Next Big Billions $ Bailout May Go To ObamaCare Health Insurers.

Next Big Billions $ Bailout May Go To ObamaCare Health Insurers. (NI).

It didn't get much attention outside Capitol Hill, but late last week House Republican leaders scuttled a vote to repeal an ObamaCare bailout plan for major heath insurance companies if they lose money on new Affordable Care Act policies.

Taxpayers could be on the hook for billions of dollars of payouts for ACA insurance policies that incur losses that exceed premiums collected.

Despite pleas from conservatives to hold a vote to repeal the sham subsidy program to the biggest insurers — like Aetna (NYSE:AET), Cigna (NYSE:CI) and Humana (NYSE:HUM) — our sources tell us the House leadership reportedly said that it "ran out of time to hold a roll call vote."

Conservative lawmakers also fear that in the anticipated lame-duck session in December, Republicans will allow the Obama administration a de facto blank check to make payments to insurance companies that lose money on ObamaCare policies without congressional approval.

The bailout measure is the Affordable Care Act's controversial "risk corridor" program, which provides financial "protection" against losses to insurers that sponsor exchange plans. The idea of this short-term program was to create a pool of funds from the profits of some insurers with ObamaCare plans to offset the losses of others.

A 2013 analysis by the Society of Actuaries says that the risk corridors program "provides a strong incentive for insurers to participate in the health insurance exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act." Perhaps too strong an incentive, budget experts worry.

Under the program, if "allowable costs" to an insurer top 103% of the "target amount," the feds subsidize half of those excess payments. The subsidy climbs to 80% of allowable costs that exceed 108% of the target amount. The potential liability to taxpayers is "uncapped," so the sky is the limit on losses.

The White House understands the stakes. Without these subsidized risk corridors to backstop the ObamaCare plans, insurance companies will stop issuing ACA plans, and the entire program could be derailed.

The most recent data on ACA plans suggest that Rubio is right. Congressional oversight hearings found surveys of insurers showing that almost all expect an ObamaCare reimbursement check from the risk corridors in excess of payments made.

If nearly all insurers are expecting a net cash payment, how can the program pay for itself?

Obama wants every American to have health insurance regardless of the cost. The net cost in the first year alone to the risk corridor program could near $1 billion. That's just a start.

Obama is asserting executive authority to subsidize money-losing plans. Rubio and nine other Senators say that he needs a congressional appropriation under the Constitution. Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., chair of the House subcommittee that handles health appropriations, made the same point in a recent letter to the White House.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office agrees, ruling Tuesday that the Department of Health and Human Services can't provide funds to insurers for excessive losses on ObamaCare plans without Congress' formal approval.

But again Republicans may duck this fight and provide the bailout funding in a lame-duck session.

"A year-end budget deal will be hard to stop," a top Senate GOP health care staffer said. "If there is Republican resistance, Obama may threaten a government shutdown to get his way. Don't be surprised if we surrender."

Meanwhile, conservatives at organizations such as Heritage Action are denouncing this subsidy plan as "corporate welfare" for the insurance lobby. They worry that Republicans have the policy and politics wrong. A new McLaughlin and Associates poll found that 81% of Americans oppose any health insurance company bailout.

What is especially perplexing is that Republicans may get blamed for a bailout to an industry that sided with the White House in passing ObamaCare in the first place.

"The Democrats who passed ObamaCare are accusing Republicans of being in the pocket of health insurance companies," notes Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard. "They accuse Republicans of wanting 'to put insurance companies back in charge of Americans' health care.' Meanwhile, voters would like the party to take a clear stand against cronyism, which benefits well-connected operatives in Washington at the expense of citizens in the heartland."

He calls killing the risk corridor program a "no-brainer" because it is the best way to kill ObamaCare altogether. But right now Republicans aren't listening. Hmmm.....Starve the beast.....shut of the money. Read the full story here.

