sudan,Kuwait,Syria, Lebanon, U.A.E., Libya and Yemen, who for many years have upheld a ban against people holding an Israeli passport for purely religious reasons. That Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, U.A.E. all refusing to accept a single Syrian refugee for fear of creating an imbalance of religious sects within their borders. That while we castigate Trump for cutting short his conversation with the Australian Prime Minister and send over apologist tweets to the Australian people, we seem to ignore the fact that the United Nations AND Amnesty International have branded Australia’s own immigration laws as a breach of human rights. 

 

*I’m a man of science. I believe in facts and what I can see.   *

*

*

So we must be reminded that 20 years ago, one of the people I admire the most, Carl Sagan said the following,

“Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time – when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness. Science is more than a body of knowledge. It’s a way of thinking. A way of skeptically interrogating the universe with a fine understanding of human fallibility. If we are not able to ask skeptical questions, to interrogate those who tell us something is true, to be skeptical of those in authority, then we’re up for grabs for the next charlatan, political or religious, who comes ambling along.”

Whether or not the Trump gamble will be worthwhile remains to be seen. There is a realization that the economy needs faster economic growth. That confidence is key. That given the reactions of the stock markets, it is possible, for better or worse, the election of Trump may have ignited company stocks. 

Trump would like nothing more than validation, made painfully obvious by his reaction to the amount of attention he put on the attendance of his inauguration. 

I believe that everything he does in this administration will be geared toward reelection. To this end, his ego may serve us well, for he may actually listen to the people. 

We must acknowledge that it is our own fault we allowed a multitude of injustices to pass for too many years. It is astonishing that we actually felt good about ourselves when we posted transparent French flags on Facebook for the terrorist attacks that killed over 230 people and that it is inconceivable to me that it took an 11 year old comment about vaginas to finally motivate everyone into action.

Admit to ourselves that it is our own inactivity in protesting the Iraq and Libya wars and foreign policies that has led to the instability that exists today. We did nothing when elected officials blatantly broke laws and accepted the fact that money allows you the freedom to do as you wish. We did nothing when we found out our own country runs more spy programs than any other in the world, not just on foreign enemies we may fear, but on leaders of our allies and even our own people.

Protest for all the unfairness in the world,  

*Don’t just wear "pussy" hats and roast Trump as your sole motivation to do anything.  *

I would like to believe that the rights and freedoms of ALL individuals will be upheld in this country I call home, be gay, lesbian, transgender, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist or even Jedi. I hope that scientific thought will be encouraged and thoughtful debate will be the way forward instead of 10-word opinions screamed across Twitter. That we should be protesting against bigotry and religious freedom across the globe.

Trump is now our President, whether we like it or not. But instead of constantly looking for ways to impeach him and moaning about the injustices of a fairly elected official, we should collectively stop acting like entitled children and try to have a more positive outlook, all the while staying vigilant and constantly reminding the current administration and ourselves that this country was based on the separation of church and state, freedom of speech, and the protection of rights of all our people.. And we need to keep it this way. Reported by Zero Hedge 4 hours ago.

**

*The latest*

Tuesday, February 17: The road to Trumpcare looks like it's about to head down the long and winding road. (More on that below.) After a week of slowly pivoting their repeal of Obamacare to a "repair" both House Speaker Paul Ryan and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer tell reporters that Republicans hope to have the "legislation" of healthcare and Obamacare repeal and replace down "by the end of the year."

This is slower than previous projections of replacement being done in President Donald Trump's first 100 days.

Spicer, however, did not clarify exactly what Trump wants to see in a replacement plan when asked during his daily press briefing.

Read the full story here»

Tuesday, January 17: The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says in a new report that repealing major parts of Obamacare without a replacement plan could lead to an additional 20-25% hike in premiums above existing projections. And it says 18 million Americans would lose their healthcare outright.  

Democratic lawmakers pointed to the report as another reason why repeal would be harmful to Americans. GOP lawmakers criticized the report since it does not include an analysis of a Republican replacement.

