Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

House delays vote on Obamacare replacement plan

0
0
House Republican leaders postponed a vote on the GOP health care plan after he came up short of votes in the full House. The Affordable Care Act replacement failed to garner enough support from ultra-conservatives, despite an offer by President Trump to remove a requirement for health insurance plans to cover a list of essential health benefits, such as maternity care, mental health and emergency services. Members of the House Freedom Caucus wanted more changes to the bill, while some moderate… Reported by bizjournals 13 hours ago.

Revised GOP Health Plan Gets Terrible CBO Score: All The Negatives, Almost No Positives

0
0
Revised GOP Health Plan Gets Terrible CBO Score: All The Negatives, Almost No Positives CBO has scored the* revised RyanCare plan* (notably not with amendments that have likely been discussed today) and it is even worse... *considerably less budget deficit reduction, the same number of uninsured, and similar effects on healthcare premium. *

*Comparison With the Previous Estimate*



On March, 13, 2017, CBO and JCT estimated that enacting the reconciliation recommendations of the House Committee on Ways and Means and the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (which were combined into H.R. 1628) would yield a net reduction in federal deficits of $337 billion over the 2017-2026 period. *CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1628, with the proposed amendments, would save $186 billion less over that period.* That reduction in savings stems primarily from changes to H.R. 1628 that modify provisions affecting the Internal Revenue Code and the Medicaid program.

 

Over the 2017-2026 period, modifications to provisions affecting the Internal Revenue Code that are not directly related to the law’s insurance coverage provisions would reduce JCT’s estimate of revenues by $137 billion. Reducing the threshold for determining the medical care deduction on individuals’ income tax returns from 7.5 percent of income to 5.8 percent would *reduce revenues by about $90 billion.* Other changes include adjusting the effective dates and making other modifications to the provisions that repeal or delay many of the changes in the Affordable Care Act, which *would reduce revenues by $48 billion.*

 

A number of changes to the Medicaid program would *reduce CBO’s estimate of savings by $41 billion over the 2017-2026 period*. The reduction would result from revising the formula for calculating the per capita allotments in Medicaid to allow for faster growth of the per capita cost of aged, blind, and disabled enrollees. The effects of changing that formula would be offset somewhat by the effects of three other provisions that would increase savings: reducing the per capita allotment in Medicaid for the state of New York in proportion to any financing the state receives from county governments; providing states the option to make eligibility for Medicaid conditional on satisfying work requirements for enrollees who are not single parents of children under age 6 or who are not pregnant or disabled; and allowing states to receive a block grant for Medicaid coverage of children and some adults instead of funding based on a per capita cap.

 

Other smaller changes resulting from the manager’s amendments would* reduce savings by an estimated $8 billion over the period*.

 

Compared with the previous version of the legislation, H.R. 1628, with the proposed amendments, would* have similar effects on health insurance coverage:* Estimates differ by no more than half a million people in any category in any year over the next decade. (Some differences may appear larger because of rounding.) For example, the decline in Medicaid coverage after 2020 would be smaller than in the previous estimate, mainly because of states’ responses to the faster growth in the per capita allotments for aged, blind, and disabled enrollees—but other changes in Medicaid would offset some of those effects.

The legislation’s *impact on health insurance premiums would be approximately the same* as estimated for the previous version.



*We would imagine conservatives will throw up all over it as it has all the negatives of the original bill with less than half the positives* - less coverage and less deficit reduction!

*Full CBO Score below*: Reported by Zero Hedge 13 hours ago.

People can't get over this photo of Republican dudes who want to cut maternity care

0
0
Republicans like to insist the war on women is nothing more than hysterical liberal outrage. 

Sure, the left uses the phrase to occasionally score political points, but sometimes Republicans make it so easy. Like when they appear to be casting aside women's needs without a second thought or even purposely targeting rights and policies that many women consider fundamental to their well-being and freedom.  

SEE ALSO: What men say about women in secret is why we can't have gender equality

Case in point: When Vice President Mike Pence tweeted a photo on Thursday from a meeting with a group of very conservative Congressional Republicans who want to eliminate maternity care from a set of required health insurance benefits, people couldn't help but notice a glaring omission: women.  Read more...

More about Women, Republicans, Politics, Gender, and Us World Reported by Mashable 12 hours ago.

The CBO score for the updated version of 'Trumpcare' is out, and it's even worse than the original

0
0
The CBO score for the updated version of 'Trumpcare' is out, and it's even worse than the original The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its revised estimate for the Republican healthcare bill on Thursday, and it could put House GOP leaders on even worse footing than the office's original assessment.

The report from the CBO on the amendments added on Monday to the American Health Care Act show that 24 million more Americans could be uninsured by  2026 compared to the current healthcare system.

The most significant change in the CBO's score was that the reduction of the federal deficit the CBO projected would be less with the amendments than under the previous version of the AHCA.

According to the report, the updated AHCA would reduce the deficit by $151 billion between 2017 and 2026, less than the $337 billion projected in the original CBO report.

This would be primarily due to a decrease in the revenue generated from taxes, but spending would stay roughly the same as they projected in the first score, the CBO said.

"Reducing the threshold for determining the medical care deduction on individuals’ income tax returns from 7.5 percent of income to 5.8 percent would reduce revenues by about $90 billion," the report said. "Other changes include adjusting the effective dates and making other modifications to the provisions that repeal or delay many of the changes in the Affordable Care Act, which would reduce revenues by $48 billion."

The amendments introduced Monday moved up the date of repeal for many of Obamacare's taxes to 2017 from 2018 in the original bill.

Additionally, the CBO said that adjustments to the formula that calculated Medicaid funding would result in a reduction of revenues totaling $41 billion over the same timeframe.

The report said that projections for the stability of the individual health insurance market and premiums for people on the individual exchanges were the same.

This score, however, does not encompass any changes made to the bill since Monday. The White House and GOP leaders have been negotiating with members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and may have promised edits on the legislation that have not been formally and publicly introduced.

GOP leadership delayed a vote on the healthcare bill Thursday because the bill did not have enough support from Republicans to pass. There has been no official word on when a vote will take place.

*SEE ALSO: Republicans delay vote on 'Trumpcare' after struggling to reach an agreement on the bill*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A body-language expert analyzes Trump's unique handshakes Reported by Business Insider 12 hours ago.

