Defying veto threat, House OKs health law change

"If you like your current coverage, you should be able to keep it."
Associated Press
Nov 15, 2013


Brushing aside a White House veto threat, the Republican-controlled House voted by a healthy bipartisan majority Friday to weaken a core component of "Obamacare" and permit the sale of individual health coverage that falls short of requirements in the law.

In all, 39 Democrats broke ranks and supported the legislation, a total that underscored the growing importance of the issue in the weeks since millions of cancellation notices went out to consumers covered by plans deemed inadequate under government rules.

The final vote was 261-157 as lawmakers clashed over an issue likely to be at the heart of next year's midterm elections. The measure faces an uncertain fate in the Senate, where Democrats seeking re-election in 2014 are leading a move for generally similar legislation.

"For the last six weeks the White House stood idly by ignoring the pleas of millions," said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and lead sponsor of the legislation.

"Our straightforward, one-page bill says, if you like your current coverage, you should be able to keep it. The president should heed his own advice and work with us, the Congress, as the founders intended, not around the legislative process."

But Democrats said the measure was just another in a long line of attacks on the health care bill from Republicans who have voted repeatedly to repeal it.

"It would take away the core protections of that law. It creates an entire shadow market of substandard health care plans," said Rep. Henry Waxman of California.

The vote came shortly before President Barack Obama welcomed insurance company CEOs to a White House meeting, and one day after he announced a shift toward making good on his oft-repeated promise that anyone liking his pre-Obamacare coverage would be able to keep it.

In brief opening remarks, he did not refer to the House vote, and showed no give in his commitment to the program known by his name. "Because of choice and competition, a whole lot of Americans who have always seen health insurance out of reach are going to be in a position to purchase it," he said.

The events capped a remarkable series of politically inspired maneuvers in recent days. The president and lawmakers in both parties have sought to position themselves as allies of consumers who are receiving cancellation notices — yet have made no move to cooperate on legislation that could require those consumers' coverage to be renewed if they wanted to keep it.

Neither Obama's new policy nor the bill passed in the House would ensure that anyone whose policy is canceled will be able to keep it. Instead, both would permit insurance companies to sell coverage renewals if they wish — subject to approval by state insurance commissioners.

The White House meeting came as the industry and state commissioners began adjusting to the president's one-day-old change in policy.

Under the shift, Obama said insurers should be permitted to continue to sell to existing customers individual coverage plans that would be deemed substandard under the health care law. Without the change, many existing plans would have been banned beginning next year, and the president's announcement was an attempt to quell a public and political furor triggered by millions of cancellation notices.

The House measure went one step further. It would give insurance firms the ability to sell individual plans to new as well as existing customers, even if the coverage falls short of the law's requirements.

Democrats sought to substitute a plan of their own that consisted largely of Obama's new policy, but failed on a party-line vote.

Even so, the combination of the president's announcement and his party's alternative apparently siphoned off a large number of Democratic votes from the GOP measure.

In a veto threat Thursday night, the White House accused Republicans of seeking to "sabotage the health care law," and said their measure would allow "insurers to continue to sell new plans that deploy practices such as not offering coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, charging women more than men, and continuing yearly caps on the amount of care that enrollees receive." A veto would come into play only if both houses approve legislation and send it to the White House for the president's signature.

Political calculations were evident as Obamacare produced yet more controversy.

The political arms of both parties in both houses churned out attacks all week that underscore the importance of the issue in the 2014 elections. Additionally, Obama made an unusual attempt on Thursday to shelter any Democrat who may have said when the bill was under consideration in 2010 — as he did — that anyone wanting to keep current coverage would be permitted to.

"They were entirely sincere about it," he said of the lawmakers. "It's not on them, it's on us."

In the Senate, a handful of Democrats who face tough re-election races next year, led by Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, are supporting legislation to require insurance companies to renew policies cancelled because of the law.

Under the law, plans generally are required to meet numerous conditions to qualify. Among them, they would have to accept all customers, regardless of pre-existing conditions, would be limited in additional premiums they could charge on the basis of age and could not cap lifetime benefits. They also would have to provide coverage in a wide range of areas — doctor and hospital care for adults and children, laboratory services, preventive coverage and prescription drugs among them.

The cancellation issue is only part of the woes confronting the president and his allies as they struggle to sustain the health care law.

