Obamacare.net

Affordable Care Act Information & Healthcare Agent Network

The REAL CONS of Obamacare

A Picture of Charlotte Gilbert Charlotte Gilbert
10/20/2012

There is no question that if you’re looking for a polarizing piece of federal legislation, you don’t need to look any further than the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare. People on every side of the aisle are either praising this landmark legislation or cursing the day this legislation was passed and enacted. There are a number of misconceptions about Obamacare. While many people will try to talk you into believing that this healthcare legislation is a good thing, here is a response to some of those talking points.

Cons Of Obamacare

One of the first issues advocates for this program will bring up is that the Affordable Care Act successfully circumvents potential problems of people being denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. Their claim is that with people out of work and people being uninsured that this is a rampant problem. However, the problem is not as large as they say it is.While there are people who try to purchase insurance on their own who may be turned down for individual health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, that number is far less than the 65 million people that are supposedly endanger of being denied insurance coverage.

Speak with an Agent now. 1-888-34-OBAMA

As of today, only a little over 77,000 people have signed up for the government subsidized Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan. There doesn’t seem to be a mad rush to take advantage of this program.For those people who are going back to work,the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act prohibits employers from refusing or charging higher health premiums to employees with pre-existing medical conditions. If the health insurance is there for them, they have a legal right to that insurance without fear of being discriminated against.

Obamacare And Extending How Long Someone Can Be On Their Parents Plan

A lot of talk has been given to the fact that under Obamacare a child can stay on their parents health insurance plans until their 26. While this is true, it doesn’t come without a catch. While you can have adequate health coverage on your parents health insurance plan, if your woman interested in having a baby, you won’t be offered that sort of coverage.

While the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 makes allotments for a spouse on an insurance plan to receive health coverage for a pregnancy, it makes no other stipulations as to the insurance companies requirements that children be covered under those plans as well. What that means is that even with Obamacare, if you’re on your parents insurance policy and you get pregnant, you’re going to have to look for maternity care from another insurance company.

Many people are claiming victory since the Affordable Care Act prohibits insurance companies from charging lifetime maximums on health insurance policies starting in 2014. The only problem with this is that it is only good for policies that were enacted or renewed after 2010. If you have a long-standing insurance policy, either with an employer or an individual policy that was enacted before 2010, the insurance company can still implement maximum coverage limits.

One area where people have been fooled is the issue of an insurance company dropping you because you were diagnosed with a serious ailment, sickness or disease. The reason why this is wrong is because previous legislation had been past years before the Affordable Care Act which prohibits insurance companies from dropping covered individuals if they were to contract a serious sickness or an incurable disease.

Is Obamacare Sustainable?

Perhaps the biggest issue with Obamacare is that it simply isn’t sustainable from a financial standpoint. Coverage plans with employers will quickly fade into obscurity since the penalty for not providing health insurance is far less costly than the premiums that employers currently pay for an employees health care insurance.

This will lead to a larger number of people needing insurance through government funded plans. If how the government runs other programs is any indication, the government will end up paying well more than they should for basic health insurance.

It is also important to understand that nothing about Obamacare is free. If the government is picking up the tab on your insurance, rest assured that somewhere down the line, you’ll be paying for it. In many cases, with higher taxes on certain medical products, you already are.

Lastly, regardless of what administrative types will tell you, the mandate for having health insurance isn’t something people are happy about. The flip flopping over if it is a penalty or a tax has left a very sour taste in many Americans mouth.

Is Obamacare Truly Reforming Healthcare Long Term?

Providing health insurance for everyone is a noble idea, but this plan is fraught with inconsistencies, strong arm tactics and these are just the things we know about. This bill is over 2,000 pages long and most of the Congress and Senate that voted for it didn’t even know what was in it, and a good majority of them probably still don’t.

Health coverage can be attained in a better way, but this bill is not what people say it is. It is a huge tax increase and it adds a financial burden that this country is ill suited to take on right now.