AHCA-ward Pause

0
0
*Like what you read below? **Sign up for HUFFPOST HILL** and get a cheeky dose of political news every evening! *

The leader of the free world took a break from being cranky to play with a truck. The State Department will approve the Keystone pipeline permit, capping off another successful election cycle for the Green Party. And the intensity level of Sean Spicer’s press briefing was upgraded today from “making unflinching eye contact while holding a lit match to palm”  to “ripping birds’ heads off with teeth.” This is HUFFPOST HILL for Thursday, March 23rd, 2017:

*FREEDOM RAUCOUS, AMIRITE  *- The best deals. Matt Fuller and Ryan Grim: “With conservatives unable to find a deal and leadership unable to find the votes, House Republicans are reportedly pulling their health care bill from the floor and delaying a vote that had been scheduled for Thursday. ‘No vote tonight,’ said a GOP leadership aide. Conservatives have teetered between strongly opposing the GOP health care bill and looming support. *The House Freedom Caucus has negotiated with the White House on potentially eliminating Essential Health Benefits and some unknown provisions in Title I of the Affordable Care Act.* That expansive section of the 2010 health care law Republicans are trying to repeal includes provisions requiring coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and allowing young adults to remain under a parent’s plan until they’re 26 years old.  The last-minute renegotiation of the bill spooked moderates, whose trickle of opposition became a steady stream throughout Thursday. Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) ― the head of the Tuesday Group, which is made up of roughly 50 moderate House Republicans ― announced his own opposition.” [HuffPost]

*Context: *“The best reason any Republican can come up with for passing this bill is that they said they would. The pretense that the legislation will result in better health care all but fell by the wayside once the CBO concluded tens of millions would lose their health insurance. As one person said Wednesday, *‘Simply put, this bill does not meet the standards of what was promised; it is not as good or better than what we currently have.’* That person was 11-term Republican Rep. Frank LoBiondo (N.J.).” [HuffPost’s Jeffrey Young and Sam Stein]

*REVISED CBO SCORE: PRETTY MUCH THE SAME, BUT WORSE* *- *The New Coke of letting grandma die. Peter Sullivan: “The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on Thursday released a new score for the revised plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare that Republican leaders are struggling to pass through the House.  *The CBO find that the latest version of the healthcare plan contains significantly less deficit reduction than the original bill, but would lead to essentially the same levels of coverage losses and premium increases*.  The legislation would reduce the deficit by $150 billion over 10 years, down from $337 billion in the original legislation, the office said. The plan would still result in 24 million more people being uninsured in 2026, a finding that has been a rallying cry for Democrats. Premiums would still initially rise by 15 to 20 percent before eventually becoming 10 percent lower, CBO said.” [The Hill]
*AHCA WAY LESS POPULAR THAN ACA* - Not A-OK. Ariel Edwards-Levy: “When the Affordable Care Act was signed in March 2010, after months of debate, about 42 percent of the public approved, according to HuffPost Pollster’s aggregate, with about 50 percent disapproving ― a level of discontent that proved to be bad news for Democrats and for Obama. At the law’s lowest ebb, in 2013, support fell to about 38 percent. That level of support, however, seems downright robust in comparison with the pessimism that’s greeted the Republican bill, known as the American Health Care Act.* Reactions to the proposal have been **overwhelmingly negative**, with **most surveys **finding less than one-third of the public in favor of the bill. Support reached a new nadir Thursday in **a Quinnipiac poll**, which found just 17 percent of voters expressing approval, and only 6 percent approving strongly*.” [HuffPost]

*SCHUMER SETS UP GORSUCH SHOWDOWN - *Congratulations to all the senators who will make noise about saving the institution before voting to go nuclear. Amanda Terkel and Jennifer Bendery: “Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) *announced Thursday that he will vote against President Donald Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court, adding that Democrats will also demand that Neil Gorsuch get at least 60 votes to be confirmed*...Some Senate Democrats have been quietly looking for ways to cut a deal with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) related to Gorsuch. One idea is to agree to give Gorsuch an up-or-down vote ― where he would need just 51 votes for confirmation ― in exchange for Republicans restoring the 60-vote requirement for advancing district and circuit court nominees. But Democratic leadership hasn’t been a part of those discussions, and Schumer’s announcement on Thursday made it clear that such a deal won’t fly if he has anything to do with it. “ [HuffPost]

*Like HuffPost Hill? Then order Eliot’s book*, The Beltway Bible: A Totally Serious A-Z Guide To Our No-Good, Corrupt, Incompetent, Terrible, Depressing, and Sometimes Hilarious Government

Does somebody keep forwarding you this newsletter? Get your own copy. It’s free! Sign up here. Send tips/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to eliot@huffingtonpost.com. Follow us on Twitter - @HuffPostHill

*TRUMP’S **TIME** INTERVIEW IS INSANE* - A 3.5 out of 5 on our HuffPost Hill patented “Precious Bodily Fluids” rating system. Marina Fang: “Trump said he didn’t really mean wiretapping because he tweeted it with quotation marks, and he was actually referring to the concept of surveillance more broadly, two lines of defense that administration officials have also employed. ..*He still thinks he will be ‘proved right’ on his **unfounded claim that 3-5 million people voted illegally*. ‘Well, now if you take a look at the votes, when I say that, I mean mostly they register wrong,’ he said of his assertion. ‘In other words, for the votes, they register incorrectly, and/or illegally. And they then vote. You have tremendous numbers of people. In fact I’m forming a committee on it.’ … And he insists everything is fine because he became president. ‘I can’t be doing so badly, because I’m president, and you’re not.’” [HuffPost]

*NUNES THE WISER* *- *Jessica Schulberg and Michael McAuliff: “House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) *apologized to angry Democratic colleagues on Thursday, one day after he unilaterally decided to brief reporters and President **Donald Trump** on **unsubstantiated allegations** that the president and his surrogates may have been subjected to indirect surveillance in the final months of the Obama administration. *Committee members gathered in a closed-door meeting Thursday morning, where ranking committee member Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) asked Nunes why he didn’t share his information with his colleagues before holding two press conferences and briefing Trump in the White House. Nunes apologized ‘in a generic way,’ Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), a member of the committee, told CNN. It was not clear exactly what Nunes was apologizing for, she said.” [HuffPost]

Great video of Nunes unable to end his press conferences.

*SEC NOMINATION A PROXY BATTLE FOR DODD-FRANK * - Zach Carter*: “A confirmation vote on President Donald Trump’s nominee to chair the Securities and Exchange Commission is quickly developing into a proxy vote signaling whether moderate Democrats will collaborate with the administration’s efforts to roll back the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law*. Trump nominated attorney Jay Clayton for the top SEC post in January. A partner at the elite corporate law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, Clayton is one of the top lawyers on Wall Street. Goldman Sachs and other firms hired him during the financial crisis.” [HuffPost]

*MAN-TERNITY LEAVE *- Today in the latest installment of “bad white guy optics.” Amanda Terkel: “President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence met with a group of conservative male lawmakers to determine the fate of maternity coverage in health care plans Thursday. Members of the House Freedom Caucus, which is composed of all men, went to the White House to talk with the president about what changes they’d like to see to the GOP health care bill. One of the major adjustments would be no longer requiring insurance companies to offer maternity care in all health plans. *Pence proudly tweeted a photo of the meeting, which didn’t feature a single woman* (although White House counselor Kellyanne Conway was reportedly there).” [HuffPost]

*You do you, Sean Spicer*: “White House press secretary Sean Spicer on Thursday defended the idea of taking away guaranteed maternity coverage in health insurance, denying that it would mean women must pay relatively more for their health care. He’s wrong about that. Ending the guarantee could mean slightly lower premiums for individual men and much older women, but it would just as surely drive up premiums for women of child-bearing age and their families ― unless it left them paying the full cost of prenatal care and delivery, typically many thousands of dollars, out of their own pockets. [HuffPost’s Jonathan Cohn]

*ANOTHER RESOUNDING VICTORY FOR MOTHER EARTH *- We’re so excited for when this year’s White House Christmas Tree is replaced with a tire fire pyramid. Valerie Volcovici and Timothy Gardner: “*The U.S. State Department will approve on Friday the permit needed to proceed with construction of the Canada-to-United States Keystone XL oil pipeline, a project blocked by former President Barack Obama, according to two government sources familiar with the process*. The move would mark the beginning of process that could be lengthy and complicated by approvals needed by state regulators and legal challenges. But President Donald Trump, a Republican, supports Keystone and days after he took office in January ordered its construction. That could mean that project, proposed in 2008, will eventually be completed.” [Reuters]

*BECAUSE YOU’VE READ THIS FAR *- Here’s a great Dane and a puppy.

