So how much is your insurance going up due to Obamacare?

[try2bfrugal]

Another good article -

"Perry argued that expanding Medicaid coverage would bankrupt the state, though by investing $15 billion in the expansion, Texas would receive $100 billion (http://www.texastribune.org/2013/02/04/agenda-texas-medicaid-expansion/) in federal funding and cover 1.8 million newly enrolled residents under the program."

Thirteen Governors Screwing Over the Uninsured

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/meet-governors-rejecting-expansion-medicaid

(http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/meet-governors-rejecting-expansion-medicaid)
(http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/meet-governors-rejecting-expansion-medicaid)

[Alan]

...."The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Affordable Care Act will reduce the federal deficit by $143 billion between 2010 and 2019, and programs like Medicaid expansion will be paid for with new taxes, such as for tanning salons and for people who make more than $250,000."


And increase individual states expenses. See "An Economic and Policy Analysis of Florida Medicaid Expansion (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st347)" as just one example:


Effect of the ACA on Florida Medicaid Enrollment and Costs. The ACA encourages states to expand Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of poverty ($32,500 for a family of four). The federal government would initially pay 100 percent of the cost of benefits for adults for three years — dropping to 90 percent in 2020 and thereafter.
If Florida expands its Medicaid program, up to 1.6 million additional individuals may enroll. Of these, 250,000 or more would not qualify for the enhanced federal match, because they were previously eligible but never enrolled. They would only qualify for the older — and much lower — federal matching rate of 59 percent. About 1.3 million would be newly eligible and subject to the enhanced federal match. This number will include some who drop private health insurance coverage. Despite generous federal payments, the Cato Institute estimates the ACA’s requirements would force Florida to increase general revenues allocated to Medicaid from just over $6 billion in 2008 (prior to the ACA), to nearly $24 billion in 2030 under an expanded program.

As previously mentioned, the states don't enjoy the same deficit leeway that the feds enjoy. In case you weren't aware of this, consider the following:
There are three general kinds of state balanced budget requirements:


The governor's proposed budget must be balanced (43 states and Puerto Rico).
The budget the legislature passes must be balanced (39 states and Puerto Rico).
The budget must be balanced at the end of a fiscal year or biennium, so that no deficit can be carried forward (37 states and Puerto Rico).


Those are realities that states must consider while being pressured by the federal government to increase their expenses. It seems to boil down to whether or not any given state's legislature is willing to think long term or short term.

[try2bfrugal]

Well, I don't know what to tell you Alan, but I'm with Jan Brewer on this one. The states without the expansion are still going to be paying the taxes to support the programs without getting any of the benefits in return, as well as leave thousands, in some states millions, of people uninsured.

I know how I'd vote if I was uninsured in a state without expansion, or was insured but had compassion for the uninsured.

Aren't the Koch brother behind the Cato institute? The ones Wikipedia says fund and support organizations that contribute significantly to Republican candidates, and that lobby against universal health care and climate change legislation -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_the_Koch_brothers

[Spartana]

Note that that the ACA was designed to have expanded Medicaid in every state. The Supreme Court made that optional, and it is only now not expanded in some Republican controlled states.

I wouldn't say it is a failing of the ACA. Look to the Republican controlled state politicians who are refusing federal funds for Medicaid expansion. If you want to see Medicaid expansion in every state, vote the politicians out of office who are blocking it.I understand that the fault actually lies with the states making the choices they have (and it being backed up by the Supreme Court). I meant that I think the ACA should have foreseen that possibility (as well as some other ramifications to the plan) and made a "Plan B" to make sure those who actually needed to have affordable cover the most would be able to get it. Those people should be put into a federal program like everyone else who can get subsidies is.

[Spartana]

And rightly so. Medicaid is a state controlled program, if the Federal government actually intended to fund programs in perpetuity, shouldn't they have done so in a federal program?Agreed. If they can make federal subsidies to many people all across the USA, they can make those same subsidies (and perhaps more) to those truelly low income and low asset people who need coverage. Why even go the Medicaid route at all? Just include those people in the federal ACA program.

