'Obamacare' to the rescue

I'm so glad for this woman, the more of these stories I hear, the better ObamaCares is looking.

link at the top and quoted. Your communication was clear, and that after all is the point.

More than once here at DU I have read a post like this without a link at the top and without any type of quotation and have initially believed that it was the OP speaking of themself. Your post was perfectly clear with your own comment at the end.

It's a style I adopted over the past year. I did feel like I should have bolded some of it, but I didn't want this woman's story to be criticized because I bolded the wrong parts. I also felt kind of bad that I was left to leave out the bit where she found out she had cancer, as it's a real powerful part of her story, but there's the 4 paragraph rule, and I wanted to highlight that she's apologizing because she was helped by HCR.

Really powerful story that I am sure will be heard resounding around the country as people pick up PCIP (https://www.pcip.gov/">Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan).

It is a powerful story. It also shows the segment of people that are helped by that part of the plan. It is not a cure all for everyone, but it does help middle class people priced out of insurance, whose prudent gamble not to buy unaffordable insurance loses. While single payer would be far better as a solution, it was not something that could have passed. What this shows is another group of people who benefit fro what did pass.

This is another reason the Republicans want to kill it before it becomes "unkillable".

When you and your neighbor knows someone who is benefiting from this, it becomes personal, and it becomes something that we simply aren't going to give up. It's all about taking responsibility for ourselves and our society and fellow citizens.

A concept that repulses conservatives (ironically).

I came to post this.Instead I'll just post the last paragraph from the op-ed:

So this is my public apology. I'm sorry I didn't do enough of my own research to find out what promises the president has made good on. I'm sorry I didn't realize that he really has stood up for me and my family, and for so many others like us. I'm getting a new bumper sticker to cover the one that says "Got nope." It will say "ObamaCares."

I'm calling it ObamaCares from now on.

Well done!

Thanks for your post.

Especially if running against Newt, who is a pretty nasty guy. Not to mention, it goes really well with the picture on your post. (I don't think I ever voted on looks, but I a not speaking of the fact that Obama is good looking, but that photo shows someone who looks caring.)

look around you....you are in DU...we are suppose to call Obamacare a failure because it didn't include a public option...the fact that this woman's life is being helped is irrelevant here...please take your nice story and get the hell out of here...we bash Obama 24/7 here....u r in the wrong website! :-(

By the way, my sister's friend was also saved because of the new rules under Obamacare (Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan)....let's keep that a secret between me and you here.

I guess that is not unusual though, I mean, just look around here. Still, I don't get why it is so necessary for people to run into the brick wall themselves before they figure it out. I'm not talking about Republicans. I expect them to be clueless. It is the Obama supporters who get turned abruptly enough that they turn "hope" into "nope" on their bumper stickers. But, apparently, they aren't that rare as we can see from DU.

Even though I don't get that, I sincerely appreciate her willingness to write this article and share her story. I guess if you can get turned one way, you can get turned back again. :)

and insurance on your own without a large company to help you is very expensive. I have a few friends that have catastrophic insurance and one of them got cancer and at least had the big part paid for.

I know how you feel though, I have been bugging my daughter for years to make health care a priority, when people are young they think they don't need it. She has it now through her work but its hard to get them to understand until someone gets hurt or needs operation.

are only a very small % of liberals...Obama is doing great with his base based on the polls...here DUers are basically anyti establishment no matter who has the WH. They also think dem ptresident are kings and so they can pass any law they want to whenever they want to and if a law isn't 100 purely progressive it must be the president's fauly because he can do whatever he wants to. This is not a reality based community here.

I do expect progressives or liberals to be able to do that, but in my experience a lot of times that simply isn't the case. People will get caught up in talking points and ideology as opposed to a human experience, so they'll completely dismiss people for wanting or needing something that ideologically might go against their beliefs.

For example, people so worried about the insurance industry profiting that they're neglecting the people who need the coverage, and indeed, the people who work in the industry itself, who have been forced by the bottom line to remove coverage from individuals. It's as if being against the evil of the insurance industry trumps being for people and their well being.

