• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

State Obamacare exchanges enroll 3 pct of target so far -report

cpwill

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,608
Reaction score
39,893
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The administration said they needed 7 million sign ups, and 2.7 million of them need to be these "young invincibles".

Nov 11 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's healthcare reform has reached only about 3 percent of its enrollment target for 2014 in 12 U.S. states where new online health insurance marketplaces are mostly working smoothly, a report released on Monday said.

States with functioning exchanges have signed up 49,100 people compared with the 1.4 million people expected to be enrolled for 2014, according to the report by healthcare research and consultancy firm Avalere Health.

With enrollment in the federal HealthCare.gov website serving 36 states stalled by technical failures, the weak sign-ups for functioning insurance exchanges could be due to the administration's difficulty to promote the program as a success, Avalere said.

The government is due to release national enrollment figures for the month of October this week. Open enrollment ends March 31, 2014.

Supporters of Obamacare and health insurers fear that scant participation in the private insurance exchanges will prevent them from becoming a sustainable new individual market, including the right mix of young and healthy members to offset coverage for older, sick people....
Click to expand...


We'll see where we end up.
 
cpwill said:
The administration said they needed 7 million sign ups, and 2.7 million of them need to be these "young invincibles".



We'll see where we end up.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

I just don't see them getting the numbers they will need for this thing to work until people show up to do their taxes and find out they will be fined for not having it. Then we'll probably see the numbers go up, but then the jury is out how people will respond to that.
 
cpwill said:
The administration said they needed 7 million sign ups, and 2.7 million of them need to be these "young invincibles".
We'll see where we end up.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Isn't it more or less required that people sign up? Why would anybody want to go first? Have you ever seen the lines of fools that stand in line at the Post Office to mail their tax return on April 15th? How about those voting lines on election day when you could have voted early in 5 minutes.

Not saying you're wrong. Just saying that 7 million out of 310 million is not a very lofty target.
 
SBu said:
I just don't see them getting the numbers they will need for this thing to work until people show up to do their taxes and find out they will be fined for not having it. Then we'll probably see the numbers go up, but then the jury is out how people will respond to that.
Click to expand...

The fine is - what? 95 bucks? v a health insurance bill that is in many cases 50, 75, 100% higher? oh yeah - and the IRS has no way of enforcing the fine?

color me..... jaundiced with the notion that that is going to work terribly well.
 
specklebang said:
Isn't it more or less required that people sign up?
Click to expand...

Nope. But you owe a tax of $95.

Why would anybody want to go first? Have you ever seen the lines of fools that stand in line at the Post Office to mail their tax return on April 15th? How about those voting lines on election day when you could have voted early in 5 minutes.
Click to expand...

Agreed, you're going to see a rapid growth in the sign-ups. I just wonder if they can start from here and get to there, especially given that we haven't even started really seeing the security issues come to full light yet. That's a powerful disincentive.
 
cpwill said:
Nope. But you owe a tax of $95.



Agreed, you're going to see a rapid growth in the sign-ups. I just wonder if they can start from here and get to there, especially given that we haven't even started really seeing the security issues come to full light yet. That's a powerful disincentive.
Click to expand...

I understand the fine goes up over the years...no?
 
cpwill said:
Nope. But you owe a tax of $95.

Agreed, you're going to see a rapid growth in the sign-ups. I just wonder if they can start from here and get to there, especially given that we haven't even started really seeing the security issues come to full light yet. That's a powerful disincentive.
Click to expand...

The State Exchanges are doing better, is that true?
 
SBu said:
I just don't see them getting the numbers they will need for this thing to work until people show up to do their taxes and find out they will be fined for not having it. Then we'll probably see the numbers go up, but then the jury is out how people will respond to that.
Click to expand...

Free tax advice: change your withholding and/or exceptions so you owe $0.01 in taxes when you file. Doing so makes you penalty $0.00 this year, next year, the year after that, etc.

And even if there wasn't a penalty, that's still good tax advice. Otherwise, you are just giving the feds an interest free loan for 11 months.
 
SBu said:
I understand the fine goes up over the years...no?
Click to expand...

It does, and the ONLY way the IRS is allowed to collect is to withhold tax refunds!
 
Samhain said:
State exchanges, if you exclude Medicaid, is where they got this number = ~50k enrollees
Click to expand...

So, how many did the Federal Exchange get?

These are real questions. Inquiring minds etc. I'm a Medicare guy at my tender age.
 
but... but.... the state exchanges are working perfectly! That's all we hear.
 
specklebang said:
So, how many did the Federal Exchange get?

These are real questions. Inquiring minds etc. I'm a Medicare guy at my tender age.
Click to expand...

To be released this week. And there is another thread that the WH has defined an ACA enrollee as "people who have purchased a plan as well as those who have a plan sitting in their online shopping cart but have not yet paid."
Who counts as an Obamacare enrollee? The Obama administration settles on a definition. | Wonkblog

If only Amazon would report sales that way.....
 
specklebang said:
So, how many did the Federal Exchange get?

These are real questions. Inquiring minds etc. I'm a Medicare guy at my tender age.
Click to expand...

