We're in NJ. I think he has Medicaid.
ACA: Affordable Care Act (better known as OBAMACARE) - Enrollment Starts October 1st - You In?
We're in NJ. I think he has Medicaid.
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ons-boosting-programs-enrollment-numbers.html
[h1]Taxpayers hit for MILLIONS as six states put inmates on Obamacare plans (which also boosts enrollment numbers)[/h1]
Cash-strapped counties in six states are enrolling inmates in Obamacare health insurance plans as a way to shift costs to the federal government – a tactic that's legal but frustrating for some Republicans who don't want to see the success levels of President Obama's signature law inflated artificially.
In many cases jails are registering inmates so they'll be better equipped to access addiction counseling and psychiatric care after their release, lowering the likelihood that they'll return for more time behind bars.
The Affordable Care Act prohibits the enrollment of full-time prisoners serving sentences, but many prisoners awaiting trial in prison jumpsuits are being enrolled purely to save county governments money – and shift costs to the feds – when they lengthy hospital stays are required.
Obamacare is fast becoming a tool to save counties money that they would otherwise spend on health care for inmates who have not yet been convicted of crimes
The law specifically excludes people who are 'incarcerated, other than incarceration pending the disposition of charges' – legal language referring to the two-thirds of county jail inmates who have been denied bail or can't afford to post a bond to gain release before trial.
'This provision,' says Correctional Risk, Inc., a criminal justice consultancy, 'will likely allow eligible inmates who are pending disposition of charges to enroll in a health insurance plan through their state insurance exchange prior to conviction.'
Not everyone thinks this is a good thing, particularly congressional Republicans who want to see the Obamacare law's net cost to he federal government go down, not up.
'We just found out that Obamacare is going to cost $2 trillion over 10 years,' an aide to a Republican senator, who requested anonymity, told MailOnline on Thursday. 'Now we're going to have local governments picking our pockets to pay for their jail inmates? What a disgrace.'
'It makes you wonder,' the Senate staffer said, 'when the president gets excited about enrolling a few million people: How many of them are criminals?'
Obamacare excludes convicts, but opens a loophole for officials who want to avoid using their own budgets to help sick prisoners
The $2 trillion figure came from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which issued a report Tuesday covering the economic impacts of the law.
Bloomberg reports that nearly 7 million people were incarcerated, paroled or serving probation terms in the U.S. at the end of 2012. And every year about 13 million people – one in every 25 Americans – are booked into county jails each year.
On January 28, San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi asked the city's Board of Supervisors for permission to sign up inmates for Obamacare as soon as they're fingerprinted and processed. His office estimates that the local government will save $2,500 in the long run for each inmate it enrolls.
That's because emergency room visits and treatment for chronic conditions can pile up when patients are uninsured.
But since most jailed inmates come from socioeconomic conditions that make them more likely to be sick, their entry into the Obamacare system puts them on equal footing with elderly patients who will take more money out of the system than they put in.
Taxpayers in all 50 states will cover the costs for county governments as Obamacare's expenses spiral upward
Even young inmates are as likely to be as sick in the years after their release as older people who have never been in the criminal justice system, according to data from the National institutes of Health.
And the large majority who enroll in Medicaid instead of in private health plans will not contribute any money at all toward health care that taxpayers in all 50 states will have to subsidize.
And that cost-shifting will include some direct medical care for inmates while they're in custody.
In Oregon, Multnomah County Commissioners received a briefing in mid-January learning how much money they could save by putting inmates in Portland and the surrounding communities on Obamacare.
They have already applied for Medicaid for 700 inmates, targeting the sickest and most likely to consume county resources when they seek medical care.
The estimated $1 million savings from an annual health care bill of $15.7 million doesn't even include a potentially larger windfall from billing Medicaid for inmates' hospital treatments.
Obamacare's enrollment statistics will also increase artificially as inmates are enrolled as soon as they are booked and fingerprinted
The Affordable Care Act specifically allows county officials to submit hospital invoices to the federal government when the treatment takes more than 24 hours, but only if the patient is a Medicaid enrollee.
County officials estimate that between 70 and 80 per cent of their inmates are eligible.
Cook County, Illinois has similar numbers. Its officials have already enrolled about 2,000 prisoners.
One former Democratic U.S. senator who debated the Affordable Care Act told Bloomberg that he and his colleagues never intended for Obamacare to cover incarcerated people who are the responsibility of local governments.