*SWAMP UPDATE: STILL QUITE FULL *- Too bad the GOP failed to gut the OCE! John Bresnahan:  “*Rep. Duncan Hunter is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department over alleged campaign finance violations, the House Ethics Committee announced Thursday. *The California Republican spent tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of campaign funds on items that appear to be personal in nature during 2015 and 2016, according to records from Hunter’s campaign — a potential violation of House rules and federal law. The funds were spent on groceries and outdoor equipment, a dentist, a nail salon and a utility company, as well as on a hotel in Italy and at the Arizona Grand Resort. Although Hunter later repaid nearly $60,000 to his campaign following news reports detailing the questionable spending, the Office of Congressional Ethics began a probe into the case.” [Politico]

*COMFORT FOOD*

- How TV show intros got so good.

- New “Handmaid’s Tale” trailer.

- How iTunes fell apart.

*TWITTERAMA*

@robdelaney: .@SpeakerRyan courting AHCA votes by saying he’ll add 35% credit card processing fee when you GoFundMe chemo money to people with melanin.

@burgessev: Someone should do a tweetstorm on health care or SCOTUS

@mattyglesias: Like the President of the United States, my two year-old son really loves trucks and making pooping faces.

Got something to add? Send tips/quotes/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to Eliot Nelson (eliot@huffingtonpost.com)

-- 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 12 hours ago.

Uncertain Fate Of Obamacare Causes Some Hospitals To Halt Projects, Hiring

0
0
(Reuters) - Uncertainty surrounding the Republican plan to replace Obamacare is forcing someU.S. hospitals to delay expansion plans, cut costs, or take on added risk to borrow money for capital investment projects, dealing an economic blow to these facilities and the towns they call home.

Hospitals typically lay out multi-year operating plans that prioritize investments, such as new clinics, medical wings, technology or other projects that help draw in more patients and increase revenue. In addition to enhancing patient care, these projects are vital to the local economy as a driver of jobs ranging from construction and maintenance to restaurants and transportation.

Denver Health Medical Center, for example, opened a new $26.9 million clinic in the city’s southwest in 2016 to provide care to an area lacking in health services and saw more patients within six months than it had expected over two years. The health system planned to build or remodel five more facilities based on the new clinic’s success.

But since November’s election, when Republicans swept the White House and Congress, Denver Health has deferred $73.7 million-worth of construction projects that had been planned to serve more low-income residents, many of whom were newly insured under Obamacare.

“We want to know what will happen with the Medicaid expansion population, and what will be the timeline for that,” said Peg Burnette, Denver Health’s chief financial officer. “Due to theuncertainty, we’re not going to issue new debt. We have no plans for that in the near future.”

Denver Health is not alone. Across the country, hospitals are shifting to a more conservative stance as they await sweeping changes to the nation’s healthcare law that for the first time in U.S. history would reverse a government healthcare entitlement program. The Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, provided coverage to 20 million Americans and brought higher revenues to many hospitals.

The law’s likely overhaul puts many hospitals in a uniquely daunting position of being unable to predict how many of their patients will be insured and what type of coverage they will have in the future. As a result, many are more wary than in years past to invest in expensive capital projects, issue debt, or expand into new regions, said healthcare experts and hospital executives.

This is playing out in Arizona, where Kingman Regional Medical Center is taking cost-cutting measures by renegotiating medical supply and service contracts. The University of Alabama at Birmingham Health System, which includes six hospitals, is largely holding off hiring non-clinical staff, a trend also evident in national data.

Across the industry, hospital jobs so far in 2017 grew by 8,775 monthly on average, compared to 11,413 jobs for the same period last year, Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows. (Graphic http://tmsnrt.rs/2mtyO0w)

The Republican-proposed bill, set to come before the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday for a vote, would unwind the Medicaid expansion, cap federal payments to states and replaceObamacare’s income-based tax credits with flat age-based credits. The bill would still need approval in the Senate if it clears the House this week.

When asked about the early signs of hospitals putting spending on hold, a White House spokesperson expressed confidence that “the disastrous Obamacare law will be replaced with the American Health Care Act — the vehicle which will reform our broken healthcare system.”

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the new proposal would cause 14 million people to lose health insurance next year and 24 million by 2026. The bill has divided House and Senate Republicans and sparked fierce criticism from Democrats and leading medical and hospital groups, including the American Medical Association and American Hospital Association. (Graphic http://tmsnrt.rs/2n0ZMKf)

“It’s very challenging to plan for your future in an environment like this,” said Beth Feldpush, senior vice president of policy and advocacy at America’s Essential Hospitals, a group that represents safety-net hospitals nationally.

Not all hospitals are on hold. Some healthcare groups in areas with growing populations, such as Atlanta and Houston, are pushing ahead with capital expansion projects. Others, such as Maryland’s Prince George’s County, are still planning to move forward with construction plans, thanks in part to a partnership with the University of Maryland Medical System.

With the new medical center, Prince George’s County hopes to end its long-time reliance on $30 million annually from public subsidies to help cover operations. But that goal assumed Obamacare would remain intact, said Thomas Himler, Prince George’s deputy chief administrative officer.

“It could be that three years out we are no longer making money, we are losing money,” said Himler.

The uncertainty has seeped into the municipal bond market, where nonprofit hospitals access capital. The sector sold 36 percent less debt for new projects so far in 2017, compared to the same period last year, while the rest of the municipal market increased the amount of new money issued by 23 percent, Thomson Reuters data shows. While municipal analysts say it’s too early to draw conclusions, the uncertainty surrounding Obamacare is a likely cause for the decline.

“There’s a wait-and-see feeling,” said Kevin Holloran, a senior director at S&P Global Ratings. “Hospitals are saying, we’ll revisit this in six months or more.”

REVENUES AND RESTRAINT

Since enrollment started in 2014, the Affordable Care Act brought significant changes to Denver Health Medical Center, a safety-net hospital with the busiest trauma center in Colorado. Historically, nearly two-thirds of patients were either uninsured or covered by Medicaid, the government health insurance program for the poor.

Almost immediately after Obamacare went into effect, rates of uninsured dropped and Medicaid coverage jumped to over half of all patients.

With so many more patients covered, hospital margins grew and days of cash-on-hand climbed. Such financial improvements enabled the hospital to invest in new projects, including the Pena Family Health Center in southwest Denver. The hospital planned to construct three more clinics, to expand two existing clinics, and to build a new parking garage to drive new revenues and expand its coverage.