[bae]

Agreed. If they can make federal subsidies to many people all across the USA, they can make those same subsidies (and perhaps more) to those truelly low income and low asset people who need coverage. Why even go the Medicaid route at all? Just include those people in the federal ACA program.

Why can't they just give us all enough cash to do what we need?

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8N0ShIjtsjw/UEfIT6SieGI/AAAAAAAAGNM/V5kSJS_WEFc/s720/Awesomized.jpg

[Alan]

Well, I don't know what to tell you Alan.....

....Aren't the Koch brother behind the Cato institute? Most business groups and health care groups support Medicaid expansion. Only the rabid tea party groups seem to oppose it....LOL, it looks like you underestimated yourself.


Expansion makes economic sense for every state.
Except for when it doesn't.


I know how I'd vote if I was uninsured in a state without expansion, or was insured but had compassion for the uninsured.
There's nothing wrong with voting with your heart, but there are always realities which must be acknowledged.

[Spartana]

Why can't they just give us all enough cash to do what we need?

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8N0ShIjtsjw/UEfIT6SieGI/AAAAAAAAGNM/V5kSJS_WEFc/s720/Awesomized.jpg

He He! That will only buy you one laser sighted plasma rifle in the 40 watt range. And which is what many people would probably buy rather than health insurance if you gave them some money directly :-)! As an advocate for some sort of universal healthcare, IF we are going to have some kind of tax payer funded health insurance, I'd like to see some level of equality across the board. Some flat tax we all pay (and not just Alan) towards our coverage (like we do for Medicare and Social Security) and equitable insurance coverage available to all for the same costs irregardless of income level. If I and many others who are fit and healthy and choosing not to work voluntarily and have high-ish assets can get if for free or low cost on Alan's dime, than Alan and you et al should be able to also. And those who are truly poor with no other options should be at the head of the line to get the ACA taxpayer funded benefits rather than just left in the dust.

[try2bfrugal]

Rick Scott in Florida has said, "While the federal government is committed to paying 100 percent of the cost of new people in Medicaid, I cannot, in good conscience, deny the uninsured access to care."

In Texas, Governor Perry won't budge. But an extensive lobbying effort pushed by hospitals, city and county government officials and church groups is ratcheting up the pressure on him.

Two of those groups, the interfaith alliance Texas Impact and Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas, have released an authoritative study showing an enormous positive financial and healthcare boost from joining the Medicaid expansion.


About 2 million uninsured Texans would reap the healthcare benefit, says the report from Billy Hamilton Consulting. Hamilton has enormous credibility in Austin. For many years, he was the state's deputy and then chief deputy comptroller, and in that role he was the state's chief revenue estimator. The entire state relied on his numbers.



Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/02/21/4636165/pressure-builds-on-texas-governor.html#storylink=cpy


So if you are reading this and want to help have insurance for all, vote the Medicaid expansion blockers in your state out of office. Your state is paying the taxes for the ACA anyway, why not reap the full benefits?

[gimmethesimplelife]

Another good article -

"Perry argued that expanding Medicaid coverage would bankrupt the state, though by investing $15 billion in the expansion, Texas would receive $100 billion (http://www.texastribune.org/2013/02/04/agenda-texas-medicaid-expansion/) in federal funding and cover 1.8 million newly enrolled residents under the program."

Thirteen Governors Screwing Over the Uninsured

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/meet-governors-rejecting-expansion-medicaid

(http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/meet-governors-rejecting-expansion-medicaid)
(http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/meet-governors-rejecting-expansion-medicaid)I was in downtown Austin last year, innocently eating a slice of cheese pizza, when the big screen TV at the pizza place I was eating at showed Rick Perry delivering his state of the state speech last January. He went on and on about the evils of expanding Medicaid in Texas and how that was just not going to happen on his watch.

Two things made me very angry - the suffering of those in Texas without insurance - and Texas has the highest percentage of residents whose lives are not worth health insurance in the country. The second thing that made me angry was how pompously and arrogantly he brushed aside the suffering of over a million people in his state. Seriously, if he found himself without assets and access to health insurance, he might very well sing a different tune.