Obama has repeatedly apologized for a dismal launch of , which consumers in 36 states were supposed to use beginning on Oct. 1 to sign up for new coverage. The website is so riddled with problems that the administration disclosed earlier this week that fewer than 27,000 signups have been completed — a number that Republicans noted is dwarfed by the flood of cancellations issued due to the law.

Compounding the administration's misery, the poor quality of the website has made it that much harder for consumers receiving cancellation notices to shop for alternative plans.

It is unclear what, if anything, the administration is prepared to do to alleviate the threat of a break in coverage for those consumers.



Stop It



Insurance companies are gambling houses. they are in the business to make money because the odds are in their favor that most people who pay insurance won't necessarily use it. think bernie madoff with all the money in his ponzi scheme. this whole situation is a train wreck and the government needs to stay out of it. As I always say, follow the money, people, follow the money. The rich are trying to get more money on the backs of the working class and have created a way that they think will put the odds in their favor. It's time for looking to Canada and see how they manage their health-care system. We need to stop the politicians who are in bed with business. Let free enterprise work.


Re: "think bernie madoff with all the money in his ponzi scheme."

Bernie Madoff was a BIG Democrat Party contributor.



and where did he get the money other than scamming people to give to the party. he took democrats and republicans for the proverbial ride when bernie made off with all the money.

The president is a puppet to very rich men who are changing our society for their greedy purposes.


upto I saw the receipt that said $8400, I didnt believe friend was like realy bringing in money in there spare time from their computer.. there aunt has done this for only about 1 year and by now paid the depts on there villa and bought a top of the range Lotus Elise. this post




Sorry for the re-post, but my message got lost on another thread:
He knew he would never get elected if he came out and did what Alinsky preached, make the middle class part of the poverty class by taking more of their earnings. If he said I am going to raise middle class taxes by 50% and re distribute to the working poor, which is in fact what he said to Joe the Plumber, he would have gone down in flames. He is doing that with health care, a family of 4 in NYC making 68k per year having to spend 25% of their after tax income on health care? WTF!! Alinsky preached that the middle class was where the money was, and very few of them would ascend to the affluent class, so in order to control them you had to make them part of the poverty class. Cloward Piven 101!!


Re: "The measure faces an uncertain fate in the Senate, where Democrats seeking re-election in 2014 are leading a move for generally similar legislation."

Obama☭are is the "trainwreck" that keeps on "giving."


The Dems will lose seats in the House and the Senate in 2014.

The Repubs will control both Houses of Congress making Pres. Obama a TRUE lame duck.

The Repubs will pass legislation that will overturn Obam☭are in 2015.

Pres. Obama will veto it, but the Repub controlled House and Senate will have enough votes along with some Dems in order to override it.


I heard this the other day form an insightful man I follow online. He said that Obamacare has been such a train wreck and people will remember this when election time comes because when you hurt someone financially, they do not forget it and remember that when going to the polls.


I agree with what you are saying, now give us some suggestions on what to do to stop them from sending people into bankruptcy over this train wreck. Why not create a letter-writing campaign and tell our government that we have had enough of their greed and robbing us blind so that they can live in mansions, travel in jets and live in the lap of luxury at the working persons expense. If they veto his veto, then they are history come election time.


Dems lose the Senate? Dream on... The only reason Republicans control even the House is extreme gerrymandering. Dems won the popular vote for 2012 House races by a noticeable margin, but lost seats regardless, thanks to creative districting.


Re: "Dems lose the Senate? Dream on..."

About 18 Dem Senators are running away from Pres. Obama's lie too.


Pres. Obama, 11/14/13:

"What we're also discovering is that insurance is complicated to buy.

And another mistake that we made, I think, was underestimating the difficulties of people purchasing insurance online and shopping for a lot of options with a lot of costs and lot of different benefits and plans and -- and somehow expecting that that would be very smooth, and then they've also got to try to apply for tax credits on the website."


Good to know that Clueless-in-Chief enjoys experimenting with people's heath insurance.

Has this genius never heard of a beta version?

A three yr. development and NO TESTING????


Well. It's not like Obama was the IT guy who built the software. Like all good leaders, he delegated. Unfortunately, whomever chose the team that built the program did a horrid job, and worse, they didn't inform the Prez that there were going to be problems. What I don't understand is why Obama didn't take a more proactive interest to keep himself informed.


Re: "What I don't understand is why Obama didn't take a more proactive interest to keep himself informed."

The word "incompetent" comes to mind.

See: The Peter Principle.


