ObamaTax Scam Alert

As if the actual law itself isn't enough of a headache, clever fraudsters continue to prey on citizens already confused about whether or not they'll be insured. I wrote about one such scam in April, and Patrick had one in May.

Now, FoIB Holly R tips us to the newest iteration:

"USCT [United States Contractors Trust] is targeting people over the Internet with pre-existing health conditions who are experiencing difficulty finding insurance. Desperate to secure individual or family health insurance, the Ohioans eagerly completed contact information forms on innocuous-looking websites"

Unsuspecting Buckeyes provide their contact and bank info, and are told that coverage is in place. The first few claims seem to process fine, but then become ensnared in what USCT says are "computer problems" but which the Ohio Department of Insurance characterizes as a"scam". All the while, premiums (as high as $550 per month) continue to bleed out of the victims' bank accounts.

The Ohio Department of Insurance has "issued a cease and desist order" to the alleged fraudsters; in the meantime, if you (or someone you know) has been targeted, contact the DOI immediately, and direct your bank to stop the auto-withdrawals.

You'll be glad you did.

Obamacare no Longer a Train Wreck

Obamacare author and soon to be former Sen. Max Baucus  described the law as a train wreck. That might be an understatement.           

In a "readiness" report, 7 states have identified the data hub as a major obstacle to getting the market place (formerly know as the exchange) up and running by October 1.

If you know what a data hub is, you will understand. If you are clueless like me, someone will have to explain it.

So here goes . . .

The data hub -- in laymen's terms, a huge digital warehouse capable of sending information to other online servers -- plays a crucial role in the exchanges, which are websites that will allow the uninsured to shop for health coverage and access federal tax subsidies to help them purchase it. The tax subsidies, for example, are supposed to be based on a person’s income; the lower your income, the higher your subsidy.

The exchange is supposed to transmit the income information entered by an applicant to the hub, which will then verify the information with the Internal Revenue Service. That verification is then transmitted back to the exchange, so the person can access their subsidy. The hub will also relay information between the exchanges and other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

It sounds simple, but it’s a significant headache for the 17 states that, so far, are building their own exchanges. For starters, the hub hasn’t been completely built yet, nor have the rules that will govern its use been finalized. 

GovTech

OK, but other than that, do you anticipate any problems?

Don't they have a bunch of geeks with taped glasses and pocket protectors that can fix this?

Come October 1, 2013 I will have my popcorn and beer ready. This is going to be better than anything on TV that day.

California Dreamin' (a Nightmare?)

Can't win for losin':

"For years, politicians and labor unions have pilloried Wal-Mart and other large employers for paying workers so little that many qualify for government health insurance at taxpayers' expense."

The ObamaTax was supposed to fix that, what with Exchanges and subsidies and (Evil) Employer Mandates and all. So how's that working out for y'all in the Golden State?

Apparently things aren't so, well, sunny:

"Legislators, backed by unions, consumer groups and doctors, are calling for fines that could reach about $6,000 per full-time employee who ends up on Medi-Cal," the state's struggling Medicaid program. Here's the thing, though, Wal-Mart (et al) doesn't pay the tax fine, their customers do. This isn't rocket surgery, it's simple economics.

Sheesh.

Under 30 Crowd May Pass on Obamacare

Seems the Facebook crowd may decide to spend their time (and resources) on something other than health insurance come January, 2014.  

According to a recent panel discussion of the under 30 crowd, many are willing to take their chances and throw their money at gizmo's rather than health insurance.

All eight panelists are employed, though some just part time, and about half have some level of health coverage. Although they understand the risks of not having insurance, they are confused by the myriad choices and frustrated by the jargon used by carriers. They struggle to see value in paying monthly premiums for something they probably won’t use.

Beth, a school teacher who goes without coverage during the summer months, noted that the cost of paying cash for an urgent care visit was equivalent to the copay required for a doctor visit. Tom, a construction worker clad in a t-shirt and baseball cap, is uninsured, but worries about being injured and not being able to afford the medical expenses. He said he had been injured in a car accident and faced a $400 bill for prescription drugs. “I didn’t have $400,” he said.

AIS Health

If you didn't have $400, did you just go without the medication?

Were you really that short of cash or just thought there were better ways to spend your money? Do you have your car insured or is that a waste of money too?

Beth must only plan on getting sick or injured when school is in session.

The panelists agreed that they would be willing to pay between $60 and $100 a month for health coverage. And while they said they would like to buy coverage from an insurer they knew, they place a great deal of value in how plans are rated (by companies such as eHealth, Inc.) and in reviews from current enrollees...particularly their peers.

Good luck finding a $60 plan.

And are your peers, the ones who can't name the Vice President and think Benghazi is a reggae singer, going to bail you out when the plan you bought doesn't cover what you think it does?

