The Affordable Obama Care Act – Government Funded Groups Use Campaign Model – Failure to enroll targeted groups in significant numbers – Enrollees still not paying premiums – Are they enrolled?

The New York Times attempt at writing a glowing piece on enrollment campaigns for Obama Care (which is the Affordable Health Care Act) is somewhat disingenuous, although the title “Obama’s Vote-Getting Tactics Struggle to Find the Uninsured”, may suggest otherwise. The story speaks to the difficulty canvassers using the Presidents’ campaign model (and prior campaign staff members) is having difficulty:

The hunt for the uninsured in Broward County got underway one recent afternoon when 41 canvassers, armed with electronic maps on Samsung tablets, set off through working-class neighborhoods to peddle the Affordable Care Act door to door. Four hours later, they had made contact with 2,623 residents and signed up exactly 25 people (New York Times)

They are using targeting, to find those individuals that most likely would “benefit’ from enrolling in the mandated plan. Many of their targets, people identified on sophisticated computer lists generated in Washington as unlikely to have health insurance, had moved away. Some were not home. Many said they already had insurance through Medicare, their parents or a job. A few were hostile at the mere mention of President Obama’s health care law. “We’re going to repeal that,” one man said gruffly as he shut the door in the face of a canvasser, Nancy Morwin, 58, a retired social worker.

New York Times

Who is running the campaign – and to what end?

The campaign is staffed by organizations deploying thousands of paid and volunteer canvassers across the country. Planned Parenthood, one of the most aggressive groups, has raised millions of dollars for the effort. It is paying about 400 workers like Ms. Morwin $12 an hour. They are knocking on an average of 18,000 doors a day in eight states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas.

Enroll America, a nonprofit group that is trying to expand the health care rolls, has hired 266 people and recruited 14,000 volunteers to not only canvass neighborhoods but also make calls at phone banks and host events at community colleges in 11 states. The group has also spent $7 million to advertise on the Internet.(New York Times)

Therefore what we have is government funded groups paying volunteers to knock on doors in the hopes that they will increase the enrollment of a government funded plan – to date the New York Times estimates there are 3.3 million insured under the Affordable Obama Care Plan. The article continues in a hopeful vein, suggesting that the numbers will increase, yet does not mention that fact that those enrolled may have difficulty proving they have coverage at all, nor the impact on the taxpayer, many of whom have seen drastic increases in premiums or have lost their insurance altogether due to the mandates under the Affordable Obama Care Plan.

One of the difficulties in tracking enrollees is that the the plan fails to bill enrollees, simply because they never built the system (computer)to bill those that had signed up on the site to begin with! (Kaiser Health News). Therefore if one hasn’t paid a premium, is one truly insured? That seems to be the question for those attempting to receive health care.

Additionally, those most likely to benefit would be the insurance carriers themselves, due to the fact that Obama care reimburses insurance companies for any losses due to many claims as the young and healthy aren’t signing up in droves (even though one would not be able to actually be confident one was insured) – the New York Post considers this arrangement a Bailout -or another example of government – corporate collusion that has a hefty price tag that must be paid for by –the taxpayer. – More on that note from Insurance Networking News article “Obama care’s Outrageous Bailout for the Insurers -Obamacare has always depended, both operationally and politically, on an alliance between the administration and insurance companies. But that alliance is vulnerable.”worth the read.

Given the above scenario –that government funded groups, are having difficulty increasing the numbers of enrollees in a government mandated and funded plan, which said enrollees are not billed for and technically not insured, while promising the insurance companies who must pay claims once these individuals are treated, suggests a system that is beyond the pale – incompetent and costly. Which is why, there are some who believe that bigger government or government involvement into the private sector (Healthcare) is a really bad idea. The simplest fix: Those that are not able to buy insurance due to income levels should be able to enroll in Medicaid – the ridiculous limit on insurance carriers in states in general, should be removed, and a federal law (commerce clause here), instituted that allows all insurance carriers to compete nationwide – thus dropping the premiums due to an increased pool, and the laws of competition. Remove the mandates with one exception, mandatory physical exams yearly at no cost, thereby allowing insurance companies to offer “a-la-carte options for plans” that would vary in price and fit the individual consumer. There would be no need for mandated coverage, thus removing the IRS and any penalties to consumers, saving the taxpayer further and with more money in their pockets, further enhancing the economy.