'It starts to look a little like a scheme by the states and local jurisdictions to avoid responsibilities that are really theirs,' he said.
[h1]Taxpayers hit for MILLIONS as six states put inmates on Obamacare plans (which also boosts enrollment numbers)[/h1]
- Obamacare is fast becoming a tool to save counties money that they would otherwise spend on health care for inmates who have not yet been convicted of crimes
- The Affordable Care Act excludes convicts, but opens a loophole for jail officials who want to avoid using their own budgets to help sick prisoners awaiting trial
- Taxpayers in all 50 states will cover the costs for county governments as Obamacare's expenses spiral upward
- Obamacare's enrollment statistics will also increase artificially as inmates are enrolled as soon as they are booked and fingerprinted
Cash-strapped counties in six states are enrolling inmates in Obamacare health insurance plans as a way to shift costs to the federal government – a tactic that's legal but frustrating for some Republicans who don't want to see the success levels of President Obama's signature law inflated artificially.
In many cases jails are registering inmates so they'll be better equipped to access addiction counseling and psychiatric care after their release, lowering the likelihood that they'll return for more time behind bars.
The Affordable Care Act prohibits the enrollment of full-time prisoners serving sentences, but many prisoners awaiting trial in prison jumpsuits are being enrolled purely to save county governments money – and shift costs to the feds – when they lengthy hospital stays are required.
Obamacare is fast becoming a tool to save counties money that they would otherwise spend on health care for inmates who have not yet been convicted of crimes
The law specifically excludes people who are 'incarcerated, other than incarceration pending the disposition of charges' – legal language referring to the two-thirds of county jail inmates who have been denied bail or can't afford to post a bond to gain release before trial.
'This provision,' says Correctional Risk, Inc., a criminal justice consultancy, 'will likely allow eligible inmates who are pending disposition of charges to enroll in a health insurance plan through their state insurance exchange prior to conviction.'
Not everyone thinks this is a good thing, particularly congressional Republicans who want to see the Obamacare law's net cost to he federal government go down, not up.
'We just found out that Obamacare is going to cost $2 trillion over 10 years,' an aide to a Republican senator, who requested anonymity, told MailOnline on Thursday. 'Now we're going to have local governments picking our pockets to pay for their jail inmates? What a disgrace.'
'It makes you wonder,' the Senate staffer said, 'when the president gets excited about enrolling a few million people: How many of them are criminals?'
Obamacare excludes convicts, but opens a loophole for officials who want to avoid using their own budgets to help sick prisoners
The $2 trillion figure came from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which issued a report Tuesday covering the economic impacts of the law.
Bloomberg reports that nearly 7 million people were incarcerated, paroled or serving probation terms in the U.S. at the end of 2012. And every year about 13 million people – one in every 25 Americans – are booked into county jails each year.
On January 28, San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi asked the city's Board of Supervisors for permission to sign up inmates for Obamacare as soon as they're fingerprinted and processed. His office estimates that the local government will save $2,500 in the long run for each inmate it enrolls.
That's because emergency room visits and treatment for chronic conditions can pile up when patients are uninsured.
But since most jailed inmates come from socioeconomic conditions that make them more likely to be sick, their entry into the Obamacare system puts them on equal footing with elderly patients who will take more money out of the system than they put in.
Taxpayers in all 50 states will cover the costs for county governments as Obamacare's expenses spiral upward
Even young inmates are as likely to be as sick in the years after their release as older people who have never been in the criminal justice system, according to data from the National institutes of Health.
And the large majority who enroll in Medicaid instead of in private health plans will not contribute any money at all toward health care that taxpayers in all 50 states will have to subsidize.
And that cost-shifting will include some direct medical care for inmates while they're in custody.
In Oregon, Multnomah County Commissioners received a briefing in mid-January learning how much money they could save by putting inmates in Portland and the surrounding communities on Obamacare.
They have already applied for Medicaid for 700 inmates, targeting the sickest and most likely to consume county resources when they seek medical care.
The estimated $1 million savings from an annual health care bill of $15.7 million doesn't even include a potentially larger windfall from billing Medicaid for inmates' hospital treatments.
Obamacare's enrollment statistics will also increase artificially as inmates are enrolled as soon as they are booked and fingerprinted
The Affordable Care Act specifically allows county officials to submit hospital invoices to the federal government when the treatment takes more than 24 hours, but only if the patient is a Medicaid enrollee.
