Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

HHS grants *more* Obamacare waivers

ObamaCare 2011 Waivers

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Nittany Lioness

Nittany Lioness

    Craving a little perspective.

  • Islander
  • 3,537 posts

Posted 04 April 2011 - 11:46 AM

http://michellemalki...12-2013-scheme/

This doesn't appear to be copyrighted -


Shhh: , considers new 2012-2013 scheme
By Michelle Malkin  •  April 4, 2011 10:01 AM Posted Image

Back in September and October, when I first started hammering the Obamacare waiver issue, I commented:

Old promise: Everyone gets to keep their health insurance.

New promise: You can keep your health insurance…if you BEG hard enough for an Obamacare waiver.

Will only high-powered, politically connected corporations and Big Labor groups be spared? Where's the transparency in how these decisions are being made?

To the first question, all signs have pointed to yes in the ensuing seven months.

To the second question, as usual, transparency is AWOL.

On Friday night, HHS quietly released another round of waiver information — picked up by The Hill. 128 new lucky winners will join 1,000 others in being exempted from the onerous, costly, private insurance-killing mandates that the rest of America is forced to follow:

The number of waivers the Obama administration has awarded for a provision of the year-old healthcare reform law grew by 128 in March.

With the new waivers, that means 1,168 businesses, insurers, unions and other organizations have received one-year exemptions from a healthcare reform provision requiring at least $750,000 in annual benefits.

The administration says the temporary waivers are granted to help stabilize the insurance market until a fuller package of reforms takes effect in 2014, but the growing number of waivers have exposed the White House to heavy criticism from Republican opponents of the law.

"The fact that over 1,000 waivers have been granted is a tacit admission that the healthcare law is fundamentally flawed," said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) last month. Upton is one of three House committee chairmen who has used new oversight powers to investigate the annual limit waivers.

The buried news: HHS is already plotting more waivers for 2012-2013…

HHS must still bridge the gap until 2014, when the mini-med plans will supposedly be phased out because consumers will be able to shop for affordable and quality coverage on new state-run insurance exchanges. HHS said it is now examining waivers options for 2012 and 2013.

The new numbers were posted on an HHS website Friday night without an announcement from the department. The 128 waivers added in March track closely to the 126 HHS awarded in February.

Let the pre-election favor-trading for future waivers begin.

***

On a very related note: Washington Examiner reporter and Regnery author David Freddoso is out with a new book, Gangster Government, today. Check it out.

Posted in: Health carePrinter Friendly
========================================================

And in case you missed it, the self proclaimed author of Obamacare wants a shiny waiver, too:

http://michellemalki...-new-york-city/

What a bunch of spectacular jerks.

Edited by Nittany Lioness, 04 April 2011 - 12:03 PM.

I'm cold Howard.jpg


#2 Julianus

Julianus
  • Islander
  • 1,660 posts

Posted 04 April 2011 - 11:51 PM

Just the idea of waivers for the national health care bill being given out stinks to high heaven, imo.
That so many waivers have been allowed says to me that the bill as it is being interpreted is a bad one. If there is going to be a national health care plan the rules have to apply to everyone equally and the money trails have to be clear. As it is Medicare and Medicaid fraud is way too high and a prime example of good intentions going awry because of poor oversight.

Pax,
Julianus

#3 Palisades

Palisades

    Northern Lights

  • Islander
  • 7,753 posts

Posted 05 April 2011 - 12:25 AM

Quote

HHS must still bridge the gap until 2014, when the mini-med plans will supposedly be phased out because consumers will be able to shop for affordable and quality coverage on new state-run insurance exchanges. HHS said it is now examining waivers options for 2012 and 2013.

So if there won't be waivers for these 1000+ employers after 2013 because the health insurance exchanges are available, doesn't that mean that despite assurances to the contrary, the plan is for all these employers to shove their employees off into the individual health insurance market? Should be interesting...

Edited by Palisade, 05 April 2011 - 12:29 AM.

"When the Fed is the bartender everybody drinks until they fall down." —Paul McCulley

"In truth, 'too big to fail' is not the worst thing we should fear – our financial institutions are now on their way to becoming 'too big to save'." —Simon Johnson

FKA:
TWP / An Affirming Flame / Solar Wind / Palisade

#4 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,914 posts

Posted 05 April 2011 - 11:05 PM

View PostJulianus, on 04 April 2011 - 11:51 PM, said:

Just the idea of waivers for the national health care bill being given out stinks to high heaven, imo.
That so many waivers have been allowed says to me that the bill as it is being interpreted is a bad one. If there is going to be a national health care plan the rules have to apply to everyone equally and the money trails have to be clear. As it is Medicare and Medicaid fraud is way too high and a prime example of good intentions going awry because of poor oversight.

Pax,
Julianus

Hence, Obamacare is a disaster waiting to happen. Good intentions being what the road to Hell is paved with and all that.