"The Doctor is in the House" - Cobalt intoxication diagnosed with the help of Dr House.

"The Doctor is in the House" - Cobalt intoxication diagnosed with the help of Dr House.HT: The Lancet.

Episode of the TV series “House” helps Medical team diagnose 'Cobalt intoxication', of patient with hip replacement.

Cobalt intoxication has been a well known cause of cardiomyopathy for over 50 years; however, it has mostly been known in the context of so-called Quebec beer drinkers' cardiomyopathy and hard steel work-related exposure to cobalt.

Searching for the cause combining these symptoms—and remembering an episode of the TV series “House” which we used for teaching medical students (series seven/episode 11)1—we suspected cobalt intoxication as the most likely reason.

We did radiography of the hip and measured cobalt and chromium. The radiograph showed a myositis ossificans-like picture attributable to metal debris at the left-sided hip. The measurement of cobalt and chromium in the blood showed severe increase of these metals.Read the full article here.

Obamacare Commemorative Stamp Collector Set released for the launch of Obamacare.

Obamacare Commemorative Stamp Collector Set released for the launch of Obamacare.HT: The PeoplesCube.

Obamacare phones offered to health insurance buyers....'Your Call may be monitored'.

Obamacare phones offered to health insurance buyers....'Your Call may be monitored'.HT: Daily Caller.

After the 'ObamaPhone' meet the 'Upgraded'  Obamacare phones.

In Tennessee, those shopping on the new health insurance co-ops could end up with more than just some health insurance. They might even walk away with a free smartphone.
The Nashville Business Journal is reporting that Community Health Alliance, Tennessee’s Obamacare health insurance co-op, is using the prospect of a free phone to encourage folks to enroll:

Community Health Alliance, Tennessee’s health insurance co-op, is running a unique promotional program to drive enrollment in its plans for sale on the exchange: health insurance in exchange for a smartphone.

The idea is to make it easier for providers and patients to stay connected, but it will also help CHA keep track of its member population, many of whom are expected to be new to the health insurance market. Read the full stor here.

Are American Muslims exempt from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act? YES under 'certain' conditions.

Are American Muslims exempt from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act? YES under 'certain' conditions.(Sources : PJMedia).(FrontPageMagazine).Laws almost always create unanticipated consequences. This is certainly likely to be the case when politicians bend over backwards to accommodate the currents of political correctness. ObamaCare uses the Social Security language of the Internal Revenue Code to determine who is eligible for “religious conscience” objection to the insurance mandate. Specifically, the law provides exemptions for adherents of “recognized religious sects” that are “conscientiously opposed” to accepting benefits from any insurance, public or private. As a consequence of this provision, Muslims may claim a religious exemption that is denied Christians and Jews. Since Islam believes insurance is haraam (forbidden) and likens insurance to gambling, the religion is excluded from requirements, mandates, or penalties set forth in the bill.
Others who fall into this category are the Amish, American Indians, and Christian Scientists. Although the U.S. Constitution grants all Americans equal protection of the law, some Americans are more equal than others. 
ObamaCare is specifically written not to apply equally to everyone. It is in most respects a law intended to discriminate — what some might call an extended Jim Crow law. If this seems exaggerated, consider: Jim Crow laws were based on racial discrimination, while ObamaCare is predicated on religious discrimination. Government acted based on a preconceived and arbitrary understanding of what is right.For example, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee Max Baucus indicated that the purpose of ObamaCare is as much about redistributing income as it is about reforming health care.
This is an application of government’s iron fist, putting income distribution and religious discrimination in the hands of Washington bureaucrats. By any reasonable standard, ObamaCare (and the Congress that enacted it) is completely unfettered from the Constitution. If logic — Washington logic — accommodates Sharia’s prohibition against gambling and hence insurance, Christians and Jews should claim that the state’s ability to expropriate property under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, thereby legitimating an exemption for these groups as well. Muslims are given exemptions from law everyone else must follow.
What has actually been enacted is a wedge between Muslims and Christians and Jews. Americans are pitted against Americans, Christian against Muslim, the Torah against the Koran. In a curious way the privilege granted Muslims and denied to most others translates into what Muslims call “dhimmitude,” or the taxing of non-Muslims in exchange for the acceptance of their presence.
Intentionally or not, ObamaCare allows for the establishment of this practice and Sharia dictates in the United States. Conversely, if a Christian refuses to pay for required health care insurance, liens can be placed against assets and hard prison time could accompany noncompliance. Non-Muslims are, in effect, paying a tax to subsidize Muslims.
The PPACA does grant a number of exemptions from the requirement to purchase the “minimum essential coverage.” (Whatever that is — Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius hasn’t yet defined it.) Prisoners, illegal aliens, and foreign nationals are exempt.
In addition, there is a religious exemption. Under Subtitle F, Part I, Section 1501—the individual responsibility requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage—individuals must be “a member of a recognized religious sect” that doesn’t participate in Social Security. According to a January 2011 Heritage Foundation WebMemo, they must pay no Social Security taxes and receive none of the benefits, in accordance with Section 1402(g)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code. The religious exemption applies to any person who is a member of a “recognized religious sect or division” with “established tenets or teachings” that would forbid that person from accepting public or private insurance. Thus the Amish, who believe in taking care of their own elderly and don’t participate in Social Security, are exempt, as are Mennonites and Scientologists.