County officials estimate that between 70 and 80 per cent of their inmates are eligible.
Cook County, Illinois has similar numbers. Its officials have already enrolled about 2,000 prisoners.
One former Democratic U.S. senator who debated the Affordable Care Act told Bloomberg that he and his colleagues never intended for Obamacare to cover incarcerated people who are the responsibility of local governments.
'It starts to look a little like a scheme by the states and local jurisdictions to avoid responsibilities that are really theirs,' he said.
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
I work for the Maryland Health Benefits Exchange (the ACA organization in MD), and by the sounds of it he did make a mistake. The application is supposed to based off of your projected 2014 income and not any previous years income. It sounds like he mistakenly put his 2012 income, which puts him below the Medicaid threshold for 1 person. What is likely to happen is that the friend will have to repay some of the benefits that he got over the next year.
I suggest that he call NJ health care exchange or the federal government exchange and report a change of life event. This will allow him to report his income and get a new determination. If he wants to see what he actually qualifies for, he can go to heatlhsherpa.com to enter his zip code, age, and income. Doing this, will give him an approximation of what kind of subsidies he qualifies for.
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
There is no $0
Not true at all. some replubican put this out to hate.. Prisoners cannot get ACA.. Noticed they called it obabmacare.. Some haters!!!! LMAO
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ons-boosting-programs-enrollment-numbers.html
[h1]Taxpayers hit for MILLIONS as six states put inmates on Obamacare plans (which also boosts enrollment numbers)[/h1]By DAVID MARTOSKO, U.S. POLITICAL EDITOR
- Obamacare is fast becoming a tool to save counties money that they would otherwise spend on health care for inmates who have not yet been convicted of crimes
- The Affordable Care Act excludes convicts, but opens a loophole for jail officials who want to avoid using their own budgets to help sick prisoners awaiting trial
- Taxpayers in all 50 states will cover the costs for county governments as Obamacare's expenses spiral upward
- Obamacare's enrollment statistics will also increase artificially as inmates are enrolled as soon as they are booked and fingerprinted
Cash-strapped counties in six states are enrolling inmates in Obamacare health insurance plans as a way to shift costs to the federal government – a tactic that's legal but frustrating for some Republicans who don't want to see the success levels of President Obama's signature law inflated artificially.
In many cases jails are registering inmates so they'll be better equipped to access addiction counseling and psychiatric care after their release, lowering the likelihood that they'll return for more time behind bars.
The Affordable Care Act prohibits the enrollment of full-time prisoners serving sentences, but many prisoners awaiting trial in prison jumpsuits are being enrolled purely to save county governments money – and shift costs to the feds – when they lengthy hospital stays are required.
Obamacare is fast becoming a tool to save counties money that they would otherwise spend on health care for inmates who have not yet been convicted of crimes
The law specifically excludes people who are 'incarcerated, other than incarceration pending the disposition of charges' – legal language referring to the two-thirds of county jail inmates who have been denied bail or can't afford to post a bond to gain release before trial.
'This provision,' says Correctional Risk, Inc., a criminal justice consultancy, 'will likely allow eligible inmates who are pending disposition of charges to enroll in a health insurance plan through their state insurance exchange prior to conviction.'
Not everyone thinks this is a good thing, particularly congressional Republicans who want to see the Obamacare law's net cost to he federal government go down, not up.
'We just found out that Obamacare is going to cost $2 trillion over 10 years,' an aide to a Republican senator, who requested anonymity, told MailOnline on Thursday. 'Now we're going to have local governments picking our pockets to pay for their jail inmates? What a disgrace.'
'It makes you wonder,' the Senate staffer said, 'when the president gets excited about enrolling a few million people: How many of them are criminals?'
Obamacare excludes convicts, but opens a loophole for officials who want to avoid using their own budgets to help sick prisoners
The $2 trillion figure came from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which issued a report Tuesday covering the economic impacts of the law.
Bloomberg reports that nearly 7 million people were incarcerated, paroled or serving probation terms in the U.S. at the end of 2012. And every year about 13 million people – one in every 25 Americans – are booked into county jails each year.
On January 28, San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi asked the city's Board of Supervisors for permission to sign up inmates for Obamacare as soon as they're fingerprinted and processed. His office estimates that the local government will save $2,500 in the long run for each inmate it enrolls.
