A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

$450 billion glitch


Posted: Jun 21, 2011

Seriously, what will it take for our lawmakers to READ the bill before they vote yes or no?  I don't about you, but I'm pretty sick and tired of these "glitches" and "surprises" they keep finding. 

March 2010, Nancy Pelosi: "We need to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it." 

 

http://blogs.forbes.com/aroy/2011/06/21/the-450-billion-glitch-3-million-extra-middle-class-americans-eligible-for-medicaid-benefits/

The $450 Billion Glitch: 3 Million Extra Middle-Class Americans Eligible for Medicaid Benefits

Jun. 21 2011 - 2:59 pm 

Wow. Philip Klein points us to this AP story, in which Richard Foster, Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, says that, due to a glitch in

Obamacare, married couples of early retirees making around $64,000 a year will become eligible for Medicaid. According to Foster, as many as 3 million Americans will qualify for the benefit. It’s “a twist government number crunchers say they discovered only after the complex bill was signed.”

If we do a back-of-the-envelope calculation, in which the average annual Medicaid expenditure per early retiree is $15,000 per year, the ten-year cost of this glitch is $450 billion. “It’s almost like allowing middle-class people to qualify for food stamps, [Foster] suggested”:

“I don’t generally comment on the pros or cons of policy, but that just doesn’t make sense,” Foster said during a question-and-answer session at a recent professional society meeting…”This is a situation that got no attention at all,” added Foster. “And even now, as I raise the issue with various policymakers, people are not rushing to say … we need to do something about this.”

Indeed, administration officials and senior Democratic lawmakers say it’s not a loophole but the result of a well-meaning effort to simplify rules for deciding who will get help with insurance costs under the new health care law.

The reason for the glitch, if you can call it that, is that prior to Obamacare, retirees’ Social Security benefits were counted as income in order to determine eligibility for Medicaid. Post-PPACA, Social Security benefits are no longer counted as income for this purpose, allowing millions of additional Americans to qualify for taxpayer subsidies.

I’ve been talking a lot recently about the problem of employer dumping under Obamacare, which could cost taxpayers trillions of dollars. This new early-retiree problem is a serious one as well. Obamacare’s defenders argue that the law is fiscally responsible—but they fail to remember that government spending almost always exceeds official projections. I’ll be interested to see what they have to say about this latest development.

 

The AP story:

AP NewsBreak: A twist in Obama's health care law

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care law would let several million middle-class people get nearly free insurance meant for the poor, a twist government number crunchers say they discovered only after the complex bill was signed.

The change would affect early retirees: A married couple could have an annual income of about $64,000 and still get Medicaid, said officials who make long-range cost estimates for the Health and Human Services department.

Up to 3 million more people could qualify for Medicaid in 2014 as a result of the anomaly. That's because, in a major change from today, most of their Social Security benefits would no longer be counted as income for determining eligibility. It might be compared to allowing middle-class people to qualify for food stamps.

Medicare chief actuary Richard Foster says the situation keeps him up at night.

"I don't generally comment on the pros or cons of policy, but that just doesn't make sense," Foster said during a question-and-answer session at a recent professional society meeting.

"This is a situation that got no attention at all," added Foster. "And even now, as I raise the issue with various policymakers, people are not rushing to say ... we need to do something about this."

Indeed, administration officials and senior Democratic lawmakers say it's not a loophole but the result of a well-meaning effort to simplify rules for deciding who will get help with insurance costs under the new health care law. Instead of a hodgepodge of rules, there will be one national policy.

"This simplification will stop people from falling into coverage gaps and may cause some to be newly eligible for Medicaid and others to no longer qualify," said Brian Cook, spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

But states have been clamoring for relief from Medicaid costs, complaining that just these sorts of federal rules drive up spending and limit state options. The program is now one of the top issues in budget negotiations between the White House and Congress. Republicans are pushing for a rollback of federal requirements that block states from limiting eligibility.

