Calif. beats ObamaCare sign-up goal weeks early

thehill.com...

Well some people are liking the Affordable Care Act:

Covered California, the state's health insurance marketplace, registered 728,410 people before the end of January and about 100,000 more in the first two weeks of February, officials said.


Another 877,000 patients were determined eligible for Medicaid in the state, which opted to expand the low-income health insurance program under the Affordable Care Act, the announcement continued.

California's exchange has been the most successful in the country since its launch last fall. Eighty percent of enrollees have paid their first premium, and about one quarter are 34 years old or younger, the system reported this week.

It's is especially noteworthy that so many truly poor people will get Medicaid.

Everyone should have access to health care regardless of income.

Now it's time to push for single payer. Get rid of the every changing policies, high deductables and exorbitant co-pays.

reply to post by FyreByrd


Preface: What I'm about to ask is not asked sarcastically: How is it more people were able to sign up for medicaid? Why weren't they eligible before? If they fall into a certain income where they can't afford to purchase healthcare now, they probably couldn't afford it last year either, so why weren't they on medicaid then?

Signed up...Yes

Paid in Full...Not a chance.

If you log on, you are signed up.

At this rate who knows who signed up and paid for anything? Every time you turn around someone is giving numbers that are both higher and lower than what they actually are, and they have been caught on more than one occasion "fudging" the numbers. By doing this they have made themselves suspect whenever they give out new totals.

I agree that EVERYONE should have access to healthcare at any time regardless of ability to pay, but I think Obamacare is not the way to achieve this. I absolutely can not afford the quotes given to me and too many others are in the same boat. Others are paying higher premiums than before while having deductibles higher than before. Those people certainly do not like it...and there are a ton of them.

Good for California for taking the bait. Let people continue to pay into a broken system, rush in to buy Obamacare and no improvements will be made to this broken sham.

There's no doubt some will love it. Most of those are the ones who are not going to have to pay for it.

BobM88
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

Preface: What I'm about to ask is not asked sarcastically: How is it more people were able to sign up for medicaid? Why weren't they eligible before? If they fall into a certain income where they can't afford to purchase healthcare now, they probably couldn't afford it last year either, so why weren't they on medicaid then?

Most of those people probably didn't know they qualified for Medicade and while signing up for ACA coverage learned that they could be covered my Medicaid.

Part of what the ACA did, in those states that accepted Federal Assistance, was to expand Medicaid benefits.

I do not know whether they lowered the threshold for eligiblity or where just adding dollars to the program.

ACA - gave people hope and for many it's a life saver.

I moved to Montana and I am signed up in California supposedly. How? Not by my own doing. I used to go to a state run health clinic with a sliding fee scale. They signed everyone of their patients up for Obama care. They sent me all the information and i just laughed because I don't even live in that state anymore.

So here I am a Montana resident signed up for Obama care in California and I never signed up myself. How many others are like my self. I bet the majority of those signed up in California! Mostly likely all signed up because they were patients at sliding fee scale state run clinics.

reply to post by FyreByrd


Just by raw numbers, 2% of the population of California have registered. Not enrolled, just registered.

From the OP's link:

State officials previously said they hoped to enroll between 487,000 and 696,000 subsidy-eligible patients by April 1. Covered California said Wednesday that 626,210 had signed up between Oct. 1 and Jan. 31. California's exchange has been the most successful in the country since its launch last fall. Eighty percent of enrollees have paid their first premium, and about one quarter are 34 years old or younger, the system reported this week.

The OP's link is a great presentation of numerical manipulation based on deliberate wording.


If anyone wants to know where I came up with the 2%:
www.worldpopulationstatistics.com...

Based on estimates and the studies by the United States Census Bureau, the population of California in 2013 is estimated to be 38,041,430, which is the largest population in the United States.

reply to post by FyreByrd


Is this the same covered California that has no doctors willing to perform a back surgery for a Chris Dunn of Sonora?

Kangaruex4Ewe

At this rate who knows who signed up and paid for anything? Every time you turn around someone is giving numbers that are both higher and lower than what they actually are, and they have been caught on more than one occasion "fudging" the numbers. By doing this they have made themselves suspect whenever they give out new totals.