That's because emergency room visits and treatment for chronic conditions can pile up when patients are uninsured.
But since most jailed inmates come from socioeconomic conditions that make them more likely to be sick, their entry into the Obamacare system puts them on equal footing with elderly patients who will take more money out of the system than they put in.
Taxpayers in all 50 states will cover the costs for county governments as Obamacare's expenses spiral upward
Even young inmates are as likely to be as sick in the years after their release as older people who have never been in the criminal justice system, according to data from the National institutes of Health.
And the large majority who enroll in Medicaid instead of in private health plans will not contribute any money at all toward health care that taxpayers in all 50 states will have to subsidize.
And that cost-shifting will include some direct medical care for inmates while they're in custody.
In Oregon, Multnomah County Commissioners received a briefing in mid-January learning how much money they could save by putting inmates in Portland and the surrounding communities on Obamacare.
They have already applied for Medicaid for 700 inmates, targeting the sickest and most likely to consume county resources when they seek medical care.
The estimated $1 million savings from an annual health care bill of $15.7 million doesn't even include a potentially larger windfall from billing Medicaid for inmates' hospital treatments.
Obamacare's enrollment statistics will also increase artificially as inmates are enrolled as soon as they are booked and fingerprinted
The Affordable Care Act specifically allows county officials to submit hospital invoices to the federal government when the treatment takes more than 24 hours, but only if the patient is a Medicaid enrollee.
County officials estimate that between 70 and 80 per cent of their inmates are eligible.
Cook County, Illinois has similar numbers. Its officials have already enrolled about 2,000 prisoners.
One former Democratic U.S. senator who debated the Affordable Care Act told Bloomberg that he and his colleagues never intended for Obamacare to cover incarcerated people who are the responsibility of local governments.
'It starts to look a little like a scheme by the states and local jurisdictions to avoid responsibilities that are really theirs,' he said.
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
Not sure what you mean by there is no $0? Also, prisoners can get ACA coverage, I'm currently working on a project to get prerelease inmates coverage in MD.
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
Prerelease..... You said it your self which means their coverage wont start until they get out anyway but no prisoners is not getting no coverage while in jail
And you posted the article just to start something
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
I think you're confusing me for someone else because I haven't posted any articles, and yes they can have coverage while in locked up. In MD prerelease can refer to anyone that is getting out within the next 6 months to a year, but that doesn't preclude them from getting coverage. Their coverage begins when they apply and continues when they get out.
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
^Goodnight. Not even going to debate about this when it is clear terms on ACA website
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
So I take it these right wing websites made it up too, right?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/10/us/little-known-health-act-fact-prison-inmates-are-signing-up.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/will-affordable-care-act-spur-reform-inmate-health-care/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...obamacare-to-pass-hospital-costs-to-u-s-.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ail-exiting-inmates-health-insurance/7385249/
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
Yea, I don't know what
superb
is talking about because I work directly for a health care exchange and I have personally helped prisoners enroll.
Last edited:
- 3,783
- 2,337
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2003
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
Wow
I didnt doubt that. And i typed that above
YOU MADE IT SOUND LIKE PRISONERS DOING 5 YEAR BID CAN GET ACA AND USE IT IN THE PRISON..THEY CANNOT
if your in jail awaiting trial then the law says you can unless you get found guilty
THE ARTICLE CLEARLY STATES AND YOU ALSO STATED PRISONERS ON THEIR WAY HOME. EXITING PRISONERS THAT ARE COMING HOME NEXT FEW MONTHS
IF YOU SIGNED UP IN MARCH YOUR COVERAGE STARTS IN MAY THUS WHY THIS PRISONER WAS ABLE TO GET IT
"When he gets out of jail in May, he said, he will have health insurance for the first time, coverage that will allow him to get treatment for his ankle, which he broke in 2007 and has been bothered by ever since."
HE IS COMING HOME IN MAY
ALSO:
But the most important benefit of the program, corrections officials say, is that inmates who are enrolled in Medicaid while in jail or prison can have coverage after they get out.
I SWEAR SOME OF YOU ALL ARE ONE TRACK MINDED
Last edited:
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
O HERE IS ANOTHER SECTION FROM YOUR ARTICLES
"Devon Campbell-Williams, an inmate serving time for assault in the Multnomah County Inverness Jail in Portland, Ore., applied for Medicaid in January with the help of an eligibility worker hired by the county to enroll inmates. When he gets out of jail in May, he said, he will have health insurance for the first time, coverage that will allow him to get treatment for his ankle, which he broke in 2007 and has been bothered by ever since."
you were trying to start something making it seem like they will get coverage in prison or jail and that ACA will pay for their cost while in jail..