Medicaid is a safety net program that serves more than 50 million vulnerable Americans, from low-income children and pregnant women to Alzheimer's patients in nursing homes. It's designed as a federal-state partnership, with Washington paying close to 60 percent of the total cost.

Early retirees would be a new group for Medicaid. While retirees can now start collecting Social Security at age 62, they must wait another three years to get Medicare, unless they're disabled.

Some early retirees who worked all their lives may not want to be associated with a health care program for the poor, but others might see it as a relatively painless way to satisfy the new law's requirement that all Americans carry medical insurance starting in 2014. It would help tide them over until they turn 65 and qualify for Medicare.

The actuary's office said the 3 million early retirees who would become eligible for Medicaid are on top of an estimated 16 million to 20 million people that Obama's law would already bring into the program, by opening it to childless adults with incomes near the poverty level. Federal taxpayers will cover all of the initial cost of the expansion.

A spokeswoman for the Senate Finance Committee, which wrote much of the health care law, said if the situation does become a problem there's plenty of time to fix it later.

"These changes don't take effect until 2014, so we have time to review all possible cases to ensure Medicaid meets its mission of serving only the neediest Americans," said Erin Shields.

But Republicans already see a problem.

Former Utah governor Mike Leavitt said adding early retirees will "just add fuel to the fire," bolstering the argument from Republican governors that some of Washington's rules don't make sense.

"The fact that this is being discovered now tells you, what else is baked into this law?" said Leavitt, who served as Health and Human Services secretary under President George H.W. Bush. "It clearly begins to reveal that the nature of the law was to put more and more people under eligibility for government insurance."

The Medicare actuary's office roughed out some examples to illustrate how the provision would work. A married couple retiring at 62 in 2014 and receiving the maximum Social Security benefit of $23,500 apiece could get $17,000 from other sources and still qualify for Medicaid with a total income of $64,000.

That $64,000 would put them at about four times the federal poverty level, which for a two-person household is $14,710 this year. The Medicaid expansion in the health care law was supposed to benefit childless adults with incomes up to 133 percent of the poverty level. A fudge factor built into the law bumps that up to 138 percent.

The actuary's office acknowledged its $64,000 example would represent an unusual case, but nonetheless the hypothetical couple would still qualify for Medicaid.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110621/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_health_overhaul_glitch

;

News Flash! Granny's MC program of 1965 - Is not the same as MC today.

[ In Reply To ..]
My first reaction to your post is that you would still be driving a Model-T if nothing changed and evolved--playing Pong instead of X-Box. If you don't create, there is no need to fix and immprove. I am glad they went ahead and did it--at least now they have SOMETHING to work with, rather than the plan the Republicans put forward during the Bush years, which was nothing, of course.

No! What they have is a flawed mess..only becoming - aware of as they start to read the darn thing!

[ In Reply To ..]
Obamacare is a disaster. Millions more will qualify for Medicaid, which is already bankrupting the states. This is probably only the tip of the iceberg, with many more glitches to come as somebody bothers to read the bill. Its disgusting what our country has turned into.

US health care is a disaster--Obamacare is better than RepublicanNoCare - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
The world health rankings placed the US at #37 in 2009. I thought we were supposed to be so great at health care?
When trying to find some data, I found that the cost of health care in Finland was $2,104 per capita (with their universal, higher-quality system), but in the United States it was more than double at $5,711 in 2003--the US, where only those lucky enough to already be healthy and have $$$ have insurance coverage.

This is crazy. We can do better than that.
Finland/US - icedT
[ In Reply To ..]