73 Comments

  1. Antonet October 20, 2012

    Sorry but that’s not true. I’m 25 and I had my first child at 20 and was covered by my parents insurance until he was born. He got on his fathers insurance after birth. I am also currently pregnant and I’m covered for all my maternity care and up until I give birth in the hospital. She will then be on her dads insurance as well.

  2. Charlie October 23, 2012

    It may be the state you are in and the policy you have. Great if you are covered but many parents will be burdened with grown children who are working and cant or wont leave the nest.

  3. Windy October 30, 2012

    Of course the policies will not be retroactive. We have to start somewhere and going into the future this will help a lot of people. It is not a perfect system. There is no perfect system. I don’t think that the “cons” you mention are all that relevant for something meant to help people in the near future.
    You do make a good point about HIPAA and the fact that some provisions people think are new with the ACA have already been in place. I have read through some of the new law and it does seem to pressure health insurance companies to focus more on healthcare and less on profits. I am concerned that their administrative costs will skyrocket though and premiums will rise in response.

  4. Renee October 30, 2012

    This information is not true! I have done medical billing for over 15 years and the pre-existing condition is a big issue. Most insurance do not cover you if you have been out of work for 30 days without insurance coverage. And the fact that Obamacare is going to cover children up to 26 years of age is great! If a young lady becomes pregnant, she is no longer a child, but a woman. The average insurance drops a child at the age of 19 unless they are in school. Then they can remain covered up to
    21 years of age. There are several people in the USA with no insurance and being refused care because they can’t pay for services up front. There has been too many lies about this healthcare plan. Maybe if the people that have the issue with the plan could experience life without medical insurance and suffer from pre-existing condition, then they would embrace this policy.

  5. Windy October 31, 2012

    I agree Renee! People who have never had the experience of being uninsured often do not stop to really consider what impact it would have on their lives should they truly be in need of it.

  6. Sheila November 1, 2012

    It is the employers that bear the cost of covering children until 26 whether they are in school, living at home or even married! If a husband and wife plan would cost $700 a month, and an employer and family plan costs $900 a month, the employer is left covering a good portion of that $200 per month. This coverage isn’t free, folks -

  7. Sheila November 1, 2012

    So nice to hear that your parent’s employer is footing the bill for your pregnancies.

  8. Windy November 1, 2012

    Do you see yourself having a third child under these circumstances?

  9. Joe November 4, 2012

    Look, more people will be covered. That is a good thing. However, why is there the need to pretend that this law is going to reduce costs for most people? That simply isn’t true. A middle class family that has fad health insurance will see premiums and taxes increase to pay for those that didn’t have insurance. They are making a sacrifice and should be commended. I don’t see the reason to deceive them.

  10. Jessica November 7, 2012

    My husband lives with a pre-existing condition, and no health insurance so we have experienced it. Yes it sucks but this plan is worse than no insurance.

  11. Anna November 7, 2012

    It’s not for kids who just “won’t leave the nest”. The policy insures kids 26 years old and younger, provided that they are in college. So essentially, only kids who are in the process of making a better life for themselves, and preparing to leave the nest. Also I’m not sure how reliable this source is, considering the fact that I counted at least 4 grammatical errors… and I’m a music teacher.

  12. Tracy November 7, 2012

    Entitled much? Why is it your parent’s employer’s responsibility to pay for an irresponsible child’s bad choices. Try getting married and getting on your husband’s insurance instead of just playing house and billing your mom or dad’s work for at least 1/2 of it.

  13. Its just math November 7, 2012

    What people fail to understand is that if you cannnot afford something you cannot have it. I see a lot of people praising this healthcare act but who is paying for it? You know what else would be nice….if the government wrote every american a check for a million dollars. Why stop with Obamacare? Heck….lets make it 2 million. Why not? It doesn’t matter if we can’t afford it, apparently that doesn’t matter in this country. The same people who blame iresponsible banks for the housing crisis are in love with this iresponsible healthcare act. Its hypocrisy. Everybody wants, wants, wants. Entitlement programs are necessary but they should be there as saftey nets not for people to take advantage of.