Where Is The Outrage? The Compassion? [UPDATED]

"For too long, Americans with pre-existing conditions have been locked out of our health insurance market. Today, the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan gives them a new option -- the same insurance coverage as a healthy individual if they've been uninsured for at least six months because of a medical condition. This program will provide people the help they need as the nation transitions to a more competitive and fair marketplace in 2014."    - HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in 2010

Yes Kathy, the biggest objective for The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was to provide access to cost effective health insurance. Back in 2010 we heard the President, HHS, and several members of Congress talk about the benefits uninsured with pre-existing conditions would receive by getting insurance through a high risk pool. This high risk pool would guarantee coverage at an affordable cost. This affordable insurance would become known as the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP).

PCIP was projected to cover 350,000 people from August 1, 2010 through December 31, 2013. To do so the government set aside $5 billion to cover the projected claims.

Actual enrollment is 135,000 and effective March 2, 2013 HHS has officially "suspended" new enrollment in the program. According to Gary Cohen,  director of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, the program is being suspended due to lack of funds. Cohen said:

"We’re being very careful stewards of the money that has been appropriated to us and we wanted to balance our desire to maximize the number of people who can gain from this program while making sure people who are in the program have coverage...This was the most prudent step for us to take at this point in time.”

Prudent for who?

In addition to cutting off enrollment, those currently enrolled are also facing significant changes. On January 1, 2013 anyone covered under the Federal pool saw their out of pocket maximums increase from $4000 to $6250 per year. Starting in July most of the states who were running their own pools are migrating over to the Federal pool meaning that these folks will also be subject to an increase in the out of pocket maximum. Oh behalf of the many people I have helped enroll in this program I would like to ask the following:

1. Why in 2011 did HHS decrease premiums for a program that has blown through the projected funding?
2. Why hasn't HHS or the Obama Administration asked for funding?
3. Why did the Administration vow to veto a bill that was set to be put forth in the House of Representatives?

Secretary Sebelius and the Obama Administration, if  these are the very people you vowed to help and protect, then why aren't you doing anything about it?

UPDATE [HGS]: And adding insult to injury, FoIB Holly R sends us this:

"Nearly two-thirds of Americans who currently lack health insurance don't know yet if they will purchase that coverage by the Jan. 1 deadline set by the [ObamaTax]"

And worse yet, "less than half of those in the survey ... think they'll get better health care after Obamacare takes full effect. Nearly 50 percent believe the [ObamaTax] will make it more difficult for them to get tests and procedures done in a timely manner"

Sounds like they've been paying attention.

Obamacare? Thanks, But No

Affordable health care. Lower health insurance premiums. You can keep your doctor AND your current insurance plan. Health insurance companies can no longer discriminate.

I mean, what's not to love about all that?

Maybe you should ask the folks surveyed by an insurance quoting firm and reported by CNBC, not exactly a bastion of conservative politics.

And less than half of those in the survey released by InsuranceQuotes.com think they'll get better health care after Obamacare takes full effect. Nearly 50 percent believe the ACA will make it more difficult for them to get tests and procedures done in a timely manner, according to the phone survey of 1,001 adult Americans conducted in early May.

And a whopping 68 percent of low-income Americans aren't sure they qualify for tax credits that would subsidize their purchase of health insurance—despite they fact that they almost invariably will qualify, the survey found. That population is most likely to benefit from government subsidies under the health-care reform law.

Is someone finally waking up from the ether? Is the truth beating back 6 years of political rhetoric?

Conservative talk radio and news stations such as Fox have been saying this for years but it was dismissed by the administration and those who voted for Obamacare.

Lest you forget, Obamacare was made law in a back room deal pushed through the Senate as a tax bill in order to bypass the 60 vote requirement (which they would not have been able to muster). Only Democrats voted for Obamacare. Not a single Republican endorsed or voted for the bill.

A total of 61 percent of the uninsured they don't having insurance because they can't afford it, the survey found. And a total of 58 percent of all adults—insured or otherwise—didn't know if they will be eligible for tax credits to offset their purchase of health insurance, even though a married couple with two kids could make up to $94,000 and still qualify.

Breaking news. If you can't afford health insurance now it won't get any better in 2014 unless you can get a mammoth taxpayer wealth redistribution subsidy.

"If only the sick enroll," Adams warned, "it could be very precarious for the industry and the cost of insurance."

You mean like what happened with PCIP?

The risk pool funded with federal taxpayer dollars that allowed almost anyone that had been refused health insurance to buy coverage at low subsidized rates ran out of money and stopped accepting new applications in March.

Yes, that program.

Obamacare is sounding like the Bride of PCIP.

It's a salad dressing AND a cancer screen!

Okay, this is too cool:

"A simple vinegar test slashed cervical cancer death rates by one-third in a remarkable study of 150,000 women"

You will never guess where - so I'll tell you: "in the slums of India."

In the West, "[p]ap smears and tests for HPV" have saved countless lives, but these are apparently too expensive for poorer nations. Enter vinegar which, when swabbed on the cervix, changes abnormal cells' color, indicating potentially life-threatening cancer.

According the the study, it's "cut the cervical cancer death rate by 31 percent."

Beat that, Honey Mustard!