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

Enrollment of Young People in ACA Likely to Improve With Time

0
0
The Department of Health and Human Services recently delivered the latest enrollment numbers for the national and state health insurance marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act. The main focus of the media has been the number of young people enrolling in the individual health insurance market.

The reason this has attracted so much attention is that if most of the enrollees are older and less healthy, they will generate high health care costs compared to the premiums they pay. That would make insurance premiums go up in the future, and coverage would become progressively less affordable.

If this older and sicker population is offset by a large number of younger and healthier enrollees, then costs and risks can be more easily managed. Younger and healthier people spend less on health care, and their premiums can be used to cover the expense of the higher-cost enrollees.

Originally, the White House hoped Americans between 18 and 34 would account for 35 to 40 percent of total enrollment by Jan. 1. The latest enrollment numbers show that about 24 percent of enrollment is in the 18-34 age range, while 30 percent enrollees are under age 35.

Opponents of the law were quick to say that the White House has fallen short and that premiums are sure to rise.

There are three reasons to question this assumption.

First, enrollment was affected by the problematic rollout of Healthcare.gov.

Second, the enrollment period is not over, and this snapshot does not represent what the final pool of enrollees is liable to look like. A better window for analyzing enrollment will come in April, after the first enrollment period ends.

Third, there is also little doubt that insurance companies will expand their marketing in 2014 and 2015 to focus even more on this younger population. That marketing campaign will clearly add to federal and state outreach efforts.

Finally, because the tax penalty for not purchasing insurance increases over time, more people are likely to buy insurance to avoid paying the penalty.

It is helpful to compare what is happening under the Affordable Care Act with Massachusetts' experience. Its state health care plan served as the model for the ACA.
Massachusetts' very successful Health Insurance Connector (similar to the ACA exchanges), which began operation in 2006, had enrollment levels very similar to what the new marketplaces are seeing now. In its first three months of operation, the connector's enrollment levels for the 19-to-34 population did not exceed 22 percent. In fact, enrollment didn't reach its high of 34 percent until ten months after the Connector's startup.

There are other historical examples. In an April 2005 poll, only 21 percent of seniors had a favorable view of the Medicare Part D Drug prescription program. That program had a troubled rollout that fall, and a year later, 38 percent of seniors still thought that the program was not working well and required major changes or repeal.

As of 2013, 35 million seniors (roughly 76 percent of eligible seniors) are enrolled in the Part D program and it enjoys widespread popularity.

The Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) was considered by many to be a failure because of its very low initial enrollment. Today, CHIP enrolls 90 percent of all eligible children.

The lesson here is that enrollment in these very large programs simply required time and education.

Premium increases are not guaranteed even if enrollment numbers for the young and healthy are lower than expected in the first year. Under the Affordable Care Act, several provisions are designed to protect insurance companies from losses if too many sick people enroll.

The first is a $10 billion reinsurance fund (covered by a $63 tax on all insurance plans), which covers much of the cost if a policyholder incurs medical bills that exceed $60,000 per year. The second provision, called "risk adjustment," redistributes premium money from health plans that paid out less to those plans that paid out more. The last provision, called a "risk corridor," limits insurers' potential losses and profits. All of these provisions are based upon the assumption that risk pools and enrollment will take some time to work themselves out.

Health care reform is a marathon and not a sprint. The initial results, while lower than hoped, are hardly a sign that that the Affordable Care Act is bound for failure. Nor can they necessarily be interpreted to say that success is inevitable. Reforming the individual health insurance market is dependent upon a number of provisions in the Affordable Care Act, as well as a great deal of work that has yet to be completed.

Insuring tens of millions of Americans without coverage will take time. As we've said before, we should be wary of instant analysis. Reported by Huffington Post 2 days ago.

Private Health Insurance Exchanges Unleash 'Transformational Change'

0
0
While Obamacare’s public exchanges have drawn plenty of media attention (most of it negative), private health insurance exchanges are quietly building steam, attracting employers looking for new tools to engage their employees and manage health care benefits more effectively. Reported by Forbes.com 2 days ago.

Republicans Are Now Trying To Come Up With An Alternative To Obamacare

0
0
Republicans Are Now Trying To Come Up With An Alternative To Obamacare WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top Republicans are saying they can no longer just be the party of "No" on Obamacare: They need to come up with an alternative health care policy.

While many Americans are skeptical of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, they also tell lawmakers they worry about keeping their costs from getting out of control. For those voters, a party that offers a platform to repeal the 2010 law without anything to replace it may not be very attractive.

As a result, lawmakers from both the establishment wing of the Republican Party and the more fiscally conservative small-government proponents in the Tea Party movement are exploring health care policies.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner of Ohio said it would be a major topic at a Republican retreat next week.

"We need to present the American people with a positive," said long-time Senator John McCain of Arizona, who in 2008 had a detailed health care reform plan as the Republican Party's presidential candidate against Democrat Obama.

"A number of people are working on it, and we've come up with the various provisions, and now hopefully we're going to put together a Republican package" on healthcare, McCain told Reuters outside the Senate last week.

Several bills have already been introduced by Republicans in the House and Senate but no single plan has yet emerged.

Some start with the repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - a move that would almost certainly be vetoed by Obama if it passed both chambers, which is unlikely as long as Democrats hold the Senate.

Some bills propose new tax credits or deductions to help people pay for health insurance.

The law, commonly called Obamacare, passed Congress in 2010 as the most sweeping U.S. social legislation in 50 years and survived a legal challenge by opponents in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012.

It requires most Americans to buy insurance, offers subsidies to help low-income people receive coverage and sets minimum standards for coverage. It aims to dramatically reduce the number of Americans who lack health insurance policies.

Instead of starting with a total repeal, Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has suggested transition legislation that might initially eliminate some provisions such as mandatory coverage of maternity care and move people with pre-existing conditions into high-risk insurance pools.

Some Tea Party-backed House conservatives also are urging action, arguing that it may no longer be enough to simply denounce Obamacare as lawmakers start campaigning for congressional elections in November.

"What's our alternative to this terrible thing called Obamacare?" asked Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio at a recent lunch meeting of House Republican conservatives.

Another conservative, Representative Raul Labrador of Idaho, said that if Republicans want to win in 2014, they should start "letting the American people know what we are for."

Boehner, who has presided over dozens of House votes to limit or curtail Obamacare, said that at their annual retreat January 29-31, House Republicans would discuss a plan to make healthcare insurance more accessible and affordable.