So here you have a president promising people they can keep their Dr.'s and keep their insurance, which we see was a total lie. Then he comes on TV, yet once again, and says don't worry, we are going to allow people to keep their insurance……..ehhhhh until 2014 elections are over with and then you will more than likely be booted off again. This is called can kicking.

Now Republicans are coming in trying to fix this disaster of a mess by saying, no lets hold the president to his own words, which he repeated over and over and over again and let Americans keep their policies. Obamas response, Ill veto it.

Whats really should stick out is the increasing number of Dems who are wising up and saying, you know, this law is wrong, was written wrong and we should do whats right.

What an arrogant child this guy is.


Amrncnanancnnnnnn: Nope. Arrogant is when you don't apologize. Obama did apologize and looked and sounded humbled in doing so. Just my opinion, of course, but your comment also an opinion.


Re: "Obama did apologize and looked and sounded humbled in doing so."

IMO, a sincere apology includes a simple "sorry."

Didn't hear it.

The arrogant pr*ck "apologized" for "folks" not understanding what he meant.

He needs to be "humbled."

The gods hate hubris.


Pres. Obama, 11/14/13:

“Keep in mind that the individual market accounts for 5 percent of the population. “

So JUST scr*w approx. 15 million people with individual policies?

A sociopath treats people as "things."


“So when I said you can keep your health care, you know, I'm looking at folks who've got employer-based health care. I'm looking at folks who've got Medicare and Medicaid.”

So if THAT is what He meant, WHY didn’t the Smartest Guy-in-Chief say THAT in the first place?


Also, what's this "folks" sh*t?

We're (bleeping) AMERICAN CITIZENS!

Not subjects to some (bleeping) monarch.

What an arrogant pr*ck.

The Big Dog's back

Cheering because crap "health insurance" can stay says a lot about you right wingers. Same kind of right wingers who cheered when they lit the ovens in Germany.


Re: "Cheering because crap "health insurance" can stay,"

So why is Pres. Obama changing his mind?

Watch as your employee portion of your employer-based health ins. premium rises when the employer mandate kicks in.

Maybe your employer will throw you on the exchanges?

The Big Dog's back

They already posted next year's rates where I work and my weekly rate went down by $3.15.


BTW: Employer mandate starts in 2015.

Wow! $164.00 per annum. Better contribute that to the Dems in thanks huh?

With an increase in bennies like FREE preventive care, improved mental and substance abuse coverage, no lifetime maximum and ALL the other mandates?

Who's your employer's insurer?

Answer the question:

So why is Pres. Obama changing his mind?

The Big Dog's back

He shouldn't give in to Repubs and change his mind. But therein lies the real lie. When the ACA was enacted, people current policies were grandfathered in. It was only after that the insurance companies started offering basically bogus policies knowing full well when they issued them that they wouldn't be compliant.


Re: "He shouldn't give in to Repubs and change his mind."

Answer the question: SO WHY IS HE CHANGING HIS MIND?

Don't some Dems in the House and Senate also want him to keep his word?

See above article: "39 Democrats broke ranks and supported the legislation,"

Didn't Pres. Clinton "throw him under the bus"?

The OLD individual policies weren't compliant with the new ACA mandates without raising the premium, THAT'S WHY they're being cancelled.

There was no (bleeping) grandfathering!

I sold group health ins. and worked for an HMO. I've forgotten more about health ins. than you'll ever know.

The Big Dog's back

There was (bleeping) grandfathering.
maroon. I sure wouldn't want you as my agent.


Better read this:

"Individual grandfathered plans can’t newly enroll people after March 23, 2010 and have that new enrollment be considered a grandfathered policy."

Also read this section:

"What grandfathered plans do and don't have to cover,"

THESE provisions made 'em impossible to continue the coverage without jacking up the premiums to be compliant.

Just cause it calls it "grandfathered," doesn't make it so.

As we've known and learned for sure - the guy is a LIAR.

I sold to businesses, not individuals and woulda referred your business elsewhere.

The Big Dog's back

I prove you wrong and you're still crying.


Nope. You're just too ignorant to understand the answer.

Re: "Grandfathered"

It depends on what the meaning of the word "is," is. - Pres. Clinton.

Also, ind. plans that were sold over 3 yrs. ago - weren't compliant or "grandfathered."

Pres. Obama could tell you that sh*t smelled like perfume and you'd believe him you PDB.

The Big Dog's back

No wonder businesses were confused with agents like you.