  14. Dumbfounded November 7, 2012

    I can’t believe what I read here – last 5 years living with your parents & having kids – on their insurance. No wonder MY insurance premiums are so high.
    Deadbeat

  15. Windy November 7, 2012

    Some things people should simply have, have, have. No one is being given a bunch of luxurious items when they acquire access to healthcare. It’s not, after all, a luxury to get treatment for a health problem you have, is it?

  16. Windy November 7, 2012

    That’s unlikely to be a large contributor to your health insurance premiums. Although I have personal feelings about multiplying when you are not set up to independently care for your children – it’s not what drives the cost of insurance. Mostly, it’s a lot of very sick people who are using the services the most that cost so much. Premiums are driven up by ridiculous prescription drug costs as well as medical malpractice insurance premiums due to our litigation happy culture as well.

  17. Windy November 7, 2012

    Oh, and there are many other factors that increase your premiums. I’ll mention that most health insurance companies are for profit and make an awful lot of money whereas almost all hospitals are non-profit or not-for-profit.

  18. Windy November 7, 2012

    Wow, this plan is worse than no insurance? Does your Husband agree?

  19. Windy November 7, 2012

    What’s the story Antonet? People can be a bit harsh about your situation but what’s your thoughts on the point they are making?

  20. its just math November 7, 2012

    Everybody deserves healthcare yes. This is not the way to do it. Just like there’s millions of homeless people……..the government buying them all houses isn’t the way to fix that problem. In either case if the government could afford it that’d be great. Problem is it can’t.

  21. Anthony S November 7, 2012

    Right! And I counted the errors too haha…

  22. Windy November 8, 2012

    If the government cut funds for some other less important things it could afford it and should afford it. There are lots of things the government pays for that it ought to scrap in favor of healthcare. It’s shameful.

  23. Arlene November 8, 2012

    If she wasn’t on her parent’s insurance, the government would have footed the bill. At least she was responsible enough to be covered under insurance. So many girls get pregnant and then have to go on government assistance, so I think everyone needs to stop attacking this woman. She was simply stating a fact. A friend of mine went to the hospital and received two bills. One was really high and the other was about a quarter of the other amount. When she called the hospital to find out which to pay, they explained to her that they made a mistake in sending both bills. The low one was if she didn’t have insurance and the higher one was if she did. So your bill is higher if you have insurance? I think the real problem is the health insurance companies. Rates keep going up and coverage keeps going down. I’m not for or against obamacare, but something needs to be done. And in all honesty, I have been trying to look up facts about obamacare and haven’t found a single sight yet that isn’t politically motivated. It would be nice if we could put politics aside and really fix the problems that we are facing.

  24. rose November 9, 2012

    i am a single white female age 61, i have not worked since 2008, can’t find a job, i am living with my 82 year old mother and she is on social security only. My question is WHAT CAN OBAMA CARE DO FOR ME????Can’t seem to get an answer to this, so i assume NOTHING.

  25. alan November 9, 2012

    So… The universal healthcare bill forces working adults to live with their parents? I thought all employers have to provide insurance. So they are not staying because of Obamacare. They can’t earn enough money to pay rent or buy gasoline.

  26. alan November 9, 2012

    Really? You would rather pay full price for medical tretment instead of a co-pay of $10-$20? or a percentage of the bill?

  27. Bev November 9, 2012

    Everyone should have healthcare but were is the provison that will keep employers from changing full time positions into two part time positions. And don’t tell me iit is not going to happen because I have been following several other posts that had employers reporting that that is the first plan that they have inorder to reduce their cost for obamacare. From what I am gathering it is cheaper to pay the penalty for not caring the coverage for a part time employee than it is to carry coverage for a fultime employee. I understand that they can not change a current employees coverage without penalty but when someone leaves a full time position for whatever reason then the employer can rehire two part timers. In my current position I work to train youth to send them out into the work force. I have a job because these young people see that they can not get a good job without training but when this begins to occur why would they try to help them self by preparing for employment when all they have to look forward to is a part time job. They would be just as well staying home seeking government assistance. If Obama care is going to be then it needs to address the loop holes that people will look for that gives them the advantage over others. If it is healthcare for all it needs to be effective for all. I pray that our divided nation and government can come together to find a resolve.