-WHAT DO REPUBLICANS WANT?-

Republicans have opposed the law for years. They say Obamacare relies too heavily on mandates and results in too much government interference in the marketplace.

They point to the rocky rollout of the Obamacare website last October as evidence of flaws in the law. But analysts wonder whether they can unify around an alternative.

"The Republicans historically had a lot of health care bills ... The Republicans never coalesced around a single bill, and that was the political weakness of the Republicans," said Bob Moffit, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation who was a top health official under President Reagan.

The administration says Obamacare is settled law now.

Vice President Joe Biden on Thursday touted popular provisions such as prohibiting insurers from rejecting people with pre-existing conditions. "We will not go back. America has turned the page."

Republicans are not averse to cherry-picking some of the more popular bits of Obamacare. Two separate House Republican proposals would address the needs of people with pre-existing conditions through state-run "high-risk" insurance pools.

A House bill by Representative Tom Price of Georgia, an orthopedic surgeon, has been introduced for three Congresses in a row but has not had a single hearing or vote while Republicans have been more focused on trying to stop Obamacare.

Price's bill proposes using refundable tax credits based on income to help Americans with the purchase of health insurance plans. McCain introduced a similar bill in the Senate.

A bill by Republican Representative Phil Roe of Tennessee would apply a standard tax deduction to help Americans pay for insurance. It has 122 co-sponsors and has been embraced by the Republican Study Committee, the largest bloc of House conservatives.

"No bill does everything," Roe, an obstetrician, said in a telephone interview. "Let's debate the differences ... I think people want to hear that there are alternatives out there."

Some outside conservative groups also like the idea of alternatives to Obamacare. FreedomWorks is surveying its six million members on ideas and will release the results in March.

Matthew Green, a professor of political science at Catholic University, thinks it was inevitable that Republicans would move from just opposing Obamacare to proposing alternatives.

"You can only get votes for so long from people saying, 'I oppose the status quo'," Green said.

(Additional reporting by Richard Cowan and David Morgan; Editing by Grant McCool)

Join the conversation about this story »

 
 
 
  Reported by Business Insider 1 day ago.

Republicans Seeking To Develop Alternative To Obamacare

0
0
(Repeats with no changes to headline or text)
By Susan Cornwell
WASHINGTON, Jan 24 (Reuters) - Top Republicans are saying they can no longer just be the party of "No" on Obamacare: They need to come up with an alternative healthcare policy.
While many Americans are skeptical of President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, they also tell lawmakers they worry about keeping their costs from getting out of control. For those voters, a party that offers a platform to repeal the 2010 law without anything to replace it may not be very attractive.
As a result, lawmakers from both the establishment wing of the Republican Party and the more fiscally conservative small-government proponents in the Tea Party movement are exploring healthcare policies.
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner of Ohio said it would be a major topic at a Republican retreat next week.
"We need to present the American people with a positive," said long-time Senator John McCain of Arizona, who in 2008 had a detailed healthcare reform plan as the Republican Party's presidential candidate against Democrat Obama.
"A number of people are working on it, and we've come up with the various provisions, and now hopefully we're going to put together a Republican package" on healthcare, McCain told Reuters outside the Senate last week.
Several bills have already been introduced by Republicans in the House and Senate but no single plan has yet emerged.
Some start with the repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - a move that would almost certainly be vetoed by Obama if it passed both chambers, which is unlikely as long as Democrats hold the Senate.
Some bills propose new tax credits or deductions to help people pay for health insurance.
The law, commonly called Obamacare, passed Congress in 2010 as the most sweeping U.S. social legislation in 50 years and survived a legal challenge by opponents in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012.
It requires most Americans to buy insurance, offers subsidies to help low-income people receive coverage and sets minimum standards for coverage. It aims to dramatically reduce the number of Americans who lack health insurance policies.
Instead of starting with a total repeal, Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has suggested transition legislation that might initially eliminate some provisions such as mandatory coverage of maternity care and move people with pre-existing conditions into high-risk insurance pools.
Some Tea Party-backed House conservatives also are urging action, arguing that it may no longer be enough to simply denounce Obamacare as lawmakers start campaigning for congressional elections in November.
"What's our alternative to this terrible thing called Obamacare?" asked Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio at a recent lunch meeting of House Republican conservatives.
Another conservative, Representative Raul Labrador of Idaho, said that if Republicans want to win in 2014, they should start "letting the American people know what we are for."
Boehner, who has presided over dozens of House votes to limit or curtail Obamacare, said that at their annual retreat Jan. 29-31, House Republicans would discuss a plan to make healthcare insurance more accessible and affordable.

WHAT DO REPUBLICANS WANT?
Republicans have opposed the law for years. They say Obamacare relies too heavily on mandates and results in too much government interference in the marketplace.
They point to the rocky rollout of the Obamacare website last October as evidence of flaws in the law. But analysts wonder whether they can unify around an alternative.
"The Republicans historically had a lot of health care bills ... The Republicans never coalesced around a single bill, and that was the political weakness of the Republicans," said Bob Moffit, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation who was a top health official under President Reagan.
The administration says Obamacare is settled law now.
Vice President Joe Biden on Thursday touted popular provisions such as prohibiting insurers from rejecting people with pre-existing conditions. "We will not go back. America has turned the page."
Republicans are not averse to cherry-picking some of the more popular bits of Obamacare. Two separate House Republican proposals would address the needs of people with pre-existing conditions through state-run "high-risk" insurance pools.
A House bill by Representative Tom Price of Georgia, an orthopedic surgeon, has been introduced for three Congresses in a row but has not had a single hearing or vote while Republicans have been more focused on trying to stop Obamacare.
Price's bill proposes using refundable tax credits based on income to help Americans with the purchase of health insurance plans. McCain introduced a similar bill in the Senate.
A bill by Republican Representative Phil Roe of Tennessee would apply a standard tax deduction to help Americans pay for insurance. It has 122 co-sponsors and has been embraced by the Republican Study Committee, the largest bloc of House conservatives.
"No bill does everything," Roe, an obstetrician, said in a telephone interview. "Let's debate the differences ... I think people want to hear that there are alternatives out there."
Some outside conservative groups also like the idea of alternatives to Obamacare. FreedomWorks is surveying its six million members on ideas and will release the results in March.
Matthew Green, a professor of political science at Catholic University, thinks it was inevitable that Republicans would move from just opposing Obamacare to proposing alternatives.
"You can only get votes for so long from people saying, 'I oppose the status quo'," Green said. (Additional reporting by Richard Cowan and David Morgan; Editing by Grant McCool) Reported by Huffington Post 1 day ago.