Comparing Finland to the US? Here are some fun facts:
 
Population
Findland:             5,244,750    
United States: 303,825,000

Life Expectancy
78.82 years    
78.14 years
    
Largest city
Helsinki            (population: 558,457)
New York City (population: 8,008,280)

GDP per capita
$38,400 US    
$48,000 US

Wealthiest Citizens
NA    
William Gates III ($40.0bn US)

Unemployment Rate
6.5%    
7.2% (higher at this date)
    
Political System
Republic    
Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition
    

Military Budget as percentage of GDP
2%    
4.06%

Beijing Olympics Medal Count
4    
110
    
Area
   304,473 km sq    
9,161,920 km sq

Coastline
  1,250 km    
19,924 km

Indexes Difference    
Consumer Prices in Finland are 28.83% higher than in United States
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Finland are 22.77% higher than in United States
Rent Prices in Finland are 1.89% higher than in United States
Restaurant Prices in Finland are 52.99% higher than in United States
Groceries Prices in Finland are 28.76% higher than in United States
Local Purchasing Power in Finland is 14.16% lower than in United States


External Debt:

United States  
$14,392,451,000,000 as of 09/30/2010
Per capita $46,577
Percent of GDP 97%

Findland
$370,800,000,000 as of 06/30/2010
Per capita $68,180
Percent of GDP 200%


The "everyone in the world has better health care than the US" was beaten like a dead horse during the debate.



BARACK OBAMA and many in the Democratic Party look to Europe for inspiration for reforming America’s healthcare. Back in 2003, Mr. Obama said, “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health-care program,” thereby endorsing the state-controlled health systems of countries such as Norway and Britain — and endorsing ideology over quality.


According to the World Health Organization, Mr. Obama was correct: In its highly influential World Health Report, America scores well below the vast majority of Western European countries — and even below the likes of Morocco and Costa Rica in one index. This report is frequently cited by Democratic reformers wanting to replace the U.S. market system with something a little more Continental. But an examination of the two indices in the WHO report tells us more about the ideology of the authors than the quality of American health care.


Michael Moore made great sport in his movie Sicko of pointing out that the WHO ranked the United States a lowly 37th in the world, considerably below top-10 France and Canada (although the United States is 15th in the other index). But, much like Mr. Moore himself, the rankings are far from impartial.


The most obvious bias is that 62.5 percent of their weighting concerns not quality of service but equality. In other words, the rankings are less concerned with the ability of a health system to make sick people better than with the political consideration of achieving equal access and state-controlled funding.


One of the five factors in the calculations is “Financial Fairness.” This favors systems that charge richer people a higher rate of health tax, irrespective of how much, or little, health service they use. Colombia comes out on top. This measure has nothing to do with the quality of health care, yet it counts for a quarter of the weighting.


The WHO claims that its rankings are a tool for comparing different means of financing health-care systems, yet this tool inherently favors taxpayer-funded systems and gives the rankings a bias that renders comparison pointless. As a result of this bias, the United States languishes in lowly 54th place on “Financial Fairness,” largely explaining its poor overall position.


The rankings include measures for “health level” and “responsiveness.” “Health level” is their way of saying life expectancy, while “responsiveness” refers to a survey based on “respect for persons” and elements such as speed of service, convenience and choice — yet even in these cases half the overall weighting is determined by considerations of equality. Thus, a country with a poor level of “responsiveness” throughout the population will score higher than a country with a good level in some parts and an excellent level in others.


The “health level” reliance on life expectancy is also dubious, as it is influenced by factors unrelated to health care, such as tobacco consumption, diet and so on. That some Americans are obese and smoke surely affects their health but has little to do with the health-care system per se — yet these factors again drag the U.S. down in the ranking.


Americans generally believe that whatever the other problems with the U.S. health-care system, its standards of care are high. In the details of the rankings there is evidence to support this: The “responsiveness” measurement, without the equality weighting, shows the United States as number one in the world — but this performance measure only makes up one-eighth of the ranking, dwarfed by the measures of equality and state funding.