  28. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    Just because they’re non profit doesn’t mean they don’t make a profit. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be around very long.

  29. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    Agreed! This president spends as if our deficit wasn’t over a trillion dollars. Unfortunately, he was re-elected by the people who are looking for the handouts he has provided.

  30. Windy November 11, 2012

    I voted for him. Unfortunately, our economy is so bad that many people depend on these “handouts” to survive. Looking for a job doesn’t mean you will get one. I was able to benefit from public health insurance (Medicaid) for about two years when I worked part-time at minimum wage while I went to nursing school. I really needed that insurance and am thankful it was there for me. I am now a Registered Nurse and can afford my own health insurance. This is a case where it worked. I paid into the system from years of work in the past so I do not feel bad that I needed to utilize Medicaid at one point in my life.

  31. Windy November 11, 2012

    Well, Mike, they need to reinvest a large percentage of this so-called “profit” into the business. No, it does not mean that a profit is not made but non-profits are not motivated solely by profit. It makes an enormous difference and it matters. A lot.

  32. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    The Medicaid you received was not a handout. It was something that you paid into and EARNED. That is exactly the way the system should work. The handouts I’m referring to are those that people receive when they have not added to, nor ever intend to add anything to the system.Enabling these people does not help them. It takes away their incentive to be productive members of society

    I applaud you for doing what you did. Your profession is a noble one and I respect it immensely. Unfortunately for you, the Chief Federal Actuary, Richard Foster, predicts that 15% of hospitals will be forced into the red. This means cutbacks(layoffs) that will make your job much harder for maybe, no more pay. The government jobs that will administer this program will expand significantly, however. This is why I’m surprised any healthcare employee would vote for Obama.

  33. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    True, but I just wanted to make the point that nonprofits still needed to be run like a business. The for profits have their stakeholders to answer to and would be negligent if they did not run their business to improve the stakeholders positions. This includes their employees who should expect these companies to improve their overall welfare. More profit means more employees, better pay and ultimately a better economy for the community. This is called free enterprise, which once made this a great and thriving nation.

  34. Windy November 11, 2012

    I work in an outpatient environment.

  35. Windy November 11, 2012

    My hope is that an increased focus on preventive care and outpatient treatment will significantly reduce the need for hospitalization. That’s why I am in the outpatient environment. People get sicker in hospitals and this increases the cost of their care. So many rehospitalizations are due to poor follow-up care and a horrible lack of communication among the inpatient, outpatient and home care staff. Filling hospital beds is how a hospital can become profitable. I don’t want that patient to be in that bed to start with. That patient stands to get sicker by being exposed to multiple drug resistant bacteria.

  36. Windy November 11, 2012

    Also, I want to add that many of our local hospitals afford luxuries such as GRANITE countertops at the nurse workstations, an incredible waste of money in a healthcare environment. If they can afford that then they don’t need to be reimbursed at the rates they get now.

  37. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    Good. Hopefully your area won’t be effected too negatively. I appreciate your thoughtful consideration of this issue. This is the kind of discourse this country needs. An honest intelligent discussion rather than childish bickering and an “I’ll show you” attitude.

    I’m sorry if my last response to your other post came off as condescending. I read it after I sent it and it sort of sounded preachy. It was not the way I intended it to sound.

  38. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    Windy, excellent critical thinking on your last two posts!My Mom got sick last year and I’ve spent a great deal of time in the hospital. Much of it was good care, but some not so good. I’m talking administrative and medical. Maybe you should think about getting into hospital administration :-)

  39. Sam November 11, 2012

    So mike d what is your solution to this healthcare problem because it is a problem? You can list your plan in bullets for simplicity!

  40. Windy November 11, 2012

    I have half my Masters degree in Healthcare Administration. Perhaps I’ll finish it.

