Massachusetts Democrat: ObamaCare is “going to hit the fan” in the next few years

posted at 6:41 pm on April 21, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

As badly as President Obama wants everyone to start running with his preferred ObamaCare narrative — i.e., that “this thing is working,” “the repeal debate is and should be over,” and that “Democrats should forcefully defend” the law — but not all Democrats actually need to defend the top-down monstrosity that is now governing our healthcare system. There were a number of Democrats that didn’t join the otherwise overwhelming coalition that voted for the passage of ObamaCare, like Rep. Stephen Lynch in Massachusetts. He sounds pretty skeptical that, had the Obama administration actually allowed the law to go into effect as planned instead of making unilateral delays for the sake of political convenience, Obama would be quite so confident that “this thing is working.” Noah Rothman at Mediaite caught the interview from the Boston Herald last week:

There have been parts of ObamaCare that have been postponed because they are unpalatable. So, as these provisions come into effect, the administration thus far is saying, ‘Gee, really can’t handle this right now, so we’re gonna’ delay it.’ These obligations keep piling up — the mandatory registration, the penalties… It’s gonna’ hit the fan, because any individual with an individual healthcare plan that exceeds $10,200 is in a Cadillac plan situation. They’re gonna’ have to pay that employer if they provide that, and many do today, never mind in 2018, will have to pay a 40 percent tax on the amount over the maximum established under the Affordable Care Act. So, that’s a huge tax. … I think it’ll be impossible for a repeal right now because you’ve taken on 31 million new people, you know, you’re trying to provide healthcare to them — that’s a good thing. The problem has always been paying for it. You know, you’ve got to rely on the other individuals who already have healthcare to pay for that, and at the same time, you’ve made a promise to those individuals, those 270 million people that already had healthcare that your healthcare will either be the same or will be improved by this. I think that’s a very tough promise to live up to under this system.


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

And yet this jackwagon voted for it.

rbj on April 21, 2014 at 6:46 PM

Single Payer soon to come…

OmahaConservative on April 21, 2014 at 6:47 PM

“Going” to?

davidk on April 21, 2014 at 6:52 PM

And yet this jackwagon voted for it.

rbj on April 21, 2014 at 6:46 PM

Actually, in point of fairness, he didn’t:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll165.xml

2YEP598 on April 21, 2014 at 6:52 PM

And yet this jackwagon voted for it.

rbj on April 21, 2014 at 6:46 PM

Did you read what Erika posted?

There were a number of Democrats that didn’t join the otherwise overwhelming coalition that voted for the passage of ObamaCare, like Rep. Stephen Lynch in Massachusetts.

OmahaConservative on April 21, 2014 at 6:53 PM

No $h!T Sherlock? Where were you when the vote came down?

Tater Salad on April 21, 2014 at 7:00 PM

Yep, just after the next election.

Or the one after that.

Or the one after that.

Or the, nah, by then we’ll have those election things nice and rigged.

Gingotts on April 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM

But in a good way.

Bishop on April 21, 2014 at 7:02 PM

And just why would it be difficult to repeal Obamacare? Oh yeah in their heart of hearts they would then, when standing in front of a mirror be face to face with a racists. It is so difficult to explain the truth, that this law is a mess. “Easy Outs” are better than “Hard Choices” for the liberal at heart. In other words will let future generations deal with it.

Buckshots on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

Yeah, it’s a good metaphor, alright.

” When the Obamacare hits the fan”.

It’s got a good ring to it.

Cleombrotus on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

How can the debate on ObamaCare be over when it hasn’t been fully implemented yet?

LouisianaLightning on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

No $h!T Sherlock? Where were you when the vote came down?

Tater Salad on April 21, 2014 at 7:00 PM

He voted ‘NO’ on the bill. Didn’t anyone read Erika’s post?

OmahaConservative on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

No $h!T Sherlock? Where were you when the vote came down?