Also left off are typical measures of health-care standards such as disease-specific five-year survival rates. With these, U.S. health care comes off somewhat better. In 2007, British medical journal The Lancet published research showing the United States to be the best in the world for cancer-survival rates, with Britain’s state-controlled “single-payer” National Health Service disturbingly far behind. It showed that a man under the United Kingdom’s tottering 60-year-old NHS has an 18 percent lower chance of surviving cancer than a man under the U.S. system.


Of course, this does not mean the U.S. health system is perfect. There is near-consensus on the need to address increasing costs, waste and the fact that too many Americans still lack insurance. But decision-makers and voters must beware ideological arguments and rankings that falsely depict idyllic socialist health systems. They do not exist.


Goodness! How did you manage to come up - sm
[ In Reply To ..]
with all those "facts" so quickly. You obviously are a researching genius. However, you did a very simplistic comparison. Did you know college is "free" for the Finnish? Also, as far as costs, you really cannot compare a country that imports most of its food to a country that has the probably the largest chemically-laden bread basket in the world. Also, you have left out Finland superiority in telecommunications, life satisfaction, etc. Go ahead, now compare the US to the other 36 countries that surpass it in health care. Should only take you 10 minutes or so.
Obamacare was never the answer, as you might - soon realize. Its worse than leaving things alone.
[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Since when is 62 considered "early" - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
retirement? And $64,000/yr is barely above poverty level these days for a dual-earner income. Typical Republican rhetoric. But, I supposed we are all to work until we drop dead and be happy with a 2-earner income of $64,000. Unbelievable.

If I could bring my income up from $19,000/year - to $32,000 I would be in heaven. nm

[ In Reply To ..]
=)

Similar Messages:


I'm Noticing Another Glitch On This BoardNov 18, 2015
buttons.  Has anyone else noticed that when you try to reply to a post (which of course we have to do now, since we can no longer like or dislike it), a window within the reply window pops up and blocks what you're trying to write?  What's up with that? ...

Obamacare-"Family Glitch" Means No Help For My Child.Mar 26, 2014
WARNING - vent below!  After 2 miserably failed attempts to get my 19-year-old child coverage on healthcare.gov, I went to an insur. agent today. No subsidy for my daughter even though we fall under the income threshold for both the cost adjustment and the tax credit because: 1.  I have employer offered insurance (which is so BAD I will NOT put her on it). 2.  We are going to claim her on our taxes as a dependent as she is still a student. Per the agent - those answers m ...

2.1 Billion.....Sep 25, 2014
That's what has been spent so far on getting Obamacare up and running, including the website, fixes to the website (which still isn't fixed), IRS crosschecking, etc.  That's alot of money - $2,100,000,000.00.  With 8,000,000 signed up, what does that come out to per person? Somebody do the math.....I can't find a calculator big enough - but if I drop the 6 zeros and do 2100 divided by 8 - that comes to 262 - add the 6 zeroes back in - $262,000,000 - is that right ...

Where Did I Put That $8.7 Billion Dollars?Jul 27, 2010
BAGHDAD – The U.S. Defense Department is unable to properly account for over 95 percent of $9.1 billion in Iraqi oil money tapped by the U.S. for rebuilding the war ravaged nation, according to an audit released Tuesday. The report by the U.S. Special Investigator for Iraq Reconstruction offers a compelling look at continued laxness in how such funds were being spent in a country where people complain basic services like electricity and clean water are sharply lacking seven years af ...

Hillary And Pakistan $7.5 Billion?????????Jul 19, 2010
Is this part of the TARP money or does she think it's going to magically appear?   ISLAMABAD – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton sought Monday to convince skeptical Pakistanis that American interest in their country extends beyond the fight against Islamist militants by announcing a raft of new aid projects worth $500 million. The projects, which include hospitals and new dams for badly needed electricity, are part of a $7.5 billion aid effort to win over Pakistan ...

