Administration Admits: In Obamacare, Select Group Can Get Health Care, Not Pay for It, No Penalty

Playing favorites?

Just the facts
Obamacare will eliminate "Free Riders" according to Obama

President Barack Obama has justified the mandate in his health-care law that requires individuals to buy health insurance by arguing that it will eliminate free riders—that is, people who get health care (often from emergency rooms) but, lacking insurance, never pay anything back into the health-care system.

"So that's why the individual mandate's important," Obama explained in a speech on Aug. 15, 2011.

Wait for it...

However, in the Supreme Court on Monday, Justice Samuel Alito forced President Barack Obama’s solicitor general, Donald Verrilli, to admit that under Obamacare these free riders will not be eliminated despite the individual mandate.

For an elite group—including people eligible for Medicaid who don’t sign up for it and people whose health care expenses exceed 8 percent of their income—the Obamacare mandate is no mandate and the penalty is neither a penalty nor a tax because they are not required to pay it, period.

Under Obamacare, Verrilli conceded, these people can continue to receive free health care care, not sign up for health insurance, not sign up for Medicaid, and not pay a penalty.

Once again Actions speak louder than words and simple lip service. These are the facts that we must all be aware of. Pay attention! Follow this case!!

cnsnews.com...

Funny how Obama calls these people "free riders" instead of "free loaders" Just another little play on words...

Interesting exchange

Alito: Suppose a person who has been receiving medical care in an emergency room -- has no health insurance but, over the years, goes to the emergency room when the person wants medical care -goes to the emergency room, and the hospital says, well, fine, you are eligible for Medicaid, enroll in Medicaid. And the person says, no, I don't want that. I want to continue to get -- just get care here from the emergency room. Will the hospital be able to point to the mandate and say, well, you're obligated to enroll?

Verrilli: No, I don't think so, Justice Alito, for the same reason I just gave. I think that the -- that the answer in that situation is that that person, assuming that person -- well, if that person is eligible for Medicaid, they may well not be in a situation where they are going to face any tax penalty and therefore—

Alito: No, they are not facing the tax penalty.

Verrilli: Right, right.

Alito: So the hospital will have to continue to give them care and pay for it themselves, and not require them to be enrolled in Medicaid.

Verrilli: Right.

Wow! There's your incentive to just remain a ward of the state your whole life. No need to even enroll in medicaid.

cnsnews.com...

reply to post by jibeho


Thank you for posting this! I think there are probably MANY such loopholes in this healthcare plan.

I understand that a lot of people are all for ObamaCare because it benefits them or their loved ones personally, or because they believe it will stop the skyrocketing of the cost of medical care. People who live in states where other forms of insurance can tell you different! Take for instance auto insurance: when I was 18 it cost me $30 per month for liability insurance. My friend's child who is now 18 pays a whopping $289 per month for the exact same coverage now.

I think the best way for the administration to handle this is to scrap ObamaCare and start from scratch. The first step should be putting regulations in place that limit the inflating cost of medical care and prevent them from denying coverage or dropping coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.

There are going to be many people who fall through the cracks and will have to seek treatment at their local emergency room no matter what the law says. There are many hard working Americans who make well above the income limit to receive any assistance, and yet cannot afford insurance premiums and still be able to pay all of their bills and feed their families. Does anyone REALLY believe the cost of insurance is going to go DOWN?

Hopefully one day we will all have equal access to government mandated healthcare.

Obamacare doesn't do enough, but it is a push in the right direction.

Explanation: S&F!

I found the cognitive dissonace from the use of the term...

For an elite group—including people eligible for Medicaid who don’t sign up for it and people whose health care expenses exceed 8 percent of their income—the Obamacare mandate is no mandate and the penalty is neither a penalty nor a tax because they are not required to pay it, period.

...when that 'elite group' is not so elite ...

Verrilli: And it's keyed to a number of things. One is, are--are you making so little money that you aren't obligated to file a tax return. And if you're in that situation, you are not subject to the penalty. It's also if the cost of insurance would be more than 8 percent of your income, you aren't subject to the penalty. So there—there--there isn't necessarily a precise mapping between somebody's income level and their Medicaid eligibility at the present moment. That will depend on where things are and what the eligibility requirements are in the State.

Sotomayor: But those people below—

Verrilli: But as a general matter, for people below the poverty line it's almost inconceivable that they are ever going to be subject to the penalty, and they would, after the Act's Medicaid reforms go into place, be eligible for Medicaid.

... to be completely laughable! ...

Lets just compare those 2 cherry picked bits more closely ...

For an elite group = for people below the poverty line

Personal Disclosure: See how they love to distort stuff 180degrees from normal!

The whole thing stinks. If you want the government to take care of you, then the governemnt should be able to do what it needs to get you to take care of yourself eventually. In the case of health care, force those who require care they can't pay for into a public non-profit plan. Give everyone else the opportunity to join that plan as well. If they cannot pay the premiums after a predetermined period the state needs to intervene and take some action to help them become self-sustaining. Jobs training, public work programs, rehab... whatever is needed. If they don't want to do it, then they should be refused care at the emergency room going forward. Tough love....but in every other species these folks would already be dead.