HTMS, an Emdeon Company, Successfully Preps WINhealth to Compete on the Health Insurance Exchange Marketplace

0
0
NASHVILLE, Tenn., Jan. 24, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- HTMS, an Emdeon company, was selected by WINhealth to provide strategic planning, product design, operational preparation and implementation for health insurance products on the Wyoming Health Insurance Exchange (HIX). WINhealth is a... Reported by PR Newswire 1 day ago.

Buying Life Insurance Now Easier for Adults Courtesy of New Real Time Quotes System at Consumer Website

0
0
Buying life insurance online is now easier for adults who use the quote system at the Cherry News website. This real time price delivery system requires no medical information to display pricing at http://cherrynews.com/life-insurance.

Midland, TX (PRWEB) January 24, 2014

The different resources that adults use to lookup life insurance policies online are not always capable of presenting accurate rate quotations. The new real time system developed at the CherryNews.com company is now making buying life insurance easier for adults using the system at http://cherrynews.com/life-insurance.

The online system presents quotations for different companies online offering various products for insurance for adults. Any user of the new digitized system has the option to view these quotes or purchase a direct plan through each company. This system for research is one effective way for determining comparison costs between companies.

One unique advantage that adults will find when accessing this Internet system is the lack of information required to calculate a price quote. Unlike systems that require medical or personal information, the new system uses the zip code that matches the mailing address of each adult.

"Locating different life insurance plans from top agencies is possible while accessing our system to find prices from lowest to highest online," said one source for the CherryNews.com company.

The different agencies that are viewable include some of the leading companies in the North American market. The new privacy features found in the lookup system are presenting anonymous ways that adults can find different plans for life insurance products.

"All quotes that adults view using our lookup tool online are presented for the short or long-term plans that are requested during access to the locator service," said the source.

The CherryNews.com company is now presenting the insurer products available as one new 2014 enhancement to its website tools available. Other plans that are underwritten for adults can be searched easily when using the alternate tools now provided.

A standard health insurance policy lookup system is now active at http://cherrynews.com/health-insurance. This system performs immediate price calculations that can be used before purchasing any type of health plan presented to adults.

About CherryNews.com

The CherryNews.com company is currently one independent resource on the Internet that consumers use to locate retail information and price discounts. This company has enabled a research system this year to produce quotations for different insurance products. The CherryNews.com private systems for researching insurance information are a new concept for consumer research this year. This company continues to publish special guides, lists and other content that is related to retail discounts and leading products online. All company content is featured through syndication programs in the U.S. on behalf of selected media companies. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.

Wonkblog: Moody’s just downgraded the health insurance industry. Obamacare was part of the reason.

0
0
Stephen Zaharuk is a Moody's senior vice president who covers the health insurance industry. That makes him the guy who authored the report downgrading the credit outlook for health insurance companies from "stable" to "negative" on Thursday. We spoke Thursday afternoon about his outlook for the health-care industry, the big unknowns looming in 2014, and why the downgrade happened now. Some of his quotes made it into this story in Friday's paper and what follows is a transcript of our discussion, lightly edited for clarity. Reported by Washington Post 1 day ago.

Nuns Get Partial Win In U.S. Supreme Court Contraception Fight

0
0
(Adds U.S. Department of Justice comment)
By Lawrence Hurley
WASHINGTON, Jan 24 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Friday that, while litigation continues, an order of Roman Catholic nuns need not comply with a part of President Barack Obama's healthcare law requiring employers to provide insurance that covers contraception.
In the latest skirmish over religious objections to providing government-mandated contraception, the four-sentence court order was a partial victory for the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Baltimore-based order of nuns that runs nursing homes, and Illinois-based Christian Brothers Services, which manages healthcare plans for Catholic groups.
The unusually worded order by the court imposed a requirement on the groups before they can claim the exemption. First, they must send written notification to the Department of Health and Human Services saying they object to the contraception mandate.
The court's decision means that, as long as the groups send the letters, they are effectively exempt while litigation continues in lower courts, putting off for now any conclusive decision on this latest legal test of Obamacare, as the president's 2010 Affordable Care Act has become known.
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents the groups, hailed the court's order.
"We are delighted that the Supreme Court has issued this order protecting the Little Sisters," attorney Mark Rienzi said in a statement. "The government has lots of ways to deliver contraceptives to people. It doesn't need to force nuns to participate."
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Justice Department stressed in an email to Reuters that the order was not final. "This injunction applies only to the plaintiffs and is not a ruling on the merits of their case. And plaintiffs have always been eligible for an accommodation from the contraceptive coverage requirement."

'PAPERWORK, NOT RELIGIOUS LIBERTY'
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which supports the mandate, said in a statement the case focused only on the way groups like the Little Sisters can claim an exemption. "This is a case about paperwork, not religious liberty," she said.
Dozens of other Catholic groups are involved in similar litigation, and most have won temporary injunctions. So far, no federal appeals court has ruled on the merits of the groups' claims, according to the Becket Fund.
The organizations have accused the federal government of forcing them to support contraception and sterilization in violation of their religious beliefs, or face steep fines.
The Little Sisters lawsuit was filed also on behalf of hundreds of other groups that obtain benefits via Christian Brothers Services, although that has not been certified as a class-action at this stage. The Becket Fund said it would also benefit from the court's order.
The unsigned Supreme Court order said it "should not be construed as an expression of the court's views on the merits."

OBAMACARE'S MANDATE
The Obamacare law requires employers to provide health insurance policies that cover preventive services for women, including contraception and sterilization.
The act makes an exception for religious institutions such as houses of worship that mainly serve and employ members of their own faith, but not for schools, hospitals and charitable organizations that employ people of all faiths.
As a compromise, the administration agreed to an accommodation for non-profits affiliated with religious entities that was finalized in July. But the Little Sisters and other Catholic groups said the compromise process still violated their religious rights.
In court filings, the government had conceded it could not enforce the mandate against the Little Sisters in any case because of the nature of their health-care plan.
A federal judge in Colorado, William Martinez, denied the plaintiffs' request for an injunction on Dec. 27. The Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals followed suit on Dec. 31, prompting a last-minute plea to the Supreme Court.
Although Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a temporary injunction on Dec. 31, the court then spent more than three weeks weighing how to proceed.
In separate cases, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments in March on whether for-profit corporations can object to the contraception mandate on religious grounds. (Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh, Gunna Dickson, Toni Reinhold) Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.

