What Started it all has failed in MA
May 6, 2014 21:13:30 #
A Mass. Exodus on ObamaCare
Functionality may be in short supply with ObamaCare -- but irony sure isn't. Yesterday, in an announcement that seemed to sum up the last year of this debacle, Massachusetts scrapped the health care system that started it all. What once served as the model for the President's law is now a symbol of its dysfunction, as the Bay State becomes the third state to junk its site and start over.
The 2006 system, which served as the basis for ObamaCare, hit its biggest wall when officials tried to merge the program with HealthCare.gov. One hundred eighty one million federal dollars later, the technical mess was so great that the state had to shift 160,000 people to temporary Medicaid coverage -- an expensive back-up plan that costs upward of $10 million a month.
In Governor Deval Patrick's (D) office, staffers tried to find the words to explain the disaster. Sarah Iselin did her best with this contender for understatement of the year: "We need a reliable website to help people." Unfortunately for Massachusetts, "reliable" and "ObamaCare" haven't done too many joint appearances. For now, the biggest questions seem to be: who's paying for this latest collapse, and will the state be able to build a lifeline to another alternative in time for the next enrollment period? Like Oregon and Maryland, which just ditched their multi-million exchanges, Massachusetts had difficulty tapping into the administration's system and complying with the law's myriad demands. Other states -- Hawaii, Nevada, Vermont -- have either watched their exchanges implode or are dangerously close.
In every failure, there seems to be one common denominator: the federal government. And Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), for one, is sick and tired of it. "Americans are once again out millions of dollars with nothing to show for it," he fumed. "Federal taxpayers should not be on the hook for the additional costs to clean up this debacle, which are sure to be high as the state scrambles to join the federal exchange." Meanwhile, one thing federal taxpayers are on the hook for is a******n. During the debate, President Obama swore the government's plans wouldn't include taxpayer-funded a******n. Now, it's impossible to find one without it!
Just ask Barth and Abbie Bracy. As Christians, they don't want to pay for health insurance that covers a******n on demand -- but in Connecticut, they don't have much choice. Every single state exchange plan includes a******n coverage, a reality so unacceptable that the couple is filing suit. With the help of our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Bracys are taking a stand against the administration's oppressive system. Although several ObamaCare challenges are working their way through the courts, this couple's case is unique, the Washington Times points out, because it's the first filed by a "would-be policy buyer challenging the a******n fee mandate." "Neither the Constitution nor federal and state law allow for this type of government coercion," says Bracy attorney and ADF Senior Counsel Casey Mattox.
Unfortunately, the Bracys aren't the only victims of the White House's you-have-to-buy-it-to-see-what's-in-it mentality. One of the most outrageous parts of the ObamaCare exchange is that Americans don't know what their plans cover (including a******n) until they purchase them. The process is so convoluted that Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.) had to introduce a bill (the A******n Insurance Full Disclosure Act) just to guarantee that Americans knew what kind of procedures they were paying for. "It was incredibly confusing, if not impossible, to find out," Smith has said.
Even Congress, with great resources at its disposal, couldn't get to the bottom of their insurance benefits. "That is what's happening in state after state," he explained. "People cannot find out if plans on the exchange include a******n." So much for the most t***sparent administration in history. Help shed some light on ObamaCare by encouraging your Congressman to co-sponsor Rep. Smith's bill, H.R. 3279.
Functionality may be in short supply with ObamaCare -- but irony sure isn't. Yesterday, in an announcement that seemed to sum up the last year of this debacle, Massachusetts scrapped the health care system that started it all. What once served as the model for the President's law is now a symbol of its dysfunction, as the Bay State becomes the third state to junk its site and start over.
The 2006 system, which served as the basis for ObamaCare, hit its biggest wall when officials tried to merge the program with HealthCare.gov. One hundred eighty one million federal dollars later, the technical mess was so great that the state had to shift 160,000 people to temporary Medicaid coverage -- an expensive back-up plan that costs upward of $10 million a month.
In Governor Deval Patrick's (D) office, staffers tried to find the words to explain the disaster. Sarah Iselin did her best with this contender for understatement of the year: "We need a reliable website to help people." Unfortunately for Massachusetts, "reliable" and "ObamaCare" haven't done too many joint appearances. For now, the biggest questions seem to be: who's paying for this latest collapse, and will the state be able to build a lifeline to another alternative in time for the next enrollment period? Like Oregon and Maryland, which just ditched their multi-million exchanges, Massachusetts had difficulty tapping into the administration's system and complying with the law's myriad demands. Other states -- Hawaii, Nevada, Vermont -- have either watched their exchanges implode or are dangerously close.