I left Austin with the feeling that social class lines are drawn even more starkly in Texas than what I am used to in Arizona. Austin's a great place, don't get me wrong, but it is in Texas nonetheless and the "leadership" in Texas clearly does not value the lives of the poor within Texas state lines. Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

Well, I don't know what to tell you Alan, but I'm with Jan Brewer on this one. The states without the expansion are still going to be paying the taxes to support the programs without getting any of the benefits in return, as well as leave thousands, in some states millions, of people uninsured.

I know how I'd vote if I was uninsured in a state without expansion, or was insured but had compassion for the uninsured.

Aren't the Koch brother behind the Cato institute? The ones Wikipedia says fund and support organizations that contribute significantly to Republican candidates, and that lobby against universal health care and climate change legislation -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_the_Koch_brothersThough she's made some decisions since expanding Medicaid I'm not on the same page with, Brewer has my eternal respect for showing the poor in Arizona some basic human respect and some basic human rights. I will always support her after this, no matter what knuckleheaded thing she may pull next. She came through on the life and death issue and I will not forget that. Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

Rick Scott in Florida has said, "While the federal government is committed to paying 100 percent of the cost of new people in Medicaid, I cannot, in good conscience, deny the uninsured access to care."

In Texas, Governor Perry won't budge. But an extensive lobbying effort pushed by hospitals, city and county government officials and church groups is ratcheting up the pressure on him.

Two of those groups, the interfaith alliance Texas Impact and Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas, have released an authoritative study showing an enormous positive financial and healthcare boost from joining the Medicaid expansion.


About 2 million uninsured Texans would reap the healthcare benefit, says the report from Billy Hamilton Consulting. Hamilton has enormous credibility in Austin. For many years, he was the state's deputy and then chief deputy comptroller, and in that role he was the state's chief revenue estimator. The entire state relied on his numbers.



Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/02/21/4636165/pressure-builds-on-texas-governor.html#storylink=cpy


So if you are reading this and want to help have insurance for all, vote the Medicaid expansion blockers in your state out of office. Your state is paying the taxes for the ACA anyway, not reap the full benefits?
I hope, I really, really, really hope that Rick Perry is forced to budge from his position. I also think the only way to change things in Texas is to get someone new in the governor's chair next time around. I pray it won't be Perry again and I take comfort in the fact that his presidential bid was quickly derailed. Rob

[ApatheticNoMore]

Why can't they just give us all enough cash to do what we need?

I don't know, as it seems to work for banksters.

[reader99]

Rick Scott in Florida has said, "While the federal government is committed to paying 100 percent of the cost of new people in Medicaid, I cannot, in good conscience, deny the uninsured access to care."

What can that possibly mean when FL did not expand Medicaid and people like me remain uninsured?

[peggy]

Rick Scott in Florida has said, "While the federal government is committed to paying 100 percent of the cost of new people in Medicaid, I cannot, in good conscience, deny the uninsured access to care."

What can that possibly mean when FL did not expand Medicaid and people like me remain uninsured?

It means he's talking out both sides of his mouth. He wants people like you to vote for him cause, you know, he really really really tried...but, well, people like Allen should also vote for him cause, his hands are tied and all....

I think it's a matter of time till these states run by nasty republicans will expand medicare and set up their own exchanges. Surely these guys must know that their shelf life is expiring, real fast. Even the dumbest voter in a red state can talk to their cousin in Kentucky and realize that he is getting a better deal.:~)

[peggy]

I understand that the fault actually lies with the states making the choices they have (and it being backed up by the Supreme Court). I meant that I think the ACA should have foreseen that possibility (as well as some other ramifications to the plan) and made a "Plan B" to make sure those who actually needed to have affordable cover the most would be able to get it. Those people should be put into a federal program like everyone else who can get subsidies is.