Free health insurance to end for Mandeville city workers

0
0
After a long and emotional debate, a divided Mandeville City Council Thursday night opted to pass along steep increases in the city's health insurance costs directly to employees, who up to now have paid little or no premiums for coverage.... Reported by nola.com 23 hours ago.

Zane Benefits Publishes New Information on Private Health Insurance Exchanges

0
0
Exchanges are Taking Off with Both Large and Small Businesses

Park City, Utah (PRWEB) January 24, 2014

Today, Zane Benefits, the #1 online health benefits solution, published new information on private health insurance exchanges.

According to Zane Benefits’ website, one of the biggest trends in employee health benefits right now is private health insurance exchanges. The concept is taking off with both large and small businesses. And, employers are turning to brokers to understand how they can benefit from a private health insurance exchange.

According to Zane Benefits’ website, at the basic level a private health insurance exchange is a store or shop specializing in health insurance merchandise. More specifically, a private health insurance exchange is a broker’s health insurance offering to individuals and/or employees.

There are two types of private health insurance exchanges for brokers and employers to understand: group market private health insurance exchanges and and individual market private health insurance exchanges.

Click here to read the full article.

--

About Zane Benefits
Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, was founded in 2006 to revolutionize the way employers provide employee health benefits in America. We empower employees to take control over their own healthcare, while helping employers recruit and retain the best talent. Our online solutions allow small and medium-sized businesses to successfully transition to a health benefits program that creates happier employees, reduces costs and frees up more time to serve their customers. For more information about ZaneHealth, visit http://www.zanebenefits.com. Reported by PRWeb 21 hours ago.

Friday Talking Points -- 2014 The Year Of The Marijuana Voter?

0
0
Before we get to the marijuana news (and speculation), while Congress was off on yet another week-long vacation, there were a flurry of reports issued from various groups studying various aspects of America. The picture on income inequality is just as bad as everyone thought it was, one of these revealed. A blue-ribbon commission created after last year's State Of The Union address reported back (just before their year was up) on what could be done to improve voting access in America -- which was mostly ignored by politicians and the media alike, sad to say.

President Obama gave a speech last week on national security, spying, and the National Security Agency, which didn't do much to mollify his critics on the civil liberties side of things. This week, a group formed to study the N.S.A. spying concluded that the sweep of all telephony metadata was just flat-out unconstitutional, didn't aid in tracking down terrorists, and should be immediately stopped.

In the world of political commentary, right-wing mouthpiece Dinesh D'Souza was indicted for breaking campaign contributions laws. So maybe he'll be too busy during the next election cycle to put out propaganda movies, who knows?

The Republican War On Women went rolling merrily along, but we're going to devote most of the talking points this week to that subject, so we'll just mention it in passing. Here's a preview: Mike Huckabee has a starring role, this week.

OK, enough of the peripheral issues. Let's get back to that rather provocative headline, instead.

Will 2014 (or perhaps 2016) become known as the "Year Of The Marijuana Voter"? This question can now be seriously asked, because the issue of radically reforming marijuana laws seems to be growing bigger and more imperative with each passing week. Even though the year is less than four weeks old, consider what has been happening:

Legal recreational marijuana sales to adults are happening in Colorado. They will also soon happen in Washington state. The sky has not yet fallen in Colorado, and it is not expected to fall in Washington, either.

This means that when the two top teams in the National Football League meet for this year's Super Bowl, their fans back at home will be able to celebrate victory by smoking pot without the fear of immediate arrest for doing so. No matter which team wins.

In the past few weeks, politicians from Chris Christie to Rick Perry to Harry Reid have been signaling they are open to a much more enlightened policy on both medical marijuana and reducing legal penalties for recreational marijuana. That's a pretty broad spectrum of politicians.

Bill Gates admitted that he voted for legalization in Washington.

The Drug Enforcement Agency is still against marijuana legalization, but then that's no real big surprise, is it?

Medical marijuana proposals have been launched in the state governments of Tennessee and Alabama, both conservative states in the South.

Outright recreational legalization has been proposed in a growing number of other state governments, including Maryland, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and even Oklahoma.

In a handful of other states, ballot initiatives are being filed to get outright legalization on the ballot for this year's election. California has already seen four separate ballot measures filed for 2014 alone.

President of the United States Barack Obama just stated in an interview that he considers marijuana to be "less dangerous than alcohol," and "not very different" than tobacco cigarettes. While the White House did then walk back his comments a tiny bit (stating Obama still doesn't support the concept of legalization), they didn't contradict Obama's key points in the interview.

In fact, Attorney General Eric Holder followed up Obama's comments by announcing that the Justice Department was going to start allowing legal businesses (legal under their state's laws) that sell marijuana (both medicinally and recreationally) to have access to American banks, just like every other legal business in the country. This is a huge tangible step forward.

And if all that weren't enough, there's a governor's race down in Florida which may hinge on supporting new marijuana laws. The newly-Democratic (he used to be a Republican) Charlie Crist has come out pro-marijuana, and it may boost his turnout significantly among key demographics.

That's a lot of marijuana news for a few short weeks of politics. What it all means -- especially that last item -- is that pro-marijuana voters are becoming important to politicians' chances of being elected. They might even change entire elections. Very soon now, the marijuana vote will become a group which cannot be ignored by politicians. More and more sitting politicians are openly sponsoring legislation to legalize marijuana, and they wouldn't be doing so if they thought it would be political suicide. The public's attitude has shifted, and poll after poll shows that the majority supports ending the "War On Weed." Even some Republicans can see which way this wind is now blowing. Medicinal marijuana is becoming so popular even states in the Deep South are looking at the possibility.

We've had election years with the media focus on "soccer moms" or "NASCAR dads" as the chosen demographic to explain the whole election. It is now quite possible that this year's election could turn on the "marijuana voter," as astounding as that concept is to even consider. Want to turn out the youth vote in a midterm year? Well, what's your position on legalization?

I still think it's too early to see many bumperstickers proudly proclaiming: "I Smoke Pot -- And I Vote" (after all, sporting one of these is still akin to a bumpersticker stating: "Please pull my car over and search it, Mister Policeman."). But we're not that far away, really. We stand at the start of a domino effect in the states -- two states have legalized marijuana, but many others are considering the notion and will likely get on board in the next two election cycles. There is still a dearth of conversation about legalizing marijuana on the national level, but this will follow after the states take the lead for a few years.

Sooner or later, though, whether it is 2014 or 2016 or beyond, the "Year Of The Marijuana Voter" is coming.

 

Congresscritters fled for their districts this week, which left the field wide open for President Obama to snag the coveted *Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week* this week.