Re: "No wonder..."

Go back to sniffing your behind and licking your b*lls Dog and leave proper discourse to humans.

Peninsula Pundit

Just a no-win situation for President Obama.
First, people were losing their substandard insurance and repubs got on him because he said you could keep your insurance.
But the reason these plans were being cancelled, you should realize, is that these substandard plans had lifetime caps. This means after the insurance company pays out so much, they pay no more.
This would mean the government would have to pick up everything after that.
Even so, after the uproar, the President then says he was wrong and allows substandard policies to continue. Even though he wasn't wrong.
And now the repubs cry on the other side of the street, even though he acceded to their requests.
This is why I have such a hard time believing that the repub party will ever do anything to actually move the country forward. It is what gives credence to the statement that repubs are the party of 'no'.
I've always said the ACA could use some fine tuning, but the way this is being done, squawk by squawk, instead of a bi-partisan, comprehensive approach is another indication of the problem in Congress and a dispassionate review of the events shows the repubs to be the bigger part of the problem.


Re: "a bi-partisan, comprehensive approach,"

Pres. Obama's Health Care summit merely showed that he and the Dems had already made their minds up and that any counter ideas were DOA.


ACA is a bastardized free-market approach which will ultimately collapse due to unsound business practices.


Re: "First, people were losing their substandard insurance and repubs got on him because he said you could keep your insurance."

So WHY did ol' Clueless NEVER ONCE refer to it as "substandard ins." on the campaign trail????


Pres. Obama, 11/14/13:

“Well, the problem with the grandfather clause that we put in place is it’s almost like we said to folks you’ve got to buy a new car even if you can’t afford be it right now,”

So, to use his analogy, he originally said that if you LIKE your "paid for" 10 yr. old car, you can keep it?

BUT, you were FORCED to trade it in and now you have to go back to the auto dealer and 'try' to buy it back?

Only a brain-numbed true believer could still support this jamoke.

thinkagain's picture

One month ago the Great and Powerful Barry said he wouldn’t negotiate, now you blame Repubs for not negotiating? What a complete and utter lack of reality. Barry doesn’t know how to negotiate, all he knows is divisiveness. He’s probably hoping Putin will rescue him from yet another boneheaded fiasco.


I agree Big Dog, the Prez should not "give in" to the GOP. Let him and Reid and Pelosi and the whole bunch of Obama butt kissers go down in flames. This is their baby!


I don't know about many other persons however for years my insurance after a $200.00 deductible has paid my claim fast and fair. I would think if there were a lot of bogus policies then the state insurance departments have not been doing their jobs as the insurance companies are regulated the states.

Also it does seem that if you like your doctor you can keep him or her however you may have to pay out of pocket as it seems insurance companies will be droping doctors due to government cut backs.

.(Reuters) - UnitedHealth Group dropped thousands of doctors from its networks in recent weeks, leaving many elderly patients unsure whether they need to switch plans to continue seeing their doctors, the Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

The insurer said in October that -underfunding of Medicare Advantage plans for the elderly could not be fully offset by the company's other healthcare business. The company also reported spending more healthcare premiums on medical claims in the third quarter, due mainly to government cuts to payments for Medicare Advantage services.

The Journal report said that doctors in at least 10 states were notified of being laid off the plans, some citing "significant changes and pressures in the healthcare environment." According to the notices, the terminations can be appealed within 30 days.

Tyler Mason, a UnitedHealth spokesperson, was not immediately available for comment when reached by Reuters.

The insurer told the WSJ that its provider networks were always changing and that it expected its Medicare Advantage network to be 85 percent to 90 percent of its current size by the end of 2014.

UnitedHealth is participating in about a dozen new state insurance markets that launched on October 1 to offer subsidized health coverage under President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul.

The insurer said previously it planned to withdraw from some markets in 2014 because of the government funding cuts.

Another top health insurer, Aetna Inc , also warned in October that it expected slowing growth in 2014 in its Medicare Advantage


So did mine, but the co-insurance, deductibles and co-pays all went up. So my weekly rate went down by $5.00 but the amount that I will pay out of pocket over a typical policy year will increase by $900. Yep, only in the liberal mind would this be considered a decrease.

Peninsula Pundit

Who determines insurance premiums, government or insurance companies?
But the insurance companies are getting a free pass.
Everyone agrees the insurance companies will screw you every chance they get, but somehow they are now 'honest brokers' here.
What party is it that is closely associated with the concerns of big business?
Is insurance 'big business'?
You can now draw logical conclusions, I hope.
How fickle public opinion.