Oops, I'm not conforming with the progressive agenda! I mean, horray for socialism!  :sarcasm:
Posted Image
689 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama in 2012:

https://www.national...at-barack-obama

#5 obsidianstorm13

obsidianstorm13
  • Islander
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 04:04 AM

yes hooray for socialism! Too bad it didn't happen the way it should have happened ya know with an actual creation of a viable social health care service for everybody.  People just keep on whining over how it's soo horrible and how the insurance companies keep on ripping everybody off but no offense as a nation, the people in the US keep letting them-everyone lobbies so hard against socializing health care without even looking, I mean really looking into how it works. It's instant panic mode, OMG it's socialist, RUN.....  :rolleyes: and now another piece of stupid legislation has been passed with all these horrible things that had to be added in because it wouldn't have passed the House or the Senate. If I had been president I would have vetoed bill without the proper public option and I wouldn't have made it so everyone must have insurance or else.  But unfortunately, I'm not president.  I really hope that this bill goes for a severe overhaul in the next year or two back to what is SUPPOSED to do.  

Sorry I like my socialist health care in the UK-It means I don't have choose between paying car insurance and going to the doctor because my contributions to the health care system are taken out of my four weekly check.  Is it a perfect system oh no there are things that I wish were better, such as wait times and the fact that certain drugs are supressed because they're too expensive and the NHS doesn't have the money to shell out for them but hey overall it's a damn sight better than what's going on back home.  And frankly, if having more money taken out of everyone's check would reduce these issues further, I'd let them raise the contribution out of everyone's checks, including my own because I feel it's necessary.  If this is a socialist system... I'll take it any day because my health has improved drastically since coming here and some day I'd like my family and friends back home to have the same too.

#6 Palisades

Palisades

    Northern Lights

  • Islander
  • 7,753 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:33 AM

^ The thing is that the U.S. health system and employer-based insurance works fine for most people, and they'll be reluctant to risk what they have to gamble on something new. So long as that's the case, the best that's likely to happen is a third-rate, cheap mess for people who can't get good insurance through their employer, and most people will be reluctant to support that system since they don't want to pay taxes into a system they're not using.
"When the Fed is the bartender everybody drinks until they fall down." —Paul McCulley

"In truth, 'too big to fail' is not the worst thing we should fear – our financial institutions are now on their way to becoming 'too big to save'." —Simon Johnson

FKA:
TWP / An Affirming Flame / Solar Wind / Palisade

#7 Mark

Mark
  • Islander
  • 5,269 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 11:35 AM

Mark:  Welcome to Obamaland. Feel free to drop in!

Posted Image

Thought you people may enjoy a laugh in the middle of this catastrophe. :rolleyes:
Mark
Discussion is an exchange of knowledge: argument is an exchange of ignorance.
Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the ability to cope with it.
APOGEE MESSAGE BOARD

#8 Themis

Themis
  • Islander
  • 6,544 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 11:43 AM

View PostPalisade, on 06 April 2011 - 10:33 AM, said:

^ The thing is that the U.S. health system and employer-based insurance works fine for most people

I can't quote statistics, but fewer employers are offering health insurance.  Coverage for dependents (which the employee pays) keeps getting more expensive.  Deductibles, prescription co-pays and out-of-pocket maximums keep rising.  Many (most?) small employers can't afford to offer health insurance for employees even if they wanted to.  And my UK friends were always aghast at the amount of money I had to pay when anything went amiss with my health (as was I, and it helped push me into bankruptcy).
Cats will never be extinct!

#9 Mark

Mark
  • Islander
  • 5,269 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 12:34 PM

Mark: I've said it before, and I'll say it again...we need to identify the root causes of high prices for medicine, healthcare, and healthcare insurance, and deal with these monopolies with prejudice.  
Pay, Profits and Spending by Drug Companies
...

Quote

  • The average profit margin of the pharmaceutical companies in the Fortune 1000 list is 16% (profits as a percent of revenue). This is in line with the profit margins of the banking (13%), diversified financial (11%), tobacco (11%), and real estate (10%) industries (Fortune, 2002)1 . None of these industries has the need to pour money back into research that the pharmaceutical industry does.
  • Drug industry returns have remained steady http://www.rxrights....h-overhaulsince 1981 at only 2 to 3% above the cost of capital (Little, 2002)2 .
  • The pharmaceutical industry's risk-adjusted return is actually lower than other R&D-intensive industries, such as computer network, equipment, and software services (Little, 2002).
Posted Image

Drug Prices Rose 9.1% Last Year, Ahead of the Fed Health Overhaul

Posted Image

Stellar Pharmaceuticals Profitable for 2010; Revenues up 32%, Net Profit Up 120%!
And Stellar is a very small pharmaceutical company.

And yes, they're even sticking it to us at our local veterinary clinic. I read a report where people were spending more on their pets during this economic crunch. Here is proof...


Vetsweb-News

Most pharmaceutical companies increased profit in 2010                //
10 Feb 2011             ...After a year of many  acquisitions and mergers, most companies saw a significant increase in  sales.            
Intervet/SPAH
Animal Health division Intervet/Schering-Plough reported sales  of $2.94 billion, an increase of 8% on the $2.72bn from 2009 trading.  The year was the first full 12 months under Merck's ownership.