Tater Salad on April 21, 2014 at 7:00 PM

He voted ‘NO’ on the bill. Didn’t anyone read Erika’s post?

OmahaConservative on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

What, HotGas posters go to the comments before reading the content? Absurd!

Myron Falwell on April 21, 2014 at 7:07 PM

An insufferable Quack masquerading as a President once found a Doctor’s white lab coat which had been left out in the sun to dry. He put it on and spoke of wondrous things to his countrymen. All bowed, both men and women, and he was a proud Quack that day. In his delight he lifted up his voice and brayed treatments and prescriptions and timetables and qualifications randomly and incoherently and mindlessly, and unleashed like minded mindless bureaucrat zombies upon the land to look for trouble, find it everywhere, diagnose everything incorrectly and then in a very grouchy and slow manner misapply all the wrong remedies, and then everyone with a mind left knew him for the insufferable Quack he really was.

Cheshire Cat on April 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM

As badly as President Obama wants everyone to start running with his preferred ObamaCare narrative — i.e., that “this thing is working,” “the repeal debate is and should be over

If so why do Dems keep talking about it?

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:11 PM

************* NO SH*T SHERLOCK *********************************:)

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:14 PM

Boston Herald, April 21, 2014

U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch, the lone member of the Bay State delegation to vote against Obama­care four years ago, now predicts the law’s botched roll-out will not only cost Democrats valuable House seats but could even jeopardize their control of the Senate in this year’s hotly contested midterm elections.

And yeah, read the article by Ms. Johnsen. It’s a bit tricky to catch the contrivance but it’s there.

Willys on April 21, 2014 at 7:14 PM

MeanWhile the Associated Press JournOlisters Feel Da Pain(s):

media
33m
Associated Press writers are stepping up their fight for affordable healthcare benefits and fair contracts by omitting bylines from their articles – @HuffPostMedia
read more on huffingtonpost.com
*******************************

Staffers: AP’s health care proposals would really hurt us
Posted on Jan 21, 2014 Last Updated Jan 22, 2014 Posted by Linda Johnson
************************************************************************

News Media Guild members across the country are uniformly opposed to AP’s health care proposals, which would cost many staffers far more than they could afford and effectively slash their income.

People would be hurt financially whether they are healthy, have a complex chronic illness, need surgery, are seriously injured or have a baby. Guild members are speaking out about how much they would be hit:
**********************************************************************

I have a rare cancer. I’ve had two major surgeries in the past two years. I’ll probably have more surgeries and possibly chemotherapy. My out-of-pocket costs for previous surgeries under the current AP health care plan amounted to probably less than $1,000. Now, I think it’s pretty likely I’ll reach the $4,800 ceiling for maximum out-of-pocket treatment expenses under the family plan this year if AP’s health care proposal stands. My two sons are on the family plan with me. One takes a medication that currently costs us $192 a year. Under AP’s proposal, that would increase to $698. The bottom line:

I see our out-of-pocket health care costs/premiums going up around $6,000 or more this year. And that’s if I stay entirely with in-network providers. I’m 57 and I’ve been healthy all my life until now. Now, when I most need insurance, I would have the worst coverage of my life under AP’s proposal. JOAN LOWY, WASHINGTON, D.C.

I have had a kidney transplant and have chronic, recurring autoimmune disease that attacks my new kidney. The new plan would cost me about $7,000 more a year if my treatment were to stay constant _ and more if new side effects occur and treatments are prescribed, which often occurs. MICHELLE MINKOFF, WASHINGTON, D.C.