  41. Windy November 11, 2012

    There’s a lot that the general public does not know or understand about the way that healthcare is delivered and the way it is paid for. Republicans in this election pitted Obamacare against the people that it is supposed to assist, rather than making a clear case for scrapping the entire plan. I honestly think that the President is aware of much of the waste in healthcare and is trying to reign it in with the Affordable Care Act. I am interested in how this plan will change things for us all.

  42. Windy November 11, 2012

    While I’m thinking of it I also want to say that the poor are being pitted against the rich in this country and that is obviously being done deliberately. We need our middle class back and for it to become the standard of America. I don’t think that it is necessary to take away everything from the wealthy to accomplish that. Generally we all need food, shelter, medical care, jobs and the like. No one deserves to have access to less than this. I personally think it is fine if someone feels the need to make millions of dollars and have a mansion and multiple cars and ownership in large corporations if they get this through hard work and follow the rules so to speak. Most people aren’t that motivated and just want to have some of the nicer things in life rather than struggle daily to make ends meet. However, today I am highly suspicious that certain politicians are interested in pitting the rich against the poor so that they can keep us all so busy attacking each other that we don’t see what else is going on around us. But that’s another topic.

  43. Mike D. November 11, 2012

    Yes, I agree. I think both major parties are guilty of this. It leads to far too many stalemates where nothing gets accomplished. Just out of curiosity, what part of the country are you from? I’m from the Northeast.

  44. Windy November 12, 2012

    Northeast here.

  45. tootie November 12, 2012

    what about employers that are not required to carrying insurance because they only have one or two emoployees. the obamacare states you have to have a certain number of employees to be REQUIRED to offer insurance. my husband lost his job and i am the only one working and have not had insurance since he lost his job. tried to get govt help but they say i make too much for a family of 4. explain this one to me please someone!!!!!!!!!

  46. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    You do not qualify because you make too much money. My suggestion to you is private insurance or public health care. Hope this helps! :D

  47. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    Our nation can come together on this issue. I live in Australia where the have had socialized medicine for years. I was recently hospitalized for 45 days, it cost me Nothing. People need to study more on the wonderful aspects of socialized medicine. If Australia can do it, the United States certainly can. There is No reason our people are not taken care of, when their health is failing. If yo are not an Obama fan, take the term out of the picture., it is just socialized medicine, not controlled by politicians,special interest groups, doctors or the Huge Drug Industry that makes billions of dollars. Not to mention the Insurance Companies themselves.

  48. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    Dear Bev, I don’t know where your sources come from, but they are unreliable, at best. The fee that you pay is Not more than Insurance Companies will charge you for private insurance. I hope this helps your decisions about health care. Take the power away from the Insurance companies and drug manufactures, give the power Back to the Doctors, They understand medicine, Not the Insurance Companies that, if they don’t like what the doctor has diagnosed, They become the doctors, and can flat out deny you on any basis that arises.

  49. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    You are exactly the type of person that “Obama Care” medicine is geared to help the Most. I don’t know enough about your work situation to explore the details to you. Is there a reason you have not worked at all for all of those years? Are you presently on Welfare or State help? Obama care will help you if you need medical attention and medication. Assume Nothing, get the Facts! I hope this helps you. :D

  50. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    Wendy! You are 100% Correct! “Non profit” usually means they are run by donations. The workers are usually retired volunteers and there are no”Stake holders?”. I think our friend Mike is suggesting “share holders” which Do make profits. It has Nothing to do with “Free Enterprise”. I think our friend Mike D. needs to do some investigation on the difference between “non-profit”, means exactly that, there are no “stakeholders?” involved in those type of businesses, hence the word “Non Profit”.

  51. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    Arlene, Yes Insurance companies Do charge More than if you have no insurance. The Insurance companies in the U.S. hold so much power, they even try to diagnose patients who have gone to doctors and made a diagnose they didn’t want to hear. Corruption at it’s finest. Also they can deny for any reason.

