• The new “Get Ready for Obamacare” video from the Kaiser Family Foundation

    Just out. Watch all the way to the end, then comment. Fair? Sufficiently complete? Clear? Confusing?


    • I give it two thumbs up. Necessarily simplistic, but overall an accurate and balanced discussion

    • Thanks for sharing. I love the Kaiser Family Foundation. Love ’em.

      But, I think that they could not figure out if they were writing for (a) an audience of health policy wonks who understand the significant elements and political pain points of the various pieces of the ACA, or (b) actual people out there trying to understand the ACA and how they will make choices.

      For instance, if the audience was (b) I might have dealt in a little more detail with what the choices might look like in an exchange, and what considerations I need to make in choosing a plan (rather than the focus on the penalty for not selecting). I could go list other examples, but that is my main take-away. A lack of clarity on the primary audience.

    • It is not terrible for 6-7 minutes. In fact, they did cover a lot in that time. But it is definitely too rosey.

      I love how proponents love to talk about “free preventive” care. In open enrollment meetings I’m very careful to explain that is is just pre-paid preventive care adding about 0.5% to 1.0% to each of their premiums. And if you are a person who has any kind of ongoing issue that your doctor wants to see you for (blood pressure, blood sugar, cholesterol, etc.) that visit could be coded as follow up care and it won’t be free anyway.

      Same is true for the claims about no lifetime or annual maxes – another addition to your premium. In 12 years of providing coverage to large employers, I never had one client hit a lifetime limit (partly because employers rarely stay with one insurer for more than a few years). But you get to pay more premium for that “benefit” now.

      No mention of the convoluted and sure to cause much confusion out of pocket credits to folks who have exchange plans and make less than 250% of federal poverty level.

      No mention how the law is impacting hiring at employers with just under 50 employees and how many hours are lost to get folks under 30 a week but I suppose that is beyond the scope of the video.

    • It seemed generally fair, complete and clear.

      My main objection is to the “someone has to pay” near the end, unless you interpret lower prices as meaning providers are paying.

      I have the feeling I’m missing something.

    • I liked it, but I think Brian Hurley’s comment is correct. There does seem to be a lack of clarity on who this video is aimed at.

    • Reasonably good video.

      I have been thinking lately that it looks like the employer mandate might go, and IMO that is the worst part of ACA, without it ACA is not that bad.. Now if they get rid of the mandated coverage of inexpensive things like birth control and raise the maximum deductibles to $30,000/year or so that would make it less bad still.

    • I know it’s hard to fit in under such a small segment, but it would have been nice to talk a little bit about using disproportionate share as one of the funding levers to healthcare reform. 99% of the US has no idea what disproportionate share is or how it has been directly funding the uninsured through the ages. Having an understanding of the amount of money the federal government has been paying for the uninsured is a helpful discussion, particularly considering its conversion to transitioning the uninsured to insured.

    • I went for a mammogram last week and noticed the games have already begun. I needed an order from my regular doctor to get the appointment because they said it was my “annual preventative check”. My insurance covers annual mammograms, but when I got to the appointment they said my insurance wouldn’t cover it because it was a follow up appointment from the previous year. Duh! That’s why it’s called an annual check.

      Just as in this video, a lot of the details are missing!