My wife and I paid more than $1,000 in 2012 for the birth of our second child, and we would get hit much harder under the new plan, which would stress us financially. One of the biggest bills last year was the facility charge, for the use of the hospital. That totaled $9,414. Under our (basic) plan, we paid a $672 coinsurance payment, with the insurer picking up 90 percent of that bill after deducting the discount Aetna negotiated with the provider. Under the new plan, with the less-than-generous 75/25 percent coinsurance split AP’s proposing, my coinsurance payment would more than double to $1,679. That is just one of several bills you receive after having a kid. Having another baby will become a bit cost prohibitive, which is maybe what the company wants. TOM MURPHY, INDIANAPOLIS

I had a knee replacement done late last year. It cost me about $385 dollars: a $150 deductible, a $200 hospital copay and about $35 for prescriptions. The bill for doctor fees, hospital, in-home care and physical therapy _ but not pain meds _ to date is $74,774, although UHC paid at discounted rates. If I’d had this done under the health plan AP’s proposed, my potential exposure could be up to $11,350. I can really appreciate the statement, “Don’t get sick, but if you do, die quickly,” because if you live, you’ll be paying for a long time. GARY MORTLOCK, SPOKANE DATA CENTER

The health plan proposed by the AP in the current contract talks would cost me at least $2,800 in the first year and more in future years, not counting any new health issues that might come up. That’s because of expensive drugs I take to keep a muscle condition I have from getting worse. What’s far more troubling than this expense, which will wipe out any ability I have to save money, is the effect it will have on families with their pressed budgets and multiple, sometimes serious, health needs. For them, the costs of this plan could be financially crippling. WILL LESTER, WASHINGTON, D.C.

My family and I are basically healthy and fit, but under this proposed plan, I would be spending more than $17,500 a year in medical expenses within the next two years. This is untenable. MARTHA MENDOZA, SAN JOSE

My rough back-of-the envelope estimate of my cost increases under AP’s plan are dramatic since I get ostomy supplies every month and will for the rest of my life. I estimate my costs in 2013 at around $1,300. Under AP’s proposal, my costs _ including premium _ would rise to $3,500 in the first year and to $4,200 the year after _ AND that assumes medical costs remain the same, which they won’t. NORMA LOVE, CONCORD

Even though I am a very healthy person with no chronic health problems, my health care costs will more than quadruple in three years under the AP’s plan. This is unsettling. It means that I would pay much more for health insurance if this is approved. More importantly, it also makes me fearful of what would happen — and how much it would cost — if I become really sick or was injured. TAMARA LUSH, TAMPA
The AP plan would cut my salary by the $12,500 maximum, given that my wife is being treated for ovarian cancer. That is unacceptable. STEVEN HURST, WASHINGTON, D.C.
========================

http://www.newsmediaguild.org/?p=3019

canopfor on January 30, 2014 at 11:29 AM

canopfor on January 30, 2014 at 9:25 PM

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:17 PM

Yeah, it’s a good metaphor, alright.

” When the Obamacare hits the fan”.

It’s got a good ring to it.

Cleombrotus on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

I also like “When Obamacare hits the fans.” Like this one.

de rigueur on April 21, 2014 at 7:22 PM

He voted ‘NO’ on the bill. Didn’t anyone read Erika’s post?

OmahaConservative on April 21, 2014 at 7:03 PM

Bart Stupak and Max Baucus are also critics and they voted no. So, while not reading the post in detail is a faux pas, I think you’d agree that any commentary from Dems about the “settled law” known as Obamacare.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:26 PM

The Associated Press ‏@AP 2h

Obama’s health overhaul has signed up millions, but has only chipped away at reducing ranks of the uninsured: http://apne.ws/1i98Z7k
============================================================

Affordable Care Act only chips away at a core goal
By JUDY LIN
— Apr. 21, 2014 5:23 PM EDT
***************************

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Swan Lockett had high hopes that President Barack Obama’s health overhaul would lead her family to an affordable insurance plan, but that hasn’t happened.

Instead, because lawmakers in her state refused to expand Medicaid, the 46-year-old mother of four from Texas uses home remedies or pays $75 to see a doctor when she has an asthma attack.

“If I don’t have the money, I just let it go on its own,” Lockett said.

The federal health care overhaul has provided coverage for millions of Americans, but it has only chipped away at one of its core goals: to sharply reduce the number of people without insurance.