  52. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    The first thing Obama tried to do when he took office was to rid us of “Bush Tax Cuts” for the wealthy, of course this could not pass, because the Senate are all Republicans and will Not work with the President. I am mortified at some of the responses of “it’s just math”. The government does not “buy them houses” as you suggest, unless you are speaking of “housing projects”, better know as the “Ghetto”, and they still pay rent. Healthcare isn’t even on these unfortunates minds. It’s if they can make the rent, pay bills, eat and live from check to check. It’s called “The Working poverty stricken people”. The next step is a cardboard box under the enter state for shelter. Foreigners are amazed when they come to the United States of America,Richest country in the free word and see all of the homeless people digging in the garbage for a bite of food. Now that is Shameful! =P

  53. Windy November 12, 2012

    You must have been responding to someone else – I never suggested the government buys anyone houses!

  54. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    No, Jessica it is not. No Health Coverage means You Pay! Obama Care is a social medical scheme to help people just like your husband! Maybe yo should get the insurance that Obama care offers and then your husband will be covered. Sheech~

  55. Windy November 12, 2012

    Well, non-profits do have stakeholders and they often need to cater at least a little bit to their most generous donors. Also, workers are not retired volunteers. They are degree holding professionals and other unskilled workers who are paid employees. Also, it is highly unlikely that I misspelled my own name on here so please call me by my real name “Windy”. :)

  56. Windy November 12, 2012

    To Joe:
    There will be a Medicare payroll tax increase that will apply to people in high income brackets, not the average American. There will be cuts to Medicare but most of this money is money that was actually paid out on fraudulent/false claims and reimbursement to hospitals will be reduced. You need more specific information to really know for sure but I do understand why you are skeptical about not getting hit with extra costs because that is what usually happens. Let us know if your premiums go up and by how much.

  57. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    How about paying Nothing, no co-pay? That is how this system will work, like most Countries that do not have Insurance Companies choose whether you live or die and try to diagnose, because they don’t like what the Doctor has diagnosed, it will cost them more money, although in reality it is Your money you have been paying in! I live in Australia and was hospitalized for 45 days, I am disabled and very ill. It cost me Nothing!! It is why I had to leave the States,because of lack of knowledge about health care laws. This is just a re-hash of what President Clinton tried to offer when he was in office. If social medicine works so well here and in many countries, why doesn’t it work there? Corruption, and keeping the American people in the dark. Open your mind!

  58. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    Not all employers pay health care for their employees. Many companies have dropped insurance and if you own or work in a small company there are no health benefits at all! Do your homework before making false claims.

  59. Windy November 12, 2012

    Cherie, the US is very far from socialized medicine and $0 co pays. We are struggling to accept even partially socialized medicine here. People who already have insurance will be allowed to keep what they have, some will be on the “Obamacare” insurance, others on Medicare or state plans/Medicaid. Americans are very leery of anything with the word “socialized” in it and also believe that their government will be the ones who run the entire show. I think that there is a general distrust of the government here (not totally unfounded imho) and it impedes serious change. Glad to hear that Australia takes care of its own. We are working on it but it’s a long way off yet.

  60. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    If those parents didn’t want to be “burdened” by their children they made together. They did not ask to come into this world. In today’s world it is harder and harder to “leave the nest” because of our economy. If they are working, Fantastic! I think it’s a great idea to cover your children until they are 26. Of course you can always toss them out in the streets~

  61. Windy November 12, 2012

    Wait… there’s more than one person who needs to do their “homework” here. Under Obamacare employers will be essentially forced to offer health insurance to their employees or pay a federal tax. I think this applies to employers with 50 or more employees (anyone with different info may correct me). This does pose the question of whether this may discourage an employer from hiring new employees or at least from hiring certain employees…

  62. Cherie Post November 12, 2012

    RENEE! Finally someone with compassion and a brain! These people Need to Study and Learn what all the program entails. This is for the good of all the people of our great nation, not just the lucky ones who have their jobs pay their healthcare, but what happens when you get laid off? Preexisting condition? Children ill? Consider all the different lives this involves!

  63. Windy November 12, 2012

    I’m not sure if I understand your situation exactly. Under Obamacare an employer would only be pressured into offering insurance if it has 50 or more employees – correct as far as I know. But if the employers has less than 50 employees those employees would then be eligible for the health insurance through Obamacare. Today someone might make too much to qualify for public health insurance but the rules change under Obamacare.