I agree that EVERYONE should have access to healthcare at any time regardless of ability to pay, but I think Obamacare is not the way to achieve this. I absolutely can not afford the quotes given to me and too many others are in the same boat.

Good for California for taking the bait. Let people continue to pay into a broken system, rush in to buy Obamacare and no improvements will be made to this broken sham.

There's no doubt some will love it. Most of those are the ones who are not going to have to pay for it.

Read the article - many have already started paying - I don't recall the percentage.

So, I assume, you would prefer people to not have access to health care while someone (you perhaps) will find the perfect solution?

No, it isn't perfect, but I'd rather have something in the right direction and continue to work for a more Civilized solution (Single payer, univeral like the rest of the developed world [though the US being 'developed' is arguable]).

What would you suggest as a solution? And how are you going about working for it?

I agree the system (private for-profit healthcare managed by for-profit insurance companies all in the interest of 'shareholders') is broken.

The system is broken. How would you like it to be fixed?

FyreByrd

Read the article - many have already started paying - I don't recall the percentage.

So, I assume, you would prefer people to not have access to health care while someone (you perhaps) will find the perfect solution?

No, it isn't perfect, but I'd rather have something in the right direction and continue to work for a more Civilized solution (Single payer, univeral like the rest of the developed world [though the US being 'developed' is arguable]).

What would you suggest as a solution? And how are you going about working for it?

I agree the system (private for-profit healthcare managed by for-profit insurance companies all in the interest of 'shareholders') is broken.

The system is broken. How would you like it to be fixed?

I did read the article. I have not had insurance in 10 years. I was seen and treated in several places in the interim. Most of those places did not require fees up front. We have Charity Care everywhere and while this is not perfect either.... it didn't cause others to lose their current coverage, doctors, etc.

How would I like it to be fixed? Probably not by making it worse. As said in my OP, I am glad some can get coverage now that could not before. But what about those that had coverage, were dropped, and now can't afford it? Do they matter less, because they had coverage before when others didn't? No.

We can both agree that the system is broken. But we could have started with looking at how we can help those who are poor get care without overhauling every square inch of it at one time. They could have taken the money they spent on advertising, building a shiiite website, etc. and expanded medicaid state by state for starters.

randomtangentsrme
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

Just by raw numbers, 2% of the population of California have registered. Not enrolled, just registered.

From the OP's link:

State officials previously said they hoped to enroll between 487,000 and 696,000 subsidy-eligible patients by April 1. Covered California said Wednesday that 626,210 had signed up between Oct. 1 and Jan. 31 . California's exchange has been the most successful in the country since its launch last fall. Eighty percent of enrollees have paid their first premium, and about one quarter are 34 years old or younger , the system reported this week.

The OP's link is a great presentation of numerical manipulation based on deliberate wording.

I don't know how you missed it. I've highlighted it for you ..... had signed up.....

Here is your the quote you posted and that I've highlighted the part you misread (it is late after all):

"State officials previously said they hoped to enroll between 487,000 and 696,000 subsidy-eligible patients by April 1. Covered California said Wednesday that 626,210 had signed up between Oct. 1 and Jan. 31 . California's exchange has been the most successful in the country since its launch last fall. Eighty percent of enrollees have paid their first premium, and about one quarter are 34 years old or younger , the system reported this week. "

Apparently this system cannot handle nested quotes, so I improvise.


I find it interesting that you read '626,210 had signed up...' to read '...had registered'. And 80% of those have already paid their premiums.

And about 25% are under 34.

Don't care how many did or didn't sign up but I agree that everyone should have access to healthcare. The thing that should be of great concern is what this is going to do to the state trying to run and support it. Federal subsidies run out December 2014.

Covered California is facing a project budget deficit for Fiscal Year 2015-16. The federal grant put in place to establish the state's health care exchange is set to expire in December. Covered California staff project that the state health care exchange will have a more than $78 million budget deficit in Fiscal Year 2015-16. Covered California, by law, is not allowed to draw from the state’s general fund to cover costs. Link

Hopefully they have a plan that doesn't fleece residents any more than obamacare is already fleecing them.