President Barack Obama announced last week that 8 million people have signed up for coverage through new insurance exchanges, but barriers persist blocking tens of millions of people around the nation from accessing health care. Questions of eligibility, immigrant coverage and the response from employers and state legislatures mean considerable work lies ahead for health care advocates and officials — but cost remains a particularly high hurdle for low income people who are most likely to be uninsured.

“We think that most people will get insurance once it’s affordable to them,” said Cheryl Fish-Parcham, of Families USA, a health advocacy group.

There are myriad ways people fall into coverage gaps. Some are eligible for discounted policies but say they still can’t afford their share of exchange plans. Others earn too much for subsidies. Immigrants living in the country illegally can’t obtain care under the law. Dozens of states haven’t expanded Medicaid. And some employers have reduced staff hours to avoid being mandated to provide care.

“I’m a nurse, but my employer doesn’t offer health insurance,” said Gwen Eliezer, 32, who lives north of Asheville, N.C.

Eliezer works an average of 29 hours a week at a nursing home, so her employer isn’t required to cover her. She qualifies for a subsidy but says the plan she found with a $200 monthly premium and $6,500 deductible is too expensive. So while her 6-year-old son qualified for Medicaid during open enrollment, she goes without. She pays cash to see a doctor for gastrointestinal pain but says she can’t afford to get the problem diagnosed.

“If I went through an emergency room, I can claim acute pain,” she said. “But then I’d end up with a lot of debt to a hospital.”

Before the launch of the Affordable Care Act, about 48 million people, or 15 percent of the population, went without health insurance, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The number of people recently enrolled includes those who switched from previous plans, and it’s not clear how many previously uninsured people are now covered.

The share of adults without insurance shrank from 17.1 percent at the end of last year to 15.6 percent for the first three months of 2014, according to a Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index released this month. The decline would translate to about 3.5 million people gaining coverage, according to the study.

Health advocates say their work isn’t finished. California “has made huge progress with the new benefits of the Affordable Care Act,” said Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access California. “But there’s more to do.”

Hair salon owner Lola Smith of Palo Alto, in eastern Pennsylvania coal country, said she couldn’t afford a policy from the federal exchange. Instead, she bought a cut-rate plan for $148 a month that helps pay for hospitalizations and doctor visits. “It doesn’t cover very much. It’s just basic,” she said.

The plan doesn’t qualify as health insurance under Affordable Care Act regulations, and Smith expects to be hit with a fine until she qualifies for Medicare next year.

Immigrants living in the U.S. illegally are ineligible for coverage. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that more than 7.5 million people fall into this category and rely on emergency rooms and safety net clinics. About 1 million members of this population are from California.

“When I see there are American citizens who don’t have access to health care because they can’t pay for it, I figure that I’ll have even less of a chance to have access to health services,” said Jose Diaz, a 67-year-old day laborer in Pomona, Calif., who came to the U.S. illegally from Mexico City nearly a decade ago. “It’s very sad.”

Nearly 5 million low-income, childless adults are without health care, according to a December survey by Kaiser Family Foundation.

A Medicaid expansion could help close that gap, and the federal government has offered to pay states nearly all of the costs for covering individuals who earn up to $16,000 a year, 138 percent of the federal poverty wage.

However, 24 states have opted against it, saying they don’t trust the federal government to deliver on its promises and don’t want to be stuck with a program they can’t afford.

Health advocates say getting those states to expand would reduce hospitalization and emergency costs across the system.

“That affects all our pocketbooks, because we all pay for uncompensated care when people don’t have timely access to preventative care,” Fish-Parcham said.

Texas is among the states to reject the expansion, and Lockett says she’s been shut out.

The Houston woman earns too much for Medicaid or a subsidy but can’t afford a full plan. She earns $1,225 a month and takes her children — a 5-year-old daughter, 18-year-old twin boys and a 19-year-old son — to the emergency room or a clinic when they need care.