This is true. Obama's great fault was in thinking that republicans would actually want to help their people and not throw them totally under the bus then back up and run over them again in the name of nasty partisanship. And that's what it is, you know. Simple Obama derangement syndrome. It isn't the expense (they always seem to find the money for incentives and tax breaks, and subsidies for the favored few). But they see health care for poor people as a waste of money. Money THEY won't get back. Not even in a productive workforce cause, you know, there are always plenty of folks lined up for the sh*t jobs.>8)

[try2bfrugal]

Rick Scott in Florida has said, "While the federal government is committed to paying 100 percent of the cost of new people in Medicaid, I cannot, in good conscience, deny the uninsured access to care."

What can that possibly mean when FL did not expand Medicaid and people like me remain uninsured?

He seems to have flop flopped again in this December 18th, article:

"On Wednesday, Scott responded to a question about Medicaid expansion by talking about people whose private insurance plans were canceled due to new coverage requirements under the Affordable Care Act.....He turned away as a reporter asked about the 800,000 Floridians who are too poor to qualify for subsidized insurance under the federal law, yet can’t qualify for Medicaid."

http://fcir.org/2013/12/18/rick-scott-moves-further-away-from-medicaid-expansion-in-florida/ (http://fcir.org/2013/12/18/rick-scott-moves-further-away-from-medicaid-expansion-in-florida/)

Vote him and his cronies out of office. He seems to have lost his conscience again.

[peggy]

Vote them out. EVery last one of them. At the national level and at the state and local level. Anyone who self identifies as a republican should be voted out, period. As nasty and partisan and nutty as the party has become, if you say you are republican you are condoning every bit of it. The voter suppression, the attack on women's rights, the push for establishing their religious theocracy, the fight against marriage equality, all of it. Vote republican, at any level, is a vote for all of these. Vote republican, at any level, and you vote to 'privatize' Social Security, shrink Medicare/medicaid, shrink and/or eliminate welfare, eliminate science in the classrooms and replace it with the bible, allow churches to dictate public policy, and a host of other items, none of which they are hiding. They are, in fact, pretty up front with their agenda.
I'm tired of people saying "Oh I don't agree with THAT, but I'm voting republican anyway."
BS! If you vote republican, on any level, you ARE agreeing with that!

If I were a moderate republican (are there any left?) I would immediately switch political parties. I would register independant, immediately. And vote green, or something like that if I was too timid to vote democrat.:idea:

[try2bfrugal]

The voter suppression, the attack on women's rights, the push for establishing their religious theocracy, the fight against marriage equality, all of it. Vote republican, at any level, is a vote for all of these. Vote republican, at any level, and you vote to 'privatize' Social Security, shrink Medicare/medicaid, shrink and/or eliminate welfare, eliminate science in the classrooms and replace it with the bible, allow churches to dictate public policy, and a host of other items, none of which they are hiding. They are, in fact, pretty up front with their agenda.

Any one of these would be enough to turn me away, but come on, bringing back Jim Crow / voter suppersssion laws? What year is this anyway? Vote them out, out, out.

Now they are passing laws to limits and constrain health care navigators to keep low income people from getting Medicaid and ACA health insurance subsidies. Vote them out.

And they have campaigns to keep young people from getting health insurance. That is crazy. They are seriously offering college kids beer and trying to talk them out of getting health insurance -

http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/beer-offensive-koch-brothers-try-bribe-college-students-not-sign-obamacare

[Alan]

Vote them out. EVery last one of them. At the national level and at the state and local level. Anyone who self identifies as a republican should be voted out, period. As nasty and partisan and nutty as the party has become, if you say you are republican you are condoning every bit of it. The voter suppression, the attack on women's rights, the push for establishing their religious theocracy, the fight against marriage equality, all of it. Vote republican, at any level, is a vote for all of these. Vote republican, at any level, and you vote to 'privatize' Social Security, shrink Medicare/medicaid, shrink and/or eliminate welfare, eliminate science in the classrooms and replace it with the bible, allow churches to dictate public policy, and a host of other items, none of which they are hiding. They are, in fact, pretty up front with their agenda.