You know what really sucks about the ACA? The consequences, that's what!

The quotes people are getting they can't afford, so they'll end up, not only, with no insurance, but they'll have to pay a fine for nothing in return! NOTHING!

You're here trying to fool people with fakery and deception. If it were so awesome, you would never have to, and word of mouth would travel faster than you could type... period.

If California's numbers suddenly get better than anyone "expects", lets consider something I wrote the other day, the day after Big O stopped in to Fresno. Just substitute "yesterday" for the date. (It drifts off into some of the other known "goals" of this retarded legislation, (if I paste that much), but it has everything to do with California and the ACA.)

Five Feet of new snow and a solid week of rain... still an enrollee drought!

Money Money Money.

That's all this administration is after.

Yesterday, scanning through the sat feeds (not regular tv), I see the Obama motorcade pull up to a field in Fresno, Ca. He and Mr "Declaration of Disaster", himself, (for federal funds), Governer Jerry Brown, talked about the drought. The steady rain last week must have scared them a little, since much more would surely mean less relief funds. Jerry Brown, btw, is the guy who just declared a disaster over a fire among trees, that need fire to survive!

Yep, two birds with one stone...

The real reason Obama was there, though, is an effort to get the hispanics in Ca. to sign up for Obamacare. Yep, our commander in chief, is playing door to door salesman, with his campaign face on... again.

Think about it... An emergency gets federal funds pumped to the farmer, (who never lost crops), he can hand it out to the workers in the fields, (and an extra 13 million to ..um... "communities"), they can buy Obamacare, and the administration can falsly claim those numbers as some kind of victory! All the while handing free stuff to their voter base. It's that 13 Million he's so eager to give away! Buy enrollees, and votes, all with your money.

win win win... for the communists.

I was wondering why, after a solid week of rain, and 5 feet of snow, the news kept broadcasting how we should ignore it, and that it wasn't even going to dent the "drought". Over, and over, and over on the nightly news. Now I know! They knew Obama was on his way there, that's why!
People are dying in avalanches, and storms are lined up to plow into the west coast for as long as we can see. Weeks of rain on the way! Geez, now they're calling it a "game changer". (this last storm)

Again, taxpayer money gets directly applied, here, to claim victory, so they can keep it, and make everybody pay. That was their ONLY goal yesterday.

Nothing they do, has anything to do with the American people anymore.

It's all about using the full weight of those same people, and the property of the United States government to make themselves, and their friends, rich... rich with, both, money and power.

Think about some of the things they've done.

They used the I.R.S. to target their political opponents, as if they were enemies from a foreign land.

The ACA fills the pockets of the already wealthy, and the real number of children that will never get that baseball glove, or big wheel, is both enormous, and unimportant to them.

Make no mistake, this is the first administration that has had the technology to harness all the data needed to digitally control your life.

Notice how before, if you didn't owe federal taxes... meh... you weren't even obligated to file. No big deal. Now it's different, and the clampdown has begun. Now you must, every single year, every single person, prove to the IRS, that you have purchased something they told you to purchase.

Again, it's the money.

I'll stop there, before it drifts.

...but, yeah,
your propaganda is false, meaningless, and worthless.
Choke on it.

Bassago
Don't care how many did or didn't sign up but I agree that everyone should have access to healthcare. The thing that should be of great concern is what this is going to do to the state trying to run and support it. Federal subsidies run out December 2014.

Covered California is facing a project budget deficit for Fiscal Year 2015-16. The federal grant put in place to establish the state's health care exchange is set to expire in December. Covered California staff project that the state health care exchange will have a more than $78 million budget deficit in Fiscal Year 2015-16. Covered California, by law, is not allowed to draw from the state’s general fund to cover costs. Link

Hopefully they have a plan that doesn't fleece residents any more than obamacare is already fleecing them.

edit on 323am4646am122014 by Bassago because: add link

you have to PASSSS the bill before you can read and find out what is INNNNN the bill!!