But since November’s elections, much of those plans have been deferred, including a $24 million expansion of a second clinic, largely financed through bonds. The health system still plans to move forward with the construction of one clinic and the remodeling of another. But those plans could be bigger.

“There’s great demand that we’re concerned about not being able to meet in the future,” said Burnette.

 

(Reporting by Robin Respaut in San Francisco and Yasmeen Abutaleb in Washington; editing by Edward Tobin)

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 10 hours ago.

Chubb appoints Michael Ho as Country President for Chubb Life in Hong Kong

0
0
Chubb appoints Michael Ho as Country President for Chubb Life in Hong Kong HONG KONG, March 24, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- Chubb today announced the appointment of Michael Ho to the role of Country President for Chubb Life in Hong Kong.Chubb appoints Michael Ho as Country President for Chubb Life in Hong Kong

Mr. Ho will be responsible for leading the Hong Kong operations for Chubb Life, the life insurance division of Chubb, which provides a broad range of life insurance and wealth management solutions for customers at different stages of life. Mr. Ho will report to Chubb Life's Regional President in Asia Pacific, Mr. Kevin Goulding.

"It is my pleasure to appoint Michael to lead our important Hong Kong business," said Mr. Goulding. "With more than 16 years of life insurance industry experience specifically in growing agency capabilities, Michael has a proven track record in leading winning teams and delivering outstanding results."

Michael joins Chubb from Prudential Asia, where he most recently held the role of Regional Chief Agency Officer, responsible for building and developing the regional agency capabilities in Asia. 

"Michael will be a great addition to lead and build our Hong Kong operation with his wealth of distribution experience and market knowledge. He will play a key role in further developing a culture of organizational excellence supporting our multiple distribution channels."

*About Chubb Life in Hong Kong*

Chubb is the world's largest publicly traded property and casualty insurance company.  With operations in 54 countries, Chubb provides commercial and personal property and casualty insurance, personal accident and supplemental health insurance, reinsurance and life insurance to a diverse group of clients.  As an underwriting company, we assess, assume and manage risk with insight and discipline.  We service and pay our claims fairly and promptly.  The company is also defined by its extensive product and service offerings, broad distribution capabilities, exceptional financial strength and local operations globally.  Parent company Chubb Limited is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: CB) and is a component of the S&P 500 index.  Chubb maintains executive offices in Zurich, New York, London and other locations, and employs approximately 31,000 people worldwide.

Chubb Life, the life insurance division of Chubb, operates in 30 countries around the world. In Asia, Chubb Life operates in Hong Kong, Indonesia, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam, and participates in a joint-venture in China. Chubb Life has been in Hong Kong since 1976, and launched its Global Wealth Management business from Hong Kong in 2015. To meet the financial protection and wealth management needs of its broad range of customers, Chubb Life in Hong Kong (Chubb Life Insurance Company Ltd.) offers a range of life protection, savings, accident and health insurance solutions through agents, brokers and banks.

Additional information can be found at: http://life.chubb.com/hk

Photo - http://photos.prnasia.com/prnh/20170324/8521701964 Reported by PR Newswire Asia 7 hours ago.

America's #1 Again (In Healthcare Costs Around The World)

0
0
America's #1 Again (In Healthcare Costs Around The World) While the American Healthcare Act, President Trump’s first major legislative effort, is going to a vote in the House of Representatives on Friday - no matter what; *for many years now, the American healthcare system has been flawed.*

As Statista's Feliz Richter illustrates in the chart below, *U.S. health spending per capita (including public and private spending) is higher than it is anywhere else in the world*, and yet, the country lags behind other nations in several aspects such as life expectancy and health insurance coverage.

You will find more statistics at Statista

USA, USA, USA! Reported by Zero Hedge 3 hours ago.

New report reveals which health funds have won and lost customers

0
0
The health insurance industry's report card shows one fund has shed more than 45,000 members. Reported by Brisbane Times 3 hours ago.

Insurance FMO Launches New Online Learning & Leads Platforms

0
0
Empower Brokerage, located in Southlake, Texas, intends to make 2017 the year of enhancements, upgrading their training and leads programs.

Southlake, Texas (PRWEB) March 24, 2017

Empower Brokerage, located in Southlake, Texas, intends to make 2017 the year of enhancements, upgrading their training and leads programs.
In February, 2017, Empower Brokerage introduced their new “Performance Partners” program to the Empower University. Reserved for elite sales agents, Performance Partners is designed to teach how to maximize their sales efforts, as well as how to best represent some of the best carriers in the senior health industry.

After releasing the Performance Partners class, Empower Brokerage added a Leads Program Prerequisite course the following week. Whether new or experienced, agents benefit from training conducted by DeWayne Long, the National Sales Director at Empower Brokerage, who has over 30 years of experience in the health and life insurance business. With his wealth of knowledge and experience, Long instructs agents on how best to work the leads provided by Empower Brokerage.

“Not one agent I’ve talked to recently has confidently told me they are working the leads properly,” commented Long. “With this training, we ensure agents not only understand how the program works but also how best to approach prospective clients.”

According to Long, thoroughly working a lead involves asking five questions. Essentially, the questions function as a needs-based analysis that determine what products a client truly needs. Instead of pushing one product type, Empower Brokerage urges agents help clients in multiple ways, whether it’s health insurance or life insurance.

“Empower Brokerage strives to help agents best serve their clients. That’s why this training is essential; agents need to know what to ask prospective clients in order to help them effectively. Failing to ask these questions not only results in a missed opportunity for the agent, but it’s a disservice to the client,” said Long.

While Empower has expanded their online university by adding two new courses, they have also improved existing classes. For instance, the Medicare Supplement Pre-Set Appointment Leads Training was revised March 15th. Long – in collaboration with William Bronson, the Marketing Director at Empower, and Andrea Hektner, the Marketing Specialist – covers the ins-and-outs of the tele-marketed pre-set appointment leads program.

Hektner claimed that the class, released over a year ago, was simply outdated. “As the program grew and improved, the training also needed to undergo improvements.”

Unlike the previous version, the new edition simulates a typical phone call made by a telemarketer, providing valuable insight into what it should sound like and how the caller interacts with the prospective client before setting the appointment. Knowing how the leads are acquired will better enable agents to prepare and anticipate client needs. Additionally, the training includes an interactive questionnaire that tests whether an agent understands how to react to certain situations. The system was designed to track student progress, provide necessary metrics to the instructor, and allow the students to take the classes in intervals. “Chopping up the content allows it to be more readily absorbed and utilized by the agents”, said Bronson.

As Hektner mentioned, Empower Brokerage added new and improved training courses to accommodate for their growing leads programs. Most recently, Empower Brokerage has introduced a new leads delivery system, called LeadServ. Instead of receiving leads through several different channels, agents can now access and manage their leads in one centralized location on Empower’s agent portal.

Bronson comments, “LeadServ is Empower Brokerage’s proprietary software application built right into our website back office. It serves timely leads to our agents, who participate, and they can set a variety of statuses, keep notes, and manage the processing of prospective clients all in one place. LeadServ is flexible enough to provide real-time metrics to specific managers, for defined groups of agents, anywhere in the world. It’s very satisfying to see its completion. I designed it to be powerful, insightful, and with the necessary framework to be expanded in the future.” Reported by PRWeb 2 hours ago.