OK, sure, his N.S.A. speech left a lot to be desired. Fair enough. But his comments on marijuana were so astoundingly commonsensical and realistic that Obama deserves the award for this alone.

What I suspect is going on, based solely on the timing, is that Obama is gauging reaction to his comments now because there is going to be some sort of mention of marijuana laws in next week's State Of The Union address to Congress and the country. Perhaps he will take my advice and announce he's rescheduling marijuana to Schedule II. Or perhaps the news from Eric Holder and the Justice Department on normalizing a legal marijuana marketplace will be highlighted somehow. Or perhaps I am totally mistaken (always a possibility), and the subject won't even come up during the speech.

Whichever way the chips fall next week, Obama has already opened a conversation on the subject which will continue at a much higher level than before he gave the interview. He has used the bully pulpit to elevate the conversation, to put this another way, in a fashion I haven't seen since at least the 1970s -- if ever.

This conversation is going to have a lot of strange bedfellows, I should point out. One of the best columns I've read (now that political pundits seem to be falling over themselves to admit their own youthful indiscretions with the wacky weed) comes from Kathleen Parker, usually a pretty conservative voice. She frames the issue better than even Obama, after mentioning some fellow columnists who had opposed legalization:



Though I respect their views and share their concerns, I come down on the other side. My long-standing position is that marijuana should be decriminalized, if not made legal. Regulate and tax the tar out of it, please, but let's stop pretending that pot consumers are nefarious denizens of the underworld. Among those who enjoy a recreational smoke are the folks selling you a house, golfing on the ninth hole and probably an editor or two here and there.

The "war on drugs" (beware government domestic wars) hasn't made a dent in the popularity of pot. Nor, after decades of common use, has it been proved to be the evil weed of Reefer Madness. How much better to have dedicated our resources to education and treatment rather than, through prohibition, to empowering criminals and cartels, not to mention ruining young lives with "criminal" records.

I came to this position not when I was a college student, a time when inhaling pot was a consequence of breathing the ambient air, but when I was the law-abiding, straight-arrow, tough-loving mother of a teenager. Suffice to say, I became aware that marijuana use was common among teens of all hues and stripes.

I couldn't imagine then or now that children might be labeled criminals for behaviors that mostly required parental attention. This should not be construed to mean I recommend pot use, certainly not by minors, any more than William F. Buckley did when he concluded that it shouldn't be illegal.



That is what has been missing in the debate -- the human perspective. Barack Obama gave his own human perspective on marijuana, ranging from the point of view of a former enthusiast to that of a parent with a teenage daughter. From here on in, the debate over marijuana laws is not only going to become more prevalent in politics, it is also going to happen on a level America hasn't seen since before Nancy Reagan got that "Just Say No" bee in her bonnet.

The ship of state turns slow, as we all know. Barack Obama just nudged us all in a better direction concerning the political discussion over how the law should treat marijuana. Because the question now becomes, at its heart: "President Obama thinks marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and about the same as tobacco -- so why is there such a wide disparity in the way the law treats these substances?"

For doing so, Obama wins his fortieth *Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week* award. We welcome Obama's evolving on the issue, and we welcome the newly-framed debate.

[Congratulate President Barack Obama on the White House contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

We had a few candidates for *Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week* this week, sad to say. So we've got a few *(Dis-)Honorable Mention* awards to start with.

Wendy Davis embellished a tiny bit on her website's bio, which is just a rookie mistake to make in politics. Her Republican opponents are trying to make it a huge deal, but at least one of them has recognized how over-the-top the criticism has gotten, so perhaps Davis can move on from this goof.

Wisconsin state representative Christine Sinicki got a little too carried away when listening to Scott Walker's "state of the state" speech, with her comments to Facebook: "OMG...this speech is so full of shit. Wish I could get up and walk out," and "Bottom line... the rich get richer and the poor and middle class continue to get kicked in the butt." You'll notice that there's a difference between the two. In the second, she went with the not-very-profane "butt," whereas in the first one she could have used "crap," but didn't. Sigh. Think before you post, people.

We almost gave this week's *MDDOTW* award to a group in San Franciscothis week. An anti-abortion group is staging a march in the city, and they hung banners which stated "Abortion hurts women." A petition has been started to the city government to ban the banners, on the basis that they are (somehow) "hate speech" and need to be censored. Um, no. You may not agree with their political message, but trying to get the city to ban it is a whole different thing, folks. The mayor's office responded beautifully (in fact, let's just give the mayor an *Honorable Mention* for this response): "Mayor [Ed] Lee is a staunch, longtime defender of a woman's right to choose and disagrees strongly with the message of the banners, but the mayor's disapproval obviously doesn't -- and shouldn't -- trump the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution."

Exactly right.

But there's an even worse group, this week, when it comes to basic understanding of the way American politics works (and is supposed to work). This comes from the League of Conservation Voters, an environmental group who donated $5,000 to the campaign of Representative William Enyart. Enyart co-sponsored legislation which blocks the E.P.A. from new coal rules. The group says this violated a pledge he had made to the group when a candidate.

So the League of Conservation Voters wants their money back.

Hoo boy. Now, while you may agree with the environmentalists' stance and you may think Enyart's a weasel of the first order for going back on his word, this is simply not the way American democracy is supposed to work. Even though it kinda-sorta seems like you are, you are not actually buying votes with your campaign contributions. At least, you're not supposed to be doing so.

One way or the other, you can't ask for a refund in politics. That's not the way it works, folks. For demanding one, the League of Conservation Voters is hereby awarded this week's *Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week* award. And no, we won't be asking for it back, sorry.

[Contact the League of Conservation Voters via their website's contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions.]

 

*Volume 288* (1/24/14)

So what does everyone think of White House chief spokesguy Jay Carney's new beard? Personally, we think it gives him a certain amount of gravitas, and lessens the baby-faced nature of watching Carney, so we have to say it's a good look on him.

Ahem. Sorry, but someone had to bring it up... but wait! Breaking news! Carney has shaved! Say it ain't so, Jay -- bring back the beard!

Kidding aside, though, welcome to this week's installment of talking points, for all and sundry to use as handy go-to statements when discussing politics either with friends and family or with the nation as an elected official. Of course, next week will be entirely consumed with the State Of The Union address, and since Congress wasn't in town we've got a fairly mixed bag today (heavy on the unending Republican War On Women).

Without further ado, let's get to it.

 *   Exactly as it was designed to do*This is issue number one. "It's working" needs to be the theme, for the next few months at the very least.

