AARP To Endorse House Health Care Bill: AP

[daniel green]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_347017.html

[Susan43]

I didn't know if I should start a new thread but the AMA has also backed the bill.

AMA, AARP back House health care bill
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html



There is a link to the bill at the site.

[ninetoes]

The number one commercial on tv today? AARP. It starts by saying "Today, more than ever, medicare patients need AARP supplimental coverage". What a coincidence to hear them backing health care reform. They stand to gain Millions from this reform.

[daniel green]

Originally Posted by Susan43

I didn't know if I should start a new thread but the AMA has also backed the bill.

AMA, AARP back House health care bill
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html



There is a link to the bill at the site.

Good to know!

[LisaM22]

Originally Posted by ninetoes

The number one commercial on tv today? AARP. It starts by saying "Today, more than ever, medicare patients need AARP supplimental coverage". What a coincidence to hear them backing health care reform. They stand to gain Millions from this reform.

we are not going single payer, medicare stays the same except for the donut hole

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by LisaM22

we are not going single payer, medicare stays the same except for the donut hole

Not true. Payments to doctors via medicare will be substantially reduced. As is, medicare only pays 80% of whatever amount they decide is allowable, patient has to pay the remaining 20%. If doctors stop taking medicare because of reduced payments, those without a suppliment to pick up the additional costs will not be able to afford a doctor. AARP knows this, hence the new push to sell their suppliments. The CBO made it clear, insurance companies will see the most profits from this new plan. Not sure why anyone is surprised by that.

[Susan43]

Originally Posted by ninetoes

Not true. Payments to doctors via medicare will be substantially reduced. As is, medicare only pays 80% of whatever amount they decide is allowable, patient has to pay the remaining 20%. If doctors stop taking medicare because of reduced payments, those without a suppliment to pick up the additional costs will not be able to afford a doctor. AARP knows this, hence the new push to sell their suppliments. The CBO made it clear, insurance companies will see the most profits from this new plan. Not sure why anyone is surprised by that.

Here is the CBO report...

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/106xx/doc...3962Rangel.pdf

I'm not so sure where it is clear about the insurance companies. What page?

[Susan43]

Originally Posted by whyme

Hubs is not renewing his membership.

I fully expect there to be a number of people that resign from AARP.

Media figures on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News continue to attach significance to reports that 60,000 senior citizens have canceled their AARP membership since July 1 because of the organization's support for health care reform, often displaying large graphics of the number while discussing it. However, the Associated Press has reported that, according to the AARP, the organization regularly loses 300,000 members a month and has also gained 400,000 new members since July 1.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200908190050

I was furious that AARP backed the damned drug bill. But as far as I'm concerned they're making up for it now.

[ninetoes]

"the number of people purchasing individual coverage outside of the
exchanges would decrease by about 6 million, and the number obtaining
coverage through employers would increase by about 6 million."

The above equates to profits for insurance companies.

-------------------------
"That estimate of enrollment reflects CBO’s assessment that a public plan
paying negotiated rates would attract a broad network of providers but
would typically have premiums that are somewhat higher than the average
premiums for the private plans in the exchanges."

The above equates to profits for insurance companies

-------------------------------

"Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS)
provisions, which would establish a voluntary federal program for
long-term care insurance. Active workers could purchase coverage,
usually through their employer. Premiums would be set to cover the
full cost of the program as measured on an actuarial basis."

The above equate to profits for the insurance companies
----------------------

"Permanent reductions in the annual updates to Medicare’s payment
rates for most services in the fee-for-service sector"

"Setting payment rates in the Medicare Advantage program on the
basis of Medicare spending per beneficiary in the fee-for-service
sector and changing the way that payments to Medicare Advantage
plans reflect differences in the health status of enrollees, yielding
savings of an estimated $170 billion"

The above equates to profits for insurance providers

Hey, I think its a good thing. It means no worry of insurance companies folding because of the "govt" plan. Especially since only 10% of Americans are going to even qualify to use the public plan.

[Susan43]

It might be clear to you, but not to me. Just as an example.

"Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS)
provisions, which would establish a voluntary federal program for
long-term care insurance. Active workers could purchase coverage,
usually through their employer. Premiums would be set to cover the
full cost of the program as measured on an actuarial basis."

This is a federal program, kind of like FEMA funding flood insurance. I can't see how the insurance companies would profit.

