the plans say X, Y and Z doctors are eligible for payment in a given plan, so the dumbazzes get the plan, then they find out the doc's may be eligible, but refuse to participate and work for pennies...
Posted on 11/04/2015 10:12:31 PM PST by Brad from Tennessee
Government health officials worked diligently this year to improve consumer experience on Healthcare.gov and make sure people know what they are getting for their money when they pick health insurance. But one thing is out of the government's control: whether doctors and hospitals will agree to accept patients who buy these plans.
Surveys and data are limited, so it's difficult to gauge the extent of the issue, but anecdotal evidence from patients and providers show it is a struggle. Some newly insured patients wonder whether it's worth paying for coverage they can't actually use. Even when they do find a provider, reports show they face crippling out-of-pocket costs they didn't expect.
Doctors or hospitals may be left out of insurance networks for many reasons; the decision is usually up to the insurance company, not the provider, but it usually comes down to reimbursement, which can be lower through plans obtained via the Obamacare marketplace.
"We have no idea what the plans are paying," says David Howard, professor in the department of health policy and management at Emory University. "That's closely guarded information. We can only draw conclusions based on anecdotal reports."
Clare Krusing, spokeswoman for America's Health Insurance Programs, said in an email that the group does not have data on how many physicians are choosing not to accept insurance or participate in certain networks. "Our recent report on out-of-network charges show that consumers are increasingly paying very high, and in many cases, exorbitant charges for medical care when they are treated by an out-of-network provider," she said. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
It’s not health insurance, it’s a tax.
On the other hand, I don’t know what a “PHx” is and apparently “Bing” search engine doesn’t either, unless it’s Phoenix Airport.
All part of the plan to create a giant fuster cluck leading to single payer and government run hospitals . . .
All part of the plan for the reasons stated in post #23, create jobs for unionized government employees to administer the plans and divert a portion of their paycheck to union dues for political action.
Obama said as much. They wanted single-payer, but had to settle for Obamacare for now.
And don’t underestimate liberal arrogance.
These people actually thought they could do it better than the private sector, which they hold in contempt.
True....Also don’t know what FICA means, or OASDI
The first sentence of the first paragraph is a bald-faced lie. That’s not s good way to open a news story.
Government gobble-di-gook.
“Politicians have convinced the American public that if there are more insurance companies “competing for your business†health care costs will go down.”
Out of the other side or their mouths, Politicians have been preaching that “healthcare” is a “right” and should be “free” for the last 50 years. Imagine how nice it would be if Pols waged a propaganda campaign aimed at “free” housing,”free” cars and “free” food
bmfl
Obama: leaving a legacy of ruining health insurance, making the country less safe, increasing the federal debt, ignoring the Constutituion, increasing and perpetuating racism, and giving away world leadership.
the plans say X, Y and Z doctors are eligible for payment in a given plan, so the dumbazzes get the plan, then they find out the doc's may be eligible, but refuse to participate and work for pennies...
My fundamental belief is that Medicare is the problem, and that Obamacare is simply one of the results.
And you are quite correct about what you call “free”, although that’s not the real problem.
The core of the Medicare distortion of reality is the promise to pay, without limit, for anything that might possibly be useful. The static analysis that gave birth to Medicare looked at what the over 65 cohort spent on medical and nursing services 1955-64, and reasoned that that would be the cost/year going forward.
But the promise to pay without limit led to the creation of an enormous industry that has created many interesting and useful things.
No senior citizen crippled by a bad hip would have paid $60 000 for a new one in 1958. Or, more exactly, there were not enough seniors in 1958 with that kind of money to justify the R&D necessary to create an industry producing safe, highly functional, and long-lasting joint replacements. But once EVERY senior had the $60 000, guaranteed, it made sense to turn American inventiveness and entrepreneurialism loose on the problem.
And, the same is true for auto sensing pacemakers, implantable defibrillators, stents, advanced eye surgery, molecular mimicry, individualized anti-cancer antibodies, etc, etc.
None of that would have happened without the government’s promise to pay without limit.
But, of course, payment without limit for all possibly useful things has meant that we cannot have a budget. And, since we could not have a budget after 1965, we first had to ditch silver coins, then the dollar-gold fix, then the debt limit. Prior to an attempt at fixed payments for certain things in 1986, Medicare could just print the extra money needed, but since then, it has proven necessary to borrow most of it from China.
Yes, of course in any system that pays without limit and without a budget, there is fraud and abuse. But, in the case of Medicare, that’s froth on the water. The real problem is that, if we doctors can invent something, however costly, the government will pay for it. And we can invent a lot of things.
Medicare still fights death as it’s prime directive. 100% of Medicare in-hospital deaths are investigated. And that in a population whose cumulative mortality rate is 100%. Everybody dies.
Medicare cannot be fixed as it presently exists.
Besides lower reimbursement rates, the doctors are worried about getting stiffed by exchange clients. The doctors have have noway of knowing if their client’s insurance is valid until 90 days of non payment.
Everyone needs to consider christian health sharing plans.
But as a point of information, have you ever wondered why they were exempt from obamacare. It is because muslims don’t believe in insurance......................
[. . .increasing the federal debt, ignoring the Constutituion, increasing and perpetuating racism, and giving away world leadership.]
And turning the White House into a P.T. Barnum exhibit of activist human curios.
>>Anyone with half a brain can see that it is the cost of medical care and not the cost of insurance that is the problem.
Then I guess I must have half a brain : )
I wish I understood why medical care costs so much less in foreign countries than here in the US. Is it because there is medical insurance that prices get inflated so high? I wonder if we didn’t have any medical insurance at all, would the cost of medical care come way down.
THere are US citizens living abroad (Mexico, Thailand, etc) who express that the medical care they receive there costs a fraction of what it costs here, and the quality of care is excellent.
100%
Something we need to be saying, repeating, is that insurance coverage does NOT equal service.
Coverage is meaningless if you can’t actually USE it.
The Obama Admin, Dems and supporters talk about COVERAGE for just that reason, and this article is just more evidence of why.
Saw the WaPo trot it out in an article about KY Governor Elect Bevin’s plan to kill the state exchange and roll back the Medicaid expansion.
Only three plans in america are exempt, the other christian plans are not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.