The monetary penalty for failure to purchase the “minimum essential coverage” is the larger of a flat dollar amount or a percentage of income between 1.0 and 2.5 percent. The penalty is phased in over a three year period, 2014-2016. The flat dollar amount is $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, and $695 in 2016. Individuals whose earnings are below the Federal poverty level are eligible for a “hardship” exemption from the penalty, which is determined by HHS Secretary Sebelius. Indian tribes are also exempt from the penalty. In addition, there is an “affordability” exemption that applies to workers whose out-of-pocket costs exceed 8 percent of their “household” income.
Where do American Muslims stand regarding the individual mandate’s religious exemption? Under a strict interpretation of the Koran, which forbids acceptance of public or private insurance, they are exempt under this loophole. However, since the great majority of American Muslims pay Social Security taxes and receive Social Security benefits, they don’t qualify for the religious exemption.
Nevertheless, PPACA rules offer a situation where American Muslims could qualify for the religious exemption. If an individual is a member of a “health-sharing ministry,”—a religious non-profit organization in which members contribute money to cover the medical expenses of those in need—they are exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance.
Health sharing ministries exemplify the Muslim principle of Takaful –individuals cooperating and protecting one another against loss or damage. This writer knows of no such health sharing ministry organizations in the U.S. at present. However, as of December 2008, Risk Specialists Companies, Inc., a subsidiary of AIG Commercial Insurance, has offered Lexington Takaful Solutions SM Takaful homeowners insurance, which includes health insurance. This is part of a series of Shariah-compliant insurance products in the U.S. 
The Takaful homeowners policy is underwritten by RSC member company A.I. Risk Specialists Insurance, Inc., in conjunction with Lexington Insurance Company, and is available in all 50 states. However, why was this provision—that members of health sharing ministries qualify for the religious exemption—put in H.R. 3590 in the first place? What happens when American Muslims, who participate in the Social Security system, join a “health-sharing ministry”?
The law is vague on this point. Presumably, they will be exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance under the religious exemption. Should this happen, the scenario of American Muslims being exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance, while the great majority of Americans labor under this requirement, will bring “dhimmitude” a big step closer to reality. In addition, what if the PPACA is amended in some way to exempt those who purchase private Takaful health insurance? The health-sharing ministry loophole is one reason, among many, why ObamaCare is unacceptable for Americans and must be removed from H.R. 3590.....Research & Credits go's completely to the TWO sources for this post.Read the full story here and here.