Re: "Who determines insurance premiums, government or insurance companies?"


Actuaries and govt. rules and regs determine the premiums.


Define "crap health insurance" if you would, please.

Insurance is NOT a one-size-fits-all kind of deal. Why do I need "free" birth control? Why do I need prenatal care or coverage for childbirth? Why do I need "free" prostate screenings? By the same token, explain to me why YOU need a "free" pap smear?

Oh, wait. The reason you and I "need" all of those things we DON'T need, and the reason all of those "free" things cost so much, is so that we can all pay for EVERYbody! I realize that all of us paid for the indigent in the form of higher hospital bills, etc., but that was frankly cheaper than THIS boondoggle.

Obamacare needs to be scrapped completely. Healthcare reform needs to be done by people who have a clue, NOT politicians who, by virtue of myriad OTHER failed or failing programs have proved time and again that government doesn't do very many things very well.

Progressives babble about "fairness." Well, how is it "fair" that so many middle-class families will be driven into poverty or bankruptcy because of this stupid plan? How is it "fair" that an evaluation will be made as to the cost/benefit to society of bothering to treat you? How is it "fair" that your much-loathed 1% will still be able to afford decent care, and the rest of us will struggle even more than we did BEFORE Obamacare?

Here's a helpful clue since you clearly don't have one: This ain't about reform. It's about CONTROL, and if it stands, it will provide that in spades!

The Big Dog's back

sam, are you really that ignorant or are you so full of hate for Obama that you can't see the differences?


1...2...3...oh wait, this is your round about way of throwing up the race card. Argument lost, now you can go back to bed.

The Big Dog's back

How did I lose?


Yes!!!!!!!! That's Sham for ya!


I'd be happy to answer all of your questions, Big Dog, just as soon as you answer mine!

I won't hold my breath, though. You almost never answer anybody's questions. Instead, you busy yourself with specious claims or race-baiting. Come to think of it, I guess that IS kind of an answer, isn't it?

There you go again

I don't know about you, but I don't give Big Dog the satisfaction of me reading his post. Please, just skip over it because it ain't worth reading. BTW, you need to check out Disney's new block buster movie " Lying King." I hear it is hilarious!

The Big Dog's back

Anything like lyin ryan?

Peninsula Pundit

As I posted above, the plan could use some fine-tuning, which plan hasn't? And as also posted above, 'lifetime caps' on coverage are the biggest reason these sub-standard plans are being discontinued.
Again, for some reason, the people posting here seem to believe that there is not a more honest broker than the insurance companies. Even though they could just add the coverage to existing plans to bring them up to standards, they just cancel the plans.
Well, I'm sure if you did, you went la-la-la in your head until those thoughts died so you could get back to Obama-Obama-Obama again.


Re: "And as also posted above, 'lifetime caps' on coverage are the biggest reason these sub-standard plans are being discontinued."

One factor.

Only ind. plans before March 23, 2010 are grandfathered. All others must comply with unlimited lifetime benefits and NUMEROUS other mandates.

Now the Incompetent-in-Chief is putting all that on hold.

Just wait until cos. begin to respond to the 2015 employer mandate in 2014 and the SHTF.

The Big Dog's back

Bullspit. I already proved you wrong on that.

Bottom Line

Big Dog, you've literally never proved ANYbody wrong about anything on here. Ever.


Our country has become an us against them society and so far they are winning. We are not a great American society when a few people control the economy and steer the money into their bank accounts. Our government may not be literally killing us, but they are killing us financially and when humpty dumpty fell off the wall all the kings horses and all the kings men, couldn't put humpty together again. WE are on the precipice. Put it in writing for the morons in congress who don't get it. They have broken our trust in them and it's time to clean house.


I thought the point of Obamacare was to keep insurance companies from screwing people over. Apparently that was hogwash too. Also, Obama cannot run again but it matters little who is in the Presidency because they are all out for themselves and not for the common man. Writing to congress is like poisoning yourself and waiting for them to die. Get real. The whole idea is to financially ruin this country and keep us under control. There will be food shortages and martial law. Start stocking up now and have a good hiding place.

The Big Dog's back

Funny the tea idiots where I work were having a "discussion" about Obamacare saying how it was going to raise our rates. I asked them if they saw the notice on the board saying what our rates would be and that they were lower. Of course the teatards changed the subject and started slamming Obama.