THAT IS NOT THE CASE! Your suppose to be a case worker you should know that
They can apply now but coverage will not start until they are out of jail!
WHY DO I EVEN BOTHER.. I'M DONE MAYNE
Last edited:
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
SEE MY OTHER POST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THEY CAN ENROLL BUT THEY WILL NOT HAVE COVERAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DUDE MADE IT SEEM LIKE THEY WILL HAVE COVERAGE WHILE IN PRISON OR JAIL WHICH IS not THE CASE. IT WILL START WHEN THEY GET OUT
- 1,477
- 75
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
Wait what do you do again? The reason I ask is because unless you work for Congress or you have read all 2,000 pages of the ACA, I'm almost positive that you do not know every single detail about. Hell, some people in Congress don't even know every single detail about it. But here is what I can tell you. In Maryland, and again I emphasize Maryland, prisoners can get Medicaid coverage that begins when they are in jail.
Also, if you read the articles instead of skimming through them to find parts that prove your point, you would have also found the following part:
Now I don't know about you, but to me that sounds like the coverage has started while they're in prison, hence the fact that states are transferring the costs of these medical expenses to the federal government. To put it another way, the Medicaid that inmates receive would not cover costs incurred while the prisoner is in the standard prison infirmary, but the Medicaid would cover the cost of transferring a female prisoner to a hospital to give birth.
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
Once again directly from ACA
Just like I said before inmates who case is pending disposition can keep it. You cannot up sign up for it and get active coverge while actually in jail, but once a inmate get out his/her coverage will resume
ACA INDIVIDUAL MANDATE AND INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS “PENDING DISPOSITION”
Starting January 1, 2014, the ACA requires all Americans to have health insurance coverage (individual mandate), and it permits “all qualified individuals” to purchase qualified health plans through their state's health insurance exchange (HIX).
Individuals who (1) do not qualify for Medicaid and (2) have income under 400% of the federal poverty level (about $46,000 annually in 2013) receive federal income tax credits to help offset their premium costs. The ACA specifies that an individual is not qualified if he or she is incarcerated, except in cases pending disposition.
According to an Access Health official, individuals who have coverage from a qualified health plan and are incarcerated pending disposition of charges can remain on their current plans until their case is disposed and they are incarcerated based on final sentencing. The official added that these plans can be designed to restart on the date of release or in such a way as to minimize coverage gaps. But, if the inmate has exchange coverage pending disposition and is jailed, he or she would probably terminate this coverage to avoid having to pay the plan's monthly premiums.
The ACA also provides for a special enrollment period, which allows people who lose existing coverage (including individuals released from prison and who lose state-funded prison health care), to enroll in a qualified plan and not have to wait for an open enrollment period (45 CFR Part 155).
Last edited:
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/05/13/Over-5-Billion-and-Counting-Obamacare-Websites
Over $5 Billion and Counting for Obamacare Websites
By Brianna Ehley,
The Fiscal Times
May 13, 2014
You thought Healthcare.gov had problems?
A handful of state-run exchange websites—which cost nearly half a billion dollars to build—still don’t work, nearly seven months after they first went live.
Largely inoperable state exchange websites in Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon and Nevada have racked up $474 million federal tax dollars so far, Politico first reported. The costs will continue to climb as states scramble to salvage the flailing websites or transition onto the federal exchange.
Related: Millions Wasted on Broken Obamacare Websites
Maryland will spend an additional $40 million to save its website, which has already cost $90 million. Nevada has spent $50 million to date and will decide in the coming weeks how much more it will spend on repair efforts. Massachusetts will pour an additional $121 million into fixing its severely troubled state portal, while also using the federal portal as a back up plan.
[h1] [/h1]
Maryland Scraps Exchange Software, Will Buy Conn.'s...
Inform
Now that the enrollment period has ended, the board that runs Maryland's troubled online insurance marketplace has opted to start over with a system that worked well in Connecticut....
“Taxpayers will have to pay whether their state-based exchange fails or not,” said Josh Archambault, a senior fellow at the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability.