Obama Wants To Spend $6 BillionJun 25, 2010
The Obama administration on Tuesday backed a proposal to spend up to $6 billion more on subsidies for electric vehicles, amid renewed interest on Capitol Hill in measures to cut petroleum consumption in response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Okay...so more money being spent by the govt.  We do not have the money to spend on this. Some cons to the electric car: Current batteries have relatively short trip capacity.Recharge time can be hours, so you don't just stop at the station f ...

Wal-Mart Investing 10 BillionFeb 26, 2014
My bad if this has been posted before. It was news to me. ...

Why Is Obama Giving 1.5 Billion To The Brotherhood?Apr 08, 2012
This week, the Obama administration quietly released $1.5 billion in foreign aid to the new Egyptian government, now dominated by a Brotherhood-led coalition in parliament — soon to be joined by an Ikhwan (i.e., Brotherhood) luminary as president. ...

Fannie And Freddie Need $8.4 Billion From US Treasury.May 11, 2010
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSWAT01445020100511 ...

TAXPAYERS LOSE 20+BILLION ON GM BAILOUTAug 23, 2012
. ...

Budget Deficit Shrinks By $200 BillionOct 13, 2012
It starts with the figures released in 2009, when the deficit reached a record high of $1.4 trillion. Why is the column in red? Because, thanks to fiscal years, Obama inherited a deficit of nearly $1.3 trillion from Bush/Cheney the moment he took the oath of office. This year, however, according to the official data published by the Treasury Department, the deficit is 1.089 trillion.   A big number, but going down--no thanks to those helpful Republicans in Congress. ...

Government Now Needs 2 BILLION More To Roll Out Obamacare.Jun 22, 2013
I can't believe people were duped into this "health care" scam.  It's not about health care, how many times do we have to say it.  It's about CONTROL. ...

Fannie-Freddie Might Need $100 Billion In New CrisisAug 09, 2017
Mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could need nearly $100 billion in bailout money in the event of a new economic crisis, according to stress test results released Monday by their regulator. The companies would need to draw between $34.8 billion and $99.6 billion in U.S. Treasury aid under a “severely adverse” scenario, depending on how they treated assets used to offset taxes, the Federal Housing Finance Agency said in its report. The losses would leave $158.4 billion to ...

Outsourcing War To Private Contractors Resulted In $60 BillionAug 31, 2011
The Commission on Wartime Contractingin Iraq and Afghanistan was created in 2008 under W with broad bipartisan support.   Membership on the commission consisted of 4 democrats and 4 republicans, appointed by Pelosi, Boehner, Reid and W.   http://www.trivalleycentral.com/articles/2011/08/31/front/doc4e5e645007cde227434173.txt ...

American Taxpayers Will Profit About 15 Billion DollarsMay 08, 2012
. ...

2 Billion Spent For The Office Of President And Nothing Has ChangedNov 08, 2012
Same president.  Same senate and house leaders.  Over 90%+ of encumbants were re-elected. What insanity, doing the same things and expecting a different result. We desparately need term limits at all levels of government. Both sides have to stop demonizing the other side.  There are just as many corrupt liberals as conservatives as democrats as republicans, etc.  Your liberal opinion isn't truth or better and my conservative opinion isn't evil. We are on a ...

$619 Billion Missed From Federal Transparency SiteAug 07, 2014
I can't imagine how the left will try to spin this one. ...

Chelsea Worked At $12 Billion Hedge FundApr 14, 2016
Very, very interesting article. ...

ObamaCare Slaps States With $15 Billion In New CostsJan 05, 2015
Thirty-six states that rely on private managed care programs to provide medical services to all or some of their Medicaid recipients are facing an added ObamaCare tax. According to a report by Milliman consulting actuaries, states that contract with Medicaid managed care plans face up to $15 billion in added costs over 10 years for their share of the law’s tax on private health insurance. States will pay even if they strongly oppose ObamaCare and are refusing to establish healt ...