"The Affordable Care Act was enacted to create access to health insurance for all Americans. New numbers are now out which show that the rate of the uninsured dropped -- in one month alone -- by over one percent. In the past few months -- since Obamacare got going full-steam, in other words, the rate has dropped from 18.6 percent of Americans to 16.1 percent -- a full two-and-a-half points. Obamacare is working. It is insuring more and more Americans and bringing down the rate of the uninsured. Exactly as it was designed to do."

 *   Three million and counting*While we're on the subject of Obamacare...

"At the end of December, over 2.2 million people had signed up for new health insurance under Obamacare. January's not even over, and we've already hit three million. And counting. As time goes by, more and more people are signing up for new insurance, exactly as predicted."

 *   Mike Huckabee tells us how it is*Hoo boy. Mike Huckabee mansplains why there is no "War On Women" at all. Just you ladies don't worry your pretty little heads about it, y'hear?

This one is really a two-part do-it-yourself talking point. Let's just string together the Huckabee quotes from this week, on women and on his own party's extremists, and the talking points just write themselves, don't they?



Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women. That's not a war on them. It's a war for them. And if the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control, because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it.

Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication. Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything that anybody else can do.

It doesn't help that some of the supposed rock stars of Republican consulting tell candidates not to even discuss issues like the sanctity of life for fear of offending women voters.

For Democrats to reduce women to beggars for cheap government-funded birth control is demeaning to the women that I know who are far more complicated than their libido and the management of their reproductive system.



Huckabee on the Tea Party, and on his plans to travel to Auschwitz soon:



Just stop it. Whatever differences we have, compared to the differences that we have to the other party, they're small. And that's why I've asked Republicans, let's stop using the term "RINO" -- Republican In Name Only. Let's stop calling each other somehow less Republican than someone else. Be for the person you're for.

[The horrors of Auschwitz] all started when people were devalued, when people were deemed "less than someone else." We look back on that time in history and we think, "How can educated people, university-trained, how can a nation like Germany with all of its resources, with its vast level of its population with higher education, get to a place where they can do something so heinous?" You realize that the only way you can end up there is when you start with the idea that people just aren't as valuable as you are.



 *   When Obama does what I did, it's evil*Mike Huckabee, part two. This should be just as entertaining as watching Mitt Romney try to explain how Romneycare was any different than Obamacare.

"Mike Huckabee is outraged that Obamacare mandates that prescriptions for birth control be covered by health insurance plans. What is bizarre and inexplicable is that when he was governor of Arkansas, Huckabee signed an almost-identical bill into law. The Arkansas law required health insurance plans in the state to provide birth control prescriptions, and it had fewer exemptions for religious organizations than Obamacare does. So why, exactly is Mike Huckabee so upset now when he signed an even more restrictive law into being when leading Arkansas? Could the ladies of his fair state not control their libido or reproductive system without the help of the government he headed, or what? When I do it, it's good, but when Obama does it, it's bad? Is that it, Mike?"

 *   Marital rape? Can't happen.*Meanwhile back on the ranch, in the continuing War On Women saga, one buckaroo bites the dust....

"I see that state senator Richard Black has dropped out of the race for Virginia's 10th House district. That's probably a good thing for Republicans denying there's a War On Women, because his claim to fame in the race so far was that he didn't believe spousal rape could even be defined, musing 'living together, sleeping in the same bed, she's in a nightie, there's no injury and so forth or anything.' Every time I hear a Republican denying their party's War On Women, there seems to be another one of these knuckle-draggers exposed for their antediluvian beliefs about rape. Good thing he dropped out of the race, but I bet there's another one out there somewhere who will say something equally as unenlightened next week."

 *   The real War On Women*This one's a good one to close the subject on.

"How Republicans can seriously deny they're waging a War On Women is beyond me. They oppose equal pay legislation like the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act. They put employers' rights above women's rights when it comes to decisions which should only be made between a woman and her doctor. They pass law after law restricting a woman's right to control her own reproductive health -- laws that are struck down again and again in the courts as unconstitutional attacks on women's freedom. They want to dictate what a doctor can say or force him or her to say things he or she doesn't agree with, because they think women are stupid. They are waging all-out war on family planning clinics in multiple states. They are going to oppose the Family and Medical Insurance Leave Act proposed by Senator Gillibrand. This is no surprise, because Republicans are against any proposal which would actually help the lives of America's women. You know what is truly revolting? The leadership of the party seems to be made up of old men, and yet they continue to open their mouths and say laughably-incorrect things about the way women's bodies work. Now they're going after birth control. All the while, helpfully explaining to women how this war against them is actually somehow going to work out better for women. I've got a message for Republicans, a message they will be hearing again in the ballot box: you are indeed waging a War On Women, and women are fully aware of it."

 *   When the party's over...*Turn out the lights.

"I see that Jimmy LaSalvia, the founder of the Republican gay rights group GOProud, has announced he's leaving the Republican Party for good. He left because of what he called the 'culture of intolerance' in the party, that he doesn't think 'any amount of policy changes can fix.' He went on to dismiss the party's attempts to rebrand itself to be more welcoming as, quote, nothing more than lipstick on a pig, unquote. LaSalvia also said he doesn't think the Republicans can win another presidential election again. While he will now be an Independent, we Democrats would like to offer a hand in welcome to Jimmy LaSalvia, should he ever wish to join a party that is truly an inclusive 'big tent' party."

 

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

  Reported by Huffington Post 19 hours ago.

Lack of Healthcare Coverage Contributes to Senior Bankruptcies

0
0
SeniorQuote Insurance Services Seeks to Protect Seniors through Unique Comparison Service that Offers Affordable Healthcare Options

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) January 25, 2014

Rising healthcare costs are threatening the financial security of Americans over the age of 65. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, healthcare costs are rising at a rate that is outpacing standard healthcare insurance coverage. According to a report updated by the CDC in October of 2013, personal health expenditures, which include services such as physician visits, hospital care, dental care, prescription drugs and nursing home care accounted for 84 percent of national health care expenditures in 2007, while private health insurance paid for only 36 percent of these personal health expenditures. Seniors are struggling with the rising cost of their personal healthcare as a result of this coverage gap.

William Haynor, a business leader with more than 40 years of experience in the insurance industry, is working to address this coverage gap and protect seniors from debt and bankruptcy through SeniorQuote Insurance Services. SeniorQuote is a unique service that provides seniors with the ability to cross-shop multiple insurance carriers for Medicare Supplement and Medicare Advantage Plans, with the support and guidance of SeniorQuote’s experienced team of insurance professionals. Haynor, age 72, says that he created the company based on his own experiences in trying to choose the right supplement plan for his personal Medicare coverage.