Read the full story here»

Friday, January 13: Congress has taken the first steps toward partial repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), better known as Obamacare.

Republicans in both the House of Representatives and the Senate passed a resolution that begins the process of repealing President Obama's signature healthcare law.

The resolution directs members of relevant committees to draft a repeal bill through the budget-reconciliation process.

With dissent among Republicans over whether or not to complete the repeal process before a replacement plan is finalized and strident Democratic resistance to any repeal of the ACA, it appears that there is a significant fight ahead over the future of American healthcare, which could lead the process down the long, winding road to Trumpcare.

*Road to Trumpcare*

President-elect Donald Trump, along with Republican leaders in Congress, says he's committed to repealing and replacing Obamacare with something "terrific." Republicans have put forth a variety of different replacement plans, but it's unclear what the final version will look like. And the path to get to the implementation of a replacement could take many forms.

Imagine it's like a board game where there are a number of ways to get to a replacement. One is fast and efficient, another winding and full of obstacles. We call it "The Road to Trumpcare," and we'll be updating the game as Congress and the new administration make their moves.

The player in our game is a hypothetical Obamacare participant. We'll call her Martha. She's a 29-year-old from Tennessee and self-employed. Martha used the federal Healthcare.gov platform to sign up for her insurance two years ago and has been reenrolling every year; she receives some tax credits for her premiums since she makes roughly $45,000 a year.

While an overwhelming majority of Americans get their health insurance from employers or a government-based program like Medicare or Medicaid, Martha is one of more than 11.5 million people who signed up for an exchange-based plan for 2017. Over 80% of these people, according to the Department of Health and Human Services, also receive subsidies for their coverage.

Martha is a bit frustrated that there are fewer choices on the platform this year, and her premiums are increasing, but she is glad to have coverage because she has Crohn's disease, which could have excluded her from coverage before ACA.

To get a better understanding of what a repeal-and-replace could mean to someone such as Martha, here are the four major scenarios for how lawmakers can address or not address the future of Obamacare.

*The Replacement Superhighway*

The fastest and least disruptive path for Republicans to follow would be to repeal Obamacare and advance a replacement bill at the same time.

The GOP could use a procedure called budget reconciliation in the Senate to strip away most of the provisions of Obamacare, specifically those that cost the government money, without the need for a single Democrat vote. Then, simultaneously, Republicans would need to go through typical lawmaking to pass a replacement bill and create some sort of new exchanges.

House Speaker Ryan and Trump both seemed to favor this option. In fact, Ryan told CNN that some of the repeal and replace measures could be "in the same bill."

According to Cynthia Cox, associate director for the Program for the Study of Health Reform and Private Insurance at the nonpartisan health think tank Kaiser Family Foundation, this would be the ideal option for patients in the event of a repeal.

"This would provide both insurers and patients a clear picture of what's going to happen fairly quickly, which would prevent disruptions to the market," said Cox. "Though, a lot of this depends on the replacement bill that the Republicans come up with."

-What does this mean for Martha?-

This would likely be the least disruptive for Martha's coverage since it would ensure that there would be no period in which the exchanges that she uses are not funded or have no federal support. For one thing, as long as Martha reenrolls in her plan during the current Obamacare-enrollment period, she will have insurance through 2017.

A quick replacement could be in place for the 2018 plan year, and depending on what the replacement is, Martha may not notice any effect on her coverage at all.

-What could go wrong?-

A lot of this hinges on the details of the Republicans' plan. Since Martha receives subsidies to help cover the costs of her plan, a number of the replacement proposals floated by the GOP could affect how much she receives. Additionally, a number of plans would institute high-risk pools, which are separate markets reserved just for people with preexisting conditions. These existed before the ACA and generally had astronomically high costs and limited utilization.

