Since the passage of Obama Care 3 years ago, our health insurance premiums have gone up 39.5%. We now pay over $13,000.00 a year for health insurance, yes that's 13 thousand. This is for 2 people, self employed, $5000.00 deductible each, no dental or eye glasses, limitations on certain types of care such as physical therapy. We spoke with our health insurance rep but I have damage to my spine, thanks to injuries handled poorly by physical therapy that we paid a boat load for out of pocket. We cannot even try to get cheaper insurance because the part of Obama care that says you cannot be turned down for a preexisting condition hasn't been implemented yet. Maybe it will be and maybe it won't and who knows what those plans will offer. Obama was right, we can keep our current plan and see whatever provider we want(but our choices in rural Montana are limited anyway). Now that our Senators passed the bill so we can see what's in it, is anybody happy with it and does anyone really understand it? I know we are not the only ones hit with significant premium hikes and uncertainty so let your elected officials know what you think about Obama Care so far.
Contact them through their websites or try these numbers:

Congressman Steve Daines: Billings, Office 406-969-1736
Washington D.C. 202-225-3211

Senator Max Baucus: Bozeman Office 406-586-6104
Washington D.C. 202-224-2651

Senator Jon Tester: General Number 866-554-4403

There is a very good book, "Health Care Reform" by Jonathan Gruber. What it is, Why it's necessary and How It Works. It is available on amazon.com..a little over eight dollars. It is in comic book form which makes it a very easy read. Efforts are being made so that it will kick in in 2014 with a few things already having been done like the kids getting to stay on their parents insurance up to 26 years.

We have a group headed by Monica Lindeen in Helena who is trying to get things set up for our state...but, it is a tough go as Insurance Companies, etc. do not want it. The Ryan Budget is as it is because they have totally taken AFC out of it.

The author of the book helped to write the Mass. Healthcare Act and also helped Congress and the President with this. It is worth the read.

When does a kid become a responsible adult? I was on my parents health insurance until I got out of college at age 21 and then paid for my own health insurance. I've never been without health insurance. Why should a 26 year old adult be on their parent's health insurance. Why is that a good thing? Seems like that is just one aspect that could contribute to significant premium hikes.

I really think it has been helpful. Especially if you have kids in college or, even trying to start out and only able to get a low paying job. I think they would like to be responsible if they can afford it, don't you? I really think there are circumstances where it is very beneficial..but, just my opinion:-)

When does a kid become a responsible adult? I was on my parents health insurance until I got out of college at age 21 and then paid for my own health insurance.

Yup, and I learned to poop in an outhouse. I think everyone should have to go through that. The selfishness of not wanting to help your neighbor, being worried over your neighbor having more or an easier time in life, is just astounding. If life were fair, horses would ride half the time.

Where was "cbt" when we were having 20% annual premium increases with other hits such as higher deductibles, higher co-pays, higher out-of-pocket maximums long before "Obamacare" was passed?

The selfishness of not wanting to help your neighbor, being worried over your neighbor having more or an easier time in life, is just astounding. If life were fair, horses would ride half the time.

permalink

seems a bit harsh...if keeping 26 yr olds on their parents health care is helpful to some, okay then. Just because I question it doesn't make me selfish and uncaring. I do many things to help others but apparently questioning this aspect really hit a note with you. I've paid for my health insurance through higher premiums, low paying jobs, job changes, poor health...it is what it is. I do think changes needed to be made in regards to healthcare but so far, I'm not yet seeing the changes in Obama Care(except the 26yr old rule)that are helpful.

Unless and until we get the private insurance companies out of this equation we will suffer these higher fees...the public option was the only answer which the GOP insisted we get rid of...that was Part of the original Obama plan.. they voted it down...so while you enjoying paying those high prices you can thank whomever voted GOP for that honor...Hope you didn't shoot yourself in the foot...I did not... do your research and find out real facts and not just Faux facts... plus my family has been paying these higher fees for many years not just since Obama care... so stop trying to blame Obama for what the GOP did... all the GOP care about is private industry being in charge and making a profit and health care doesn't need to be in the hands of greedy insurance companies no matter what you think... Now they are trying to get the Medicaid money from the Feds and trading it in for vouchers from private insurance companies...it is happening in several conservative GOP states... read it and weep...I sure did..