“I have always been healthy and active,” said Haynor. “But in 2010 it seemed that all at once I was hit with every medical problem you could image. I was laid up in the hospital for weeks and without proper Medicare Supplemental insurance, the bills would have threatened my family’s savings. I was thankful that I had the right medical coverage. Our goal is to provide this same measure of healthcare security to as many seniors as possible.”

According to a study published in early 2005, 46 percent of US personal bankruptcies were related to outstanding medical expenses. Meanwhile, bankruptcies for individuals over the age of 55 have more than doubled since the early 1990s, with the rising cost of healthcare expenses as the major contributor.

“With the right healthcare coverage, we believe many of these bankruptcies could be avoided,” continued Haynor. “Individuals relying on standard Medicare coverage are not completely protected. In my case, the medical expenses not covered by Medicare could have totaled more than $100,000. Fortunately, my supplement plan covered these additional costs and I paid virtually nothing.”

SeniorQuote operates a nationwide call-in support center designed to assist seniors in finding the healthcare coverage program that best fit their personal needs. Haynor and his team of licensed agents continue to expand their customer’s choices with the addition of new coverage programs from many of the industry’s top insurance carriers. The company recently added final expense insurance to their list of services to support the growing population of seniors and their families. Haynor plans to launch a series of Youtube videos in which he instructs seniors on the importance of final expense insurance and Medicare coverage , as he chronicles his personal experiences in finding the right supplement insurance for his family.
About SeniorQuote Insurance Services, Inc.

SeniorQuote Insurance Services, Inc., headquartered in San Diego, California, is a Medicare Supplement, Advantage, and final expense insurance agency founded for the singular purpose of helping seniors find the perfect insurance coverage to meet the needs of their family. The company, founded by veteran insurance executive William Haynor, offers Medicare Supplement, Advantage and final expense products from several of the nation’s leading and most respected carriers, through a team of licensed, experienced, and highly trained customer associates. To learn more about the company and the carriers represented, visit SeniorQuote.com or call 800-992-7724. Reported by PRWeb 11 hours ago.

Zane Benefits Publishes New Information on Health Insurance Expense Reimbursement

0
0
Employers Using Section 105 Software for Tax-Free Health Care Reimbursements via Payroll

Park City, Utah (PRWEB) January 25, 2014

Today, Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, published new information on health insurance expense reimbursement.

According to Zane Benefits’ website, the easiest way for small and medium sized employers offer health benefits today is with a Section 105 "Pure" Defined Contribution Plan. With the right Section 105 Software, employers can record tax-free health care reimbursements via their existing payroll service.

According to Zane Benefits’ website, when an employer reimburses an employee through a Section 105 Pure Defined Contribution Health Plan, employee gross salaries are not affected. An employer simply adds the dollars that have been approved for employees' qualified insurance premiums to the employee's paycheck using a non-taxable line-item. This concept is often referred to as a "tax-free addition" or "negative deduction" on the paycheck.

Click here to read the full article.

--

About Zane Benefits
Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, was founded in 2006 to revolutionize the way employers provide employee health benefits in America. We empower employees to take control over their own healthcare, while helping employers recruit and retain the best talent. Our online solutions allow small and medium-sized businesses to successfully transition to a health benefits program that creates happier employees, reduces costs and frees up more time to serve their customers. For more information about ZaneHealth, visit http://www.zanebenefits.com. Reported by PRWeb 8 hours ago.

Health Partners America and VelaPoint Insurance Announce Stronger Partnership

0
0
Health Partners America (HPA), a company that provides training, tools, and technology solutions for insurance agents and employers who are navigating the health reform legislation, and VelaPoint Insurance announce stronger partnership.

Birmingham, Alabama (PRWEB) January 25, 2014

Health Partners America (HPA), a company that provides training, tools, and technology solutions for insurance agents and employers who are navigating the health reform legislation, and VelaPoint Insurance announce stronger partnership.

Mel Blackwell, CEO of Health Partners America states, “To further leverage and better position HPA in the post ACA marketplace, it is more important than ever that we are focused on delivering an outstanding product with excellent customer service. In order to accomplish this and deliver the best possible outcomes for the HPA community, we are taking steps to become more closely aligned with VelaPoint Insurance (our fulfillment partner).”

With the recent changes and technology requirements hitting the industry, and the need for a clear, solid voice of reason and direction, the principals of HPA and VelaPoint Insurance are proud to announce that Josh Hilgers will now be VelaPoint's Director of Agency Development.

Hilgers states, “VelaPoint Insurance has been working on products and services to better compliment and round out the solutions HPA partners need to be competitive in the marketplace. I believe my new role at VelaPoint Insurance will better position HPA and its partners to understand and have access to all of the solutions that are now available through VelaPoint Insurance.”

Aaron Goddard, President of VelaPoint, states, “Having Josh's visionary concepts so close to the technology and the front lines of customer service will help ensure the best experience for consumers. This will ensure that together the partnership of HPA and VelaPoint will continue to be a Market Leader providing the key tools to capitalize on PPACA changes.”

Josh and the leadership at HPA believe this will put HPA’s partners in the best position to succeed.

The mission of both HPA and VelaPoint Insurance has always been to serve the broker community with technology and training that is world class. This strategic move will help to continue to drive innovative thinking, technology and thought leadership for the industry.

About Health Partners America

Founded in 2007, Health Partners America partnered with VelaPoint Insurance to provide insurance brokers with the tools, training, and technology to help businesses deliver quality health coverage using affordable solutions. Health Partners America is an all-star team of professionals with acute experience in the realms of insurance, business development, and training. Backed by VelaPoint’s exchange certified enrollment team, HPA is uniquely equipped to help brokers navigate the change presented by the new health care law. Together, HPA and Velapoint Insurance provide the industry’s first broker-friendly private health insurance exchange, allowing advisors to provide custom solutions to employer groups, associations, and other organizations. They are the best in the country at supporting and elevating brokers' prosperity through training, tools, and technology. For more information, visit healthpartnersamerica.com.

###

If you would like more information about this topic, please contact Katie Burns at 205-443-2184 or media(at)healthpartnersamerica(dot)com. Reported by PRWeb 8 hours ago.

Allen West: Mike Huckabee 'Has No Reason to Apologize,' Government Is 'Trying To Be The Sugar Daddy'

0
0
Former Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) said former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) has "no reason to apologize" for saying Democrats tell women they "cannot control their libido" without the government.