The other issue is that any change to the law may be rejected by Democrats. If Republicans want to make any larger changes outside the budget process they would need Democrats on board. If the GOP advances a bill that changes coverage in some way or rolls back parts of the ACA that do not deal with the federal budget, Democrats may block a replacement using the filibuster. Additionally, if even a few Republicans in the Senate don't like the replacement, that could sidetrack the process. If the GOP moves ahead with the repeal while Democrats object to changes to the law, it could make the road that Martha is on even more winding.

*The long and winding road*

One of the first scenarios floated by Republicans was a partial repeal of the law under what is called budget reconciliation — delaying until a later date so that Republicans can craft a full replacement bill. This would pass a law that says the ACA will be repealed in the future, somewhere between two and four years, effectively delaying the end of the ACA.

In theory, this allows GOP lawmakers to advance the political goal of repeal while giving enough time to develop a comprehensive plan for replacement. The exchanges set up by Obamacare could be intact, meaning that the more than 20 million people with ACA-based plans would still be covered, while Republicans devise a plan that would replace the ACA and keep these people covered, as numerous GOP lawmakers have promised.

Since the delay aspect could stretch the replacement process out up to four years, this would allow the GOP time to build a consensus on a replacement. It would also be politically beneficial since it would push the repeal out past the 2018 midterms or 2020 presidential election.

Republicans could avoid political fallout if the replacement plan falls short of expectations, and they could build a larger majority in the Senate to pass the bill without worrying about a filibuster.

According to Cox, while the plan sounds good, there are a few problems that could arise with this strategy.

"Depending on the parts of the law that are repealed through the reconciliation process, you could see destabilization in the individual insurance market," Cox told Business Insider.

According to Cox, without an individual mandate for people to sign up for insurance, there would be significant numbers of younger people leaving the individual market, which would lead to a pool of even older and sicker people in the exchanges.

In a worst-case scenario, this would lead to a breakdown of the individual insurance market. Businesses hate uncertainty, so it is likely that with the exchanges' futures in doubt, insurance companies would simply pull out completely. Healthy policyholders could see the writing on the wall and not renew their policies, leaving only the sickest patients in the marketplace causing, as Cox called it, "a real death spiral," repeating the turn of phrase used by Republicans to describe Obamacare's growing issues.

Also, by leaving just the sickest Americans in these exchanges, premiums for those who remain behind would be much higher than the current increases.

"If the individual mandate were to be repealed without countermeasures, it would cause very large increases in the cost of premiums," Cox said. "These increases would make what we've seen in the market so far look small."

There are, of course, ways to mitigate this. For one, Republicans could extend and enhance certain measures, called reinsurance and risk corridors, which help to provide money for insurers that take on a higher percentage of sick patients. This would help decrease the large losses some insurers are reporting and possibly inspire more companies to offer plans on the exchanges.

Many GOP lawmakers, however, have referred to these provisions as "bailouts," so that may be politically untenable.

-What does this mean for Martha?-

This plan takes her down our game's long and winding road, full of stops and starts and pitfalls along with way. As debates over the repeal continue, Martha could be stuck in a car she has no control over, stalled out and awaiting updates about her coverage. The process could take years.

Republicans, through reconciliation, would have options to pull funding for the law in a few different ways while crafting a replacement. They could simply roll back the taxes associated with the law, they could also repeal the individual mandate that all people have to buy insurance, or they could pull all funding including subsidies people like Martha get or eliminate Medicaid expansion. All these would create a different level of disruption to the market.

In the best-case scenario for Martha, the individual mandate is maintained to ensure stability of the individual market until some other plan is proposed. While Martha doesn't see her premiums or deductibles shrink, nothing goes too awry. Also, lawmakers provide enough assurances to insurers that they stay in the market, preventing a monopoly-like situation in Martha's market and higher costs.