Peggy, you left out the part where Republicans want you and your children to breathe dirty air and drink polluted water, but then again, everybody who's anybody already knows that. ;)

[JaneV2.0]

Absolutely, Alan. Look at West Virginia.

[try2bfrugal]

Peggy, you left out the part where Republicans want you and your children to breathe dirty air and drink polluted water, but then again, everybody who's anybody already knows that. ;)

They are on record as being against most environmental protection laws. That is no secret either.

"Republicans boasted that with this bill, they have cut the EPA's funding by 20% since 2010."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/politics/budget-winners-losers/

[ApatheticNoMore]

Vote them out. EVery last one of them. At the national level and at the state and local level. Anyone who self identifies as a republican should be voted out, period.

most anyone who identifies as Rep or Dem should be voted out. Vote them all out!*


As nasty and partisan and nutty as the party has become, if you say you are republican you are condoning every bit of it. The voter suppression, the attack on women's rights, the push for establishing their religious theocracy, the fight against marriage equality, all of it.

And what do you support if your a Democrat? Targetted assasination with a kill list, drone warfare, the NSA, the NDAA, the police state, growing inequality (oh never mind their pretty words look all around you - look at the world bipartisan trade bills and bank bailouts have made - don't believe their words - believe your own lying eyes!), silencing of all whistleblowers, silencing of the press, fracking every single state with poisoned water supplies, oil flowing from the tarsands, global climate agreements sabotaged, immigration deals for skilled workers to replace your job (probably not going to happen though), secret trade deals to establish corporate rule and overthrow soverignty and your ability to influence even local government, secret laws, sercret courts! This is what lesser of two evils makes possible. Vote them all out! Vote them all out!* Primary! Take to the streets! Boycott! Protest! Drop out! Resist! Disobey! If you do not resist and keep pretending our problems can be solved with a corrupt system you allow all this, the destruction of the world.

* I don't actually support a mindless voting them all out, that was rhetorical, I support reviewing their voting records. However if you hold the issues above as deal breakers, you will find very few people that you can in good conscience vote for (at least in the duopoly). But if you do find them: vote them IN! Vote them IN! :)

[try2bfrugal]

Vote the lesser of two evils. The Republicans aren't going to have less drones and wire tapping, and at least with the Dems you'd have tougher EPA laws, expanded Medicaid in every state and no voter suppression laws.

[Alan]

"Republicans boasted that with this bill, they have cut the EPA's funding by 20% since 2010."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/politics/budget-winners-losers/
Gosh, I wonder why the 2010 budget increased 35% over 2009? You don't think it's finally getting back on track do you?



Learn more about EPA’s Proposed FY 2014 Budget (http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/7cd17bf640a0800985257b49006069f5!OpenDocument).




Fiscal Year

Enacted Budget

Workforce



FY 2013

$7,901,104,000

15,913



FY 2012

$8,449,385,000

17,106



FY 2011

$8,682,117,000

17,359



FY 2010

$10,297,864,000

17,278



FY 2009

$7,643,674,000

17,049



FY 2008

$7,472,324,000

16,916



FY 2007

$7,725,130,000

17,072



FY 2006

$7,617,416,000

17,355

[ApatheticNoMore]

Every state in the union almost is being fracked but we debate EPA budgets. Fighting for seats on the titanic.

[try2bfrugal]

Gosh, I wonder why the 2010 budget increased 26% over 2009? You don't think it's finally getting back on track do you?

[B]

I don't know. Why don't you ask someone who lives in West Virginia?

[bae]

Vote the lesser of two evils.

I don't view either party as the "lesser" of two evils though. They are both evil, just in different ways, not necessarily in "lesser" or "greater" ways.

I will confess, I am a member of the Republican Party, so that I can participate in caucuses and attend the conventions and attempt to sway some people with my small-l libertarian ways. (The local Democratic Party is so locked up in back-room deals and cronyism that there is simply no chance for an interested individual to participate effectively.)