In every failure, there seems to be one common denominator: the federal government. And Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), for one, is sick and tired of it. "Americans are once again out millions of dollars with nothing to show for it," he fumed. "Federal taxpayers should not be on the hook for the additional costs to clean up this debacle, which are sure to be high as the state scrambles to join the federal exchange." Meanwhile, one thing federal taxpayers are on the hook for is a******n. During the debate, President Obama swore the government's plans wouldn't include taxpayer-funded a******n. Now, it's impossible to find one without it!
Just ask Barth and Abbie Bracy. As Christians, they don't want to pay for health insurance that covers a******n on demand -- but in Connecticut, they don't have much choice. Every single state exchange plan includes a******n coverage, a reality so unacceptable that the couple is filing suit. With the help of our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Bracys are taking a stand against the administration's oppressive system. Although several ObamaCare challenges are working their way through the courts, this couple's case is unique, the Washington Times points out, because it's the first filed by a "would-be policy buyer challenging the a******n fee mandate." "Neither the Constitution nor federal and state law allow for this type of government coercion," says Bracy attorney and ADF Senior Counsel Casey Mattox.
Unfortunately, the Bracys aren't the only victims of the White House's you-have-to-buy-it-to-see-what's-in-it mentality. One of the most outrageous parts of the ObamaCare exchange is that Americans don't know what their plans cover (including a******n) until they purchase them. The process is so convoluted that Congressman Chris Smith (R-N.J.) had to introduce a bill (the A******n Insurance Full Disclosure Act) just to guarantee that Americans knew what kind of procedures they were paying for. "It was incredibly confusing, if not impossible, to find out," Smith has said.
Even Congress, with great resources at its disposal, couldn't get to the bottom of their insurance benefits. "That is what's happening in state after state," he explained. "People cannot find out if plans on the exchange include a******n." So much for the most t***sparent administration in history. Help shed some light on ObamaCare by encouraging your Congressman to co-sponsor Rep. Smith's bill, H.R. 3279.
May 6, 2014 22:53:44 #
Democrats will find a way to blame this working system's failure on republicans, just watch! A working system, add a little democratic flare and watch it fail. While that program cost too much at least it worked and was amended several times.
Democrats should be h*****g their heads, not even trying to defend this and actually open their mouths against the law.
I've asked several democrats if they'd buy a house unseen, of course not, how about a second hand car, well no, so why do you stand behind a law that wasn't even read, no answer.
Democrats should be h*****g their heads, not even trying to defend this and actually open their mouths against the law.
I've asked several democrats if they'd buy a house unseen, of course not, how about a second hand car, well no, so why do you stand behind a law that wasn't even read, no answer.
ldsuttonjr wrote:
A Mass. Exodus on ObamaCare br br Functionality m... (show quote)
May 6, 2014 23:52:36 #
ldsuttonjr wrote:
A Mass. Exodus on ObamaCare br br Functionality m... (show quote)
A Conservative would say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." A Liberal Democrat says: "If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is, then blame the Republicans." I have said it before; you could give the Federal Government the ice water concession in the Sahara Desert, and they would find a way to lose money.
May 7, 2014 00:19:29 #
Democrats have been selling ice cubes to Eskimos for years but finally got caught, when did they start selling ice water in the desert?
Loki wrote:
A Conservative would say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." A Liberal Democrat says: "If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is, then blame the Republicans." I have said it before; you could give the Federal Government the ice water concession in the Sahara Desert, and they would find a way to lose money.
May 7, 2014 03:21:36 #
bmac32 wrote:
Democrats have been selling ice cubes to Eskimos for years but finally got caught, when did they start selling ice water in the desert?
They haven't, it would be sensible, and therefore not included in the Democratic platform. I simply observed that if they did, they would find a way to lose money.
Last I heard, they gave up on ice cubes to Eskimos, and are currently involved in a shoes for snakes thing.
May 7, 2014 04:04:28 #
bmac32 wrote:
Democrats should be h*****g...
Democrats should be h*****g...
There, fixed it for you. No, no thanks necessary...
May 7, 2014 08:33:15 #
Most of them I agree with that but you know they'd use bungee cord!
docwill wrote:
There, fixed it for you. No, no thanks necessary...
May 7, 2014 08:59:43 #
And don't forget everything they sell is TAXED!
Loki wrote:
They haven't, it would be sensible, and therefore not included in the Democratic platform. I simply observed that if they did, they would find a way to lose money.
Last I heard, they gave up on ice cubes to Eskimos, and are currently involved in a shoes for snakes thing.
Last I heard, they gave up on ice cubes to Eskimos, and are currently involved in a shoes for snakes thing.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.