It seems to me that by taking a sentence or two out of context doesn't necessarily make your point. That is why I asked for the page #'s. I'm not saying your point is invalid, but it doesn't prove much to me.

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by Susan43

It might be clear to you, but not to me. Just as an example.

"Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS)
provisions, which would establish a voluntary federal program for
long-term care insurance. Active workers could purchase coverage,
usually through their employer. Premiums would be set to cover the
full cost of the program as measured on an actuarial basis."

This is a federal program, kind of like FEMA funding flood insurance. I can't see how the insurance companies would profit.

It seems to me that by taking a sentence or two out of context doesn't necessarily make your point. That is why I asked for the page #'s. I'm not saying your point is invalid, but it doesn't prove much to me.

Ok, tell me what Im missing? IF you want it, you must purchase it thru your employer, whom I assume purchases it thru an insurance provider? Are you saying the feds are the provider? If so, then I stand corrected, but it isnt how I read it when I read the actual proposed bill (yes, I read the entire 2000 pages)

[LisaM22]

Originally Posted by ninetoes

Ok, tell me what Im missing? IF you want it, you must purchase it thru your employer, whom I assume purchases it thru an insurance provider? Are you saying the feds are the provider? If so, then I stand corrected, but it isnt how I read it when I read the actual proposed bill (yes, I read the entire 2000 pages)

how long did it take you to read those 2000 pages? just curious...

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by LisaM22

how long did it take you to read those 2000 pages? just curious...

six days, started the 29, finished the last of it late last night.

[Susan43]

Here are two summary's from the Democratic Whips office.

http://majorityleader.gov/docUploads/SUMMARY_FINAL.pdf
http://majorityleader.gov/docUploads...LEDSUMMARY.pdf

And here is where I found it.

http://majoritywhip.house.gov/index....d-2e352338b4dc

[Susan43]

Here is a list of groups supporting the healthcare bill.

http://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/reports?id=0263

And here is a link to the American Cancer Society and the ad they plan to run.

http://www.acscan.org/

Just go take a look at all those "fringe" groups.

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by Susan43

Here is a list of groups supporting the healthcare bill.

http://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/reports?id=0263

And here is a link to the American Cancer Society and the ad they plan to run.

http://www.acscan.org/

Just go take a look at all those "fringe" groups.

I didnt say ACS doesnt support reform, I said they dont support the bill's requirements that people with pre-existing conditions will have to wait six months to get coverage via the public plan. Maybe you consider that six months as being non important, but to a cancer, or heart patient, that six month wait could be deadly. If the goal is to prevent such tragedy's, this bill falls far short of doing so.

I will admit though, I have never heard of the ACS being called a fring group. I always found them to be respectable. Guess its all in what one wants to see.

[LisaM22]

Originally Posted by ninetoes

six days, started the 29, finished the last of it late last night.

impressive, I do not think will try and beat it, I will just read the reviews

[LisaM22]

Originally Posted by ninetoes

Not true. Payments to doctors via medicare will be substantially reduced. As is, medicare only pays 80% of whatever amount they decide is allowable, patient has to pay the remaining 20%. If doctors stop taking medicare because of reduced payments, those without a suppliment to pick up the additional costs will not be able to afford a doctor. AARP knows this, hence the new push to sell their suppliments. The CBO made it clear, insurance companies will see the most profits from this new plan. Not sure why anyone is surprised by that.

first of all that is wrong, but, if that turned out to be true then modifications would need to be made as it was discovered, no one is saying this bill is perfect, no one expects it to be, many changes will need to be made as time goes on to make it better

[HeyHeyStupid]

Originally Posted by LisaM22

first of all that is wrong, but, if that turned out to be true then modifications would need to be made as it was discovered, no one is saying this bill is perfect, no one expects it to be, many changes will need to be made as time goes on to make it better

AARP ... another big distributer of policies.

ITA Many changes, the biggest being boot the for profit insurance companies and conglomerate 'hospitals.'

[LisaM22]

Originally Posted by HeyHeyStupid

AARP ... another big distributer of policies.

ITA Many changes, the biggest being boot the for profit insurance companies and conglomerate 'hospitals.'

exactly, if medicare was covering less, that would mean aarp would have to cover more, they obviously would not support that, you have to love the spin from the right

[Sharmalady]

Originally Posted by Susan43

I didn't know if I should start a new thread but the AMA has also backed the bill.