I'm also, shock, an elected official. A Republican. In a county that votes 60-70% Democrat. On my winning platform of "I won't spend your tax dollars wastefully."

So you better vote me out, apparently I'm evil too...

[Alan]

Every state in the union almost is being fracked but we debate EPA budgets. Fighting for seats on the titanic.
Oh it's not really a budget debate, it's a debate about how terrible Republicans are. ;)

[Lainey]

Oh it's not really a budget debate, it's a debate about how terrible Republicans are. ;)

It's not personal, it's your policies. Other than that, everyone on this forum could sit and enjoy a beer and others' company.

[ApatheticNoMore]

By the way the lovely Dem representative that I'm supposed to vote for because representative democracy ... and because well they aren't a Republican ... removed their phone number from their web page. They don't even want you to contact them on issues or only use email please. :\ I'm sure the number can be gotten otherwise, but they certainly are in no rush to hear from the unwashed masses.

Soon it will be" press 1 if you would like to oppose war with Iran, press 2 if you would like to support war with Iran, press 3 if you think we need a stimulus bill ... and they wonder why their approval rating is single digits. >8)

[gimmethesimplelife]

Vote them out. EVery last one of them. At the national level and at the state and local level. Anyone who self identifies as a republican should be voted out, period. As nasty and partisan and nutty as the party has become, if you say you are republican you are condoning every bit of it. The voter suppression, the attack on women's rights, the push for establishing their religious theocracy, the fight against marriage equality, all of it. Vote republican, at any level, is a vote for all of these. Vote republican, at any level, and you vote to 'privatize' Social Security, shrink Medicare/medicaid, shrink and/or eliminate welfare, eliminate science in the classrooms and replace it with the bible, allow churches to dictate public policy, and a host of other items, none of which they are hiding. They are, in fact, pretty up front with their agenda.
I'm tired of people saying "Oh I don't agree with THAT, but I'm voting republican anyway."
BS! If you vote republican, on any level, you ARE agreeing with that!

If I were a moderate republican (are there any left?) I would immediately switch political parties. I would register independant, immediately. And vote green, or something like that if I was too timid to vote democrat.:idea:Anyone who voted against Medicaid expansion in Arizona that I can vote for I will automatically vote against - it's what I can do to show love and respect for other human beings. And I agree that this is a good idea, Peggy. Rob

[Spartana]

Anyone who voted against Medicaid expansion in Arizona that I can vote for I will automatically vote against - it's what I can do to show love and respect for other human beings. And I agree that this is a good idea, Peggy. RobI personally think that if they had changed the requirements for who can get Medicaid - i.e. make assets counted towards qualifying for Medicaid (besides a principle residence and personal vehicle and belongings) as well as income. Then there might have been a better response by the states to expand Medicaid. As it was written (based on taxable income alone) many states felt it would allow too many people with high asset and non-taxable income levels onto Medicaid rather than just the poor. So while the previous Medicaid asset limits were ridiculously low, I think some level of assets should be counted. For example if a veteran want to use the VA hospital for treatment of a non-service connected illness/injury, the VA allows you free coverage if your gross income from all sources (not just taxable) is below $16K and your assets (from all assets except primary residence, personal vehicle and belongings like clothes, furnishings, etc...) is under $80K. If you are above that level then you can stuill get treatment but you'll have to pay a co-payment and/or a share of the costs. I think republican led states would be more on board with expanded Medicaid of they had something like that.

[iris lilies]

I personally think that if they had changed the requirements for who can get Medicaid - i.e. make assets counted towards qualifying for Medicaid (besides a principle residence and personal vehicle and belongings) as well as income. Then there might have been a better response by the states to expand Medicaid. As it was written (based on taxable income alone) many states felt it would allow too many people with high asset and non-taxable income levels onto Medicaid rather than just the poor. So while the previous Medicaid asset limits were ridiculously low, I think some level of assets should be counted. For example if a veteran want to use the VA hospital for treatment of a non-service connected illness/injury, the VA allows you free coverage if your gross income from all sources (not just taxable) is below $16K and your assets (from all assets except primary residence, personal vehicle and belongings like clothes, furnishings, etc...) is under $80K. If you are above that level then you can stuill get treatment but you'll have to pay a co-payment and/or a share of the costs. I think republican led states would be more on board with expanded Medicaid of they had something like that.