Oh boy Howdy, it is confusing and I do try to do research..maybe I should get the book you mentioned Jeri. So what are some thoughts on the medical device tax? Does the book you mentioned talk about things like this Jeri? A 2.3% tax on companies specifically for these devices such as pace makers, prosthetics, etc? I understand it's up for repeal or maybe modification. Max Baucus supports the tax. What other ways can Obama Care be funded without a tax like this? People who need things like these(many veterans) are already in a world of hurt. So it's frustrating...you don't want greed to get in the way of people affording their health care needs but you don't want them to be taxed out of it either. Where's the balance?

trying to get some links to come up that I read on this tax but they aren't coming through...one from the Washington times, one from the huffington post. I guess this tax is on the companies that develop and sell things like MRI machines, blood pressure cuffs, etc.

[This message has been edited by cbt (3/21/2013)]

Here is what snopes says about it...
http://www.snopes.com/pol...device.asp

other than that, not familiar with it altho I have a pacemaker myself...but that is just a tiny portion of what we were discussing so kind of like changing the subject isn't it??

So according to snopes, Cabelas made a mistake on charging for that tax on a lot of stuff and now people are grabbing that and insisting it is a fact...Great!!! another Faux fact...

[This message has been edited by howdy (3/21/2013)]

cht:

"Obamacare" hasn't even been implemented yet.

Settle down.

So what are some thoughts on the medical device tax? Does the book you mentioned talk about things like this Jeri? A 2.3% tax on companies specifically for these devices such as pace makers, prosthetics, etc? I understand it's up for repeal or maybe modification.

Yes, there is a medical device excise tax being charged. Even when the providers are having to pay that, guess who ends up paying for it. The Insured! Why? Because the insurance Companies are going to pass that extra expense along through increased premiums to cover the cost!

If Obamacare really Affordable as it's title claims?

No Way!

I am retired Military and my Government provided health care premiums have gone up 20% in the last two years, even with supposedly a COLA increase, the effective change to my retired pay was a reduction of 4.49% across the same time frame.

That 20% only takes into consideration the cost of the annual premiums. It does not take into account the fewer number of Formulary medications that are being covered, the increase in medications that are now Non-Formulary, and the increase in Co-Pays.

That has resulted in my paying roughly $1800 more this last year in prescription medications. About $150 more per month, increasing the number of living expenses/bills that this FI Retiree can not afford to pay! Add that to the reduction I mentioned above and explain to me where Obamacare is affordable.

If Obamacare is such a great deal, why did Congress exempt their members past, present, and future from being affected by it?

"Obamacare" hasn't even been implemented yet.

Settle down.

Obamacare is being implemented in phases, through 2016 at the moment, the Senate is now trying to get it extended out to 2018 so that voters will not become disgruntled with the Democratic Party itself for passing this disparaging piece of manure to begin with.

Some requirements of the bill went into effect in 2012 (one prime example: medical device tax), others kick in this year, more next year, etc..

Howdy, I had not heard of the Cabela's error. Read the Snopes link and apparently they had a computer glitch with some new software that erroneously charged the medical excise tax when it shouldn't have. Thankfully they caught it on the first day. Yep, your right, this is how faux facts get spread..thanks for sharing the link.

As far as taxing companies that design and produce medical devices to help fund Obamacare, I'm not a fan...I don't think these devices should be targeted because they aid in life and quality of life and I'm afraid a tax on them will have some poor unintended consequences. Why not target a company that makes something unhealthy, say, like soda, to help fund Obamacare? I agree with Max Baucus on many things but I think he got this one wrong. Best I can tell, Tester doesn't support it.

I don't think these devices should be targeted because they aid in life and quality of life and I'm afraid a tax on them will have some poor unintended consequences.

Exactly why healthcare should NEVER be managed by companies operating for profit.

I think the answer (since you asked me my opinion)is to get the insurance companies totally out of the equation, and have a type of "medicare for all" deal and instead of you and I and others paying huge amounts a month (we are paying 800 per month approx. ) and just charge like Medicare does...which right now is 105 per month to each person receiving it...apparently 90% or so of medicare monies go directly to the care of the patient and not profits as there is no profit built in and that's the way it should be...I wouldn't mind paying so much a month for health care instead of the enormous amount we are paying and I am positive it would be a great deal less if you removed the profits and insurance companies out of it...as an American, we realize there is a cost (like we pay right now to the insurance companies) but if we could all get together and pay a great deal less directly to a public option like Medicare we could all afford it for the most part...Middle income folks are indeed paying way too much for their premiums and have been for years and would love that relief I am quite sure...for the poor people that don't have insurance I am also sure there is an answer as well...As far as military insurance (Tricare) that the other person commented on, the only thing I have read recently is you guys took a hit with the sequester which just started which has nothing to do with Obamacare...Anyway, the above is mostly my answer for the problem which you asked me for so I wonder what your answer is?

