Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 10:31 AM Oct 2013

Sebelius Explains 'If You Like Your Plan, You Can Keep It'

Sebelius Explains 'If You Like Your Plan, You Can Keep It'

The first question Wednesday that House Republicans asked Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius about HealthCare.gov's troubled rollout focused on President Obama's promise: "If you like your health plan, you can keep it."

House Energy and Commerce Chair Fred Upton (R-MI) pressed Sebelius on why the president had made that statement, given recent reports of individual policies being dropped prior to 2014, which is when the law's major market reforms take effect.

"Mr. Chairman, there was no change," Sebelius said. "The regulation involving grandfathered plans, which applied to both the employer market and the individual market, indicated that if a plan was in effect in March of 2010, stayed in effect without unduly burdening the consumer with reducing benefits and adding on huge costs, that plan would stay in effect and never have to comply with any regulations of the Affordable Care Act."

"That's what the grandfather clause said. The individual market which affects about 12 million Americans, about 5 percent of the market. People move in and out. They often have coverage for less than a year. A third of them have coverage for about six months. And if a plan was in place in March of 2010 and again did not impose additional burdens on the consumer, they still have it. It's grandfathered in."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sebelius-explains-if-you-like-your-plan-you-can-keep-it

Time to Investigate Those Insurance Company Letters
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023948905

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sebelius Explains 'If You Like Your Plan, You Can Keep It' (Original Post) ProSense Oct 2013 OP
I don't understand all the caveats wercal Oct 2013 #1
The insurance company can choose to cancel it, even if not required to by the law IronLionZion Oct 2013 #5
Thats not at all my situation wercal Oct 2013 #7
Sebelius is saying that a "plan" is constant if there are only minor changes -nt- DireStrike Oct 2013 #6
I don't think that's what she is saying wercal Oct 2013 #9
The hoops to appease the egregious greedy outrageous insurance companies in this country are RKP5637 Oct 2013 #2
Insurance companies are just like the mafia flamingdem Oct 2013 #3
Yup, and ProSense Oct 2013 #4
This is a only an "issue" due to poor management, but this explanation is just spin... Demo_Chris Oct 2013 #8
Are you ProSense Oct 2013 #11
Of course the handwringing is BS... Demo_Chris Oct 2013 #12
No, ProSense Oct 2013 #13
K & R Scurrilous Oct 2013 #10

wercal

(1,370 posts)
1. I don't understand all the caveats
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 10:42 AM
Oct 2013

"...that plan would stay in effect and never have to comply with any regulations of the Affordable Care Act"

Just two days ago, we received notice of next year's plan. It listed two very specific changes, and attributed the changes to the ACA. They were relatively minor, and estimated to increase our rates by 2%....but the understanding was that the changes were required.

Now Sebelius says they aren't required?

IronLionZion

(45,442 posts)
5. The insurance company can choose to cancel it, even if not required to by the law
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 08:04 AM
Oct 2013
https://www.healthcare.gov/what-if-i-have-a-grandfathered-health-plan/


Many insurance companies don't feel the need to keep offering the old plans when they can get more revenue with new ACA compliant plans.

wercal

(1,370 posts)
7. Thats not at all my situation
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 09:39 AM
Oct 2013

My situation is that the insurance company is making changes to the plan, as required by the ACA.

This is directly contradicted by Sebelius' statement.

Nobody is cancelling my plan.

wercal

(1,370 posts)
9. I don't think that's what she is saying
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 10:35 AM
Oct 2013

What am I missing here:

"...and never have to comply with any regulations of the Affordable Care Act."

That doesn't jibe with the changes my plan is making.

I know there has to be a caveat or qualifier for 'existing plan' that allows her to make this statement. Just wondering what the semantics are.

RKP5637

(67,108 posts)
2. The hoops to appease the egregious greedy outrageous insurance companies in this country are
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 10:43 AM
Oct 2013

ridiculous.

flamingdem

(39,313 posts)
3. Insurance companies are just like the mafia
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 11:43 AM
Oct 2013

Thank goodness they were reigned in.

Sebelius is doing a great job testifying.

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
8. This is a only an "issue" due to poor management, but this explanation is just spin...
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 09:55 AM
Oct 2013

Any time you are forced to explain why a falsehood isn't really a lie, it's spin at best. This is an example of how even the best messaging and spin serves only to make the teller look foolish. The listener is left to wonder if the speaker is foolish enough to believe the nonsense they are spewing, or more insulting, do they really believe anyone else would fall for it...

In any case, this is very simple. Obama repeatedly promised something that they knew to be false. And if they somehow didn't know, that's hardly confidence inspiring (or an excuse). And the non-excuse they are offering today is no improvement. It would be better if they just admitted that they were mistaken and moved on. Don't try to convince me that fire is not hot because the sun is hotter still, no matter how clever your words I wont be burned in that way.


ProSense

(116,464 posts)
11. Are you
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 12:37 PM
Oct 2013
This is a only an "issue" due to poor management, but this explanation is just spin...

Any time you are forced to explain why a falsehood isn't really a lie, it's spin at best. This is an example of how even the best messaging and spin serves only to make the teller look foolish. The listener is left to wonder if the speaker is foolish enough to believe the nonsense they are spewing, or more insulting, do they really believe anyone else would fall for it...

In any case, this is very simple. Obama repeatedly promised something that they knew to be false. And if they somehow didn't know, that's hardly confidence inspiring (or an excuse). And the non-excuse they are offering today is no improvement. It would be better if they just admitted that they were mistaken and moved on. Don't try to convince me that fire is not hot because the sun is hotter still, no matter how clever your words I wont be burned in that way.

...desperately trying to valid the BS claim? I mean, the fact that this is being rehashed again should be a clue that's the handwringing is BS.

Think Progress debunked NBC's report on insurance cancellations, and there is more
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023942430

Conservative LA times debunks the myth that Obama was lying
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023951789
 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
12. Of course the handwringing is BS...
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 01:08 PM
Oct 2013

The entire issue is ridiculous. Anyone with a freaking brain in their head knew this 'promise' was beyond any President's ability to deliver. That's not the point. The point is to stop with the tapdancing and the spin and just say, "Yeah, sorry, call it what you like but we decided it was more important to have minimum standards insurance policies had to maintain."

The end.

What more do they need to say?

Instead, someone at the White House has decided that the best way to handle the accusation of lying is to compound the integrity problem by blowing smoke up the American people's ass.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
13. No,
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 01:15 PM
Oct 2013
The entire issue is ridiculous. Anyone with a freaking brain in their head knew this 'promise' was beyond any President's ability to deliver. That's not the point. The point is to stop with the tapdancing and the spin and just say, "Yeah, sorry, call it what you like but we decided it was more important to have minimum standards insurance policies had to maintain."

The end.

What more do they need to say?

...the "entire issue" is a bunch of people gleeful over a BS talking point that will amount to nothing.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Sebelius Explains 'If You...