“I was disappointed,” Lockett said, “because I was kind of excited about getting on the Affordable Care Act on the marketplace.”

___

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/despite-optimism-obstacles-remain-health-care

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Lynch is one of the few Stupack Democrats that still didn’t vote for it.
He’s also firmly in Big Labor’s pocket, and they HATE Obamacare right now, this is the constituency Lynch is speaking for.
Also Lynch probably wants to be the first on the draw to tell his fellow Democrats “I told you so” when they all finally realize how big of a political miscalculation passing Obamacare was.

MWC_RS on April 21, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Correction Baucus and Stupak voted yes.

HA is glitchy tonight and it is hit or miss if a post goes through. This is the third post where I’ve had to re-iterate my thoughts a second time.

I’m out of here and hoping for better connectivity later.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:28 PM

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:27 PM

You must be looking at what is going on with Obamacare and laughing your ass off.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:30 PM

Bart Stupak and Max Baucus are also critics and they voted no. So, while not reading the post in detail is a faux pas, I think you’d agree that any commentary from Dems about the “settled law” known as Obamacare.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:26 PM

Agreed. But for some to ignorantly plunge in and accuse him of something he didn’t do is both astounding and ill-informed…

OmahaConservative on April 21, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Bart Stupak and Max Baucus are also critics and they voted no. So, while not reading the post in detail is a faux pas, I think you’d agree that any commentary from Dems about the “settled law” known as Obamacare.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:26 PM

That any Democrat managed to vote no on the darn thing attracts my attention more than anything else, given the lemming-like nature of the party.

But until proven otherwise, Rep. Lynch had and has nothing to lose, being in a one-party Socialist state. His stance is a total aberration, a freak of nature.

Myron Falwell on April 21, 2014 at 7:34 PM

???????????????????????????????????????????:

https://twitter.com/PressSec

Jay Carney (EOP) ‏@PressSec Apr 18

“I was paying $10,000/year for insurance & now I’m paying less than $1,500/year for my insurance.” Watch → http://go.wh.gov/tKmjpF #ACAWorks
Expand
============

Jay Carney (EOP) ‏@PressSec Apr 18

“You saved our son’s life.” Watch President Obama meet 6 families who wrote to him on how the #ACA is helping them-http://go.wh.gov/tKmjpF

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:43 PM

Hey America the crap in that crap sandwich will be delivered later. Lick them lips.

CW on April 21, 2014 at 7:44 PM

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:27 PM

You must be looking at what is going on with Obamacare and laughing your ass off.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:30 PM

Happy Nomad: Well, kinda at times,…the Dis-Information and Lies are
F’n, er,..Boinking OutStanding( a tad sarc):)

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:45 PM

But until proven otherwise, Rep. Lynch had and has nothing to lose, being in a one-party Socialist state. His stance is a total aberration, a freak of nature.

Myron Falwell on April 21, 2014 at 7:34 PM

Full disclosure, I know nothing about Representative Lynch or his motives. He does reside in a one-party Socialist state but I suspect his district has a large number of dissenters.

Bart Stupak crafted a deal with Pelosi for his yea vote and those of other pro-life Democrats. It involved assurances from his own party about pro-life issues. The filthy bastard didn’t do it out of concern about unborn life, he did it because his district would vote him out of office if he voted for federally funded abortions. Which they did when it became clear that Obamacare funds the death of children.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:48 PM

Well, kinda at times,…the Dis-Information and Lies are
F’n, er,..Boinking OutStanding( a tad sarc):)

canopfor on April 21, 2014 at 7:45 PM

Thought so! It will be interesting to see the stories when Canadians come over the border for medical treatment and find that the services are different.

Keep in mind that opting out of Obamacare is not going to be cheap. So anybody who searches out private alternatives are still going have to pay thousands in healthcare just to pay for the worthless parasites who get “subsidies” under Obamacare.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:54 PM

Bart Stupak crafted a deal with Pelosi for his yea vote and those of other pro-life Democrats. It involved assurances from his own party about pro-life issues. The filthy bastard didn’t do it out of concern about unborn life, he did it because his district would vote him out of office if he voted for federally funded abortions. Which they did when it became clear that Obamacare funds the death of children.