In the worst-case scenario, these four factors go the opposite way. Insurers, facing the uncertainty of the next two to four years, decide to exit the markets leaving Martha with just one or even no choices for coverage. With only a small penalty, people healthier than Martha leave the exchanges, which leads to an even sicker group of people being covered by the exchanges and higher prices for Martha. The "death spiral" predicted by GOP lawmakers for Obamacare truly does set in and prices shoot to astronomical levels, well above projections made before the passing of the law. Concerned that allowing a lapse in her coverage could cause her to be denied coverage in a replacement because of her preexisting condition, Martha sticks with the ever more expensive coverage

*The leave-as-is loop*

A third option for ACA changes would be to simply pass a few bills that make minor but needed adjustments to the law without a full-on repeal.

Democrats may be more amenable to this option. They have long pushed for reforms to the ACA, recognizing the increasing premium costs. Some ideas floated by Democrats have been to expand premium subsidies, strengthen the penalty for not enrolling, and provide more assistance to insurers that take on a larger number of sick patients.

This would leave a majority of the framework of the law — Medicaid expansion, the exchanges, and the statutory aspect — while providing tweaks to encourage younger, healthier people to sign up and balance the market.

Politically this may be tough for Republicans since they've made ACA repeal a talking point in elections for the better part of a decade, but if there were enough face-saving concession it could placate this worry.

-What does this mean for Martha?-

Essentially, Martha would see few changes in her healthcare. The exchanges would still be intact and all the provisions protecting her care would also be in place. There may be some positive changes, new provisions could bring down various costs, or another insurer may be available in her area, but not much else.

*The repeal-without-replacement cliff*

A final, though perhaps least likely option, would be for Republicans to simply repeal the bill and not worry about replacement.

After running against the bill for so long, the GOP could just repeal it and label it a disaster, making small changes along the way but not introducing a full-scale replacement.

This seems the least likely of the options, however, since Republicans have repeatedly said that they want to ensure continuing coverage and uphold the popular parts of Obamacare. Also, the political blowback from those losing coverage would be significant.

-What does this mean for Martha?-

Martha would likely lose any type of coverage come 2018 and be back to the pre-ACA world. She could try to access health insurance through the individual health insurance market, but with a preexisting condition there is no guarantee she could get access to coverage.

She could hope that her state implements a high-risk pool, where higher risk patients can get catastrophic insurance that covers the worst-case scenarios, but these plans are incredibly expensive and few people chose to access the pools when they did exist pre-ACA.

This, in many ways, would be the worst-case scenario for Martha.

*Democratic response*

In terms of direct action, there are few choices for Democrats to block moves on the law made by Republicans.

Obviously, unless there is a change to the rules, Senate Democrats could filibuster any statutory changes to the ACA. Outside of that, it appears that they simply have to influence the Republican agenda.

Perhaps most potent for Democrats would be to use Republicans' repeal against them. Some of the highest rates of utilization for ACA plans come from heavily Republican areas, and waging a public-relations campaign to get the conservative base to push back on any changes to the bill, the Democrats may have a way to get at least some of what they want.

Politico reported that many Democrats, while vehemently opposing a repeal of the ACA, would be willing to work with Republicans to find some way to keep various part of the law in a replacement bill.

"If it makes sense, I think there'll be a lot of Democrats who would be for it," Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill told Politico.

Whether Democrats go along with a replacement may come down to the amount of influence they can exert over the law.

*An uncertain future*

For now Martha, in our game, is hurtling down the road in her car. She doesn't like the increasing costs but wants to keep her coverage.

What turns The Road to Trumpcare takes are, for now, unknown, but more than 20 million real Americans are waiting anxiously to find out.

*SEE ALSO: One-third of Americans don't appear to know Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the same thing*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's how to use one of the many apps to buy and trade bitcoin Reported by Business Insider 44 minutes ago.

While the fate of the Affordable Care Act remains shaky, Covered California reported higher enrollment even as signups dropped on the federal insurance marketplace. The state health insurance marketplace added 412,105 new signups in this fourth open enrollment, with another 1.2 million renewing their coverage. This brings the total state enrollment to about 1.5 million people insured, but exact figures for renewals will be available in March. Nationwide, Kaiser Family Foundation estimates about… Reported by bizjournals 2 hours ago.