Fewer than 50,000.




Apparently the administration planned on having the first million people signed up by now. Instead they got 10% of that. That means in order to catch up to the targets they have to hit, they have to start hitting 100% of their targets, plus an additional 900,000 people.
 
SBu said:
I just don't see them getting the numbers they will need for this thing to work until people show up to do their taxes and find out they will be fined for not having it. Then we'll probably see the numbers go up, but then the jury is out how people will respond to that.
Click to expand...

You only get fined if you get a return. Put 2 on your taxes.
 
cpwill said:
:lol: This is the State Exchanges.
Federal Exchanges aren't any better.
Click to expand...
Samhain said:
To be released this week. And there is another thread that the WH has defined an ACA enrollee as "people who have purchased a plan as well as those who have a plan sitting in their online shopping cart but have not yet paid."
Who counts as an Obamacare enrollee? The Obama administration settles on a definition. | Wonkblog
If only Amazon would report sales that way.....
Click to expand...
cpwill said:
Fewer than 50,000.

Apparently the administration planned on having the first million people signed up by now. Instead they got 10% of that. That means in order to catch up to the targets they have to hit, they have to start hitting 100% of their targets, plus an additional 900,000 people.
Click to expand...

OK, they aren't doing very well. Agreed. But this isn't like a new Iphone. Nobody wants to go first. I think they'll do much better as the time approaches but believe me, I have no cat in this race. No law should exceed 50 pages and when they do, I can feel that hand in my pocket.

I suppose the next election will be the Obamacare election...
 
cpwill said:
The fine is - what? 95 bucks? v a health insurance bill that is in many cases 50, 75, 100% higher? oh yeah - and the IRS has no way of enforcing the fine?

color me..... jaundiced with the notion that that is going to work terribly well.
Click to expand...

Well, its the greater of $95 or a 1% surtax on taxable income... that would be $1,000 to someone with $100K of taxable income. That is a little more compelling. ... and this is the "soft year". Each go up next year to $325 or a 2% surtax in 2015; and finally to $695 or 2.5% of taxable income thereafter.

http://individualmandate.com/
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
Well, its the greater of $95 or a 1% surtax on taxable income... that would be $1,000 to someone with $100K of taxable income. That is a little more compelling. ... and this is the "soft year". Each go up next year.
Click to expand...

And to not pay the $95 or any surtax they report less income. This is true when you raise taxes on the rich, the feds get no more income, meaning the people will only tolerate a certain about to give to the government. This will be true on the lower income people as well. I have to pay $95 or a surtax. I don't think so. Obamacare if a failure before it begins.
 
Born Free said:
And to not pay the $95 or any surtax they report less income. This is true when you raise taxes on the rich, the feds get no more income, meaning the people will only tolerate a certain about to give to the government. This will be true on the lower income people as well. I have to pay $95 or a surtax. I don't think so. Obamacare if a failure before it begins.
Click to expand...

Yes, its what happens when the Dems wuss out and implement a Republican idea rather than the right thing, Medicare Part E (aka, single payer)...
 
upsideguy said:
Yes, its what happens when the Dems wuss out and implement a Republican idea rather than the right thing, Medicare Part E (aka, single payer)...
Click to expand...

The Dems would have been committing political suicide with single payer. They knew it and that's why they didn't do it.
 
specklebang said:
The State Exchanges are doing better, is that true?
Click to expand...

According to an article I've read the #'s of people signing up for plans must be higher. There were 40,000 people enrolling plans just in NY State, and 8,000 in KY, so I don't see how the nationwide total could be 49,000.

Kentucky GOP senators were wrong that state didn't want Obamacare | MSNBC

The state’s healthcare exchange, Kynect, has “enrolled [Kentuckians] in new insurance plans at a rate of about 1,000 Kentuckians a day,” Beshear continued. “The rush of our families and small businesses to enroll in Kynect demonstrates how enthusiastic Kentuckians are about obtaining affordable health coverage.”

Kentucky’s not alone—28,000 signed up in California and 40,000 enrolled in New York.
Click to expand...
 
apdst said:
The Dems would have been committing political suicide with single payer. They knew it and that's why they didn't do it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Then again, the Cons have made political suicide an art form. It seems the Dems should get a little fun for themselves.

In the long-run, single payer works and works quite well. If they could get it passed, it would have put the Dems in power for a generation. However, it never would have passed. Only this bastardized view of national healthcare was doable. In the short-run, it has already been a form of political suicide for the Dems. In the long-run, however, the tables will turn on the Cons and they know it (which is why they are fighting to the death right now.)
 
Last edited:
sangha said:
According to an article I've read the #'s of people signing up for plans must be higher. There were 40,000 people enrolling plans just in NY State, and 8,000 in KY, so I don't see how the nationwide total could be 49,000.

Kentucky GOP senators were wrong that state didn't want Obamacare | MSNBC
Click to expand...

Because they excluded Medicaid enrollments. Its < 50.000 in the 14 state exchanges when you exclude that, because most of those state's raw numbers are 80-90% Medicaid signups. Not great news for those state's 2015 budgets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom