New data from HHS: 365,000 sign-ups for ObamaCare plans so far

posted at 11:21 am on December 11, 2013 by Allahpundit

We already knew the number of sign-ups on Healthcare.gov for November — 100,000 or so — but the number from the state exchanges was a mystery. In October, the states signed up roughly three times as many people as the feds did, thanks to the fact that their websites were relatively functional. If that trend held in November, it would have meant 300,000 new sign-ups on top of the 100K that Healthcare.gov delivered. Per today’s HHS report, the trend … did not hold. The states banked roughly 150,000 new sign-ups last month, not quite double what they did in October.

HHS’s target, by the way, was 800,000 total enrollments through November 30th. They made it less than 50 percent of the way. But that brings us to a new mystery: How far short of 50 percent did they actually fall? As usual, they’re being slippery about it.

Adding a caveat, HHS noted that it is trying to correct a problem that may have resulted in some of the signups being counted twice, thus potentially overstating the number…

Individuals have until Dec. 23 to pick plans and until Dec. 31 to pay premiums for policies that go into effect on Jan. 1. By that time the administration had originally projected 3.3 million Americans would enroll in insurance through the exchanges, according to an internal HHS document unearthed by the Associated Press.

That means more than 2.9 million signups are required for December to catch up to the original target pace, an ambitious goal even assuming a better-functioning website, a stepped-up outreach effort and lot of Americans waiting until the last minute to decide on a plan.

Three huge caveats to the 365,000 figure. One: As Phil Klein notes in the excerpt, by HHS’s own admission, some of them are duplicates. And the fact that they felt obliged to admit that in a report that they’re desperately trying to spin as good news suggests that “some” isn’t an insignificant number. Two: As you hopefully already understand, “sign-ups” aren’t the same as “enrollments.” HHS’s original targets for O-Care were based on the assumption that people would be fully enrolled with their new insurers and ready to go with coverage on January 1. But because they’re desperate for positive publicity, they tweaked that metric so that anyone who’s tried to sign up and gotten as far as choosing a plan, even if they haven’t actually purchased it yet, counts in terms of them hitting their target. The actual number of people who’ve enrolled, not just “signed up,” is a well-kept secret. Three: As you also know by now, even if you’ve pulled the trigger on a plan and enrolled with an insurance company, your enrollment isn’t valid until you’ve paid your first month of premiums. There’s big news about that today but it really deserves its own post, so stay tuned. For the meantime, it’s enough to say that if you discount the number of duplicates, the number of people who haven’t actually completed enrollment on the website yet, and the number who haven’t paid their premiums, you’re looking at some fraction — probably a small one — of 365,000 who’ve really, truly, honestly enrolled in ObamaCare and have their coverage already in place for January 1.

As for the million-dollar question, whether the exchanges are drawing enough healthy young people to offset the cost of the chronically ill, HHS won’t say. That’s actually better evidence that this boondoggle is in deep trouble, I think, than the fact that they’re way off their target enrollment number. Lefties like Ezra Klein have been comforting their readers with reminders that the overall number of sign-ups is less important than having a sustainable risk pool of whatever size. And that’s true: Even if the numbers are underwhelming, having a healthy mix of “young invincibles” to help cover the sick in each exchange would make the system viable. From there, the feds could work on expanding the size in years to come. You can imagine, then, how ecstatic Sebelius and her team would be if the early data confirmed that the risk pools were looking good despite being smaller than expected. They’d be leading with that information, with the number of enrollments just a footnote to the really important news. The fact that they’re not only not leading with it but don’t want to talk about the demographics tells you all you need to know about how they’re doing right now.

Exit question: Several million people in the individual market have had their old insurance canceled. How many of them have re-enrolled in a new plan? We don’t know that number either.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Adding a caveat, HHS noted that it is trying to correct a problem that may have resulted in some of the signups being counted twice, thus potentially overstating the number…

So what they’re saying is, they’re counting enrollees the same way they count votes. Okay then.

BKeyser on December 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Disaster thy name is big government.

kcewa on December 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Since the ads are predominantly geared to the youth,it tells you they are nowhere near the number they need…JengaCare topples by March….

hillsoftx on December 11, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Ryan’s replacement will stop this!!!

WryTrvllr on December 11, 2013 at 11:26 AM

How many have actually bought health insurance?

rbj on December 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Question: If 5 million people lost their individual plans as a direct result of Ocare, and there is no other market for purchasing health insurance for these folks, and presumably all 5 million didn’t give up their self-employed status and take a job with employer-based health care, why is the target 3.3M?

BKeyser on December 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM

It’s gotten to the point whether neither I, nor a majority of Americans, even trust the “hard figures” coming out of the government. It’s presumed (correctly, in most cases), that all statements — including numbers and statistics — are lies lies lies, promulgated for propagandistic purposes.

Zombie on December 11, 2013 at 11:28 AM

The mistake journalists make (and on purpose I am sure), they should just throw out a number, say “Less than 10,000 have enrolled”, and stick with that number and force the administration to refute it with an actual number or live with it.

The admin gives us phony numbers…why not use it against them?

right2bright on December 11, 2013 at 11:30 AM

We have tried to sign up – between the insurance company and the government they cannot find their azzholes with either hand.

I am ready to give up and go bare. At the prices they are charging you probably will do better off to self-insure. Unless of course you get run over by a bus. In that case let’s hope it just takes you out.

redguy on December 11, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Question: If 5 million people lost their individual plans as a direct result of Ocare, and there is no other market for purchasing health insurance for these folks, and presumably all 5 million didn’t give up their self-employed status and take a job with employer-based health care, why is the target 3.3M?

Well, some of those people may have enrolled in new plans outside the exchange. Their insurer sends them a cancellation letter; they call the insurer to complain; the insurer tells them they have new plans to offer; and the customer signs up for one to make sure he still has coverage on January 1. All of that takes place outside Healthcare.gov, which is A-OK so long as you’re not seeking a subsidy. In fact, some cancellations come with news that the insurer has automatically enrolled the customer in a new, ObamaCare-approved plan.

Allahpundit on December 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Adding a caveat, HHS noted that it is trying to correct a problem that may have resulted in some of the signups being counted twice, thus potentially overstating the number…

I smell ACORN.

fogw on December 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

So what they’re saying is, they’re counting enrollees the same way they count votes. Okay then.

Oh, so a lot of dead people have enrolled too?

txdoc on December 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Obmacare – Credibility is JOB NONE

JayTee on December 11, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Can’t they just get a bunch of fake sign-ups like they do for voter registration? They should send ACORN, or whatever they are calling themselves to stay one step ahead of the police, to sign up folks.

Cindy Munford on December 11, 2013 at 11:37 AM

I am ready to give up and go bare. At the prices they are charging you probably will do better off to self-insure. Unless of course you get run over by a bus. In that case let’s hope it just takes you out.

redguy on December 11, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Actually, the way the law is written you can get hit by that bus, and then as the intake person takes your information, you can sign up for health insurance right then.

“I’m covered now”

BobMbx on December 11, 2013 at 11:37 AM

As libfreeordie helpfully pointed out, this plus the new Obamacare medicaid enrollments only equals 37/100ths of 1% of the population of the US.
 
Thirty seven
 
one hundreths
 
of one percent.

rogerb on December 11, 2013 at 11:38 AM

How long until ZeroCare defenders like Klein start whining,

“Hey, ObamaCare is just an insignificant social welfare program serving a small number of primarily poor Americans and Republicans are just so dedicated to being mean and petty toward the poor that they won’t even let a small program go about it’s business!”

MTF on December 11, 2013 at 11:39 AM

Pretty soon they will have more sign ups than people in the U.S. Odumbo math.

rjoco1 on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

I hope none of y’all need to visit an emergency room any time in the next year or two, because they’re going to get busy.

SomeCallMeJohn on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

How many have actually bought health insurance?

rbj on December 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Fifty-seven…

Pest on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

But because they’re desperate for positive publicity, they tweaked that metric so that anyone who’s tried to sign up and gotten as far as choosing a plan, even if they haven’t actually purchased it yet, counts in terms of them hitting their target.

How long before the metric shifts even further (a la unemployment) to the number of people who have signed up for or kept their insurance policies?

BlueCollarAstronaut on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

I would think that most employer based plans were pretty close to Obamacare compliant anyway, so it would seem that they wouldn’t be hit with hugely high premiums. I think I read the average yearly increase, causing the world to end as we know it, was about 6%, so Obamacare is going to beat that right?

Cindy Munford on December 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM

As for the million-dollar question, whether the exchanges are drawing enough healthy young people to offset the cost of the chronically ill… how many of these supposed sign-ups have actually paid for their new policies?

FIFY

Applying on the website simply indicates intent. Until money has changed hands nothing has actually happened. Reports I’m seeing suggests from some states suggests that paid premiums represents about 20% of those that have applied/inquired/created-an-account. So, if this number has any meaning, about 73,000 actually have a new policy waiting for them on Jan 1.

Heckuva job, there, Barcky and Kathy!

Ace ODale on December 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Exit question: Several million people in the individual market have had their old insurance canceled. How many of them have re-enrolled in a new plan? We don’t know that number either.

Obama once claimed there were 46 million uninsured, but today they say 30 million. I think Obama just doesn’t want to be made a fool of, so he needs to add 16 million more uninsured to make his past comments true.

NotCoach on December 11, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Allahpundit on December 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Okay, that makes sense. Bring us back to your exit question and the lack of information on that front. Thanks AP.

BKeyser on December 11, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Fifty-seven…

Pest on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

42

NotCoach on December 11, 2013 at 11:44 AM

That means more than 2.9 million signups are required for December to catch up to the original target pace

A total impossibility… The total number of signed up by December 31st will not exceed 1 million… Moreover how many of the signed up bought the insurance…

Regarding the young and healthy, why are we still debating human nature here? Among the uninsured young and healthy who are not qualified for Medicaid very few of them are going to sign up because paying the 1% of their salary as a penalty is much more cheaper than buying a crappy Obamacare insurance that will cost them vastly more even with all available subsidies and of course it will have very high deductibles and very high doctor co-pay…

mnjg on December 11, 2013 at 11:44 AM

so let’s step back — even if we’re generous, we’ve basically radically altered the whole health care industry and 1/6 of the economy to cover 300K PEOPLE so far?????

I stand by my earlier prediction– there will be a net loss of people with health insurance in the US in 2014 because of Obamacare

I predict far more people will lose insurance, than sign up for new policies

Of course that number will be buried and suppressed from ever seeing the light of day, but hopefully someone will actually look at the net new people with insurance in 2014 to show what a complete clusterfark this is

thurman on December 11, 2013 at 11:44 AM

WTF is our “healthcare experience”? Annoying as “did you enjoy your restaurant experience”?

katy the mean old lady on December 11, 2013 at 11:45 AM

That means more than 2.9 million signups are required for December to catch up to the original target pace, an ambitious goal even assuming a better-functioning website, a stepped-up outreach effort and lot of Americans waiting until the last minute to decide on a plan.

Hey it’s December. It isn’t like folks have anything going on. Two weeks from now will be the 25th to get those sign ups done and then a week more to take care of any glitches. What could possibly be wrong with the plan?

Seriously, this mentality that 2.9M signups are even possible is what has been wrong about Obamacare from the start. Instead of recognizing the enrollment system was broken they declared on track and ready to go live on 1 October- figuring they could bluff their way through any snags. Instead of coming up with a new plan that is realistic about the situation and shortcomings of the enrollment system they are sticking to the target pace that is virtually impossible even if everybody devoted their full attention to getting enrolled between now and the end of the month. Not that I want the lazy stupid coward or his administration to succeed but a little bit of honesty would go a long way right now instead of putting out insane targets or pretending that problems don’t exist.

And BTW, the security issues have yet to be addressed, along with doc shock, and the fact that this is just the sign-up at this point with administration of Obamacare another nightmare down the line.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 11:46 AM

365,000 sign up!

12 million lose health coverage!

Success!!

portlandon on December 11, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Fake number. Bogus metric.

And the number still sucks even if it weren’t a lie. This Regime and their program are both garbage.

forest on December 11, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Fifty-seven…

Pest on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

42

NotCoach on December 11, 2013 at 11:44 AM

At long last, we know what the Question is.
Kind of disappointing.

SomeCallMeJohn on December 11, 2013 at 11:51 AM

WTF is our “healthcare experience”?

katy the mean old lady on December 11, 2013 at 11:45 AM

Clearly a focus group-tested term. Used to express concern that people are being screwed around while trying to enroll for insurance they do not want but must obtain since Obama cancelled the plan they do want.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Nurse Ratched blamed “the media” for the low number, during the hearing. She stopped short of blaming Faux.

Schadenfreude on December 11, 2013 at 11:52 AM

And it’s still amazing that the GOPe is so stupid to acquiesce to the Dems on amnesty and tax hikes. We are under one-party rule and are too blind to realize it.

Myron Falwell on December 11, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Fifty-seven…

Pest on December 11, 2013 at 11:40 AM

1 in each state!

txdoc on December 11, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Buried in same report: Medicaid new enrollees – 800k.

So, three to one for free stuff. Oh, yeah. This is big success.

Hucklebuck on December 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM

And that’s true: Even if the numbers are underwhelming, having a healthy mix of “young invincibles” to help cover the sick in each exchange would make the system viable.

Nope. I believe this is totally wrong, unless I am misunderstanding some key part of this scheme.

The “system” being “viable” is another way of saying that the insurance companies enroll enough healthy people to balance out the sick, since they can’t discriminate against the latter group and must take a loss. Whether year people enroll on the exchange or off the exchange is irrelevant to whether the insurance companies themselves make a profit.

In fact, I would guess that they need a much higher raw number AND a higher percentage of healthiest on the exchanges, for the simple reason that people enroll in OFF of the exchanges will be skewed towards people who know they aren’t eligible for subsidies. The healthy members of this group might very well take a much dimmer view of signing up for such exorbitant coverage – the fact that there is no subsidy means that when they sign up, it really is them, rather than the government, that is subsidizing the sick.

So, to make up for the fact that the OFF-exchange people will probably skew sicker, the on-exchange sign ups must skew healthier than the overall population, AND the total number on the exchanges must be large enough to offset the sick, off-exchange signups.

Can anyone who understands this all tell me if this is right?

RINO in Name Only on December 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM

As you also know by now, even if you’ve pulled the trigger on a plan and enrolled with an insurance company, your enrollment isn’t valid until you’ve paid your first month of premiums. There’s big news about that today but it really deserves its own post, so stay tuned.

I read an article regarding this issue. Numbers are…sub-optimal…as they say in DC.

WisRich on December 11, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Report: Out of The 365K HHS Says Chose A Plan Through Obamacare, As Few As 18K Are Fully Enrolled After Paying First Month’s Premium…

But amid the rush to enroll as many people as possible by the Dec. 23 deadline, there’s a huge caveat that isn’t getting much public attention: In order for coverage to take effect on Jan. 1, enrollees must pay their first month’s premium on time. (The deadline varies somewhat by state and by insurer.)

That’s slow going, according to consultants and some insurers, raising the prospect that actual enrollment will be far lower than the figures HHS is releasing.

“There is also a lot of worrying going on over people making payments,” industry consultant Robert Laszewski wrote in an email. “One client reports only 15% have paid so far. It is still too early to know for sure what this means but we should expect some enrollment slippage come the payment due date.”

Another consultant Kip Piper, agreed. “So far I’m hearing from health plans that around 5% and 10% of consumers who have made it through the data transfer gauntlet have paid first month’s premium and therefore truly enrolled,”

Resist We Much on December 11, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Nurse Ratched blamed “the media” for the low number, during the hearing. She stopped short of blaming Faux.

Schadenfreude on December 11, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Okay, I’ll bite. How was this the media’s fault?

For not being the propagandists the administration wanted them to be? For telling the truth instead of concetrating on the “positive stories” about Obamacare (which would generally be to pay attention to the parasites and moochers who benefit from Obamacare while ignore the millions being screwed over so that some slutty welfare queen doesn’t have to pay for the pregnancy/abortion)? Did the media cause the error messages or kidnap those responsible for the backend that wasn’t even written when the system went live?

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 11:58 AM

RINO in Name Only on December 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Yikes, lots of auto-correct fails in there. Hope it’s intelligible enough that someone can get the gist – no time right now to edit. I’ve been confused about this point for quite some time, and curious if someone can tell me if this is seems right, or I’m misunderstanding the law.

RINO in Name Only on December 11, 2013 at 12:00 PM

…was about 6%, so Obamacare is going to beat that right?

Cindy Munford on December 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM

That’s inline with my employer coverage increase, but as has been noted, only a part of the story. Deductibles/out of pocket max DOUBLED. In real terms to myself, that means a huge net increase in cost.

JusDreamin on December 11, 2013 at 12:01 PM

And that’s true: Even if the numbers are underwhelming, having a healthy mix of “young invincibles” to help cover the sick in each exchange would make the system viable.

The only way this EpicClusterFark could ever become ‘viable’ is if the laws of economics and human nature could suddenly be repealed and left null and void.

This disaster was never designed or intended to be ‘viable’.

Viability is immaterial – at best marketing spin to ‘sell’ the federal government’s seizure of 1/6th of the national economy, embark on a massive expansion of wealth redistribution, and codify that the needs and the interests (fairness and social justice) of the federal government supersede the concepts of individual liberties and freedoms.

For the progressive-fascists, there is no downside other than the short-term political impact of the fiasco – we’re on the path to the ‘only other viable solution – single payer’ because we’ve never totally eliminated an entitlement program once established no matter how fiscally and socially destructive it is.

Athos on December 11, 2013 at 12:03 PM

The fact that they’re not only not leading with it but don’t want to talk about the demographics tells you all you need to know about how they’re doing right now.

Very good point Allah..Very good point..:)

PS..Plus very few believe Team Obie anymore..:)

Dire Straits on December 11, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Ryan’s replacement will stop this!!!

[WryTrvllr on December 11, 2013 at 11:26 AM]

A very good point, which is why it is so important to make sure that Paul Ryan’s replacement is elected.

Dusty on December 11, 2013 at 12:04 PM

A lot of the 5 million who lost plans are going to take a breather from insurance altogether. They will wait until some of the dust settles on what increasingly looks like an out-of-control obamacare with an insecure website. These people, with their premiums, will exit the system for a few months, maybe longer, some maybe indefinitely. Look for the insurance industry to panic.

paul1149 on December 11, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Pig Virus) Calls Republicans “Wild Propagandists” For Highlighting Millions of Americans Losing Their Health Plans Under Obamacare…

Resist We Much on December 11, 2013 at 11:59 AM

Hey, when Dems are in power this is about the time (a year out from the next election) that Waxman comes up with some wildly partisan issue to hold committee hearings on. Something to grandstand about for the months leading up to the real campaign kick off. I guess that name-calling is all he has without some committee chairmanship to exploit.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Three huge caveats to the 365,000 figure…”

Four: They probably added a few zeros to the right-hand side to center -justify the comma.
Appearances is everything.

Tsar of Earth on December 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM

These people, with their premiums, will exit the system for a few months, maybe longer, some maybe indefinitely. Look for the insurance industry to panic.

paul1149 on December 11, 2013 at 12:06 PM

And when the 2015 premiums climb because of non-participation, look for the Dems to panic.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Ryan’s replacement will stop this!!!

[WryTrvllr on December 11, 2013 at 11:26 AM]

A very good point, which is why it is so important to make sure that Paul Ryan’s replacement is elected.

Dusty on December 11, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Even if Ryan’s replacement is a hard-core Dem, it would be an improvement.

Myron Falwell on December 11, 2013 at 12:14 PM

So if 5.6 million people have lost their health insurance so far (by Fox News’ count with some states not yet reporting), and if we believe the HHS number of 365K people signing up for Obamacare, then only 6.5% of those who lost their health insurance because of Obamacare have been able to buy Obamacare health insurance.

It has been 71 days since October 1, so that enrollments have averaged 365,000 / 71 = 5,141 people per day. If people sign up at the same rate through March 31 (182 days), there would be 936K enrollments by March 31, meaning that 16.7% of those who lost health insurance due to Obamacare could buy it back, most likely at a higher price than what they paid before. Sebelius set a target of 7 million enrollments, and they won’t even get 1 million.

It has been written that health care is about 1/6 of the US economy–so to control 1/6 of the economy, Obamacare throws people off their health insurance and gives it back to 1/6 of them, leaving the other 5/6 without insurance.

So when the employer mandate takes effect next year, we’ll have this problem multiplied by 10 or 20…

Could some Democrat please explain WHY DID THEY DO THIS???

Steve Z on December 11, 2013 at 12:15 PM

JusDreamin on December 11, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Due to The Won waving his magic wand and giving businesses until next year, we have been spared but I am fully expecting next year to be a shocker. I wonder if any families of four have seen that $2500 annual savings yet?

Cindy Munford on December 11, 2013 at 12:17 PM

The healthy members of this group might very well take a much dimmer view of signing up for such exorbitant coverage – the fact that there is no subsidy means that when they sign up, it really is them, rather than the government, that is subsidizing the sick.

RINO in Name Only on December 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM

This is the gist of the Adminstration’s ‘viability’ argument.

They are, via the mandate, requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a tax sufficiently painful enough as to encourage them to purchase health insurance.

Since the new policy coverage demands open the insurance companies to a substantial adverse selection risk (pre-existing conditions) – the insurance companies need to have a substantial number of healthy individuals who rarely use healthcare services to pay a substantial premium to offset the higher costs the insurers will be exposed to with the others. As designed, the ‘young healthy’ insureds are subsidizing the premiums of the older / less healthy insureds.

To offset the higher costs of premiums, the federal government is going to cover, for select individuals in the middle / lower classes, part to most of their premiums via subsidies. The intent was to mask the most of the financial pain for the young healthy to offset the costs of the less healthy via the taxpayer. The problem here is that the subsidy qualifications are pretty narrow. The one’s with the lowest incomes are qualifying for the expanded Medicare coverages (ie free healthcare paid by government) so they don’t help out with the risk of a premium / cost death spiral.

The young healthy who don’t get good enough subsidies or qualify for Medicare are deciding that it’s in their interests, this year, to pay the 1% of the their income as a ‘tax’ rather than buy coverages. They don’t see the tax, and it’s not really due until they file their 2014 returns…so why buy expensive coverage now (even if the website worked).

What we’ve seen so far – is that the vast majority of those signing up are the one’s who are either qualifying for the expanded Medicare or those who have health issues that necessitate having health insurance. The insurance companies are looking at substantial losses on their policies – but know that the US government is going to use taxpayer funds to help offset their losses – at least for a while.

But all of this is just about the massive amount that this ClusterFark is going to cost the taxpayer – healthcare spending in 2020 will be over $5T when we consider O’Care and Medicare. Deficits and debt will soar – but that’s SOP for this Administration.

The real damage goes beyond the costs – the damage to the industry as a whole as more, not less, will not have insurance, seeing fewer Doctors, who will be more overworked and less compensated, an faced with even more soaring costs of their own.

Athos on December 11, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Have you noticed we don’t hear much griping from insurance companies lately. I guess they’re buried in piles of ObamaBribe and busy (quietly) reinstating canceled policies.

Next: Doctors, hospitals – Your ObamaBribe checks are in the mail.

Tsar of Earth on December 11, 2013 at 12:20 PM

US launches Spanish-language health care website

” The U.S. government has debuted the Spanish-language version of the healthcare website that will help Latinos to shop and sign up for new insurance plans under President Barack Obama’s health care reform law.

The site, http://www.CuidadoDeSalud.gov, was soft-launched over the weekend. Over the next month, the Department of Health and Human Services will boost its promotional efforts to introduce the site to Spanish-language speakers.

The department will rely on feedback from Spanish-language organizations that use the site during the initial stage to improve it before it is mass marketed, said department spokeswoman Joanne Peters….”

CNBC

workingclass artist on December 11, 2013 at 12:20 PM

This should go out with each cancellation notice and each doubled premium invoice.

You know your old health plan that was CANCELED last year? Democrats made that happen. Not a single Republican voted for it. In fact Republicans did everything they could to keep it from happening. Remember that when you vote.

jukin3 on December 11, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Well, some of those people may have enrolled in new plans outside the exchange. Their insurer sends them a cancellation letter; they call the insurer to complain; the insurer tells them they have new plans to offer; and the customer signs up for one to make sure he still has coverage on January 1. All of that takes place outside Healthcare.gov, which is A-OK so long as you’re not seeking a subsidy. In fact, some cancellations come with news that the insurer has automatically enrolled the customer in a new, ObamaCare-approved plan.

Allahpundit on December 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

.
Here’s hard fact anecdote to back up what you are saying, AP.

My son is a “young invincible” who is off are plan at the end of this year because he has turned 26.

He completes his paramedic training in January and HAS to have insurance since the BULK of EMT/Paramedic positions are now at 29 hours or less per week …

(Two takeaways in one there – these a government jobs which are overwhelmingly unionized – and they are scaling back hours so they don’t have to provide health insurance.)

… so his chances of a catastrophic injury are too great to ignore. My wife checked out the just the pricing/deductibles on the “Obamacare approved plans” and I went on esurance.

His new insurance plan starts on 12/31/2013 and is less than 1/2 the cost and the deductibles are 1/3 as much.

Most likely not a coincidence? esurance and others are now advertising on the radio out here in fly over country that you can still get the “type of health insurance coverage you have been used to” on their websites.

The SCOAMF, the Wicked Witch and HHS may not be willing to tell the truth – but the health insurance companies KNOW what the Obamacare risk pool is shaking out to be … and they may ALREADY be going to “fall back mode” so they can limit the damage when this rape of the American people gets repealed.

Side note: Many firefighters make less than $ 15/hour and people serving fast foot think they are ENTITLED to $ 15/hour?

PolAgnostic on December 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM

ObamaCare, the gift that will keep on giving, right through November 2014.

GarandFan on December 11, 2013 at 12:32 PM

And 200,000 have signed up to be Colonists on Mars !!!!

CrazyGene on December 11, 2013 at 12:42 PM

More of this to think about. First why is the number 365,000. Why not 365,019 or some other odd number. why is the number the same as the days in a year? This leads to think that they do not know and are just making up a number that sounds good to them. After all of this if you take their number and you apply their number of 5% paid the premium then there are only 18,250 that actual signed up so far. Not counting duplicates.

jpcpt03 on December 11, 2013 at 12:55 PM

And 200,000 have signed up to be Colonists on Mars !!!!

CrazyGene on December 11, 2013 at 12:42 PM

My theory is that there really isn’t that many interested. These are folks who were using Healthcare.gov

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 1:02 PM

The department will rely on feedback from Spanish-language organizations that use the site during the initial stage to improve it before it is mass marketed, said department spokeswoman Joanne Peters….”

workingclass artist on December 11, 2013 at 12:20 PM

As I recall, the Spanish website was the first to be abandoned when the “glitches” started with healthcare.gov My guess is that the system is still fragile and they don’t want to have too many people try and log on all at once.

And, of course, it is probably racist to assume that those who do not speak English well enough to use the other website are probably not those who will be paying into Obamacare. My theory is that they dumped fixing this site was that they needed to fix the system where people who will actually fund Obamacare can be found.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 1:07 PM

As for the million-dollar question, whether the exchanges are drawing enough healthy young people to offset the cost of the chronically ill, HHS won’t say. That’s actually better evidence that this boondoggle is in deep trouble, I think, than the fact that they’re way off their target enrollment number

If they are less than half to their minimum target does the percentage even matter? Arguing over the risk pool if the goals were met would be one thing, but less than half not even showing up?

What point does that make?

Gatsu on December 11, 2013 at 1:15 PM

I am just wondering do US citizens overseas have to buy ObamaCare, it’s a tax right, so you have to get it?

Patricksp on December 11, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Question: If 5 million people lost their individual plans as a direct result of Ocare, and there is no other market for purchasing health insurance for these folks, and presumably all 5 million didn’t give up their self-employed status and take a job with employer-based health care, why is the target 3.3M?

Well, some of those people may have enrolled in new plans outside the exchange. Their insurer sends them a cancellation letter; they call the insurer to complain; the insurer tells them they have new plans to offer; and the customer signs up for one to make sure he still has coverage on January 1. All of that takes place outside Healthcare.gov, which is A-OK so long as you’re not seeking a subsidy. In fact, some cancellations come with news that the insurer has automatically enrolled the customer in a new, ObamaCare-approved plan.

Allahpundit on December 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Yep. When I received the cancellation letter for my *non-compliant*
policy, I also received – at the same time – the offer for an Obamacare compliant policy that most closely matched what I had, along with the new premium amount. I didn’t even have to call my carrier. I could have just started forking over the monthly checks for the new amount on Jan. 1 and not ever had to go near the exchange.

But my question is, aren’t lumped together nationwide targets and enrollment numbers basically pointless when each state has to get the right mix and ratio of the young and healthy in its own insurance market?

lynncgb on December 11, 2013 at 1:44 PM

..depends upon what the definition of “sign-ups” is, of course.

The War Planner on December 11, 2013 at 1:57 PM

Come January 1, 2014 thanks to Obama, American medical care will be partying like it’s 1914 … … or maybe 1814 … …

VorDaj on December 11, 2013 at 2:00 PM

It’s gotten to the point whether neither I, nor a majority of Americans, even trust the “hard figures” coming out of the government. It’s presumed (correctly, in most cases), that all statements — including numbers and statistics — are lies lies lies, promulgated for propagandistic purposes.

Zombie on December 11, 2013 at 11:28 AM

..any more of that sedition, old son, and you will be hauled off to Room 101. Now sit back, sip your Victory Gin, view the viddie of our triumphant struggle against Eastaisa, and contemplate soothing thoughts like the fact that your weekly chocolate ration has been raised from 30 grams to 25 grams.

The War Planner on December 11, 2013 at 2:00 PM

Who can say that Obama has no respect for the Founding Fathers when clearly he wants to bring American medical care back to what it was during their time?

VorDaj on December 11, 2013 at 2:02 PM

But my question is, aren’t lumped together nationwide targets and enrollment numbers basically pointless when each state has to get the right mix and ratio of the young and healthy in its own insurance market?

lynncgb on December 11, 2013 at 1:44 PM

That depends on what the “risk corridor” really is.

oldroy on December 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Due to The Won waving his magic wand and giving businesses until next year, we have been spared but I am fully expecting next year to be a shocker. I wonder if any families of four have seen that $2500 annual savings yet?

Cindy Munford on December 11, 2013 at 12:17 PM

best of luck for you and yours next year Cindy.
As to that mythical family of 4, you can bet the fine people that brought you BambiCare™ will march them out front and center. As soon as they find them…

JusDreamin on December 11, 2013 at 2:08 PM

End this phony charade and tell us how many have actually paid for insurance . . . anything less is meaningless.

rplat on December 11, 2013 at 3:12 PM

“365 whatever” indicates a made-up number. People often use “365″ as the number of choice when they haven’t a clue and are scrambling for a numerical answer— just picking the number of days in the year.

stillings on December 12, 2013 at 10:43 AM