AMA, AARP back House health care bill
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html
There is a link to the bill at the site.

Two very reputable organizations.
It's a no brainer.

[StarShine]

Originally Posted by daniel green

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_347017.html

That is why I refuse to be a member of AARP because they always back things I am against.

[crocdog1]

Originally Posted by StarShine

That is why I refuse to be a member of AARP because they always back things I am against.

Yes indeed. It is best for Seniors such as myself to be against an organization that has our interests at heart.

Much better it is to support the Party of NO, who has always been against our interests, including that of SS and MEDICARE.

Yes, we should support the Party of NO, whose only interests are for that of WALL STREET (In this specific case the INSURERS) who can, will and do drop us like a hot potato if we have a medical issue they deem will cost them too much $$$$.

All they have to say is that we have a "pre existing condition" to deny us coverage.

Just My Humble Opinion

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by LisaM22

first of all that is wrong, but, if that turned out to be true then modifications would need to be made as it was discovered, no one is saying this bill is perfect, no one expects it to be, many changes will need to be made as time goes on to make it better

Please point out what is "wrong" in my post. If you have a link to show medicare payments are not going to be reduced, or medicare pays more than 80%, I would appreciate it. I have posted links, many times, showing my post to be accurate, so I am anxious to see when the changes to medicare policy were made.

[forensicpsy~]

Originally Posted by ninetoes

Not true. Payments to doctors via medicare will be substantially reduced. As is, medicare only pays 80% of whatever amount they decide is allowable, patient has to pay the remaining 20%. If doctors stop taking medicare because of reduced payments, those without a suppliment to pick up the additional costs will not be able to afford a doctor. AARP knows this, hence the new push to sell their suppliments. The CBO made it clear, insurance companies will see the most profits from this new plan. Not sure why anyone is surprised by that.

Of course you're right. AARP has an agenda. People should start looking for an alternative to AARP.

imo

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by forensicpsy~

Of course you're right. AARP has an agenda. People should start looking for an alternative to AARP.

imo

"The pay for CEOs of insurance companies that participate would be limited by the bill, Roe said, "except if you're the head of the American Association of Retired Persons," who is allowed to make more than $1 million per year. "

http://www.greenevillesun.com/story/306513

[Snitch]

Originally Posted by Susan43

I didn't know if I should start a new thread but the AMA has also backed the bill.

AMA, AARP back House health care bill
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/...are/index.html



There is a link to the bill at the site.

Since the AMA represents an insignificant number of doctors and AARP has its own agenda in pushing their own ins policies (and lost a huge number of participants this summer), I would say their endorsements are as meaningful as your own.

[Snitch]

Originally Posted by LisaM22

we are not going single payer, medicare stays the same except for the donut hole

huh?? Haven't you been listening to obama? He's going to pay for the pelosi plan by cutting Medicare reimbursements such that no doctors will be Medicare providers.

When obama says 'you can keep your same doctor', he omits but your doctor won't keep you!

[theal3]

Originally Posted by Snitch

huh?? Haven't you been listening to obama? He's going to pay for the pelosi plan by cutting Medicare reimbursements such that no doctors will be Medicare providers.

When obama says 'you can keep your same doctor', he omits but your doctor won't keep you!

I understand they are raising the reimbursement rates to Doctors, cutting the waste.

[ninetoes]

Originally Posted by theal3

I understand they are raising the reimbursement rates to Doctors, cutting the waste.

That isnt quite accurate. They are raising reimbursement rates to primary care doctors, cutting rates for specialists.

[birdwatch]

Originally Posted by Snitch

Since the AMA represents an insignificant number of doctors and AARP has its own agenda in pushing their own ins policies (and lost a huge number of participants this summer), I would say their endorsements are as meaningful as your own.

Well maybe their 25-35% membership will increase if the AMA has stopped using their money to oppose health care reform. Other survyes have indicated docters tend to want a private-public blend.
Others countries such as France and Germany have excellent health care and they have both private and public insurance.
I hope that the writers of the reforms have been looking at stuff that works and not re-inventing the wheel. I'm hopeful - but not very. Like any other change it will probably be miserable till all the kinks get ironed out over time. They only thing I feel sure of is that the powerful strangle-hold the insurance companies have now is just shameful.
And politicians need to get out of bed with the insurance companies and whole heartedly work together on tweaking a really good plan for their constituants, instead of laying back and criticising and hoping the plan fails. Yeah - I can dream, can't I?