"If anything the Democrats should be apologizing," West told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.

West said Huckabee is "right."

"Government is trying to be the sugar daddy," West said.

At this week's Republican National Committee meeting in Washington, D.C., Huckabee said the Republican party "stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women." He followed those comments by saying Democrats "want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control."

"Women I know are outraged that Democrats think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication," Huckabee said. "Women I know are smart, educated, intelligent, capable of doing anything that anybody else can do."

Huckabee made the comments despite having signed a health insurance mandate that included contraception in preventative care into law while serving as governor of Arkansas.

*Watch West's remarks on Huckabee in the video above.* Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

No, Moody's Did Not Downgrade The Health Insurance Sector, But Yes Obamacare Is Hurting The Industry

0
0
This week Moody’s changed its outlook to “negative” from “stable” for the health insurance industry, and that’s triggered a raft of inaccurate headlines blaring that Moody’s “downgraded” the sector. This also triggered backlash from some on the right who worry this will be politicized by the Obama administration in light of rival rating agency Standard & Poor’s allegation that it’s being sued by the Justice Department as retribution for downgrading U.S. sovereign debt. Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, a favorite political writer of mine, wondered whether Moody’s would be punished for going negative on health insurance due to rocky rollout of Obama's signature endeavor, the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Yet these scenarios involving two rating agencies are very different, and they beg some analysis to set the record straight. Moody’s outlook change was far less impactful than a sovereign debt rating change because it technically did not affect any specific health insurance company and was a comment on the operating environment for some companies in a sub-sector of an industry that's a fraction of the GDP. In full disclosure, I worked for Moody’s as a bond analyst in the not-for-profit hospital sector, and I occasionally collaborated on healthcare projects with Stephen Zaharuk, a senior vice president and the lead author of Moody’s health insurance outlook change. I also concede that political retaliation is not out of the realm of possibility given the Internal Revenue Service’s harassment of Tea Party Groups that didn’t toe a leftist line. In its new report, Moody’s says a driving trigger for the health insurance outlook change was what the agency calls an “unstable and evolving regulatory environment” characterized by “ad hoc changes” that disrupted planning about the Affordable Care Act “well after product and pricing decisions had been finalized.” This uncertain operating environment factored into Moody’s lowering its expected earnings by the health insurance industry this year to a net margin of 2 percent from 3 percent. Unfortunately, the Obama administration delayed many Obamacare regulations until after the 2012 elections so they couldn’t be discussed during the campaign. This is troubling because it played politics with serious policy and compressed the time that health industry leaders could manage these enormous changes. Reported by Forbes.com 1 day ago.

New Benefits Come With Obamacare

0
0
People who buy individual health insurance policies are getting a set of no- or low-cost 'essential health benefits,' including flu shots, colonoscopies and mammograms. Reported by Wall Street Journal 20 hours ago.

No, Moody's Did Not Downgrade The Health Insurance Sector, But Yes Obamacare Is Squeezing The Industry

0
0
No, Moody's Did Not Downgrade The Health Insurance Sector, But Yes Obamacare Is Squeezing The Industry Reported by ajc.com 19 hours ago.

Schumer's Plan for Beating the Tea Party: More Government!

0
0
Schumer's Plan for Beating the Tea Party: More Government! Sen. Chuck Schumer's speech denouncing the Tea Party has received a bit of mockery on conservative talk radio this week. Yet it is worth exploring in greater depth, because it reveals the confusion--and the deception--of the Democratic Party's leadership as they attempt to salvage control of the Senate in 2014, and to rescue the left's agenda from the many failures of the Obama presidency, especially the disastrous rollout of Obamacare.

At the core of Schumer's argument is the contention that the Tea Party is racist. Americans who support the Tea Party, he says, share a "fear of a changing America...It looks different; it prays different; it works different. This is unsettling and angering to some." (Never mind that the most prominent Tea Party leaders were women, and that the Tea Party is responsible for the first black U.S. Senator from the South since Reconstruction.)

That fear, Schumer said, needed an additional element--and here he weaves a conspiracy theory around what he calls "Tea Party elites." It was these "elites," he says, who commandeered conservative media and "proffered government as the reason, the cause, of people’s frustration and anger. They proposed a simple remedy: greatly shrink or even eliminate government and your problems would vanish." Democrats didn't push back enough.

The very idea of a "Tea Party elite" is ridiculous. The movement defines itself as anti-elitist, and is virtually at war with the Republican leadership and the well-heeled donor class. True elites, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are committing serious money to defeat Tea Party candidates in the 2014 primaries. The Tea Party even lacks a unified organizational hierarchy--a fact that has, at times, made it far less politically effective.

What Schumer, the Senator from Wall Street, is doing is merely joining two terms--"Tea Party" and "elite"--that are each, on their own, somewhat unpopular. Schumer has been obsessed with such framing, ever since the Tea Party helped Republicans win  the House. In March 2011, for example, he urged Democrats on a conference call to use the word "extreme" when discussing Republicans, not realizing that reporters were listening in as well.

Schumer's strategy for defeating the Tea Party is even more laughable. He believes that the Tea Party elites hate government, while the grass roots look to government for help: "even the average Tea Party member likes and wants to retain most of what government does," he argues. Therefore Democrats need to champion government itself: "We must state loudly and repeatedly that we believe government is often a necessary force for good."

Unfortunately for Schumer and his ilk, the Obamacare failures continue to mount, and millions more people stand to lose their health insurance this year. Schumer's strategy is not even new: the Democrats first tried it in 2010, under the tutelage of Chicago radicals like convicted felon Robert Creamer, who at least understood that the Tea Party is anti-elitist, even if he mistakenly thought that Tea Party supporters resented the wealthy.

Schumer's agenda is the same today as it has always been: to frame the opposition as extremists. To that end, he is even willing to acknowledge that middle class incomes have declined "significantly" and that "good paying jobs" have disappeared "in the past few years." If Schumer truly believes 2014 is a "golden opportunity" to boast about government, then Republican victory is certain, despite deep divisions. As they say: good luck with that!

 
 
 
  Reported by Breitbart 15 hours ago.

Taxpayer Advocate: Brace for Obamacare Tax Surprises

0
0
It's not too early to start thinking about the tax implications of health care reform.Did you buy health insurance through one of the exchanges? You might be eligible for a refundable tax credit. Taxpayers had the option of estimating their 2014 income to see if they... Reported by Newsmax 7 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images