This just gets better and hetter

[Adam]

Federal exchange sends unqualified people to Medicaid

The federal health care exchange is incorrectly determining that some people are eligible for Medicaid when they clearly are not, leaving them with little chance to get the subsidized insurance they are entitled to as the Dec. 23 deadline for enrollment approaches.

State and industry officials haven't quantified the problem yet, but the National Association of State Medicaid Directors may release information next week after following up on reports from around the country, says Executive Director Matt Salo.

Here's what happens: When consumers applying for insurance put their income information into subsidy calculators on HealthCare.gov — the exchange handling insurance sales for 36 states — it tells them how much financial assistance they qualify for or that they are eligible for Medicaid. If it's the latter, consumers aren't able to obtain subsidies toward the insurance, although they could buy full-priced plans.

If the Medicaid determination is wrong, consumers should file an appeal with the federal marketplace, says Department of Health and Human Services spokeswoman Joanne Peters, but she says she does not have an estimate on how long that would take.

Remember that six weeks ago, Democrats were actually proud of the number of new Medicaid enrollees they had, as if somehow lots and lots of new people dependent upon the government was somehow something to be proud of.

I guess those folks are in for a big surprise, too.

[Billy Jingo]

Remember that six weeks ago, Democrats were actually proud of the number of new Medicaid enrollees they had, as if somehow lots and lots of new people dependent upon the government was somehow something to be proud of.

I think it has more to do with people having access to healthcare who didn't before.

Which may be why conservatives hate it so much .... fewer slow, agonizing deaths.

[Adam]

I think it has more to do with people having access to healthcare who didn't before.

Who did not have access to health care before?

I keep hearing this claim, and it keeps not being true.

[Billy Jingo]

Who did not have access to health care before?

I keep hearing this claim, and it keeps not being true.

I guess everyone has access to Porsches too, I suppose. Is that what you mean?

[Adam]

I guess everyone has access to Porsches too, I suppose. Is that what you mean?

Yes.

Now, if you want to say that there are people who can't afford Porsches, or first class seats on airplanes, or top-notch health care, then that's fine. Say that there are people who can't afford health care, and then you're being honest. Claiming that they "don't have access" is just a lie specifically crafted to evoke the notion that there's some sort of modern-day equivalent of George Wallace standing in the hospital door, when in fact the exact opposite is true: there are a SHITLOAD of different places and programs out there to provide free or very low cost health care, medications, preventative care, etc. to people who are poor. Is that perfect? Does that cover every little thing that could ever go wrong? Absolutely not. But it's a flat-out lie to claim that people are somehow barred from getting health care. It's simply not true, any more than anyone is barred from getting a Porsche or flying in a first class seat.

[Billy Jingo]

Yes.

Potato, potato.

[Adam]

Potato, potato.

No, truth/lie.

[Billy Jingo]

No, truth/lie.

Whatever lets you sleep at night, dude.

[Billy Jingo]

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

~ From The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams

[scott]

I think it has more to do with people having access to healthcare who didn't before.

Which may be why conservatives hate it so much .... fewer slow, agonizing deaths.

Could you quantify the number of people who have access to healthcare now who didn't before?

[scott]

"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."

"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

"But the plans were on display ..."

"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

"That's the display department."

"With a flashlight."

"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

"So had the stairs."

"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

~ From The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams

Funny, and it's not an exaggeration to say that even that process works better than the ACA right now.

[Billy Jingo]

Could you quantify the number of people who have access to healthcare now who didn't before?

Is this going to be a semantic argument over the word "access"? If so, I really don't see any point in going on. If not, I think Adam's comments in the OP will lead you to the number, or a close approximation. Not that I think you are really interested.

[scott]

Is this going to be a semantic argument over the word "access"? If so, I really don't see any point in going on. If not, I think Adam's comments in the OP will lead you to the number, or a close approximation. Not that I think you are really interested.

I'm just trying to figure out if you think the net results are positive, 5 million losing health insurance to cover 300,000.

[Billy Jingo]

I'm just trying to figure out if you think the net results are positive, 5 million losing health insurance to cover 300,000.

You think that is the final number?

No need to even get into the whole insurance industry shenanigans on this one.

[Adam]

Is this going to be a semantic argument over the word "access"? If so, I really don't see any point in going on. If not, I think Adam's comments in the OP will lead you to the number, or a close approximation. Not that I think you are really interested.

Neither article discusses the tens of millions of people who are losing "access" because of Obamacare. They only talk about the "success" of getting hundreds of thousands enrolled in Medicaid, or not.