So as long as your rates went down, screw the others who had their rates go up. They can eat it right?

Typical parasite mentality:
I got mine, to he** with you!

The Big Dog's back

I pay for mine, why should I have to pay for yours when you exceed your limits? Why should I have to pay for you when your insurance drops you because you made a claim? Why should I pay for you because your insurance doesn't cover pre-existing conditions?


I pay my own way. Never asked anyone else for help. It is called Personal Responsibilty. You should try it some time.

You strut around here crowing your rates went down. Yet thousands upon thousands of American's rates went up. That is their problem not yours though huh?

And despite what the Liar-In-Chief said about people not losing their coverage, we now know that was a complete fabrication. But you have no care those Americans because your rates went down.

Liberal mentality is so selfish. Screw them right? You benefited from this. That's all that matters.

Peninsula Pundit

That's the motto over the door to the Republican National Committee, Pete.


Re: "our rates would be and that they were lower."

The Employer mandate doesn't start until 2015.

Pres. Obama pushed it back WHY?

The Big Dog's back

Nothing to do with the employer mandate you PDB.


Re: "Nothing to do with the employer mandate"

It has EVERYTHING to do with the EM.

Answer the question you PDB:

Pres. Obama pushed it back WHY?

The Big Dog's back

When are you going to graciously accept defeat and move on?


Re: "When,"

When are you gonna understand that your employer remains largely unaffected until 2015 you PDB?

Answer the question:

Pres. Obama pushed back the employer mandate WHY?

Peninsula Pundit

Republican tears.
We all hate to hear a Republican cry.

The Big Dog's back

If I ran a hospital or was a Doctor I wouldn't accept your inferior plans.


Then you'd be out of business.

1. If someone is willing to pay the bills, you have to accept their money.

2. No hospital or Dr. is in a plan's network for any reason except it's a business necessity.

The Big Dog's back

The elephant in the room? Medicare for all would solve all of this.


Are you in a place where you could afford to have you taxes triple to pay for it? The studies I've read show that if went to a single payer that is what would happen to everyone who is working.

The Big Dog's back

Stop going to right wingnut sites that will solve your problem.

The Big Dog's back

Should the rest of us pay for you too yawnn?


Re: "Medicare for all would solve all of this."

Medicare and Medicaid are BROKE you PDB.

Let's just ALL climb aboard the Titanic eh?


The Big Dog's back
Sat, 11/16/2013 - 9:16am

I pay for mine, why should I have to pay for yours when you exceed your limits? Why should I have to pay for you when your insurance drops you because you made a claim? Why should I pay for you because your insurance doesn't cover pre-existing conditions?
Now you want Medicare which YOU have to pay for out of your taxes? Make up your mind. For your information, It is this kind of stuff that lets everyone know that you are not to be taken seriously.


Re: "39 Democrats broke ranks and supported the legislation,"

WHY? 'Cause the Dems are RUNNING scared.

The Big Dog's back

I hope they get replaced by Progressives.

The Big Dog's back

What about the 3 Repubs who voted against it?

Peninsula Pundit

That means there must be 3 Republicans who have the courage to stand up for their convictions.
Only 3.

The Big Dog's back

The Facts

First of all, there are four parts to Medicare: Part A (hospital insurance), Part B (medical insurance), Part C (Medicare Advantage — private plans for parts A and B), and Part D (prescription drug plans).

When asked for evidence of Medicare going broke, a Romney spokesman pointed us to news articles about the latest Medicare trustees report, showing that the Part A trust fund would be exhausted by 2024.

So, in other words, we are not talking about all of Medicare, just the part that covers hospital visits, hospice care, nursing facilities and the like. Part B, which involves seeing a doctor, is paid out of general funds and premiums.

Moreover, though the fund would be “depleted,” it would NOT be “penniless” or “broke.” That is because the government could still cover 87 percent of estimated expenses in 2024 — and 67 percent in 2050. So, yes, there would be a shortfall, but it doesn’t mean that the fund is bankrupt.

There are various ways that Congress could deal with this problem. Already, in the Obama health care law, a surtax was added that would hit wealthy Americans, which extended the “insolvency” date by 12 years. . (This is why Biden can claim that repeal of the health care law would make Medicare go “bankrupt” sooner.) Congress has also moved some functions from Part A to Part B to extend the life of the fund, in which was basically a book-keeping maneuver.