And, would some one please explain why we are surprised at this "revelation"?

it's amazing to me that america can't simply look at WHAT WORKS in other countries and go from there.
what does the republican party want to happen..."if you can't afford healthcare, remain sick until you eventually get better or until you die" ....this is a simplification, obviously, but for me, it does focus the arguement.

Originally posted by jimmyx
...what does the republican party want to happen..."if you can't afford healthcare, remain sick until you eventually get better or until you die"...

Frankly, I'd prefer that option to having the Federal Gov't micro manage my health care. Quicker and much less painful.

i just googled "who paid for dick cheneys heart transplant"....absolutely no answer...just some op-eds, and stupid blog posts, but NO ANSWER!
oh yeah...now i know, cheney is a wealthy, republican, former vice-president.....that damn liberal media.

reply to post by jimmyx




This is the official rule for a former Pres. I would expect something less for a VP

Medical Expenses. Former Presidents and their spouses, widows, and minor
children are entitled to treatment in military hospitals because of their status as secretarial designees, authorized to receive such benefits by the Secretary of Defense. Health care
costs are billed to the individual at an interagency reimbursement rate established by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Former Presidents and their dependents may
also enroll in private health plans at their own expense.

www.senate.gov...

I would imagine most opt for a private health plan. Sorry to disappoint you. Why bring Cheney into this anyway?

reply to post by OmegaLogos


So, you missed this part

Alito: So the hospital will have to continue to give them care and pay for it themselves, and not require them to be enrolled in Medicaid.

Verrilli: Right.

Slap the mandate on me but exempt the already exempt from enrolling in medicaid. Sorry, does not compute. If they mandated that these folks enroll in medicaid then perhaps they would be able to forecast the never ending costs associated with it.

Let's just nix ALL mandates period!!

ETA
What about Obama's no "Free Riders" statement?

Without some kind of system that has everyone paying into that system, healthcare costs will continue to balloon and be unstable.

The mandates are a Republican plan...it was their answer to a public option/single payer from Democrats (who never had the votes in the first place). They passed Republican health care.

Without a mandate or single payer system, the only other way to get control of costs is to deny people healthcare. Granted, if someone without insurance goes to the hospital, whether to no fault of their own or not, it ultimately increases costs FOR ME and EVERYONE ELSE.

That's the ultimate problem here.

Originally posted by David9176
Without some kind of system that has everyone paying into that system, healthcare costs will continue to balloon and be unstable.

The mandates are a Republican plan...it was their answer to a public option/single payer from Democrats (who never had the votes in the first place). They passed Republican health care.

Without a mandate or single payer system, the only other way to get control of costs is to deny people healthcare. Granted, if someone without insurance goes to the hospital, whether to no fault of their own or not, it ultimately increases costs FOR ME and EVERYONE ELSE.

That's the ultimate problem here.

Who needs healthcare anyways?

If you drink Sunny D and exercise you will be healthy, its time to take responsibility
in America for being responsible.

Originally posted by incoserv

Originally posted by jimmyx
...what does the republican party want to happen..."if you can't afford healthcare, remain sick until you eventually get better or until you die"...

Frankly, I'd prefer that option to having the Federal Gov't micro manage my health care. Quicker and much less painful.

Sure you would, until you are actually dying.

In 2008, then presidential candidate Barack Obama was opposed to the individual mandate. He stated the following in a Feb. 28, 2008 interview on the Ellen DeGeneres show about his divergent views with Hillary Clinton:

"Both of us want to provide health care to all Americans. There’s a slight difference, and her plan is a good one. But, she mandates that everybody buy health care. She’d have the government force every individual to buy insurance and I don’t have such a mandate because I don’t think the problem is that people don’t want health insurance, it’s that they can’t afford it. So, I focus more on lowering costs. This is a modest difference. But, it’s one that she’s tried to elevate, arguing that because I don’t force people to buy health care that I’m not insuring everybody. Well, if things were that easy, I could mandate everybody to buy a house, and that would solve the problem of homelessness. It doesn’t."

As you can see, Obama really never wanted a Mandate...he was always for public option....but the votes weren't t here in the Senate to do it....so he ultimately passed REPUBLICAN HEALTHCARE to get more people paying into the system and to try to get a hold of costs.

Here is the history of Federal Mandate Legislation:

1. Nov. 20, 1993
(date introduced) Consumer Choice Health Security Act (SB 1743) (624 KB) Sponsored by Senator Don Nickles (R-OK) & 24 Republican cosponsors

"Subtitle C: Employer Provisions - Requires employers to: (1) withhold health insurance premiums from employee wages and remit such premiums to the employee's chosen insurer; and (2) notify employees of their right to claim an advance refundable tax credit for such premiums."