Meanwhile, Oregon’s website, which already cost $259 million, is so troubled that the state has opted to scrap the site entirely and spend an extra $5 million to use Healthcare.gov instead.
The Obama administration had intended for states using the federal portal to gradually transition away from HealthCare.gov and onto their own exchanges. However, since so many states had issues with their websites, it appears that the opposite is happening. Minnesota, Nevada and Rhode Island are all considering following Oregon and switching to HealthCare.gov. Not one of the 36 states using the federal exchange intends to set up their own exchanges.
The switch from state-based exchanges to Healthcare.gov essentially means dumping millions of dollars down the drain to start over. And the federal government isn’t the only entity that’s been losing money on the failed or severely flawed websites. As Oregon Live noted, many insurance companies have poured money into customizing their own portals to help consumers navigate their state’s website during the open enrollment period.
Still, in some states, officials say it is cheaper than trying to salvage the lost-cause websites. CoverOregon executives, for instance, said repairing their website would cost an additional $75 million. In contrast, shifting to the federal portal would only cost about $5 million.
Policy experts argue that an unintended benefit of having more states use the federal portal is that it’s cheaper per enrollee. A report by Jay Angoff, a former Missouri Insurance Commissioner said it cost the federal government an average of $647 to sign up each enrollee on the federal portal, compared to the $1,503 per enrollee on the state-based exchanges.
As of November 2013, the federal exchange healthcare.gov. is estimated to have cost $677 million according to former HHS, Kathleen Sebelius.
Since 2011, the federal government has spent nearly $4.7 billion to help implement the exchanges, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates. While some exchange websites like Oregon and Massachusetts suffered from nightmarish technical issues, others performed quite well.
It seems to all come down to how well a state managed its contractors and its exchange portals, since the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services gave them the freedom to be in charge of how their exchanges were designed and who would design them.
“CMS provided states with the flexibility to launch their Marketplace in a way that made the best use of its system’s capabilities at the time,” a CMS spokesperson said. “One of the main advantages of operating a state-based Marketplace was the ability to offer innovative designs that meet the needs of the states, it’s consumers, and it’s insurance market.”
While CMS had oversight over the states—requiring them to provide progress reports-- several including Oregon and Massachusetts still had severe management issues.
In fact, Oregon had so many management and oversight issues that its contractor is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
An earlier review by the federal government suggested that the contractor “may have boosted billings by ‘throwing bodies rather than skillset’ at problems,” Oregon Live reported.
A separate investigation into Maryland’s exchange by a federal watchdog is also underway.
The Congressional Government Accountability Office has also launched a probe into how well the federal government provided oversight over all of the troubled state exchanges.
Over $5 Billion and Counting for Obamacare Websites
By Brianna Ehley,
The Fiscal Times
May 13, 2014
You thought Healthcare.gov had problems?
A handful of state-run exchange websites—which cost nearly half a billion dollars to build—still don’t work, nearly seven months after they first went live.
Largely inoperable state exchange websites in Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon and Nevada have racked up $474 million federal tax dollars so far, Politico first reported. The costs will continue to climb as states scramble to salvage the flailing websites or transition onto the federal exchange.
Related: Millions Wasted on Broken Obamacare Websites
Maryland will spend an additional $40 million to save its website, which has already cost $90 million. Nevada has spent $50 million to date and will decide in the coming weeks how much more it will spend on repair efforts. Massachusetts will pour an additional $121 million into fixing its severely troubled state portal, while also using the federal portal as a back up plan.
[h1] [/h1]
Maryland Scraps Exchange Software, Will Buy Conn.'s...
Inform
Now that the enrollment period has ended, the board that runs Maryland's troubled online insurance marketplace has opted to start over with a system that worked well in Connecticut....
Meanwhile, Oregon’s website, which already cost $259 million, is so troubled that the state has opted to scrap the site entirely and spend an extra $5 million to use Healthcare.gov instead.
The Obama administration had intended for states using the federal portal to gradually transition away from HealthCare.gov and onto their own exchanges. However, since so many states had issues with their websites, it appears that the opposite is happening. Minnesota, Nevada and Rhode Island are all considering following Oregon and switching to HealthCare.gov. Not one of the 36 states using the federal exchange intends to set up their own exchanges.
The switch from state-based exchanges to Healthcare.gov essentially means dumping millions of dollars down the drain to start over. And the federal government isn’t the only entity that’s been losing money on the failed or severely flawed websites. As Oregon Live noted, many insurance companies have poured money into customizing their own portals to help consumers navigate their state’s website during the open enrollment period.