I'm with you, Howdy. I'm paying more out of pocket but if it helps more people get coverage especially children and young people it's worth it. It goes back to the old adage neglect costs more in the long run.

Oddly enough, the National Journal (a CONSERVATIVE website/magazine) says surveys show if people are given a list of individual facets of the ACA, they love it. No exclusions for pre-existing conditions, no maximum on benefits, that sort of thing, people are in favor. Call it "Obamacare" and don't mention the benefits and they hate it.

I do wish we had socialized or at least single payer medicine. It would do wonders for the economy. I know there is one Republican plan, which pops up every few years, to tax health benefits as income, thus raising taxes on lower and middle income people plus discouraging them from having coverage.

Die and decrease that surplus population, poor people. Then bring in some illegals from across the border and let them work to death.

Meanwhile the CVS Pharmacy plan is creating a stir. Looks like this might become quite common. Is that a bad thing?

If this (link included) is what you are talking about, it is a bad thing IMO as it is violation of privacy...but have no idea what you are talking about, as it is apples and oranges to what we have been discussing...we are talking about a solution to national health coverage and you are talking about one companies terrible idea to violate their employees rights by requiring a lot of info in order for them to get health insurance...
http://abcnews.go.com/blo...ay-a-fine/

Donald Mullikin, I'd forgotten about Congress exempting their members from Obama Care...do you recall any explanation for this? I had to reread you post a couple times. It made me sad and mad that our veterans are being impacted in multiple ways...higher health care costs in multiple ways and pensions being reduced. What a dominoe effect! Not right!

Mary B, re: the medical devices being taxed...well, for now, they are being made in the private sector....and I feel pretty strongly that since they are life, quality of life devices that impact everyone but very much so the elderly and disabled, I don't think an excise tax on them the right way to go to help fund Obama Care...I think they should find something else to tax. As far as companies designing and making medical devices, do you think that eventually the government should take over them completely? How do we get the best and brightest minds to work on these devices....is it better in the private sector or government sector or somehow combining both in some way? Just curious what your thoughts are on that.

Howdy, I've been giving your post some thought but I'll have to get back to you later...

http://factcheck.org/2010...alth-bill/

Don't you sometimes wonder where all the negative information starts? Pretty amazing.

re: Jeri's post above about the Faux Fact of exempting members of Congress from Obama care...I am so very sick of Faux facts...Please everyone start researching your facts...don't just take one sources word for it...

a staffer from Max Baucus's Office passed this on to me re: the Medical Device Tax and it's repeal...both Max and Jon Tester voted against the repeal.

U.S. NEWS
Updated March 22, 2013, 6:10 p.m. ET
Medical-Device Tax Repeal Faces Uphill Climb in Senate
By KRISTINA PETERSON And CHRISTOPHER WEAVER
WASHINGTON-The push to repeal the 2010 federal health-care law's tax on medical devices got a boost in the Senate this week, but the search to replace the nearly $30 billion the levy provided to fund other parts of the law will impede efforts to unwind it.

Intense lobbying from the medical-device industry helped nudge the Senate to vote 79-20 Thursday night to repeal the 2.3% tax on sales of pacemakers, surgical tools and a swath of other devices. Strikingly, 34 lawmakers who caucus with the Democrats signed onto the repeal, including many who created the tax by voting for the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

Democrats who supported the amendment said Friday that they would need to find a way to generate the same amount of revenue before they would vote to pass it into law.

"We need to look at where we can replace the revenue from," said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), who voted for the amendment out of concern the tax is preventing the companies from hiring new workers. The amendment approved Thursday night specified the tax should be repealed without increasing the federal budget deficit.

Earlier this week, Rep. Dan Maffei (D., N.Y.) introduced legislation that would offset the tax by cutting subsidies for oil and gas companies. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) proposed an amendment that would pay for it by cutting wind-power tax credits. There is no sign those offsets have broader support in Congress, and a Senate Democratic aide said reaching a final agreement on a way to pay for the repeal was unlikely.