This is entirely too sensible. DC will never go for it.

[CeciliaW]

Random posting about new things under ACA

I went to get my prescriptions refilled. They had all expired at 12/31/13. Every single one of them.

No problem says the Pharmacist says she, "We'll just call your Doctor and have new ones faxed over. "

Three days later they let me know I have prescriptions ready to pick up.

I go and there are 2 of at least 5 that I usually get. The others I have to go and actually SEE the Doctor. You know the same one that's been prescribing the same things for going on 5 years now.

The other two? One is $0. Interesting, but it's only a 30 day supply. The other one is $27 for 90 days (generics and all) but it used to $11, or I could get a 30 day supply for Free. Hunh?

This is going to take some getting used to. Thank whatever power you believe in (there should be an acronym for that) that I still have some of the other meds in my cabinet.

*rabbit hole anyone*

[ApatheticNoMore]

Family member signed up. So the plan is $50 cheaper a month than the non-ACA plan (that includes like a $10 a month subsidy) but in my opinion this is in part because it's an inferior plan. The prior plan was a PPO, this is an silver level EPO. EPOs have no out of network maximums or coverage pretty much (go out of network = go bankrupt). However the out of pocket maximum if you stay in network is less. So it's more risky but I can't tell people who aren't rich to spend all their money on stupid healthcare premiums either and you get healthcare with the lousy healthcare system we have not the one you wish we had. It costs $5 more to see a doctor.

2 times when asking questions they were dropped from the website queue (to ask a question) and had to start back at the beginning of the line. 3rd time was the charm. So therefor enrollment took an entire day. So big surprise here but the websites is buggy. The doctor lookup was finally working (wasn't a few weeks ago) but the hospital lookup was not. And I am thankful to have employer provided insurance where I can get a good PPO, wonder how unaffordable it will be this year, it it keeps going up it's going to drive me to the exchange :\.

[Simply Divine]

I hope, I really, really, really hope that Rick Perry is forced to budge from his position. I also think the only way to change things in Texas is to get someone new in the governor's chair next time around. I pray it won't be Perry again and I take comfort in the fact that his presidential bid was quickly derailed. Rob
Perry is not running for governor again. The contenders are Greg Abbott (R) and Wendy Davis (D).

[try2bfrugal]

Perry is not running for governor again. The contenders are Greg Abbott (R) and Wendy Davis (D).

Abbott is against Medicaid expansion. If you live in Texas vote your conscience.

[ApatheticNoMore]

About $12 a paycheck or $24 a month or $288 a year, that's how much they are going up this year. I'm relieved. I expected much worse. Of coures out of pocket max has probably gone up like $1500. And of course it means I'll be paying around $350 a month for health insurance - which is really ridiculous, but not that much more ridiculous this year than last. $288 won't force me to take a second job quite yet :)

[iris lilies]

By the way the lovely Dem representative that I'm supposed to vote for because representative democracy ... and because well they aren't a Republican ... removed their phone number from their web page. They don't even want you to contact them on issues or only use email please. :\ I'm sure the number can be gotten otherwise, but they certainly are in no rush to hear from the unwashed masses.

Soon it will be "press 1 if you would like to oppose war with Iran, press 2 if you would like to support war with Iran, press 3 if you think we need a stimulus bill ... and they wonder why their approval rating is single digits. >8)

Yep, I encountered the "no phone number" issue when I was last contacting the turds in Congress about something. And it was amusing that one form said "please give us your email so that we can contact you with an answer" and they never did. The other Congressman aske dif I wanted a response and I marked the "no response needed" box. I didn't want an answer I just wanted my voice to be heard on a particular issue.

[rodeosweetheart]

My health insurance premiums at work doubled.
For less coverage.