Pfizer Animal Health
Pfizer Animal Health revenues for 2010 were $3.58 billion an  increase of 29% compared to the prior year. This is an increase of 29%  compared to 2009. 2010 was the first full financial year since the  company integrated the Fort Dodge business as part of its parent  company's acquisition of Wyeth pharmaceutical company.

Novartis Animal Health
Novartis Animal Health saw revenues increase by 7% over the  2010 financial year. The business unit is part of Novartis' Consumer  Health division, which also comprises the OTC and CIBA Vision units,  with most figures consolidated into the overall divisional results.

Merial
Merial's owner, sanofi-aventis, reported a  sharp increase in income from animal health which reflects the fact it  no longer shares Merial's income with Merck. Merial net income was €418m (2010), €241m (2009); sales $2635m (2010), $2554m (2009).




So, lets start quizzing these pharmaceutical companies as to how they managed to get OBAMA, bought and payed for, before he released his health-care reform plan, that has increased the prices of drugs!!

Edited by Mark, 06 April 2011 - 12:35 PM.

Mark
Discussion is an exchange of knowledge: argument is an exchange of ignorance.
Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the ability to cope with it.
APOGEE MESSAGE BOARD

#10 obsidianstorm13

obsidianstorm13
  • Islander
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 04:19 PM

You mean congress... Congress is and has been bought and paid for since I can remember.  Not Obama... he can only suggest legislation to be put up and sign it once it gets through the House and Senate...but they squabbled from what I have read here on Exisle and elsewhere, that certain people wanted certain things in the bill and others out... originally the bill had the public option... that was scrapped to appease certain groups from what I know of it.  
Our congressmen get bought out by lobbyists... and yeah I do think Obama really should have vetoed that bill.  At least it's something and I do really think that it will get drastically altered over the next years.

#11 Palisades

Palisades

    Northern Lights

  • Islander
  • 7,753 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 04:47 PM

^ Actually, the Obama administration did agree to a back-room deal with PhRMA in which the White House agreed to oppose any Congressional efforts to put government drug price negotiations into the health insurance bill in exchange for PhRMA supporting the legislation.
"When the Fed is the bartender everybody drinks until they fall down." —Paul McCulley

"In truth, 'too big to fail' is not the worst thing we should fear – our financial institutions are now on their way to becoming 'too big to save'." —Simon Johnson

FKA:
TWP / An Affirming Flame / Solar Wind / Palisade

#12 obsidianstorm13

obsidianstorm13
  • Islander
  • 1,118 posts

Posted 07 April 2011 - 02:44 AM

Well after glancing at the article, I can see why he did it but it doesn't make it the right thing to do certainly.  On one hand he managed to gain support for his bill but on the other his decision hurt a lot of Americans.  I don't know how I really feel about the POTUS having secret meetings with lobbyist groups, I have to say.

#13 Nittany Lioness

Nittany Lioness

    Craving a little perspective.

  • Islander
  • 3,537 posts

Posted 29 November 2011 - 11:08 AM

More news on waivers -

http://thehill.com/b...waiver-requests

I find that a bit odd.

I'm cold Howard.jpg


#14 Cheile

Cheile

    proud J/Cer ~ ten years and counting

  • Islander
  • 10,776 posts

Posted 30 November 2011 - 02:08 AM

View PostThemis, on 06 April 2011 - 11:43 AM, said:

View PostPalisade, on 06 April 2011 - 10:33 AM, said:

^ The thing is that the U.S. health system and employer-based insurance works fine for most people

I can't quote statistics, but fewer employers are offering health insurance.  Coverage for dependents (which the employee pays) keeps getting more expensive.  Deductibles, prescription co-pays and out-of-pocket maximums keep rising.  

Palisade, you are so wrong you don't even get it.  pretty much what Themis said is true.  plus these cheap-ass companies discriminate against people for every little reason they can fabricate and label a "pre-existing condition"--one of their favorites being if you're not a size zero.  

and i don't want to hear any crap about how insurance companies ~*can't afford*~ to ensure fat Americans.  b*llsh*t.  because according to the asinine "standards" of the medical industry, my size 4-6 mother is considered overweight.  this is a woman who can occasionally buy sweaters made for tweens in what they call "XXL" and whose health i worry about because she lives on the damn Atkins diet.  they need to stop borrowing their standards and ideals from the f*ck*ng modeling industry and get with reality.

Posted Image


"Andromeda may be over but it's not dead. Not as long as we have fanfic writers dedicated to keeping it alive.  Whether you accept everything as canon or stop at a certain point. Whether you accept and enjoy Nu Drom or only accept Classic Drom, it will never be over.  Not as long as we have each other [and Beka], who binds us all together." ~ Mary Rose

Twitter * Facebook * ExIsle at Facebook

icon by mercscilla @ LJ



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: ObamaCare, 2011, Waivers

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users