2. Nov. 23, 1993
(date introduced) Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act (SB 1770) (1.6 MB) Sponsored by Senator John H. Chafee (R-RI) & 20 cosponsors (2-D, 18-R)

"Subtitle F: Universal Coverage - Requires each citizen or lawful permanent resident to be covered under a qualified health plan or equivalent health care program by January 1, 2005. Provides an exception for any individual who is opposed for religious reasons to health plan coverage, including those who rely on healing using spiritual means through prayer alone."
3. Jan. 18, 2007
(date introduced) Healthy Americans Act (SB 334) (427 KB) Sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) & 17 cosponsors (7-D, 1-I, 9-R)

"Healthy Americans Act - Requires each adult individual to have the opportunity to purchase a Healthy Americans Private Insurance Plan (HAPI). Makes individuals who are not enrolled in another specified health plan and who are not opposed to coverage for religious reasons responsible for enrolling themselves and their dependent children in a HAPI plan offered through their state of residence. Sets forth penalties for failure to enroll."
4. Feb. 5, 2009
(date introduced) Healthy Americans Act (SB 391) (394 KB) Sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) & 14 cosponsors (8-D, 1-I, 5-R)

"Healthy Americans Act - Requires each adult individual to have the opportunity to purchase a Healthy Americans Private Insurance Plan (HAPI), which is: (1) a plan offered by a state; or (2) an employer-sponsored health coverage plan. Makes individuals who are not enrolled in another specified health plan and who are not opposed to coverage for religious reasons responsible for enrolling themselves and their dependent children in a HAPI plan offered through their state of residence. Sets forth penalties for failure to enroll."
5. Dec. 24, 2009
(date passed) Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (HR 3590) (2.2 MB) No sponsors. Bill re-written by Senate Democrats. No Republican Senator voted for the bill. Read more.

"Subtitle F: Shared Responsibility for Health Care - Part I: Individual Responsibility - (Sec. 1501, as modified by section 10106) Requires individuals to maintain minimal essential health care coverage beginning in 2014. Imposes a penalty for failure to maintain such coverage beginning in 2014, except for certain low-income individuals who cannot afford coverage, members of Indian tribes, and individuals who suffer hardship. Exempts from the coverage requirement individuals who object to health care coverage on religious grounds, individuals not lawfully present in the United States, and individuals who are incarcerated."

You can find the links to the actual bills at this link...along with the Obama quote above.
healthcarereform.procon.org...

Democrats passed Republican healthcare....they all voted against their own idea.

So folks....if this does get destroyed by the Supreme court...WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO????

Seriously, what great plan do you guys have other than to deny people healthcare? Lose your job and your insurance....suddenly have a heart attack? Do you believe we should tell these people to go F themselves and suffer...die???

reply to post by David9176

There is the history of the mandate....it came from the GOP. Democrats passed Republican healthcare....they all voted against their own idea.

So folks....if this does get destroyed by the Supreme court...WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO????

Seriously, what great plan do you guys have other than to deny people healthcare? Lose your job and your insurance....suddenly have a heart attack? Do you believe we should tell these people to go F themselves and suffer...die???

And just what if ...

what IF ...

The plan all along was to have the "mandate" or even the whole law
thrown out in the first place ?

What better way to be "forced" into an "enhanced" public State by State Medicaid system ?
(make the Medicaid standards fit more people)

I bet the government would start to use insurance companies to underwrite policies at a "Medicaid" level.

And perhaps even Medicare too at a later time.

All the insurance companies and Medicare use private "Pharmacy Benefit Managers" already.
(Medco, Express Scripts, etc)

The Dems and Repubs make it look like the other one set up the other !!
The perfect "can't blame one or the other" dilemma

reply to post by David9176

What great plan do you guys have other than to deny people healthcare? Lose your job and your insurance....suddenly have a heart attack? Do you believe we should tell these people to go F themselves and suffer...die???

How can you ask that question? Of course it's what they believe and what they want. They want poor people to die, rather than know they have contributed a dollar to help them.

It's the small minded and mean spirited who have to find such things to complain about, to make themselves feel superior. So pathetic is their internal life -- it's all they have. What will they turn on if all the poor disappear? The crippled? The sick? The blind? The incapacitated? What's left? Wounded animals?

reply to post by xuenchen


One thing is for certain, everyone has to start paying into healthcare or costs will continue to explode. There is no way around it. That is why the mandate was passed....basically those without insurance would lose some of their tax returns to help cover the costs that the rest of us would have to cover otherwise.

The real battle is whether it should be profitable or not. Obama passed profitable healthcare. In many countries, it's completely illegal to profit from healthcare and you can be put in prison for it.

But not here in the USA....we are stubborn, selfish pricks who are slaves to the almighty dollar.

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by xuenchen

 

One thing is for certain, everyone has to start paying into healthcare or costs will continue to explode. There is no way around it. That is why the mandate was passed....basically those without insurance would lose some of their tax returns to help cover the costs that the rest of us would have to cover otherwise.

The real battle is whether it should be profitable or not. Obama passed profitable healthcare. In many countries, it's completely illegal to profit from healthcare and you can be put in prison for it.

But not here in the USA....we are stubborn, selfish pricks who are slaves to the almighty dollar.

edit on 27-3-2012 by David9176 because: (no reason given)

[color=gold]In many countries, it's completely illegal to profit from healthcare and you can be put in prison for it.

That point deserves some merit.

We need to find some real-time examples.

AND a theory on how to achieve that scenario in the U.S. ?
(and if it's even possible)