GOP Resurrects A Bill From 2003 To Help Small Firms Buy Health Insurance

0
0
House Speaker Paul Ryan supports a bill that would allow "association health plans" to be sold nationally to small businesses. But critics say such plans tend to be skimpy and not well-regulated. Reported by NPR 1 hour ago.

The Logic-Defying CBO Obamacare Replacement Score Breaks Its Own Rules: NCPA

0
0
National Center for Policy Analysis Senior Fellow John R. Graham has released a study tackling the problems with the CBO's score for the GOP's Obamacare replacement.

Dallas, Texas (PRWEB) March 24, 2017

According to a new study by NCPA Senior Fellow John R. Graham, "the Congressional Budget Office score is invalid because it does not obey the rules Congress has directed the CBO to follow. The CBO itself previously recognized Obamacare would kill two million full-time equivalent jobs, which the GOP reform would restore. Yet, it estimates a reduction in employer-based coverage due to the GOP reform, which is not plausible. Employer-based coverage will improve under this reform."

The Congressional Budget Office's recent "score" of the GOP's Obamacare replacement bill fails on many fronts:·     It fails to account for the reform's positive effect on economic growth and prosperity, which the CBO is mandated to do.
·     It estimates 24 million will lose health insurance, but 14 million of those do not already have actual health insurance, but instead depend on the Medicaid welfare program.
·     It ignores the reform's effect on working people's ability to increase their hours or take a promotion without worrying their benefit will be clawed back, which it does under Obamacare.

“For any working person who wants to be free of worrying whether working an extra shift or getting a promotion will cause a drop in her income after paying for health insurance, the GOP Obamacare replacement bill offers meaningful relief,” asserts John R. Graham.

The Logic-Defying CBO Obamacare Replacement Score Breaks Its Own Rules, among Other Problems: http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/ba842.pdf Reported by PRWeb 13 minutes ago.

SourceMedia Introduces Open Enrollment Readiness Benchmark

0
0
New scorecard tracks employer preparedness for annual benefits sign-up periods.

New York, NY (PRWEB) March 24, 2017

SourceMedia today announces the launch of a new data-based performance benchmark that gauges how prepared employers are for their annual employee benefits enrollment periods.

The Open Enrollment Readiness Benchmark was developed by SourceMedia Research and the editors of Employee Benefit Adviser (EBA), the company’s information resource for employee benefit brokers, agents and consultants. This new tool is sponsored by ADP, a provider of human resource management software and services. The benchmark, which will be updated monthly, gives benefit advisers a way to measure their clients’ open enrollment progress against other organizations of similar scale.

The Open Enrollment Readiness Benchmark is based on monthly surveys of 400-plus prescreened HR and benefits executives of various sizes and across multiple industries. These professionals are asked to rate their completion levels for various activities — from selecting health plans to reviewing enrollment metrics — that take place during the four critical phases of open enrollment: benefit plan design, employee preparation, employee enrollment and post-enrollment analysis.

Respondents’ ratings are aggregated and scored on a scale of 1 to 100, with 100 being fully prepared. These scores are used to produce a readiness mark for each of the four phases, as well as an overall composite score. Scores are broken out for small, medium and large employers to enable more accurate benchmarking of firms. The benchmark is accessible at EBA’s website.

“The benchmark is the only tool that allows benefit advisers to see how ready employers are for open enrollment, giving those consultants an indication of where their clients might be falling behind and where they should be focusing their clients’ efforts,” said John McCormick, Editorial Director of SourceMedia’s Employee Benefits group, which includes EBA and Employee Benefit News.

In January, employers with benefit plans that take effect in the first quarter of 2018 received an initial Open Enrollment Readiness Benchmark score of just 43, indicating that, while progress is being made, most organizations still have work to do.

“Keeping HR leaders up-to-date on regulatory changes is a big endeavor—and so is calculating the risks associated with being out of compliance,” said John Ayala, President of Major Account Services for ADP. “Without the right technology on hand, administering benefits impedes HR’s ability to streamline workflow and share information. More than ever, brokers must adapt to provide a holistic human capital management solution in order to succeed. The OERB report provides brokers the ability to communicate key information to their clients about their open enrollment process which is essential for making informed decisions and building a better workforce.”

About Employee Benefit Adviser
Employee Benefit Adviser (EBA) is the information resource for employee benefit advisers, brokers, agents and consultants. In an era of tremendous change and challenge, EBA is the benefits broker's digital roadmap, providing the current awareness and perspective advisers need to optimally serve their clients, anticipate changes in the marketplace, and run their businesses. EBA covers a broad range of critical content, including comparative market data, legal and regulatory updates, the latest products and services, and best practices in benefits delivery — including health insurance, vision and dental insurance, voluntary products and services, and retirement benefits. The benefits broker community relies on EBA to stay connected, through its website comment forums, its social media communities, and live events.

About SourceMedia Research
SourceMedia Research is a full-service B2B market research service that draws upon SourceMedia’s market expertise and proprietary database of engaged executives to develop information and insights for clients. SourceMedia Research provides research solutions for marketers, agencies and others targeting sectors such as banking, payments, mortgage, accounting, employee benefits and wealth management.

About SourceMedia
SourceMedia, an Observer Capital company, is a business-to-business digital marketing services, subscription information, and event company serving senior-level professionals in the financial, technology and healthcare sectors. Brands include American Banker, PaymentsSource, The Bond Buyer, Financial Planning, Accounting Today, Mergers & Acquisitions, National Mortgage News, Employee Benefit News and Health Data Management.

About ADP
Powerful technology plus a human touch. Companies of all types and sizes around the world rely on ADP’s cloud software and expert insights to help unlock the potential of their people. HR. Talent. Benefits. Payroll. Compliance. Working together to build a better workforce. For more information, visit http://www.adp.com/business.

For more information, please contact:

Dana Jackson
dana.jackson(at)sourcemedia(dot)com
212-803-8329                        

John McCormick
212-803-8509
john.mccormick(at)sourcemedia(dot)com Reported by PRWeb 20 hours ago.

Trump starts healthcare judgment day by attacking the conservative Freedom Caucus in Twitter tirade

0
0
Trump starts healthcare judgment day by attacking the conservative Freedom Caucus in Twitter tirade President Donald Trump started Friday off with a Twitter tirade aimed at the conservative House Freedom Caucus as Republicans prepare for an uncertain vote on their healthcare legislation.

"The irony is that the Freedom Caucus, which is very pro-life and against Planned Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they stop this plan!" tweeted Trump.

Republicans delayed a vote on the GOP leadership's plan to repeal and replace Obamacare, the American Health Care Act, because the party did not have enough votes to pass the bill.

The House Freedom Caucus, whose members argue that the AHCA does not go far enough in its repeal of Obamacare. The holdouts from the Freedom Caucus appeared to have enough votes to block the passage of the bill on Thursday.

The AHCA does pull funding from Planned Parenthood, but the Freedom Caucus' main issue is that other regulation from Obamacare will stay in place under the AHCA.