That’s simplistic of course, and would work of cause, which is why it is not even remotely on the table.

There is always 2014 and 2016 – yet, in the meantime, the level of incompetence is stunning while the odds of a failing system are increasing.

Affronted - Obama Care (Affordable Health Care Act) – Buffers Big Business (Insurance Companies) against Loss – is Anyone Surprised? - The 1 Trillion Dollar Budget.

According to Bob Laszewsk, writing his Health Care Policy and Market Place Review blog – the Obama administration’s bill subsidizes insurers against adverse losses they might incur up to 2015 – this allows the carriers to limit any increases in the cost of policies, before everything skyrockets in 2016.

The Washington Post article (here) written by Ezra Klein, describes Mr. Laszewsk as “president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, a policy and marketplace consulting firm that has him working closely with many in the health industry as they try to navigate the Affordable Care Act” - He goes on, in an interview, to suggest fixes for Obama care’s computer woes, and does so with an eye toward inevitability, as well as for his clients, the insurance companies.

Although Laszewsk’s blog is technical in style written for those who are more familiar with insurance profits/losses and terminology- it is easy to get the gist – Obama care is a taxpayer funded project – right down to buffering the insurance companies.

Time and again, one sees the Federal government vested in Corporate America, which is a tad disconcerting to those who are concerned, regardless of party, when business (See K Street), benefits from Federal tax dollars. It runs against the grain of those who believe in free enterprise, without strings, fail or flourishing on one’s own steam.

With the new budget in place topping 1 trillion dollars – the Establishment GOP is thrilled to have preserved Incandescent light bulbs, and been granted a few concessions, here and there (Washington Times) – which screams both parties are either in collusion or being bi-partisan – and can do well without any interference from smaller parties influence. Those that may prefer to curtail spending, and reduce the debt per person in the nation (taxpayer), while prohibiting corporate collusion with government programs, should be gnashing their teeth at this latest budget.

Cruz’in in Dallas – Defund Obamacare – The Option and the Consequences

Ted Cruz, at a town hall meeting in Dallas suggested that the Congress Stop the Affordable Health Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare by simply defunding the program. He was greeted with enthusiastic support and a smattering of protestors(Dallas Morning News). One might think that Cruz is suggesting a tactic that would be so deplorable that the entire government would come to a screeching half. Frankly, should Congress halt funding, as it does hold the purse strings, one might look to history to see if it is feasible, and what type of tool it might be to stop a program that is obviously harmful to the nations financial stability and most especially the financial security and health of millions of American’s who will be shuttled into the Obamacare program, against their will.

The Kaiser Foundation offers the scenario where premiums for private pay family plans are in the neighborhood of $16,000 annually, which is a “modest increase” – As insurance carriers attempt to get out of Obama care exchanges, successfully, those employer groups are faced with the decision as to whether or not to fund employees healthcare programs or pay a smaller fine to just shove them into the nearest exchange. (Graph’s, etc., at Kaiser).

Therefore, Cruz has a good point, should Congress shut down the government, it would be an inconvenience to most American’s living on fixed incomes, but it would depend a great deal on the messaging as well as the willingness of the Republican’s in Congress and the Senate to step up and do the right thing rather than worry about how the Media and the General Public who would never vote for them anyhow, perceives those individuals. Frankly, it is a big bargaining chip to use in opposition when one is in the Congress. One might want to ask how the budget was balanced, and other reforms that drove the economy to success under the Clinton Administration were accomplished. Or, one might ask Newt Gingrich, who pushed the nation into a shutdown, as part of a larger showdown, forcing the hand of then President Clinton to act.

It was, in essence, a lot of bleating about something that bruised a few polecat class egos, and helped the nation prosper.

If one is not concerned with ego, then one might want to do something right for the nation. Cruz is obvious in his consideration for those who work for a living and the millions upon millions of individuals who will lose their healthcare, and be forced into a system that has yet to meet any of its benchmarks for readiness. In other words, those individuals will be without adequate coverage, or coverage of any kind, while employers will simply pay a fine. Meanwhile, Congress, the Unions, and others who have won exceptions from participating in the plan, will live life as normal. Whether on is a Democrat or Republican, one must take a long hard look at what the program really is, rather than base decisions on partisan nonsense and, ultimately one would find that agreement with Cruz is a normal course of action. Hopefully, there are others of his ilk ready to perform the job they were hired to do.