Because Thursday's measure was an amendment to the Senate Democrats' budget-a partisan blueprint that stands little chance of passing the GOP-led House-the vote to repeal the tax was largely symbolic. Lawmakers are unlikely to bring forward the measure as a stand-alone bill on the Senate floor and will push instead to have it considered in broader discussions to overhaul the tax code and reduce the deficit, a Democratic Senate aide said.

"It's just a way of opposing health care," Sen. Sherrod Brown (D., Ohio) said of the amendment he voted against. He lamented that "a very effective lobby .got a whole bunch of my colleagues in both parties" to support the measure.

Device makers on Friday viewed the wide bipartisan support for the repeal as a signal that their three-year effort to repeal the tax could succeed.

"There's still a long ways to go, but it shows strong support," said Stephen Ferguson, chairman of Cook Group Inc., a closely held device maker with 11,000 employees based in Bloomington, Ind., that has actively opposed the tax. Mr. Ferguson said the firm has suspended plans to build five mid-Western factories because of the tax.

Since the tax took effect Jan. 1, the device industry has paid $388 million in excise taxes, collected by the Internal Revenue Service in bimonthly installments, according to AdvaMed, an industry group. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects it will raise just under $30 billion over a decade to fund the health law.

Medtronic, MDT +0.37% the nation's largest device maker, said in a statement it applauded efforts to repeal the tax, but recognizes it is an uphill battle. The Minneapolis-based maker of heart implants, stents and diabetes-care equipment expects to pay up to $175 million per year in excise tax.

The tax-a 2.3% excise tax on all U.S. sales-covers medical equipment ranging from implantable pacemakers and hips to health-care machinery such as MRI machines and infusion pumps, as well as the plastic tubing, surgical tools and other supplies that stock hospital shelves.

Device manufacturers have argued the tax is unfair because they will not gain enough new customers from the health-care overhaul to offset their new costs. Other health-care sectors counter that the burden of paying for the health-care law should be evenly distributed and that they have already made financial sacrifices.

Write to Kristina Peterson at [email protected] and Christopher Weaver at [email protected]



Brianne Rogers Dugan

Deputy State Director

Senator Max Baucus

220 W Lamme Street, Suite 1D

Bozeman, MT 59715

From that article:

"Earlier this week, Rep. Dan Maffei (D., N.Y.) introduced legislation that would offset the tax by cutting subsidies for oil and gas companies. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) proposed an amendment that would pay for it by cutting wind-power tax credits."

also the email addy for one of the staffers is kristina.peterson(AT)dowjones.com....Would this be one of the wall street bunch? I am becoming increasingly suspicious of anyone connected to wall street...

Sorry my cynicism is showing...

howdy, I thought the CVS "wellness plan" was kind of relevant because the version I heard explained it as a logical, intended reaction to the Affordable Care Act.

well I don't think we need to give insurance companies that much information in order to be covered...kind of a two edged sword IMO at least but I see your point...I wouldn't ever be in favor of it tho and doubt many Americans would as most of us love our privacy...

howdy, re: a medicare type program for all that you mentioned...it wouldn't surprise me if things went that way at some point, but I'll tell you my mom's experience with it as she is 85...she lost a great provider because the Doctor found all the Medicare red tape too burdensome and time consuming so the Dr. left her private practice and joined an Urgent CAre clinic where she is on salary. I think a system like that will depend on which medical practioners can do their job reasonably well and not let the system get to them...might lose some quality folks that way. BTW, my mother had a long term care health insurance plan that went up 85%..she thinks it's due to multiple factors including Obama Care. She dropped the coverage. My solution for now, is that Obama Care is law and so we have to deal with it as it gets implemented. Pelosi was being honest, the bill had to be passed to see what's in it. It was impossible for anyone to really understand a bill that large and so now it's learn as we go. So I'm trying to keep informed best I can and communicate with our senators and reps since some things could possibly modified. Had it not passed, I would've hoped that changes would have been looked at in a way so people would actually know what was in the bill....I would've hoped for a more thorough focus on insurance companies to find solutions with them to improve coverage and lower costs. One thing that concerns me is how everyone talks of affordability but no one seems to thinking about quality...the two don't always go hand in hand and as someone who has experienced poor care over quite a few years, thousands of dollars of out of pocket costs I never dreamed of and a damaged spine and limited function to show for it, I don't wish poor care on anybody. I really don't! The focus cannot be just on affordability...quality has to be part of the equation or it will cost more money and more.