It’s also important to remember that the Part A fund has from its inception been on the brink of going “broke.” Page 4 of a useful report by the Congressional Research Service, titled “Medicare: History of Insolvency Projections,” shows that in 1970 it was due to go “broke” in 1972.


Re: "That is because the government could still cover 87 percent of estimated expenses in 2024,"

And the 13% difference will be made up HOW?

So if you pay 13% less of your electric bill what happens?

Also, Medicare loses approx. $60-$100 billion annually in waste, fraud and abuse.

Medicare for everyone? Care to try for a trillion dollar annual loss?

The Big Dog's back

I thought it was broke you PDB?


Re: "I thought it was broke,"

How much is in and where is the "Medicare Trust Fund"?

The U.S. is $17 trillion dollars (and growing) in debt.

It's a (bleeping) accounting fiction you PDB.

The Big Dog's back

Graciously accept defeat and move on.


Re: "Graciously accept,"

Accept your ignorance? OK.


Dog cannot evem win an argument with himself in the mirror. Come on Contango, you are better. Don't argue with this loon.


Pres. Obama, 11/14/13:

"I was not informed directly that the website would not be working as -- the way it was supposed to,"

Has I been informed, I wouldn't be going out saying, boy, this is going to be great.

You know, I'm accused of a lot of things, but I don't think I'm stupid enough to go around saying, this is going to be like shopping on Amazon or Travelocity, a week before the website opens, if I thought that it wasn't going to work."

So the Incompetent-in-Chief is pleading total ignorance?

How can this be?

Isn't he supposed to be the smartest guy that EVER occupied the office?


Actuaries are warning that the President's about face could REALLY (bleep) up the health ins. marketplace.

“Changing the ACA provisions could alter the dynamics of the insurance market, creating two parallel markets operating under different rules, thereby threatening the viability of insurance markets operating under the new rules.”


Anybody with an IQ above room temperature would have expected that result. Apparently, the "smartest man in the room" missed the first day or two of Econ 101, and was stoned out of his gourd for the remainder of the course. He sure hasn't exhibited he learned anything then, or that he's learned anything lately, has he?


Re: "Apparently, the "smartest man in the room" missed the first day or two of Econ 101"

He also is a 'supposed' Constitutional expert, but has not written one scholarly paper on the subject. Go figure.

He probably has his school records sealed because he doesn't want to embarrass us mere mortals with how smart he REALLY is.


Actually, he just might BE an expert on the Consitution. Probability alone doesn't account for his circumventing it at every turn!

As far as his school records are concerned, the prevalent rumor is that he attended Occidental as a foreign student under the name of Barry Soetero. The last I heard (as of a couple of weeks ago), somebody actually got their hands on a piece of paper that confirms that. Unfortunately, if that were true, it would have been everywhere by now, but it isn't.

The truth is that I don't think the grades are an issue. There's something else. We all know that Al Gore got some D's, and that George W. Bush got some C's. That had absolutely ZERO effect on winning or losing either of them any votes. People just don't care all that much (unless the grades are stellar, in which case it's something to brag about). No, there's something else that's apparently worth millions in legal fees to keep hidden. I just don't know what it is.


Re: "The truth is that I don't think the grades are an issue."

Agreed. There are other factors too that show the degradation of society.

BHO ADMITTED to using coke.

Look at that bozo mayor in Toronto. And let's not forget crack smokin' DC Mayor Marion Barry who won re-election!

Remember: History was made at the 1995 SOTU speech. All three men on the dais, Clinton, Gore and Gingrich had ALL admitted to using marijuana.

The Big Dog's back

I know, I know, you would have preferred Kesslers.


Obamacare is turning out to be nothing short of plain old catastrophic health insurance. It's a huge mess and I'm with the crowd, don't cave. They jammed this down our throats with no negotiations, no tAlks, nothing. Hell Nanci didn't even know what was in it. Down th flames they are going and the democratic cockroaches are jumping ship. Love it.

Darwin's choice

Please don't insult cockroaches by calling them democrats......!!

The Big Dog's back

Who's jumping ship?

Dr. Information

Many Dems who voted for this thing.


@ Dr. Information:


FYI, have you read this yet?

"Confessions of Quantitative Easer; We went on a bond-buying spree that was supposed to help Main Street. Instead, it was a feast for Wall Street."

Scary sh*t.

The author was also on "The Kudlow Report":