--and fewer benefits, to cheer for helping the other 10%. If you send a boat out to pick up 10 of 100 drowning people, do you expect the other 90 to stand up and cheer?

And yet somehow you miss that.

The prescription drug plan saved $1.5 billion for seniors this year. Hundreds of extra dollars in their pockets that would not have been there if we did nothing or fantasized about a system that wasn't able to pass a congress that was beholden to corporations because we can't vote in sane politicians.

--but given that there is almost no regulation, it comes at a huge cost to everyone, including those who are not getting help.

Sure if they're lucky and can afford it they'll be able to buy "coverage" but most of them will get stuck with crap that has out of pockets that are so high they still won't be able to pay for care. And, if they have conditions that can't be ignored, they'll still wind up in bankruptcy court while the insurance companies cut their CEO's big bonus checks with the premiums their victims paid.

the people benefitting from the new law.

We can appreciate what little came from the ACA while still demanding more.

And we can definitely complain about the terribly-run process that produced the ACA while still appreciating the good things from the ACA.

We're not as dumb as you'd like us to be.

Why is it that the only opinions in that vein I see are effectively against it completely?

You misinterpret our complaints as being "against it completely". The vast majority complaining about lack of a public option, the tossing women overboard and drawing out the bill for a year do like many elements of the bill. But that doesn't invalidate their complaints. Nor are they required to start every complaint about the ACA with a list of parts they like first.

There is a small number of people who want to throw the whole thing away and start over. However, that's not because they hate everything in the ACA. It's because they feel a better result would come from starting from scratch.

...as being controlled by blue dog DLCers. Fact of the matter is Obama got basically everything he wanted, except a public option. A public option that will have extreme real world pressures to materialize in the not-too-distant future. Essentially bemoaning not having something that is inevitable unless we somehow give the entire Presidency, Congress, and Senate to an extreme right wing President. And then, the only way that happens, the whole top political structure goes right wing, is by the very 'complaints' that are completely disingenuous and completely miss the mark.

Many people are upset with Obama because he argued 'against' a mandate during the primaries (but he never ruled it out completely, and he even talked about fines). Many progressives, like Krugman, are happy that the mandate happened, because it means that the entire industry can only go one way. Krugman in particular was very annoyed that the Republicans were http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/naked-blackmail/">trying to kill the mandate. Yet I had to endure several pointless debates from people against the mandate here, not because of any reasonable position, but more likely because they don't like that Obama "flip-flopped," etc.

My complaints:

1) Single payer is cheaper, and provides better service in many ways.
2) See 1.
3) Long, drawn out process that completely stalled Obama's agenda because Rham was terrified of repeating what happened during Clinton's attempts at healthcare reform. This allowed the Republicans to regroup and mount an effective attack.
4) See 1.
5) The delusion that the stalling by Republicans would result in significant Republican support.
6) See 1.
7) The obsession with making the plan get a good CBO score means it's phased in slowly, greatly weakening support for the program since it's not all in place yet. In addition, it will be difficult for the public to remember that the good things coming later on came from the ACA, and not some new program.
8) See 1.
9) The tax on "Cadillac" plans - great way to punish unions so that you can get that good CBO score. The way it's written, more and more health plans will be considered "Cadillac" over time.
10) See 1.
11) With only private options, there's nothing to prevent collusion between health insurance companies resulting in higher premiums.
12) See 1.
13) Women's health care is not something to be used for showy political gain. The abortion rider crap is insulting and just plain wrong.
14) See 1.

Yes, there are some people with a hatred of the mandate, since that money must go to a private company. But single-payer is a mandate too, so I don't particularly object to mandates in general. Plus, I'm well aware that no-preexisting-conditions means a mandate is necessary for insurance to function at all. In fact, that is Krugman's position, not some "only go one way" thing.

