Heineman (Gov.R-NE) opts for federal health insurance exchange

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Martha Stoddard

LINCOLN — Gov. Dave Heineman announced Thursday he has opted to go with a federal health insurance exchange.

The governor's decision came down to money, with Heineman saying a state exchange would cost Nebraska taxpayers $470 million more than a federal exchange.

“I want to share with Nebraskans that I have listened to all sides of this issue,” he said in a press statement. “As governor, my focus is on implementing the federal health care law in the most efficient and cost effective manner for Nebraskans and their families.”

Whether the state or federal government runs the exchange, he said, all citizens will have the option to purchase insurance policies through an exchange.


FULL story at link.



Read more: http://www.omaha.com/article/20121115/LIVEWELL03/711169995/1718

[DCKit]

1. We're going to have Universal Health Care before the (R)s know what hit 'em. nt

[Bibliovore]

15. Indeed!

While it doesn't yet go as far as many of us would like, the Affordable Care Act really is, as Biden put it, a big fucking deal -- not least of which because it should wind up changing minds toward taking it further. 8)

[dlwickham]

2. doesn't seem like too many states are going to set up their own exhange

[RandySF]

3. TAKERS TAKERS TAKERS!!!!!!

[Kingofalldems]

4. Democrats shoot---and they score!

[Berlum]

5. "It came down to money." - D'oh. Stupid Republicans

All the Republican tantrums have been pointless. Just putting their godforsaken corrupt degenerate party for fatcats above the interests of America and the American people.

Now that they are all LOSERS, they are only too happy to agree to what is sensible.

Ye gads, Republicans are a Curse Upon America.

[blueclown]

6. Why is it so much more expensive for states to set up their exchanges?

Is that the power of the private sector at work?

[drm604]

9. I don't know that it's actually more expensive

it's just that, when a state opts for the federal exchange, the money isn't coming out of their budget, it's coming out of federal dollars.

[DCKit]

10. Or the difference between setting up 51+ exchanges, or just one.

Does each state run its own Medicare program? SS? Dept of Defense? FEMA?

It's not a difficult concept.

[CreekDog]

12. bigger groups, less risk, less cost

[DCKit]

18. Thanks!

[blueclown]

22. These are "exchanges"

They are providing a marketplace to purchase insurance, not actually providing insurance.

I'm not sure how your example applies. I would assume the framework for creating these "marketplaces" - the information systems, the protocols, training the personel - I am sure that is where most of the cost is coming from.

[CreekDog]

25. the insurance offered through the exchanges can be a big group since it's offered nationally

in theory a statewide exchange is going to be more limited in size than a product on a national exchange.

[blueclown]

23. Each state does run its own Medicaid program

That is how the program was designed.

Your examples the Department of Defense and FEMA don't apply - and the DOD example is particularly egregious. Defense is one of the major functions of our federal government; it is one of its enumerated powers.

[ccavagnolo]

11. ding ding

they is lurning!

[Name Unpronounceable]

7. There are some positive comments here

and that's good and promising. I don't really understand the ins and outs of these stories relating to the health care law, though. I've tried to Google "Obamacare will lead to public option or single-payer" but all I get back are scare tactics bs from way back in 2010 about how the Marxist Kenyan is taking away our freedoms. I've read somewhere on this website a few months ago that there is some hidden clause or something like that that will lead to some kind of single-payer. Is this just wishful thinking or is it real? I've looked up some health insurance premiums for my state and the premiums are ridiculous. $2,000 a month? 3,000? And to qualify for a Medicaid program, you have to earn less than 700 dollars a month? How can someone who makes a few pennies more than that all of a sudden not be considered poor? How can someone who makes 1,000 a month afford to pay for health care on top of food, rent, clothes?

It seems like there is good feeling around that maybe something good will come of this. It's a start. But will it really lead to a single-payer option? How will that go about?

So far, so good, in any case. First, the unthinkable happened when Roberts decided to vote with the reasonable faction of the court. Then (thankfully), Obama won the election, keeping Romney and Ryan out with their detestable ideas about the poor taking care of themselves and the sick getting better by sheer will power (or whatever the hell they think).

[Bandit]

16. If you make less than $30,000 a year the federal Government will subsidize your coverage.

They can't and don't expect you to spend every penny you make on just Private Health Insurance...That is why it is a good deal for many if not most Americans...

[mrf901]

19. but how much does it cost?

I know lots of people who take home
$250 a week.

it is not possible for them
to pay $1000 a month.

[Bandit]

24. If you can not afford it the Government will step in and make sure you get it

That is what this is all about. Thirty miilion people that did not have health insurance will now get it....If you work for a company that employs more than fifty people then that company has to provide it, if you don't and make less than $30,000 a year the Government will provide it for you..That is the big "gift" Romney was talking about to get votes for Obama..

[mrf901]

28. I don't see any of that happening

what I do see is ...
companies will limit hours to less than 30 a week
companies will split up into smaller companies

not seen yet, but antcipated...
companies will pay a $2000 fine

[drm604]

8. Thinking about this, why would any state not go for the federal exchange?

I'm thinking that this was done on purpose so that no state could legitimately complain about a federal takeover, because they do have the option of a state exchange, but they'd all opt for the federal exchange to save money.

Of course the ironic result of that is that the wealthier states, mostly blue, end up carrying most of the burden for everyone, and the red states are once again the takers.

[Skittles]

14. because they hate the feds more than they care for their people

Last edited Fri Nov 16, 2012, 01:06 AM - Edit history (1)

reference Texas as an example

[drm604]

17. Is Texas setting up a state exchange?

[Skittles]

21. LOL

Last edited Fri Nov 16, 2012, 02:22 AM - Edit history (1)

you are so funny; our repuke bastard governor doesn't give a shit about the people

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20121115-gov.-rick-perry-officially-refuses-to-set-up-texas-health-insurance-exchange-under-obamacare.ece

The man is one big giant blowhard hypocrite

[drm604]

26. Exactly my point.

He says he hates the feds but he's letting them take responsibility for the exchange rather than the state. It's hypocritical.

[Skittles]

27. aw, Perry screams about the feds, then requests federal disaster aid for the hurricanes

there is no limit to the hypocrisy of republicans - NO LIMIT

[mrf901]

20. what does an exchange do?

yoju seem to be an expert

[justice1]

13. THANK-YOU GOVERNOR HEINEMAN FOR STANDING UP TO AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!