[Mayasmimi]

Originally Posted by Snitch

Since the AMA represents an insignificant number of doctors and AARP has its own agenda in pushing their own ins policies (and lost a huge number of participants this summer), I would say their endorsements are as meaningful as your own.

Actually read this evening that the AMA is pulling out. Sorry...cannot find the link. I, for one, am happy about that decision. I have always worked to provide insurance for my family and myself. My own daughter does not. So sad for her and it makes me cranky. No brainer folks.

Have no pity for folks who don't. Keep your "change".

[Shotzie]

I cancelled my membership with AARP after 25 yrs when they start telling me who an what to vote for..they use to stand for protecting us, now it is how much money they can make with their supplements ins..GRRRRRRR

We may be old, but we are NOT STUPID!!!! like the government..CHANGE THAT an we might get somewhere..

[Fairlady]

Originally Posted by whyme

It is not a "donut hole." A donut hole is a sweet little treat, what this should be called is The Big Black Abyss. Once you fall in it, your
finances will never recover. Thanks so much, you filthy, bribe
taking politicians. God knows none of YOU will ever suffer like this, as you have the best bennies in the world. We were better off without it, when we could get many medications for free from the companies.

whyme .... Let's see .... I know all about that "Big Black Abyss", as you rightfully call it. I start falling into it around the end of March every year .... so essentially I'm paying a full year for coverage, only to receive it for 3 months.

If NOTHING else, I'm looking forward to that big black hole closing.

jmo

[Fairlady]

Originally Posted by Mayasmimi

Actually read this evening that the AMA is pulling out. Sorry...cannot find the link. I, for one, am happy about that decision. I have always worked to provide insurance for my family and myself. My own daughter does not. So sad for her and it makes me cranky. No brainer folks.

Have no pity for folks who don't. Keep your "change".

Mayasmimi .... Where do you get the idea that others DON'T work to provide insurance for their families ?? What does that really have to do with ANYTHING when discussing healthcare reform. MANY people have worked all their lives, and have been unfortunate enough to get sick ((imagine that)). They have been paying health insurance premiums all their working lives too. Their insurance company decides not cover treatment they might require, or hospital bills, or they might even CANCEL them if they get sick.

The misconception that health care reform only will help those who DO not work for a living is just wrong.

jmo

[R~O~S]

Originally Posted by Shotzie

I cancelled my membership with AARP after 25 yrs when they start telling me who an what to vote for..they use to stand for protecting us, now it is how much money they can make with their supplements ins..GRRRRRRR

We may be old, but we are NOT STUPID!!!! like the government..CHANGE THAT an we might get somewhere..

FWIW: The AARP is not an insurance carrier, they don't produce insurance products and they're not the carrier for that product. Aetna is the insurance carrier who provides insurance to the AARP as a group at a discounted rate due to the size and diversity of the group.

The AARP doesn't make a dime off those insurance policies, they provide access to them for their members at a discounted rate in exactly the same way an employer does for their employees or a veterans group such as the American Legion does for their members.

Be careful not to cut off your nose to spite your face by ignoring the details.

https://www.aarphealthcare.com/produ...h/default.aspx

Presenting AARP® Essential Premier Health Insurance, insured by Aetna. Custom-designed employer-like benefits for AARP members aged 50-64 and their dependents.

Which is exactly why the CEO of the AARP doesn't come under the limited annual compensation clause of any bill aimed at insurance companies. The AARP isn't an insurance company. Aetna, that CEO is going to come under the limitations.

[Lifeguard]

Originally Posted by R~O~S

FWIW: The AARP is not an insurance carrier, they don't produce insurance products and they're not the carrier for that product. Aetna is the insurance carrier who provides insurance to the AARP as a group at a discounted rate due to the size and diversity of the group.

The AARP doesn't make a dime off those insurance policies, they provide access to them for their members at a discounted rate in exactly the same way an employer does for their employees or a veterans group such as the American Legion does for their members.

Be careful not to cut off your nose to spite your face by ignoring the details.

https://www.aarphealthcare.com/produ...h/default.aspx



Which is exactly why the CEO of the AARP doesn't come under the limited annual compensation clause of any bill aimed at insurance companies. The AARP isn't an insurance company. Aetna, that CEO is going to come under the limitations.

Wow, some facts instead of opinion. Very important facts, indeed. Thanks!