GOP leadership spent much of Thursday attempting to compromise on the bill to get the Freedom Caucus and others on board. Trump, who House Speaker Paul Ryan called the "closer," met multiple times with the Freedom Caucus over the past two days and has been unable to sway their votes.

Trump also appeared to appeal directly to the American people, arguing that the AHCA is the best chance that the US has to overhaul the healthcare system.

"After seven horrible years of Obamacare (skyrocketing premiums & deductibles, bad healthcare), this is finally your chance for a great plan!" Trump tweeted.

Health policy analysts have predicted that deductibles would rise under the AHCA, while plans would generally cover fewer health issues.

Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office projected that premiums would increase for two years after the AHCA's passage and then come in lower than the baseline thereafter. The CBO also projected 24 million more people would be without health insurance in the 10 years after the AHCA is passed compared to the current system.

 

Trump issued an ultimatum to GOP lawmakers on Thursday night, saying that they needed to pass the AHCA on Friday or Obamacare would stay in place. A vote is expected later today.

*SEE ALSO: http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-healthcare-pass-ahca-obamacare-2017-3*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The Trump family's lavish lifestyle is costing taxpayers a fortune Reported by Business Insider 21 hours ago.

Republicans Scramble For Health Bill Votes After Trump Ultimatum

0
0
U.S. Republican lawmakers struggling to overcome differences over new healthcare legislation confronted a stark choice after President Donald Trump delivered an ultimatum: pass the bill on Friday or keep Obamacare in place.

Trump, a real estate magnate who touted his dealmaking prowess in the 2016 presidential campaign, faced the first major test of how well his skills would translate in Congress. Days of negotiations failed to produce a deal amid opposition from moderates and conservatives in his own Republican Party, and it was far from clear the bill had enough support to pass.

Financial markets, which have been buoyed by Trump’s plans to cut taxes and boost infrastructure spending, are watching closely. U.S. stock markets fell on Thursday as Republican leaders delayed a vote, and European stock markets opened lower on Friday, although the U.S. equity market looked set for a higher open.

The House of Representatives was set to vote late Friday afternoon on the Trump-backed bill to replace Democratic President Barack Obama’s 2010 Affordable Care Act.

“Lawmakers will have to be accountable as to why they didn’t vote to get rid of Obamacare when they had the chance, and that chance is today,” White House budget director Mick Mulvaney told CBS “This Morning.”

The House Rules Committee, which sets the duration of the debate on legislation and decides whether amendments will be allowed to be offered, was expected to formally send the Republican healthcare bill to the House floor on Friday morning.

Democrats uniformly oppose the bill, and it appeared to lack the needed Republican support as well, despite last-minute changes intended to broaden its appeal.

At least 35 Republicans still plan to vote against the bill, according to CBS News. If all House members were to vote, Republicans can only afford to lose 21 votes.

The American Health Care Act is the first foray into legislation for Trump, a New York businessman and reality television star who took office on Jan. 20.

The vote had been set for Thursday, the seventh anniversary of the signing of Obamacare. In an embarrassing setback, it was postponed because of tepid support.

By Thursday evening, Trump signaled he was done negotiating and demanded lawmakers back the bill, or face the consequences.

“The message is ... it’s done tomorrow, or Obamacare stays,” said Representative Chris Collins of New York, a Trump ally.

 


After seven horrible years of ObamaCare (skyrocketing premiums & deductibles, bad healthcare), this is finally your chance for a great plan!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2017



The irony is that the Freedom Caucus, which is very pro-life and against Planned Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they stop this plan!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2017


*KEY CAMPAIGN PLEDGE*

Replacing Obama’s signature health care plan was a key campaign pledge for Trump and Republicans, who viewed it as overly intrusive and expensive.

Obamacare aimed to boost the number of Americans with health insurance through mandates on individuals and employers, and income-based subsidies. About 20 million Americans gained insurance coverage through the law.

The House replacement plan would rescind taxes created by Obamacare, repeal a penalty against people who do not buy coverage, slash funding for the Medicaid program for the poor and disabled, and modify tax subsidies that help individuals buy plans.

Conservatives believe the Republican bill does not go far enough to repeal Obamacare and moderates think the plan could hurt their constituents.

House leaders agreed to four pages of last-minute amendments, including allowing states to choose which “essential benefits” are required in insurance plans, keeping a 0.9 percent surcharge on Medicare for high-income Americans for six years, and giving states more money for maternal health and mental health.

It was unclear whether that was enough to win over skeptics.

Trump has indicated an eagerness to move on to tax reform, trade deals and infrastructure, but a defeat in Congress will cast doubt on his ability to deliver.

If Republicans manage to ram the legislation through the House, it faces a tough fight in the Senate. It could draw opposition from moderate Senate Republicans who do not like the House measure’s new restrictions on federal funding for women’s healthcare provider Planned Parenthood.

Many senators, especially those who represent poor, rural states, worry that constituents who for the first time have health insurance because of Obamacare, will lose that coverage and not be able to afford the Republican replacement.

The House and Senate had hoped to deliver a new healthcare bill to Trump by April 8, when Congress is scheduled to begin a two-week spring break.

(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, David Morgan, David Lawder, and Amanda Becker; Writing by Roberta Rampton and Doina Chiacu; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore and Bernadette Baum)

-- 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 hours ago.

Why Trump’s Pick For The US Supreme Court Is Dangerous For America

0
0
We ought to have no doubt as to President Trump’s intentions for the U.S. Supreme Court. He was clear during the campaign that any nominee of his would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. His choices for the next justice, released by his campaign in September 2016, were vetted by the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society, pillars of the ultra-conservative infrastructure. So Trump’s ultimate nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch shouldn't be a surprise to any of us.

On the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Gorsuch sided overwhelmingly with corporate interests, dismissive of case law allowing federal agencies to decide how to implement their mandates to protect public health and safety.

Perhaps no case is a more notorious test of women’s rights, religious rights, and agency power than Hobby Lobby v. Burwell. There the Supreme Court held, egregiously, that a closely held corporation could use religious grounds to reject a government regulation that employee health insurance include coverage for all forms of contraception, unless the government can demonstrate a “compelling” state interest in restricting religious conduct. In Hobby Lobby, the court ruled women’s interests were not “compelling” enough to overcome the newly created rights of the employer. Think about that.

As a member of the 10th Circuit, Judge Gorsuch wrote his own, far more extreme take on Hobby Lobby, based on the assertion that “All of us must answer for ourselves whether and to what degree we are willing to be involved in the wrongdoing of others.” He continued, “For some, religion provides an essential source of guidance both about what constitutes wrongful conduct and the degree to which those who assist others in committing wrongful conduct themselves bear moral culpability.”

The religious rationale has become the basis for claims that one can refuse to serve gays, to justify noncompliance with child labor laws, to negate anti-kidnapping laws; and to fine a transgender individual, also justified by the employer’s religious objection. These instances may not survive challenge now, but if Judge Gorsuch gets his way, you might ask how they differ in logic from refusing to serve African Americans as the inferior descendants of Ham, as was once commonly claimed. I haven't come up with a reasonable answer.