The number of Virginians who have health insurance from the state's Marketplace under the Affordable Care Act grew by more than 36,000 in the 2016 open enrollment period, according to the latest government figures.

Statewide, 421,897 selected health insurance plans from Nov. 1, 2016, to Jan. 31,... Reported by dailypress.com 15 minutes ago.

WASHINGTON ― Senate Republicans have not yet begun to work in earnest on a replacement plan for the Affordable Care Act, Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said on Tuesday.

It was a rare public admission of what has become obvious from the outside, as Republicans find both the politics and the substance of Obamacare repeal more difficult in practice than in rhetoric. (Watch the video above, produced by J.M. Rieger, to see the problem as it unfolds over seven years.)

“To be honest, there’s not any real discussion taking place right now,” Corker told reporters in the Capitol.

He said nervous talk about the consequences of repeal were accurately captured by secret audio from last month’s Republican retreat in Philadelphia. The same fears were expressed in additional sessions that were not recorded, he said. 

“At the retreat, which y’all unfortunately were able to listen to every word of ... we had breakout sessions where it was just the Senate talking about it, and you would have heard more of the same,” Corker said. “But the fact is we’re gonna end up covering people and we’re gonna end up granting flexibilities, but there’s gonna be a cost associated with it.”

Discussion at the retreat was captured on audio by an unknown person who sneaked into the room. The recording featured members of the House and Senate fretting about the political peril of repeal promises. According to Corker, the spy would’ve caught the same angst no matter where the recorder had been placed. 

Asked when Republicans might get down to the business of crafting an Obamacare alternative, Corker said he wasn’t sure.

“I have no idea,” he said. “I’m not on a committee that deals with this ... but I don’t see any congealing around ideas yet. And I think it’s fine that we take our time. I thought the The Wall Street Journal editorial today was dead on. I mean, we’re dealing with something that is very important, very complicated. It’s explosive if not handled properly, and we should take our time and do it right.”

Some senators have taken steps to advance the Republican health care agenda. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in 2015 co-sponsored a health care bill with Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), working across the Capitol with Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.). Hatch could draw on that measure for his panel’s work in crafting a replacement.

Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) released an outline of policies he favors to transition from the Affordable Care Act to a new system, but he hasn’t actually detailed what the new system would look like. And other Republican senators, including Bill Cassidy (La.) and Susan Collins (Maine), have talked about new health care proposals.

Rather than show that the Senate GOP is on top of an Obamacare replacement, the existence of these various competing plans, which are at different levels of completeness, are instead a sign of how far Republicans are from a consensus on how to move forward ― the “congealing around ideas” Corker referred to. It also illustrates Corker’s observation that no one in the upper chamber is in charge of aligning the disparate efforts.

The House may be further along, but still is nowhere near agreement, despite promises from House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that Obamacare repeal and “replace” would be completed by year-end. He’s been promising a GOP plan for years.

One Republican congressman, asked Tuesday about replacement progress, suggested the question was better directed at “the big boys.”


I had one GOP member tell me to ask "the big boys" what the Obamacare replacement plan is, with the implication being they have no plan.

— Matt Fuller (@MEPFuller) February 7, 2017

Ryan has his own broad replacement outline, released last year but never written as legislation. Committees have begun holding hearings and writing small parts of whatever “replace” may turn out to be.

But there are other plans emerging from the House, including one from the conservative Republican Study Committee and another from Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), who Trump has named to be secretary of Health and Human Services. And, of course, Trump has made a lengthy string of contradictory statements about own his goals for the health care system, and has promised to release a proposal of his own after Price wins confirmation.

The flurry of uncoordinated activity ― and the inactivity Corker described ― on health care reform in the White House, the Senate and the House shows that Republicans now confront a reality Democrats acknowledged even before Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008 and led his party on the road to the Affordable Care Act.