If you like your fiscal deficits, California....you can keep your fiscal deficits

reply to post by FyreByrd


And I'm not sure how you missed it:

your quote from the article:

Covered California, the state's health insurance marketplace, registered 728,410 people before the end of January and about 100,000 more in the first two weeks of February, officials said. Another 877,000 patients were determined eligible for Medicaid in the state, which opted to expand the low-income health insurance program under the Affordable Care Act, the announcement continued.

so that's 728,410 "registered."

my quote from the article:

Covered California said Wednesday that 626,210 had signed up between Oct. 1 and Jan. 31. California's exchange has been the most successful in the country since its launch last fall. Eighty percent of enrollees have paid their first premium, and about one quarter are 34 years old or younger, the system reported this week.

That's 626,210 "signed up." Neither say enrolled.
So we have a discrepancy in numbers right there.

Taking your number I come up with 1.914%
Taking my number 1.646%

My quote also states the 80% of enrolled have paid their first premium.
Just as when I was in college, I could sign up for a seminar that was offered but I was not enrolled until I showed up for the course and paid my fee.

But let's assume the 626,210 is the number enrolled, the 80% that has paid gives us 1.317%

So that 25% of under 34 years old is: .329% of the population of California.

How is this not a numerical manipulation based on deliberate wording? And how did I misread anything?

reply to post by lernmore

You know what really sucks about the ACA? The consequences, that's what! The quotes people are getting they can't afford, so they'll end up, not only, with no insurance, but they'll have to pay a fine for nothing in return! NOTHING! You're here trying to fool people with fakery and deception. If it were so awesome, you would never have to, and word of mouth would travel faster than you could type... period.

LOL ... excellent rant!!

The consequences ... wait'll the debt collectors show up. No one who could Not afford insurance could hope to pay their deductibles. But now ... there's a way for the insurance industry to account for all their costs. The bailouts are coming or the freeloaders are going to take down the entire insurance industry. Either way ol' Holmes could give a fat baby's @$$. Insurance has always been a crock'o crap in my book.

Funny thing about word traveling by mouth. Let's hope the fallout from this mess is directed at the detrimental effect of government overreach. Time for a new restrictive amendment to be added to the Constitution. Something along the lines of: Any financial shortfall created by the passage and enforcement of Federal Law shall be paid-in-full from the salaries and pension programs of elected US Government officials. Should their entitlements be insufficient, they shall be permanently forfeited and the difference made up from the political war chests of the two dominant political parties.

reply to post by FyreByrd

The system is broken. How would you like it to be fixed?

This is no excuse for doing it the wrong way.

reply to post by FyreByrd


The numbers to watch are not registration. We need to follow the numbers through the registration process to see how many are actually given coverage.

In my case I registered and was denied because the state is not expanding their medicare rolls.


There is a HUGE difference between registration and acceptance.

Well let's look at the real numbers as well as the conflicting information.


1) The California Insurance Commissioner (Nov 2013) announced "officially" over 1 million cancellation notices.

2) We know Obama announced those old policies could be kept IF the States said OK (California said NO).

3) We know California was caught cooking the numbers at least once.

4) We know that some Medicaid "sign-ups" are people that previously had insurance or already had Medicaid.

5) We know that the government kept saying 30 million or 40 million or 50 million had no insurance in 2008 nationwide.


Something isn't quite adding up to "success".


[from Dec 2013]
California's Uninsured: By the Numbers

Key findings in this annual update include:

While one in five Californians overall is uninsured, the rate among those who work is even higher: one in four.

Sixty-two percent of uninsured children in California are in families where the head of the household worked full-time during 2012.

Employees in businesses of all sizes are more likely to be uninsured in California than in the rest of the United States.

In businesses with fewer than 10 employees, 40% of workers are likely to have no insurance.

Nearly one-third of the uninsured in California have annual family incomes of $50,000 or more.

Nearly 60% of the state's uninsured population is Latino.

As far as a "solution"......how can we come with a solution when we aren't sure what all the "problems" are?

reply to post by FyreByrd


I am sure that from all the sign ups the majority of new medicaid qualifiers will be happy to have somebody else paying for their free health care.

Sadly the government have a way to deceiving the public with numbers.