Gorsuch is a jurist straight from central casting in appearance and demeanor, albeit not in ideology. He will likely adopt a stance of vague neutrality at his hearings and try to hide his established views in his pre-hearing questionnaires. He has been on a charm offensive visiting with senators one by one. But charm is not compassion, independence, or an indicator of fairness, and it is certainly not the basis for a seat on the Supreme Court.

Judges are always applying their values to the definition of words — as to what constitutes “compelling,” at the very least. So it is fair to look at other examples of the values applied by Judge Gorsuch. Such an examination does not paint a pretty picture.

In one dissent, Judge Gorsuch upheld the termination of a truck driver whose trailer brakes failed in freezing weather. After being instructed to stay with cargo in the trailer, the truck driver waited hours for help and began to think he was freezing to death. So he unhitched the trailer and drove for help. Judge Gorsuch stood apart from the majority of the court in completely ignoring the driver’s peril and suggesting that federal law did not protect the driver from the company’s charge that he had disobeyed instructions and abandoned the cargo.

In another case, Judge Gorsuch held that a police officer did not use excessive force against a nine-year-old when she put him in a twist-lock hold that broke the child’s collarbone. And he opined that an assistant professor who, after 6 months of cancer treatment, had been given enough time to recover, even though her doctor warned her not to return to work right away because of an ongoing flu epidemic at the university. (Other courts ruled that such cases warranted a jury trial.)

We need to abandon the charade that Judge Gorsuch is just moderately conservative or has an appropriately modest view of precedent on the court. As a Supreme Court justice there will be no check on his approach to the law, rooted as it is in extreme right wing legal theories.

Importantly for me, and for Jews everywhere, is that we are commanded by our faith to pursue justice. Jews have always been and should always be advocates for the powerless. So we ask ourselves, as Judge Gorsuch did, “to what degree we are willing to be involved in the wrongdoing of others?” We ought not condone his cramped judicial philosophy. So you might say my “religion” makes me reject Judge Gorsuch.

He's supposed to be okay with that, right?

Nancy K. Kaufman is the chief executive officer of the National Council of Jewish Women, a grassroots organization inspired by Jewish values that strives to improve the quality of life for women, children, and families and to safeguard individual rights and freedoms.

-- 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 11 hours ago.

Obamacare Repeal Would Knock 10 Percent Of This State Off Health Insurance

0
0
WASHINGTON ― There are a lot of things Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) doesn’t like about Republicans’ Obamacare repeal bill. It significantly raises costs on seniors. It kills the requirement that insurance companies offer maternity care and mental health care as essential health benefits.

But there’s one particularly staggering effect that repealing the Affordable Care Act would have on her state: As many as 475,000 people would lose their health insurance. That’s more than 10 percent of Oregon’s population.

“It just creates a nightmare,” Brown said in a Thursday interview with The Huffington Post.

As many as 40,000 Oregonians would lose their jobs as a result of repeal, as those jobs were created as a result of more people participating in health insurance. That’s according to the Economic Policy Institute, which offers a state-by-state breakdown of the effects of Obamacare repeal.

The governor said she’s been hearing from rural health care providers around her state who are worried about the effects of the GOP’s repeal bill on their populations seeking drug treatment. The legislation ends the requirement for insurance companies to offer the treatment, which means thousands of people in Oregon would lose it, Brown said.

“These are, generally speaking, people suffering from opioid addictions,” she said.

The only lawmaker in the Oregon congressional delegation supporting the repeal bill is Rep. Greg Walden (R), who is also the state’s only GOP congressman. His office did not respond to a request for comment about all the people who would lose health insurance in his state.

Walden, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has played a pivotal role in shaping the repeal bill. During a Friday morning committee hearing, he said Republicans amended the bill late Thursday to dedicate $15 billion to a new fund to help states pay for essential health benefits, like substance abuse treatment. That flexibility for states, he argued, is the better option, rather than requiring insurance companies to cover all essential health benefits.

“I’m proud of the product,” Walden told the Rules Committee, which met hours before the House is set to vote on the bill.

Brown disagreed that the GOP’s proposal, which would ultimately kick 24 million Americans off of health insurance and offer roughly $200 billion in tax cuts to the wealthy, is a good thing.

“I think it is the wrong direction for Oregon,” she said. “Ninety-eight percent of children are covered. Ninety-five percent of adults are covered. We want to move forward, not backward.”

-- 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 hours ago.

Winners and losers in House Republican health plan

0
0
The measure would repeal major parts of Obama's health law, capping future funding for Medicaid and cutting tax increases for high-income families, health insurance companies and drugmakers. The bill would repeal tax credits that people can use to purchase health insurance and replace them with a new tax credit that is less generous for most. The GOP health plan includes nearly $1 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade, and much of that would go to the very wealthy. The bill would allow insurers to charge higher premiums as people age and become more susceptible to health problems. Because of this provision, the nonpartisan Congressional Office estimates that younger patients would see their premiums drop. —Healthy people who choose not to have health insurance. The bill would limit future spending on Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor, reducing their benefits. The bill raises taxes for some low-income families because the new tax credits for buying health insurance are smaller than the credits under Obama's health law. Reported by SeattlePI.com 19 hours ago.

Trumpcare: An Indirect Cut To Social Security

0
0
Over 2.8 million Social Security beneficiaries are under the age of 65. Claiming benefits at the earliest possible age, 62, or not long after means that those beneficiaries will have smaller monthly Social Security benefits for the rest of their lives than people who have the luxury and resources to delay. But most have no other choice. Some may have lost their jobs and have no other income; others work in physically-demanding jobs and their bodies are worn out; still others must stop work to care for a sick spouse or parent. There’s a good reason that the most common age to claim Social Security’s earned benefits is age 62.

These “young” Social Security beneficiaries are in a particularly vulnerable position. In addition to having smaller monthly benefits, they aren’t yet eligible for Medicare. Because they have retired, they don’t have employer-based health insurance. So their only option is the individual insurance marketplace. But insurance corporations are not very interested in covering such an expensive (read: not profitable for them) population. Their solution? Charge customers in their sixties enormous premiums.

The Affordable Care Act (“ACA,” AKA Obamacare) took steps to help older Americans afford health insurance. The law limited how much insurance companies are allowed to charge older customers compared to their younger counterparts. It also created a system of income-based subsidies that significantly reduce the cost of insurance, which is particularly important for older and poorer Americans. Under the ACA, a 64-year-old with an annual income of $26,500 pays $1,700 in premiums each year.

The so-called “American Health Care Act” (AKA Trumpcare) would be a disaster for Social Security beneficiaries in their early sixties. It would repeal the ACA’s regulations on insurance companies, allowing them to charge older Americans up to five times as much as their younger counterparts for health insurance. The bill would also replace the ACA’s income-based subsidies with inadequate age-based stipends. That same 64-year-old making $26,000 who pays $1,700 in premiums under Obamacare would pay $14,600 under Trumpcare. That’s a 750 percent increase, and more than half her income!

Given that the average Social Security benefit for a 64-year-old retiree is only $12,920, there will likely be retirees for whom insurance premiums consume more than their entire Social Security benefit. Or in other words, an indirect cut of 100 percent! Trumpcare would force people who have worked and paid into Social Security for their entire lives to turn over their monthly checks to insurance companies. For the one-third of beneficiaries who rely on Social Security for all or nearly all of their income, that leaves nothing for food, housing, utilities, or the rest of life’s expenses.