Health care is complicated, and monkeying around with one-fifth of the economy will create winners and losers. The losers can get loud, and the winners can worry they might actually not wind up on the winning side.

In 2009 and 2010, Democrats gambled that the winners would sufficiently outnumber the losers to make reshaping the health care system worth it. And while public polling has found support for the Affordable Care Act tepid ― even with the recent upswing in the law’s ratings as repeal looms ― Democrats succeeded in significantly shrinking the ranks of the uninsured and reducing the rate of those who lack coverage to a historic low.

Republicans had it easier during the nearly seven years since the Affordable Care Act’s enactment. The opposition party could afford to focus solely on the losers, such as people paying more for their insurance under the ACA, and on the law’s shortcomings, like the high deductibles many policies carry.

Now that they’re in charge of the entire federal government and have the means to keep their promises to repeal the Affordable Care Act and “replace” it with something else, Republicans are awakening to the tradeoffs involved in eliminating coverage for as many as 30 million people, and to the difficulty of meeting the standards they themselves established for health care reform.

And unlike congressional Democrats and the Obama White House in 2009, Republicans haven’t laid groundwork with the powerful health care industry, including physicians, hospitals, health insurance companies, drugmakers and patient groups. That has the industry nervous, and leaves the GOP with a lot of work.

Trump’s vows to provide “much less expensive and much better” health care is at odds with the GOP agenda of eliminating the taxes that financed about half of the Affordable Care Act’s coverage expansion. It also contradicts the party’s opposition to regulatory mechanisms that require insurers to offer plans to anyone regardless of pre-existing conditions, to cover a core set of basic health services, and to provide full financial protection against very high costs by forbidding annual and lifetime benefits limits and capping patients’ out-of-pocket costs.

Repealing taxes is popular, but Corker warned that doing so sets up a perpetual trap for Republicans. “If you repeal the taxes on the front end and you end up with, say, a Medicaid expansion, or even if it winds up being refundable tax credits, you’re still expending dollars,” he said. “And if you repeal all the sources of income on the front end, then” ― Corker paused to emphasize the absurdity of the position ― “it’s difficult to me to see how you ever get to a place where you actually fund what you’re expending. And then you’ve self-created the doc-fix scenario, where each year it just keeps getting extended, you’re piling up the deficits, because I don’t see Republicans voting for a tax increase.

“That’s why to me it’s important that this happen simultaneously,” Corker said. “I don’t see a scenario where people are pushing to insure less people. You gotta have money to pay for that.”
*Survey results will be posted here on Friday, Feb. 10. Matt Fuller and Jonathan Cohn contributed reporting. Sign up here to get Ryan Grim’s newsletter, Bad News.*

-- 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 20 minutes ago.

The number of Virginians who have health insurance from the state's Marketplace under the Affordable Care Act grew by more than 36,000 in the 2016 open enrollment period, according to the latest government figures.

Statewide, 421,897 selected health insurance plans from Nov. 1, 2016, to Jan. 31,... Reported by dailypress.com 11 hours ago.

A bill to shut down the state's marketplace where people buy health insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act passed its first committee vote Tuesday. Reported by Denver Post 22 hours ago.

Republicans on the Colorado Senate Finance Committee took the first step Tuesday toward unraveling Connect for Health Colorado, the state’s health-insurance exchange for individual and small-group policies. GOP state lawmakers said they want to give Coloradans more insurance choices and come up with a more Colorado-focused plan. Senate Bill 3, sponsored by state Sen. Jim Smallwood, R-Parker, was approved on a 3-2 party-line vote. The vote came after one of the driving forces in passing the bill… Reported by bizjournals 20 hours ago.

Reported by MarketWatch 15 hours ago.

The 21st Century Cures Act includes provisions affecting Medicare Advantage, drawing from the bipartisan Senate Finance Committee's Chronic Care Working Group, and the small employer health insurance market. Reported by Mondaq 10 hours ago.

