I Have A Question About HCR, As If There Could Be More Questions... BUT

[ChiciB1]

I realize/understand "sorta" what has happened with HCR, I know I'm not happy about it... but there is one question I must have missed, or overlooked!

Will coverage START in 2014 and WILL the citizens of America have to START PAYING for health insurance RIGHT AWAY, or does payment also NOT KICK IN until 2014?

This may have been posted, but I missed it! Anyone who has the answer, please enlighten mw!

Thank you

[Jersey Devil]

1. Some coverage starts immediately but subsidies don't kick in for 3 years

The 3 year wait is mainly to avoid the kind of criticism that would have certainly been made during the 2010 elections if it kicked in immediately by keeping the cost down as scored by CBO. It is a political tradeoff to get votes from those who would have been hesitant to vote for HCR leading up to next year's Congressional elections.

Other provisions, like no refusal for childrens' pre-existing conditions, continued coverage to age 27 for children, etc., would take effect immediately. I believe the mandates do not kick in until the subsidies do but frankly I am not sure about that either.

[ChiciB1]

3. Maybe This Will Be Another "Surprise" For "We The People!" n/t

[rateyes]

2. What I hear is that the mandates start immediately, but the coverage doesn't.

[ChiciB1]

4. I Was Kind Of Thinking This, But Wasn't Sure... I Have Lost Almost All My

faith in what they do in D.C. anymore! I've known about this deal and that deal, but THIS ONE is a majoring Screwing for us, as I see it!

But would like to find out about the issue anyway!

[frazzled]

7. No, that is wrong.

It doesn't even make any sense. The mandates begin in 2014.

[SpartanDem]

5. My understanding is the taxes don't until 2013

some the business taxes start immediately, but excise on benefits and the payroll taxes start a year before.

[frazzled]

6. Mandates don't begin until 2014, when the Exchanges are up ...

This according to the Senate bill, which the House will probably just approve.

As far as I can tell, penalties will kick in gradually beginning in 2014: $95 per person penalty in 2014, $350 per person in 2015; $750 or 2% of income, whichever is greater, beginning in 2016.

Thinking about it, that 2% is not a bad deal for lower income people: say you are a young person earning $15,000: you can't buy insurance for $750 for sure. I think the penalties need to be higher in order to get people to cover themselves. If you're one of these non-patriots who doesn't want insurance, you should have to pay more than $750. I'm for charging the price of the lowest-priced policy.

[enlightenment]

8. "non-patriots"?

So now some wretched sod refusing to buy crappy health insurance that they wouldn't be able to afford to use anyway is unpatriotic.

Damn, it's getting tough to keep up with the daily meme . . .

[frazzled]

9. Got your attention, didn't it.

When my kids used to get out of control, and nothing you could say would get their attention ... you'd finally have to raise your voice above the comfort level. And then they'd stop and say "Why are you yelling at us?"

Well, that's about how I feel about a lot of what's going on here: out of control, childish tantrums. And to get them to stop, you have to ratchet up the noise level sometimes.

But in a way, yes: the arguments that say "I don't want the government to force me to buy health insurance" are selfish, right-wingish, rugged individualist kvetching, really no better than the anti-tax teabaggers, imo. The reason everybody should be required to purchase health insurance is that it helps the common good: without younger, healthier people in the pools, the costs will just get higher for everyone else. The system can't work unless everyone gets it. That has been the progressive stand on mandates for many years now.

Now, for your claim that the insurance you will be required to purchase will be "crappy." For the first time there will be regulators who will be setting the rules for what basic insurance has to contain, including no copay preventive health services, limits on annual and lifetime out-of-pocket charges, etc. That's better than what you have now: completely unregulated insurers. It's a "vast improvement," in Paul Krugman's words.

Lastly, I should point out that the now-defunct (but not dead) Public Option insurance would have the same regulated elements and, according to the CBO, slightly higher price than the private exchange plans. The PO was never meant to be a "better deal" for you: it was meant to force private insurers to compete and to drive the whole down. That's important: and there's a good chance that if this bill passes, the PO will be revisited in the not-too-distant future. If it is defeated ... you can forget about any of this for the next decade or two. People just dying (literally) to get insured will love you for that.

[enlightenment]

10. I am currently uninsured and 'uninsurable' so I'm one of those

people of whom you speak. I've read the House bill, the Senate bill, and the Manager's amendment. I'm not happy with what I see and it has nothing to do with that nice little 'with us or agin us' binary you mentioned - it has to do with what I read. When I call it crappy, it's based on an analysis of what they are proposing to offer, not some happy-dance picture summary posted on a blog.

Paul Krugman is an economist and I respect him for that. He is not an expert on health care or insurance, as far as I know - so his opinion on anything beyond the economics of the plan - an opinion based on a presumption that it will all work out exactly as it is 'supposed' to work and not taking into account the very real possibility that the insurance industry will finagle every bit they can between now and 2014 - is surprisingly blindered for a smart guy.

The regulation of which you are so fond is unformed and vague. Show me something that suggests it will have any real teeth to it and I'll be happy to give it a read.

Know your audience before you start your lecture, champ, and stop assuming that you're the only adult in the room.

[Skittles]

11. you you just not fucking get it?

the mandates are a problem when there's NO PUBLIC OPTION