And this is only for premiums. There is also the expense of co-pays, deductibles, medicine, hearing aids, and so much more. Most seniors are living close to poverty. Trumpcare likely will push many more below the poverty line. Families cannot spend half (or all!) of their incomes on health insurance. Instead, they will be forced to go without it. If they cannot go without it, they will go without food.

Social Security is designed to ensure that, after a lifetime of work, seniors should be able to retire with dignity and independence. Trumpcare would turn them into beggars.

And that’s not all. Trumpcare also massively cuts Medicaid, which seniors of all ages rely on for long-term care, as well as acute care. So it’s no surprise that the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 30 percent of low-income Americans aged 50-64 will be uninsured by 2026 if Trumpcare passes. Not only that, people who must go without coverage for 63 days or more — only slightly more than two months of unaffordable premiums — and then try to get covered again will be forced to pay thirty percent higher premiums for an entire year!

This is a true Catch-22. You can’t afford insurance, so you must pay almost a third more if you can finally scrape together enough to afford that coverage!

As it is, millions of Americans in their early sixties are barely hanging on until they’re eligible for Medicare. We should be lowering the Medicare eligibility age to 62 so that every Social Security beneficiary also receives Medicare, as a step towards making health care a right for everyone in this country. Instead, Trumpcare moves in exactly the wrong direction by massively increasing healthcare costs for an age group that is already struggling.

Unbelievably, the first incarnation of this horrific bill didn’t garner enough conservative support in the House because it isn’t stingy enough! Paul Ryan and his lieutenants have now made Trumpcare even worse to placate the so-called “Freedom Caucus.” The newest version of the bill would let states, rather than the federal government, determine which “essential health benefits” insurance plans are required to include. That means that if states decide to drop or change essential health benefits, insurance companies will be able to sell older Americans junk plans that don’t actually cover the care they need, including hospitalization, prescription drugs, and preventative care.

That means that a 63-year-old woman could scrape together her savings and much of her Social Security benefit to buy insurance, and then one day have a fall and end up in the hospital. Only when she receives an enormous bill for the hospital stay will she learn that the insurance she sacrificed so much to pay for was useless when she needed it. And, she will be reminded it of it thereafter as she is hounded and harassed by debt collectors, until, at last, she is driven into bankruptcy. This is no way to treat hardworking Americans who have spent a lifetime contributing to our nation.

When Members of Congress vote on this terrible bill, they would do well to remember another important characteristic of the 62-64 age group: They vote in huge numbers, and are an especially large share of the midterm electorate. Regardless of party affiliation, voters who have their insurance premiums raised by 750 percent will not be in a forgiving mood in 2018. Nor should they be. Trumpcare may be their ultimate death sentence.

-- 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 19 hours ago.

House Of Lies

0
0
It wasn’t fake news and couldn’t be called that; we all watched it together.

FBI Director James B. Comey, testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, said that neither the FBI or the Justice Department had any information that President Barack Obama ever ordered Donald Trump’s phones tapped at Trump Tower. “I have no information that supports those tweets,” Comey said.

In “those tweets” in the early hours of March 4, the sitting president of the United States lied, accusing his predecessor of a serious crime with no justification or evidence for the accusation.

Anyone can get things wrong; many presidents have gotten things wrong. Lying must also contain intent. And behind Trump’s continual falsehoods is intent: changing the facts with “alternative facts” and conspiracy theories that support him, his agenda, and his brand.

READ MORE: Seeking Truth, Speaking Truth, Practicing Truth

In a New York Times op-ed the day after Comey’s testimony, David Leonhardt made the distinction: George W. Bush thought that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was wrong; Barack Obama thought people would be able to keep their current health insurance program if they wanted, which also turned out to be wrong.

“They made careless statements that proved to be false (and they deserved much of the criticism they got),” Leonhardt writes. “But the current President of the United States lies. He lies in ways that no American politician has before. He has lied about, among other things, Obama’s birthplace, John Kennedy’s assassination, Sept. 11, the Iraq War, ISIS, NATO, military veterans, Mexican immigrants, anti-Semitic attacks, the unemployment rate, the murder rate, the Electoral College, voter fraud, and his groping of women.”

Very alarmingly, most of the readers of this column, and probably even their children, could easily add many more Trump lies to the list: the size of his inauguration crowd, the size of his victory, the size of his wealth, the size of his business successes, and insults his opponents and anyone who dares to challenge him — as Trump has made a habit out of bullying his way through life.

Then there are the many facts that Donald Trump refuses to disclose — like his tax returns. And, of course, with the facts of Trump’s financial life hidden, he can create his own facts, to protect his personal financial interests — even if they conflict with the national interest.

Donald Trump and his team have also consistently repeated that he and they have nothing to do with Russia, have no serious business interests or history there, had no relationships with Russian foreign operatives who tried to influence the American election in his favor, and that the Russians had no impact in their interference in the United States 2016 election. Trump says, “Russia is fake news.”

But Comey says otherwise. The FBI director made the extraordinary announcement this week that an investigation is underway to see whether members of the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Comey went on to say, “As with any counterintelligence investigation, this will also include an assessment of whether any crimes were committed.”

READ: When Did Christians Become Comfortable with the Loss of Truth? 

As Leonhardt suggests, there is a need now for more than journalistic fact checking. Deeper moral reflection is now required. “He tells so many untruths that it’s time to leave behind the textual parsing over which are unwitting and which are deliberate — as well as the condescending notion that most of Trump’s supporters enjoy his lies,” Leonhardt writes. “Trump sets out to deceive people. As he has put it, ‘I play to people’s fantasies.’”

Alternatively, Jesus said, “You will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”

What will happen to a nation’s freedom when its people don’t know the truth anymore? What happens when the political leader of the nation doesn’t seem to know the truth but lies about it day after day? Has repetitive lying already become normalized and accepted in the country under Donald Trump? What will the effect be on our children when even they can see that the president lies all the time? Will that make it harder for us as parents to tell them to always tell the truth? How does it affect a nation’s credibility when his supporters say that nobody should take what he says “literally”? What does it do to the nation’s moral fabric when the intelligence and justice officers of a nation tell us publicly that there is no proof behind the president’s numerous accusations? And, what does it mean when the president refuses to apologize or accept any responsibility for his mountain of deceptions?

As a Wall Street Journal editorial put it on Tuesday, in an unusually scathing critique from the conservative newspaper, “Two months into his presidency, Gallup has Mr. Trump’s approval rating at 39%. No doubt Mr. Trump considers that fake news, but if he doesn’t show more respect for the truth, most Americans may conclude he’s a fake president.”

The perpetual and seemingly pathological lying of the president of the United States is now more than a political issue, and certainly more than a partisan one; it is both a moral and a religious crisis now for the nation. And it is time for leaders in the faith community to stand up and say so. The truth will indeed set us free, and the unwillingness of the faith community to speak the truth to power could help put us into political bondage.

Jim Wallis is president of Sojourners. His book, America’s Original Sin: Racism, White Privilege, and the Bridge to a New America, is available now.

-- 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 17 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images