Now, was it possible for my desire for single-payer to get implemented at this time? No. But a public option was well within reach, and could be used to eventually get de-facto single-payer. It was pre-compromised away. Plus the administration decided to kowtow to Lieberman and his desire to punish the evil hippies that almost dethroned him. My solution to that problem would be to take away his committee assignments and talk about cutting aid to Israel.

This story will somehow be twisted into something sinister and ugly... I give it about 15 minutes but till then I will be happy for all those that are and will be helped because ObamaCares.

This is fantastic for this person, but we can't all wait until we're sick to buy it. It will only work if everyone buys in.

...have been able to afford the Buy In price of these policies available under the Affordable Health Care Act.

ObamaCare HAS indeed helped some people,
those in the UPPER 15% who are RICH enough to afford the average $800/month premiums.

America IS a Great Country... for the RICH,
for those in the Lower 85%, its STILL the Same Old Shit.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please provide the source for that utterly unsupported claim. I highly suspect that number is originating from a right wing thing tank.

PCIP premiums https://www.pcip.gov/StatePlans.html">average under $500, and for most of the population will be under $300. Those premium will only go down.

Yes, this is still a lot of money. But as a DUer posted here, they pay around $200 for $5,000,000 in medical expenses. And most people will likely fall in a lower end of the category.

PCIP will be a lifesaver for millions of American people, and as the entire industry is assimilated into one group the premiums can only go down.

When my brother had cancer his COBRA was $397/month for single coverage. (In Minnesota he could have kept his 3 kids who were over 18 but under 25 on his policy but that would have cost $1200/month). He couldn't afford that amount - fortunately I was able to swing it for him. PCIP was not available at the time but, after following your link, the monthly cost would not have been any less and the allowable out of pocket of $5,950 (in-network) would actually have been higher than the insurance he had.

Nothing in this insurance scam - including the PCIP - guarantees anyone access to care. Only that they can (and in 2014 will have to) buy an over priced product from a for profit middle man whose profits increase when they find ways to deny us care.

He died in May, his insurance was supposed to renew June 1 and he was worried about what the premium would go to & if I'd be able to handle it I was worried too, as I had been laid off & was trying to pay my own COBRA as well. I wonder how much the stress may have contributed to his death. We did know he was terminal but even his doctors thought there was more time.

Another year on disability and he would have qualified for Medicare. As it was, his disability payment was "too high" for Medicaid or any state assistance. At the time, the Minnesota "high risk" pool required a person be without coverage for 3 months and then, if you wanted actual coverage the premium would have run close to $1000 a month - for $400/month you got a $10,000 deductible before the "coverage" paid a dime.

Only in America does a seriously ill person have to worry about how much "coverage" they can afford and if that coverage will allow them to see a doctor or if they still won't be able to afford that. Nothing in the Profit Protection Act changes that.

Yes, it is shameful that we have to pay to get medical care in this country.

It is good that we're getting reform that is making that go away slowly but surely.

Too late for many, but there are still many who can and will benefit from it.

And it won't be predicated on "$800 premiums." The premiums will only go down, it's basic math. More people paying in, less people sick, lesser premiums.

would have run from between $307 & $414 depending on the plan chosen. It also has an annual out of pocket of $5,950 - not a hard number for a cancer patient to reach. If you divide that out of pocket by 12 it comes out to $495.83/month. Add the premium in and a person is looking at an average monthly expense between $802 and $909.

As of Jan 1, the coverage I get through the contract house I work for is going to have a $2500 deductible and a $6000 max out of pocket. I doubt I'll even bother with the "free" screening tests because I won't be able to afford follow up. - A decision more and more people make when they get stuck with this crap. Basically all I - along with millions of others - will be doing is making a monthly contribution to UnitedHealth Groups' profits.

Insurance companies are already paying out less because of these high out of pocket plans yet they continue to raise premiums and post record profits. This is not going to change.

Multiply by three what people over that age have to pay.

I find it hard to believe that a government subsidized insurer is going to be 'more' than the private insurer. And the facts suggest that it's not true.

And thanks President Obama.

:thumbsup:

Thanks for posting.