  64. Windy November 12, 2012

    You know what would really help? If there were a website (at least for those with internet access) where you could find out exactly how Obamacare would impact your specific situation.

  65. Charlie November 13, 2012

    That would be great but no one knows how it would affect you until it goes into full effect. With states nullifying obamacare, it may not affect you art all. I would suggest researching to your states current legislation on obamacare.

  66. Charlie November 13, 2012

    The employer would cut back the employees hours to 28 creating part time positions and also cut full time positions in order to not have ot pay the $3000 fine per employee. The fines kick in on the 31 employee….not the 50th…

  67. Windy November 13, 2012

    Maybe – but I guess it depends on the staffing needs too.

  68. FutureUser November 14, 2012

    There seems to be a problem with the requirements vs. the options. I would like to see insurance companies offer a plan that allows young adults to be on their parents’ insurance, as well as a plan that does not. That would allow each family to choose whether to cover the adult children, based on their employment situation, for example. This would lower the cost for the family plans, by reducing the coverage overlap between the (employed) young adult’s own plan, and their parents plan.

    I think the same is true of contraception coverage. I’d like to see insurance companies offer a plan that covers it, and a plan that does not. Then each person can apply their own individual conscience and situation to the matter. 80-year-olds paying for their contraception coverage is not a “personal responsibility”, but rather a tax for being old.

  69. Windy November 15, 2012

    Actually, that would negate the whole point of making sure EVERYONE has ACCESS to birth control and healthcare – they can always just simply NOT USE the contraception if they do not wish to. People are free to make their own “conscious” decisions even when their plan offers such coverage. Also, if parents get to choose a plan that does not cover their older children that is pretty selfish – even if the situation were that the child said they don’t “need” it. You never know when you will need health insurance and an ER visit would set those parents back quite a bit more than a slightly increased premium.

  70. dpms November 15, 2012

    Thats because your parents employer decded to cover dependent daughters for maternity. Not all employers have that benefit. With the implementation of Obamacare more employers are going to drop that coverage

  71. rose November 16, 2012

    i don’t have the luxury of popping out kids for the government to support, where is my obama care????

  72. timothy December 20, 2012

    Just when I thought Wendy had a clue she proved me wrong. What a crock of misinformation, Wendy. How foolish of you to say “I have read through “some” parts of the law.” You are claiming wisdom about something you really have no knowledge of. You claim the new law “pressures insurance companies to focus more on healthcare and less on profits” is an absolutely incorrect statement. Maybe, Wendy, you should read all 2,700 pages of the bill before you make such innocuous and un-founded statements! The new government mandate, the ACPPA, is full of demands placed on institutions, hospitals and individual doctors to either cut cosst by providing less care and therefore make care less expensive. If there is not compliance by said hospitals and providers they will be fine by the government. This is not about private insurance companies, this is about government mandates. All health care is mandated through the government, not the insurers. Read the bill,the entire bill, before you spout off about its “benefits”. You are wrong, and you should apolgize for your deception. Obamacare is a disaster, you’ve simply jumped on the bandwagon. By the way, Wendy, what are your credentials that allow you to make such false assumptions, read the entire bill and stop the lying!

  73. Ann March 10, 2014

    I have many questions with this unaffordable care act. How many people in the government that voted for this has their health insurance through it? I think they should be forced to buy their health insurance through the marketplace. Wouldn’t it of made more sense to revamp Medicaid to cover people with pre-existing conditions and people who fall between the cracks and leave the rest of us alone? How come smoking cigarettes is a penalty but being an alcoholic or drug addict isn’t? How come this government is encouraging females to have babies? Why aren’t they passing out free birth control instead of forcing everyone to pay for maternity and child health care when they don’t have kids and can’t or won’t have kids. The government wants us to get out of debt and save for our retirement, how are we suppose to do that when we have to pay unreasonable health insurance premiums now. Obamacare did not and is not taking into consideration that we have other bills to pay every month.