Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (158786)	8/12/2013 3:35:09 PM
From: tonto	2 Recommendations Recommended By locogringo TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224795

Kenneth, you really hacked that article...you may have a job with NBC in the future with your skills... The Feds have guaranteed exchanges and Walker is placing the onus on them instead of us. I believe the reduced liability for us is a smart move... It’s no secret that Gov. Scott Walker opposes the federal health care reform law commonly known as Obamacare. But an op-ed he co-wrote for the Wall Street Journal last week drives home the point — and drives home Walker’s hypocrisy about his position.The column, written with Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, is titled “Unworkable Obamacare.” Here are a few passages from it: “The closer we get to Oct. 1, the day government-mandated health-insurance exchanges are supposed to open, the more we see that the administration doesn’t have a legitimate plan to successfully implement the law.” » VIDEO: WALKER: GOP SHOULD PUT GOVERNORS FRONT AND CENTER “Governors have firsthand experience with implementing public-assistance programs. We know how important it is to care for our most vulnerable citizens. ... We also know that a one-size-fits-all approach like Obamacare simply doesn’t work. It only creates new problems and inequities. That’s why if you look at all 50 states, you’ll see 50 unique ways of handling Medicaid.” The governors make a number of other strong and valid points about the problems arising with Obamacare, but these statements stand out. Why? Because Walker turned down the chance for the state to establish its own exchanges. He refused to use his “firsthand experience” to set them up the way he thinks they should be. He knows the “one-size-fits-all approach” doesn’t work, yet he chose it for his state’s residents instead of our “unique way of handling Medicaid.” And do you know what he’s doing to “care for our most vulnerable citizens”? He’s kicking those who are on BadgerCare, the state’s medical assistance program, with incomes between 100 percent and 133 percent of the federal poverty level out of the program. But he said we shouldn’t worry about them because they’ll be able to get health insurance — on the exchanges. These are the same exchanges that he refused to have the state, with all of its knowledge and experience, establish itself. And they’re the same exchanges he excoriates now. Walker doesn’t like Obamacare. We get that. But he could have been a hero. He could have said, “Hey, we’re stuck with this, and a lot of it is really bad, but because we know what works best for Wisconsin, we’re going to do as much as we can to get our residents the health insurance coverage they need.” Instead, his plan is to put as much of the onus on Obamacare and the federal government as he can. Politically, it’s a great move. The problem is, if Walker’s right, there are real people — real people of Wisconsin, his state — who are going to be hurt. He can blame Obamacare for it — he already is and there’s certainly more coming. But he can’t escape the fact that, if this is what he truly thinks about Obamacare, he’s putting Wisconsinites at risk. He will have to live with that. Now for your version of the same article... And do you know what he (Walker) is doing to “care for our most vulnerable citizens”? He’s kicking those who are on BadgerCare, the state’s medical assistance program, with incomes between 100 percent and 133 percent of the federal poverty level out of the program. But he said we shouldn’t worry about them because they’ll be able to get health insurance — on the exchanges. These are the same exchanges that he refused to have the state, with all of its knowledge and experience, establish itself. And they’re the same exchanges he excoriates now. Walker doesn’t like Obamacare. We get that. But he could have been a hero. He could have said, “Hey, we’re stuck with this, and a lot of it is really bad, but because we know what works best for Wisconsin, we’re going to do as much as we can to get our residents the health insurance coverage they need.” postcrescent.com

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (158786)	8/12/2013 3:48:05 PM
From: tonto	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224795

There are of course many viewpoints regarding the poorly conceived Obamacare that was passed without it being read... CBO: Obamacare to Cover Millions Fewer Than Before Supreme Court Decision Kathryn Nix July 24, 2012 at 4:28 pm (13) Earlier today, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released an updated cost estimate for Obamacare that showed that the law will cost less over 10 years than last predicted—because fewer people will be covered. Now, although Obamacare spends more than $1 trillion, CBO predicts it will leave 30 million Americans uninsured, falling far short of what was promised. The reason for the changes to the law’s cost projection is the recent Supreme Court ruling. Though the Court allowed Obamacare’s individual mandate to stand as a tax, it deemed a separate provision—the Medicaid expansion—to be unconstitutional. As a result, states can choose not to expand their Medicaid programs and are no longer at risk of losing all their federal Medicaid dollars if they don’t. As Heritage health policy expert Nina Owcharenko explains, “If the Administration’s attempt to centralize health care decision making in Washington was unworkable, its unconstitutional imposition on the states has made its problems even worse.” As a result of the Court’s decision, the outlook for the law has changed. Here are the main takeaways from the CBO’s latest report: Obamacare will cost less… The new CBO scoring shows that the net cost of Obamacare will be $84 billion less over the next 10 years than predicted in its last analysis in March 2012. Spending on the Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program expansion will fall by $289 billion, while increased spending on the exchanges to cover some of those who will no longer qualify for Medicaid will cost $210 billion. The law will now add $1.17 trillion in new government spending over 10 years—paid for by massive tax hikes on all Americans and robbing money from the Medicare program. …Because more people will be uninsured. Obamacare will cost less because it will insure fewer people. While the Medicaid expansion extended to all individuals below 138 percent of the federal poverty line, the exchange subsidies are only available to those earning between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level, which means only a portion of would-be new Medicaid enrollees will qualify for subsidies. In 2022, this will add 3 million more to the number of Americans who will still be uninsured under Obamacare. Obamacare falls far short of its promise for universal coverage. Since day one, it’s been clear that Obamacare will not achieve universal coverage, and every time CBO revisits the law, the numbers show just that. In March 2010, when the law passed, CBO predicted that there would be 22 million people still without insurance in 2019. In March 2012, the estimate increased to 27 million in 2022. Now, the number has once again increased—to 30 million. So Obamacare leaves just as many people uninsured as it covers. Massive uncertainty underlies CBO’s estimate. According to CBO, “what states will be able to do and what they will decide to do are both highly uncertain. As a result…[the] estimates reflect an assessment of the probabilities of different outcomes…in the middle of the distribution of possible outcomes.” As CBO points out, states’ decisions to expand or not expand Medicaid hinge on a number of factors, including their budget outlooks. States that decide to expand would face “a large extra cost.” Over the last two years, Obamacare has shown itself to be a law muddled with unintended consequences, unworkable provisions, and costly, ineffective new programs. Today’s report from CBO shows that Americans can expect this trend to continue, driving home once again that the health law will not achieve what it promised and needs to be repealed. Posted in Featured, Health Care [slideshow_deploy]