In an interview published in the Feb. 6, 2017, issue of AIS’s Health Plan Week, former Aetna CEO Ron Williams discusses the perils Congress faces in trying to fix or replace the ACA.

(PRWEB) February 08, 2017

In a Feb. 6 interview with AIS’s Health Plan Week, former Aetna CEO Ron Williams weighs in on the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) flaws, and the perils Congress faces in trying to fix or replace it.

Once again, a fledgling presidential administration is in a position to rebuild the nation’s health insurance system. But given that politics generally trumps policy on Capitol Hill, lawmakers face many of the same problems that plagued the development of the ACA, Williams says. During sometimes heated debates in 2008 and 2009, Williams was a fixture at congressional hearings where he often served as the voice of the health insurance industry.

In an exclusive interview, Williams says health insurers must be given greater flexibility to build products that address the specific needs of a wide variety of consumers. “In a one-size-fits-all approach, we ended up with plan designs that are very comprehensive and therefore cost a lot. What we need are different types of insurance, some of which have copays, some that have coinsurance, but they need to offer a better first layer of coverage,” he says.

While the public insurance exchanges are at the heart of the ACA, Williams sees them as “an unnecessary intermediary,” and suggests a Medicare Advantage model would allow federal subsidies to be delivered directly from a health insurer to the member.

Williams is now chairman and CEO of consulting firm RW2 Enterprises, LLC, and is active in private equity as well as a director on corporate, public sector and non-profit boards.

Visit https://aishealth.com/archive/nhpw020617-02 to read the interview in its entirety.

About Health Plan Week
Published since 1991, the 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 changes to the Affordable Care Act. Visit http://aishealth.com/marketplace/health-plan-week for more information.

About AIS Health
AIS Health is a publishing and information company that has served the health care industry for more than 30 years. AIS Health’s mission is to provide objective and relevant business and strategic information for health care executives, by developing highly targeted news, data and analysis for managers at health insurance companies, pharmaceutical organizations, providers, purchasers and other health care industry stakeholders. AIS Health, which maintains journalistic independence from its parent company, MMIT, is committed to integrity in reporting and bringing transparency to health industry data. Learn more at http://AISHealth.com and http://AISHealthData.com. Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.

Findings Uncover that Repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Would Put Generation at Serious Risk of Losing Access to Healthcare Insurance, with More than Half of Young Millennials Currently Covered Under Parent’s Plan

Bothell, WA (PRWEB) February 08, 2017

February 8, 2017 – Vertafore, the leader in modern insurance technology, today released the results of a new study evaluating insurance sentiment and coverage rates of U.S. millennials as it relates to their personal finance habits. The survey of nearly 450 consumers ages 18 to 35 revealed that more than three-quarters (77%) of respondents understand not having insurance is risky, yet they remain the most underinsured generation – covered on average 14 percent less than older age groups across health, renters, home, life, and disability insurance. Ironically, while a vast majority of millennials (80%) have health insurance, prioritizing healthcare over all other forms of insurance, 88 percent admit they would rather go without health insurance for a year than give up their cell phone. With more than half (52%) of younger millennials (18-25) now under their parent’s healthcare plan and at risk of losing coverage if the ACA is repealed, this could mean giving up favored millennial luxuries such as Netflix, cell phones, or dining out.

Key findings of Vertafore’s 2017 millennial personal finance and insurance survey include:

Healthcare is Top Insurance Priority but ACA Repeal Could Impact Coverage Rates
Covered at a rate of 80 percent, millennial respondents prioritize healthcare over all other forms of insurance. However, that rate of coverage could significantly change given that more than one-third (35%) of all millennials aged 18-35 are either covered under their parents’ plan or purchase insurance through an exchange, both key mandates of the ACA. If the ACA were to be repealed, this group would be at risk of losing health insurance altogether. Additional key findings include:· Young millennials (18-25) are most vulnerable to losing access to health insurance if the ACA were to be repealed, with more than half (52%) currently covered under their parent’s plan.
· Following the recent presidential election, one-fifth (20%) of millennials cited feeling more at risk of losing their health insurance.

