Your Search Results
With the much anticipated release of the Supreme Courts Ruling on Obama-Care and while surfing the web last night while watching television, I stumbled upon an article entitled “Three Reasons The Supreme Court Should Overturn Obama-Care’s Individual Mandate”.
Some people think yes, they must do so or they are guilty of discrimination. Sandra Fluke and Karen Hu wrote a paper for The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law in 2011 that reviews employment, hiring and termination discrimination in the workplace against lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgendered and queer (LGBTQ) employees. All fine and good.…
All across the United States, health insurance companies like Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield in Connecticut are meeting with state insurance regulators about premiums. During the past couple of weeks, Anthem proved to Connecticut state regulators an average 18 percent premium increase reflected the requirements of federal health care mandates and increased provider costs.
Obamacare was meant to keep medical expenses from driving you into financial ruin, not for the medical insurance to drive you into financial ruin.
I’ll try to make this somewhat complicated event easy to understand. Insurance companies submit estimates for insurance costs (payouts) in to the federal government. If the payouts exceed 103 percent of the estimate, the taxpayers cut a check to insurance companies for 50 percent of the loss. 108 percent equals an 80 percent bailout.
How can anyone feel good about this? We’ve got a bunch of states stating they will not create exchanges simply because it will cost way too much money, which leaves the responsibility to President Obama’s Department of Health & Human Services to create and manage this boondoggle.
In 1993 Maine enacted health insurance regulations that, among other things, told insurance companies that they pretty much had to charge the same premiums to all who applied. This concept is called “community rating”, and it is an essential piece of Obamacare.