Ford Cancels $1.6 Billion Mexican PlantJan 03, 2017
Ford Motor Co (F.N) said Tuesday it will cancel a planned $1.6 billion factory in Mexico and will invest $700 million at a Michigan factory as it expands its electric vehicle and hybrid offerings. The second largest U.S. automaker had come under harsh criticism from President-elect Donald Trump for its Mexican investment plans. ...

U.S. Gov't Gave Away $125 BILLION Last Year Setting A New RecordMar 17, 2015
BTW, you do realize that our debt has gone OVER the $18 Trillion mark, don't you? It happened on the 15th, but that's another post.WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal agencies set a new record for improper payments last year, shelling out $125 billion in questionable benefits after years of declines. The payments included tax credits for families that didn't qualify, Medicare payments for treatments that might not have been necessary, and unemployment benefits for people who were act ...

Fiat Chrysler To Invest $1 Billion To RevampJan 08, 2017
This is what winning looks like! #MAGA ...

The GAO Identifies $45 BILLION In Redundant Programs In 2014Apr 20, 2015
The federal government has no idea how many tax dollars it’s wasting on redundant federal programs every year—but it’s likely in the neighborhood of $45 billion. That’s according to the Government Accountability Office, which identified more than two dozen new areas of inefficiency and overlap in its annual reportto Congress. This is on top of the more than 160 redundant areas that the GAO has identified in its three previous reports. “It's impossible to ...

Trump Bashes $4 Billion In IRS Refunds To Illegals,Aug 20, 2015
see immigration differently. The president’s aggressive executive action on immigration is still being litigated, and Mr. Trump proposes action of a different kind. In the meantime, tax credits and refunds for illegal immigrants have become controversial. Forbes ...

Wall Street Record Bonuses Return As Big 3 May Pay $30 Billion Nov 09, 2009
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=au.pavWlxfZg&pos=11   ...

Wall Streetâs Payout For 2009: $145 BillionJan 15, 2010
By Daniel TencerThursday, January 14th, 2010 -- 10:29 pm Banks poised to start fearmongering campaign about Obama's bailout fee If you still needed statistical proof that the folks on Wall Street have become entirely detached from reality in the wake of the massive taxpayer-funded bailout of their colossal mistakes, here it is. The 38 largest financial institutions on Wall Street will pay out a total of $145.85 billion in compensation for 2009, an 18 percent increase over 2008 and "sligh ...

Treasury's TARP, AIG Bailout Costs Fall To $30 Billion-Oct 05, 2010
Not too shabby for saving the country from the second great depression.  At the end of Bush's term, the DOW was around 7,000.  Recently the DOW is around 11,000.  Certainly the country is still hurting, but things ARE getting better. http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110920/exclusive-treasurys-tarp-aig-bailout-costs-fall-to-30-billion?mod=bb-budgeting&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode       ...

Karl Rove And Cronies To Spend $2 Billion To Buy ElectionJun 24, 2011
Pity the American Citizen ...

President Clinton's Philanthropic Summit Got $2 Billion In Pledges Sep 27, 2012
THAT for a worthwhile goal?  This is from the site "Global Good News," which I like to drop in on now and then. Where I also just learned the beautiful seaside park my daughter got married at in Cozumel is now a nature reserve and Rwanda's economy is growing robustly across all sectors. :) "Healthcare for athletes with mental disabilities, organic know-how for Indian farmers, and solar technology for isolated communities were among the pledges made at former US President Bill Clinton ...

McConnell-Reid Deal Includes $2 Billion EarmarkOct 16, 2013
for Kentucky Project A proposal to end the government shutdown and avoid default orchestrated by Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Leader Harry Reid includes a $2 billion earmark for a Kentucky project. Language in a draft of the McConnell-Reid deal (see page 13, section 123) provided to WFPL News shows a provision that increases funding for the massive Olmsted Dam Lock in Paducah, Ky., from $775 million to nearly $2.9 billion. The dam is considered an important project ...