Insurance Gap is Putting Millennials at Financial Risk
Although a majority of millennials believe insurance is complicated and expensive, more than three-quarters (77%) do understand that not having insurance is risky. When evaluating rates of insurance coverage, however, a gap emerges between millennial personal finance habits and the insurance they purchase, such as:· The most significant disconnect in insurance coverage falls to millennial renters, with more than half (58%) failing to purchase renters insurance. According to Allstate, the average renter in a two-bedroom apartment has $30,000 worth of personal belongings – property that would not be replaced in the event of a fire, flood, or break in.
· When it comes to auto, 17 percent of millennial drivers were uninsured – 5 percent higher than the national average of 12 percent (according to the Insurance Research Council). This puts millennials at greater risk, liable for thousands of dollars if held responsible for an accident, which at last count averaged anywhere from $9,300 per incident for property damage to $80,700 for a disabling injury (National Safety Council).
· As it relates to disability insurance, older millennials (26-35) were nearly two and a half times more likely to purchase coverage than their younger (18-25) counterparts.

When Push Comes to Shove, Millennials Choose Luxuries over Insurance
Despite the common assumption that millennials are irresponsible with their money, when comparing insurance purchases and personal finance habits, the survey reveals they buck the misconception and incorporate insurance into their budgets as financially able. That is, unless that means giving up television streaming services such as Netflix, cell phones, or dining out. Additional personal finance insights include:· Although renters insurance costs an average of just $144 annually, only 40 percent have purchased this type of insurance – indicating a stronger preference to spend $100 a year on television streaming services like Netflix as well as craft beer and spirits over coverage.
· Millennials are not all irresponsible – nearly 60 percent reported being unwilling to skip, delay, or temporarily stop paying for healthcare insurance if given the choice to save money.
· A majority (63%) of millennials spend less than $300 a month on all forms of insurance, and more than half indicated they would invest in more insurance if they could afford it. Ironically, over 60 percent admit to spending more than $75 a month on eating out.

“Despite common misconceptions that millennials are unaware and uneducated about insurance, our research clearly shows they value insurance but financial barriers and personal spending habits inhibit securing proper coverage,” said Bruce Winterburn, VP of Industry Relations at Vertafore. “As we begin the new year, now is a great time for millennials to align what they know to be true with the actions they take on insurance coverage. Their future finances depend on it.”

Vertafore’s study polled 1,294 U.S. residents, including 444 millennials ages 18 to 35. Approximately 48 percent were males and 52 percent were females. SurveyMonkey conducted the survey in November 2016 and the full survey results are available upon request.

About Vertafore
Vertafore offers the broadest and most adaptable technology solutions to better prepare the insurance industry for digital disruption. The Vertafore product line is built on a platform, empowering customers and other solution providers to adapt and thrive as the market changes. Vertafore’s platform features fast innovation, partnerships with the best technology companies, and customizable solutions to help companies remain independent during a time of industry disruption. As the leader in modern insurance technology with the largest customer base in the industry, Vertafore connects every point of the distribution channel, from agencies and carriers to MGAs, MGUs, and state governments. For more information about Vertafore, visit vertafore.com, read the company’s blog, and follow the company on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook.

© 2017 Vertafore, Inc. All rights reserved. Vertafore and the Vertafore logo are trademarks of Vertafore and its subsidiaries. Reported by PRWeb 10 hours ago.

While the fate of the Affordable Care Act remains shaky, Covered California reported higher enrollment even as signups dropped on the federal insurance marketplace. The state health insurance marketplace added 412,105 new signups in this fourth open enrollment, with another 1.2 million renewing their coverage. This brings the total state enrollment to about 1.5 million people insured, but exact figures for renewals will be available in March. Join the conversation: Follow @SVbizjournal on Twitter,… Reported by bizjournals 9 hours ago.