Still, in some states, officials say it is cheaper than trying to salvage the lost-cause websites. CoverOregon executives, for instance, said repairing their website would cost an additional $75 million. In contrast, shifting to the federal portal would only cost about $5 million.
Policy experts argue that an unintended benefit of having more states use the federal portal is that it’s cheaper per enrollee. A report by Jay Angoff, a former Missouri Insurance Commissioner said it cost the federal government an average of $647 to sign up each enrollee on the federal portal, compared to the $1,503 per enrollee on the state-based exchanges.
As of November 2013, the federal exchange healthcare.gov. is estimated to have cost $677 million according to former HHS, Kathleen Sebelius.
Since 2011, the federal government has spent nearly $4.7 billion to help implement the exchanges, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates. While some exchange websites like Oregon and Massachusetts suffered from nightmarish technical issues, others performed quite well.
It seems to all come down to how well a state managed its contractors and its exchange portals, since the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services gave them the freedom to be in charge of how their exchanges were designed and who would design them.
“CMS provided states with the flexibility to launch their Marketplace in a way that made the best use of its system’s capabilities at the time,” a CMS spokesperson said. “One of the main advantages of operating a state-based Marketplace was the ability to offer innovative designs that meet the needs of the states, it’s consumers, and it’s insurance market.”
While CMS had oversight over the states—requiring them to provide progress reports-- several including Oregon and Massachusetts still had severe management issues.
In fact, Oregon had so many management and oversight issues that its contractor is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
An earlier review by the federal government suggested that the contractor “may have boosted billings by ‘throwing bodies rather than skillset’ at problems,” Oregon Live reported.
A separate investigation into Maryland’s exchange by a federal watchdog is also underway.
The Congressional Government Accountability Office has also launched a probe into how well the federal government provided oversight over all of the troubled state exchanges.
- 4,122
- 640
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
yay! more money wasted on people creating websites. but at least we got people working. fascism ftw
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
That might explain the big spike in the April jobs report.
RustyShackleford
Supporter
- 64,964
- 196,088
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
You two will never give up. It is getting sad now 
kdawg
Staff member
- 10,969
- 12,444
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
The interesting thing about providing healthcare for prisoners is that doing it that way is probably cheaper.
Sure, prisons should employ a medical staff to look after the prisoners day to day - and that is part of the cost (to the general public) of running a prison, in the same way as providing guards.
But, if a prisoner needs surgery billing the prison (and, indirectly, you) is expensive - but doing it the same way as everyone else spreads the cost and makes it easier to manage.
Next you'll be saying that if a prisoner escapes the police shouldn't be involved - each prison should supply and resource a local and national task force because that's only fair.
Sure, prisons should employ a medical staff to look after the prisoners day to day - and that is part of the cost (to the general public) of running a prison, in the same way as providing guards.
But, if a prisoner needs surgery billing the prison (and, indirectly, you) is expensive - but doing it the same way as everyone else spreads the cost and makes it easier to manage.
Next you'll be saying that if a prisoner escapes the police shouldn't be involved - each prison should supply and resource a local and national task force because that's only fair.
superb
Banned
- 5,042
- 935
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2013
Prisoners do not get healthcare. My sister work at the prison. If they have a release date coming up then can apply get approved but the policy will not go into effect until they get out
kdawg
Staff member
- 10,969
- 12,444
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2003
^ that's not what I said anyway.
Prisoners do get healthcare - it's just provided as part of the whole imprisonment package. It's not like they're thrown in a cage and denied basic necessities. They're a vulnerable group (lot of drug users etc) and bored so accessing healthcare gives them something to do.
I was just making the point that allowing them to be covered by the ACA could actually be financially better for taxpayers.
Prisoners do get healthcare - it's just provided as part of the whole imprisonment package. It's not like they're thrown in a cage and denied basic necessities. They're a vulnerable group (lot of drug users etc) and bored so accessing healthcare gives them something to do.
I was just making the point that allowing them to be covered by the ACA could actually be financially better for taxpayers.
- 63,609
- 50,739
- Joined
- May 23, 2005
how it cost 5 bill to make a website
- 2,692
- 5,651
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
You two will never give up. It is getting sad now
Thought they were on Bengahzi again?
