Skip to comments.Useful info!!!- ObamaCare's Secret Mandate Exemption repeals the individual mandate two years
Posted on 03/12/2014 5:50:36 AM PDT by dennisw
ObamaCare's Exemption HHS quietly repeals the individual purchase rule for two more years.
But amid the post-rollout political backlash, last week the agency created a new category: Now all you need to do is fill out a form attesting that your plan was cancelled and that you "believe that the plan options available in the [ObamaCare] Marketplace in your area are more expensive than your cancelled health insurance policy" or "you consider other available policies unaffordable."
This lax standardno formula or hard test beyond a person's beliefat least ostensibly requires proof such as an insurer termination notice. People can also qualify for hardships for the unspecified nonreason that "you experienced another hardship in obtaining health insurance," which only requires "documentation if possible." And yet another waiver is available to those who say they are merely unable to afford coverage, regardless of their prior insurance. In a word, these shifting legal benchmarks offer an exemption to everyone who conceivably wants one.
Keep in mind that the White House argued at the Supreme Court that the individual mandate to buy insurance was indispensable to the law's success, and President Obama continues to say he'd veto the bipartisan bills that would delay or repeal it.
HHS is also trying to pre-empt the inevitable political blowback from the nasty 2015 tax surprise of fining the uninsured for being uninsured, which could help reopen ObamaCare if voters elect a Republican Senate this November. Keeping its mandate waiver secret for now is an attempt get past November and in the meantime sign up as many people as possible for government-subsidized health care. Our sources in the insurance industry are worried the regulatory loophole sets a mandate non-enforcement precedent, and they're probably right. The longer it is not enforced, the less likely any President will enforce it.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
White Hut polling on Obummercare is obviously producing butt-puckering terror.
Obama is slowly gutting his own law. That’s positive in the sense that this was a horrible law and should be downright repealed. But it’s negative in the sense that the taxpayers are going to be on the hook for bailing out the insurers.
You might think, “screw the insurers”, they went along with this travesty. But through the risk corridor provision, the insurers are protected from loss. It was the bone that was thrown to them to get them aboard. They’ll get theirs. Taxpayers will get hosed.
Each side can play, “Gut Obamacare”. If the GOP gets the Senate, Congress can pass bill after bill dismantling it. Obama can veto those bills, but he will hurt his party in the process.
Then if the GOP wins in 2016, “Gut Obamacare” can continue with presidential EO’s. Then we’ll watch the Rats squeal.
“White Hut polling on Obummercare is obviously producing butt-puckering terror.”
But CNN stated support for CubaCare is”rebounding.” CNN wouldn’t shill for the WH, would they?
You might think, screw the insurers, they went along with this travesty. But through the risk corridor provision, the insurers are protected from loss. It was the bone that was thrown to them to get them aboard. Theyll get theirs. Taxpayers will get hosed.
So then what’s left of 0bamacare? Do they plan to keep their power after 2016 and then clamp down and force everyone to comply?
The dems are a bunch of fascist bastards. They absolutely must be kicked out of power.
The other issue is that all of the insurers had to revamp their entire product portfolios in order to comply with the 0bamacare rules. All of the pricing and product specifications were set up that way. They are really not in any position to “go back” and let you keep your old policy if you liked it.
Another question I have is whether 0bama, on his own, changing the rules, actually provides any cover for the insurers to offer their “old” plans, or would they be deemed to be breaking the law if it came down to a court action?
Before Obama it seem like we had pretty good Insurance system in place. Some people had Cadillac's, some had Chevy's some had Yugo's and some had to walk. Rather than just trying to get the walkers into a car they decided to repossess everyone's car and stuff us into a Volt. Expensive and unreliable. Now we got more walkers.
How is it that Obama decides what is the law?
I thought we had 3 co-equal branches of government. Obama seems to operate like the law is a suggestion, but he can choose to operate however he pleases.
That is not rule of law! (and alone is an impeachable offense.)
You get a Chevy Volt that catches on fire (spontaneously) in your garage
So that could make the insurance "affordable" for a lot more people, in terms of assessing the Obamacare penalty.
ObamaCare is on it’s death bed it can’t last two years.
A few weeks ago, prior to the government shutdown, President Barack Obama was frequently on TV talking about how the Republican Party is being hijacked by minority, far right-wing Tea Party extremists who wanted to delay the individual mandate in Obamacare for one year, the same delay afforded to businesses.
For a period of time, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz he was portrayed as a terrorist as being the No. 1 guy responsible for the shutdown. All he wanted was to delay the individual mandate for one year.
Ted Cruz has been vindicated but never gets any credit foe this in the MSM. It’s a real shame the Dems have such a grip on the media
Ted Cruz might as well be clairvoyant the way he tried to stop 0Care just a few months ago. Cruz called it! And the Demagogue Democrats used the most lurid descriptions of Cruz and other republicans. Called them hostage takers, anarchists etc etc
Focusing solely on Zerocare as an election tactic without offering other arguments is huge mistake. Two weeks before the November elections The courts are going to throw the whole thing out. Dening the GOPES the use of this argument and the Republicans who bought into this idea will be left with epis.
Yes, the insurers are not fully covered. They will accrue losses and as they adjust rates upward to reflect the makeup of their subscribers (more sick, fewer healthy), that’s when the “death spiral” accelerates. The more expensive the coverage, the fewer healthy people will subscribe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.