Happy Nomad on April 21, 2014 at 7:48 PM

I just wish the truth would come out about how big Pelosi’s payout to Stupak was. Even by politician standards (which aren’t that high to begin with) he was criminally stupid… he must’ve had the kickback of a lifetime that has been successfully hidden forever in Pelosi’s swamp.

Myron Falwell on April 21, 2014 at 8:05 PM

“Going” to?

davidk on April 21, 2014 at 6:52 PM

The worst is yet to come. He’s right about that.

rickv404 on April 21, 2014 at 8:11 PM

It’s probably been mentioned elsewhere but Lynch does, in fact, have a split vote on the Affordable Care Act (the names reeks of ’1984′ irony where the Ministry of Love is responsible for killing people-the exact opposite of love.)In 2009 Lynch voted for the House version of Obamacare but when the House version was superseded by the Senate version, Lynch, to his credit, did vote against it.

Lynch well knows that, bad as it is now, Obamacare is front loaded with benefits and back loaded with payments and claims which will exacerbates costs exponentially. Don’t also forget that only those who really need healthcare are signing on (high risk front load) so when payment crunch time comes (no cash available back load because the young are not joining) there will be a cash flow crash.

MaiDee on April 21, 2014 at 8:17 PM

I think it’ll be impossible for a repeal right now because you’ve taken on 31 million new people, you know, you’re trying to provide healthcare to them — that’s a good thing.

Huh? They fudge the numbers to get 7.1 million enrolled – and now it miraculously grows to 31 million. Wow! That Obamacare is one helluva fertilizer.

Hill60 on April 21, 2014 at 8:18 PM

Just remember that Shillery Clinton supports Obamacare.

kemojr on April 21, 2014 at 8:39 PM

It is not because it is unpalatable per se. The problem is that it can only run on 100% unicorn farts. Check out page 2311……

mouell on April 21, 2014 at 8:39 PM

You really have to feel sorry for those Associated Press people don’t you? Every article a piece of political hackery. The article above being case in point. Apparently they believe that noone ever fact checks anything they say. Aside from advocating Medicaid expansion as some kind of a good thing, it is a flat out lie to say that someone making $1200 a month does not qualify for a subsidy. Have these people even visited the website? Or is it that reporters just cut and paste the DNC talking points?

brindle on April 21, 2014 at 9:03 PM

The stupid is strong with this one.

trapeze on April 21, 2014 at 9:13 PM

Massachusetts Democrat: ObamaCare is “going to hit the fan” in the next few years

Nonsense, Obama will simply continue to ignore, change or make up new laws as is politically convenient for him and the Democrats, easy!

RJL on April 22, 2014 at 1:50 AM

MWC_RS on April 21, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Right. Lynch is a complete tool of Big labor interests. His big problem is with the Cadillac Labor Union health plans. Stevie could care less about the hosing the middle class will take when ObamaCare is fully operational. He’s unconcerned about the destruction of the nation’s health care system.

wraithby on April 22, 2014 at 11:15 AM

Health advocates say getting those states to expand would reduce hospitalization and emergency costs across the system.

And yet, the study showing exactly the opposite with a large sample of Medicaid recipients shows exactly the opposite.

I am not a health care reporter. How come I know this yet that writer does not, since he never mentions it as counterpoint?

winoceros on April 22, 2014 at 11:36 AM

His district is chock-full of blue chip type firms with great health care plans. Those will disappear and that will directly lead to a loss of lawn upkeep, landscaping, boats, etc. Just disposable income which will now be paying their “fair share” instead of feathering their hard-earned nests. But these fools will keep voting Democrat and fundraising, just like in my old trial law firm. Like health care reform now?

winoceros on April 22, 2014 at 11:57 AM