Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

ObamaCare Clusterfuck: Covered California to delay quality rating system

Je repete: This is what project managers do when they can't deliver on poorly architected bloatware like ObamaCare: They triage functionality, slip deadlines, and say "everything's fine. Really!" Sacramento Business Journal:

Covered California has decided not to include a quality rating system for health plans when the new insurance marketplace kicks off enrollment in October.

The issue has been controversial because some plans have complained there is not enough time to prepare their reporting systems to track the requested data.

So, Obama was lying when he said using the Exchanges would be like buying a flat-screen TV?

Perish the thought!

NOTE Incidentally, the providers aren't so wrong, but that's only because all the plans, every single one, are apples to oranges, both with respect to each other, and with respect to existing plans. So there's no baseline at all.

0
No votes yet

Comments

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

What a croc (Krugman) - for him it's just about name recognition (state people won't know they're buying ObamaCare because it'll have a different name in every state) and confusion over "who to thank" for those who get "a lot of benefits" from one of the myriad incarnations of ObamaCare.

Krugman on the razor's edge of shilling-mendacity (assuming, charitably that there's some marginally real dividing line). Actually, Krugman dutifully implementing ObamaCare as Campaign 2014 and 2016 -- which is what the effort is (see LS posts here on CW).

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

condescending, IMO.

Heck, he worked right beside Larry Summers in the Reagan Administration.

Why the h*ll does anyone call him "a liberal," for cryin' out loud?

And UPS is "behind the curve."

Mr. A's company threw their employees' "working spouses" under the bus 3 or so years ago.

That's why I feel certain that they will lead the way to eliminate "all" spousal group health coverage, in time. Probably very soon, if not this year.

katiebird's picture
Submitted by katiebird on

Because of the Affordability Gap between buckets .... Unless companies are paying the full (or very nearly full) cost of coverage for spouses then families are almost certainly (laughing -- I can't help it) better off getting insurance through exchanges.

katiebird's picture
Submitted by katiebird on

As Nancy Pelosi famously said, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.” But the problem with “comprehensive” legislation is that, when everything’s in it, nothing’s in it. The Affordable Care Act means whatever President Obama says it means on any particular day of the week. Whether it applies to you this year, next year, or not at all depends on the whim of the sovereign, and whether your CEO golfs with him on Martha’s Vineyard. A few weeks back, the president unilaterally suspended the law’s employer mandate. Under the U.S. Constitution, he doesn’t have the power to do this, but judging from the American people’s massive shrug of indifference he might as well unilaterally suspend the Constitution, too. Obamacare is not a law, in the sense that all persons are equal before it, but a hierarchy of privilege; for example, senators value their emir-sized entourages and don’t want them to quit, so it is necessary to provide the flunkies who negotiated and drafted the Affordable Care Act an exemption from the legislation they imposed on the citizenry. Once again, the opt-out is not legal. As the Wall Street Journal trenchantly observed, “OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in Congressional pay in return for less overall compensation.”

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

... excellent essay. Swift and punchy run down of ObamaCare's inherently anti-Democratic and unconstitutional features.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

He says:

The cynical [or perhaps knowledgeable and savvy--;-)] among us have always assumed Obamacare was set up to be so unworkable a grateful populace would embrace any 2016 Democrat promising single-payer health care.

The way things are going the entire system may collapse first.

Rainbow Girl's picture
Submitted by Rainbow Girl on

"Covered California is training thousands of educators, enrollment counselors and insurance agents to help launch enrollment in the new state health benefit exchange on Oct. 1, but the navigator program will be delayed until open enrollment in 2014."

It makes you wonder how important California and HHS think navigators are if skipping navigator services for Year One Enrollment in ACA are being dropped and delayed until 2014 (presumably Year Two of ACA Enrollment).

Isn't this also going to (presumably) affect enrollment numbers on the theory that without navigators (giving these the benefit of doubt as to value provided) Mr., Mrs. and Ms. Smith will simply pay the penalty after attempting to navigate Rube Goldberg Boulevard by themselves?

On the ratings. A note in the article mentions that "some" ratings may be available for plans that offer ACA policies that "have an 80% overlap" with existing (non-Exchange) policies. This magnifies the apples to oranges (consumer deception) aspect of the ACA insurance policy market.

Frankly, I would view any ratings attached to any of the plans roughly as reliable as the AAA ratings that Moody's et al. slapped onto the portfolios of built-to-fail mortgage bundles. Without 100% transparency as to how those ratings are constructed, I wouldn't give them the time of an eye-flick.