Updated date:

Patient Protection and the Affordable Care Act: Features (Health Care Reform, Obama Care)


Mike has a keen interest in the effects of politics in our culture. He has a unique way of simplifying complex concepts.

Since the Individual Mandate and the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care/health care reform) were upheld by the Supreme Court (6/28/2012), I thought it would be a good idea to sell the features of the law. President Obama did a great job of crafting the law and navigating through all the opposition, but he didn't do a very good job of selling it to the people.

Do You Like the Features of the Law?

I find it interesting that, when presented with the individual aspects of the law, a majority of the people like it. But when it is presented as "Obama Care," they don't like it. As you will see, it has already done many good things, and there are many benefits that the law brings into effect in the very near future. At the end of this article is a link to the site where you can get more detailed information on each aspect of the law.

Click on chart to view full size.

Click on chart to view full size.

Premium Costs for a Family of Four

This chart shows what the premium costs are for a family of four without health care reform and with health care reform. Without health care reform at any income level, the average cost is greater than $11,000.

With health care reform, a family of four with an income of $33,075 would pay $1,500 in premiums. As you can see as you progress up the income scale, the yearly premium would increase as well—but nowhere as high as it does without health care reform. At almost a $100K of income, the premium would be about $9,000 per year.

Today, a family of four pays over $1,000 per year to cover those without health care insurance. This is just in emergency room costs. Because health care reform brings more people into the system, the health care costs are lower.

Explaining the Features

For purpose of explanation, the law can be divided into four main parts:

  1. Consumer Protection
  2. Wellness Care
  3. Individual Mandate
  4. Job Creation

1. Consumer Protection

No Pre-Existing Conditions

In 2014, the days of insurers discriminating based on pre-existing conditions will be gone for good. Americans with cancer and diabetes will get the care they need. Parents of sick children can no longer be refused coverage because of pre-existing conditions.

Patient’s Bill of Rights

There is legislation that prevents Insurers from cancelling your coverage without cause when you get sick. They may no longer put lifetime dollar limits on your benefits. By 2014 most annual dollar limits on benefits will be a thing of the past.

Better Value for Your Health Care Dollar

A Medical Loss Ratio Rule law states that 80% of your premium dollars must go to your own health care. It must not go to your insurance company for administrative cost, advertising, or CEO salaries and bonuses.

Premium Review Laws

Your insurance company can’t raise rates by 10% or more without first explaining its reasons to your state or a federal Rate Review program. Your Rate Review program will determine if the rate increase is unreasonable. A rate hike is unreasonable if, for example:

It is based on faulty assumptions or unsubstantiated trends. It charges different prices to people who pose similar risks to the insurer.

Your state regulator can approve or reject an unreasonable or excessive rate increase, if your state laws give the regulator this authority

2. Wellness Care

Preventive Care for Seniors

Seniors will not have to pay for cancer screening and other recommended preventative care. It will be offered at no additional costs. Screening includes the following:

  • Mammograms every 12 months for eligible beneficiaries age 40 and older.
  • Colorectal cancer screening, including flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy.
  • Cervical cancer screening, including a Pap smear test and pelvic exam.
  • Cholesterol and other cardiovascular screenings.
  • Diabetes screening.
  • Medical nutrition therapy to help people manage diabetes or kidney disease.
  • Prostate cancer screening.

Doughnut Hole

The doughnut hole is the coverage gap in Medicare coverage for prescription drugs. The new law begins to eliminate the gap with a 50% discount on brand-name drugs in 2011. The hole will be fully phased out over the next few years.

3. Individual Mandate (Individual Responsibility Law)

This law is better known as the individual mandate. This is the law that was under Supreme Court deliberation. Since it was up held by the Supreme Court, the law will be effective 1/1/2014. Under this law, most individuals who can afford it, will be required to obtain basic health insurance coverage or pay a tax to help offset the costs of caring for uninsured Americans. If affordable coverage is not available to an individual, he or she will be eligible for an exemption. This law will affect 1% of the population.

Please understand: If you already have insurance, this law will not affect you.

Click on chart to view full size.

Click on chart to view full size.

4. Job Creation

Job Losses From Health Care Repeal

This chart shows that if health care reform were repealed that premiums would increase at such a rate that employers would not be able to keep employees on the job. It would cause the following:

  • Increase medical spending by $125 billion by the end of this decade and add nearly $2,000 annually to family insurance premiums
  • Destroy 350,000 to 400,000 jobs annually over the next decade
  • Reduce the share of workers who start new businesses, move to new jobs, or otherwise invest in themselves and the economy

Tax Credits for Small Businesses

In 2019 when health care reform will be fully implemented, there will be tax credits for small businesses. Health Care will save employers an estimated $3,000 per employee per year. This will help companies be more competitive, create jobs, and help strengthen our economy

More Information: The Health Care Law and You

Below is the link to the website Health Care Law and You. Here you will be able to read the entire law, if you so desire, read key features of the law, and work with an interactive time line that shows what has already been implemented and what will be implemented. Also included, you will be able to compare service providers, and get information on preventive care.



5/8/2012: Fighting Medicare fraud has long been a top priority for President Obama. Today, we are releasing a new infographic that describes how the Affordable Care Act—the new health care law—is helping the Obama Administration crack down on Medicare fraud and make Medicare stronger.

7/19/2012: As of July 11. 2012, the Republican house has voted 33 times to repeal Obama Care, in spite of the Supreme Court ruling on The Individual Mandate.. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. But is it really insanity? I think they are using repetition to brainwash the people into thinking it is bad. They also say if you tell a lie over and over again, it becomes believable. I think that is what they are doing.

Advocate and Share

If you like what you read here and you think the law is good, then advocate for it and pass this information on to others to help eliminate the confusion.

If you don't like it, then you may want to advocate against it, but be careful what you wish for—you might get what used to be.

This content reflects the personal opinions of the author. It is accurate and true to the best of the author’s knowledge and should not be substituted for impartial fact or advice in legal, political, or personal matters.


Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 25, 2013:

SassySue1963: Thank you for your information.

SassySue1963 on May 25, 2013:

He gave up the single payer option to get Lieberman's vote. It had nothing to do with the GOP. They weren't given anything, so no they also did not give anything.

ObamaCare defines full time, thereby the employer must supply health benefits, as 30 hours. That is the reason that hours are being cut. Here is the link to the definition within the law itself.

"(4) Full-time employee

(A) In general

The term “full-time employee” means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week."

That is the exact wording from the Law itself.


That is a link to Section 1513 of the Law itself. You have to scroll down through the definitions until you get to the definition of "full time employee"

As for California, no premiums have not been lowered, they simply were not as high as was projected. They still rose from an average of $177 a month to $346 a month. Those rates are for the middle class people who will not qualify for the subsidies. The rates your link quotes are for low income people.

"The Congressional Budget Office predicted back in November 2009 that a medium-cost plan on the health exchange – known as a “silver plan” – would have an annual premium of $5,200. A separate report from actuarial firm Milliman projected that, in California, the average silver plan would have a $450 monthly premium.

[b]Now we have California’s rates, and they appear to be significantly less expensive than what forecasters expected.[/b]

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 25, 2013:

I've added a link to an article that shows how Obama Care is causing insurance companies to lower premium costs on the state market place for California. This is exciting news. Don't miss it!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 30, 2013:

SassySue1963: I was really angry with you and I looked up the definition of the word compromise and I was miss using it. A compromise is when both sides give up something in order to reach a mutual agreement. Your are right, the GOP didn't give up anything and it never will as long as Obama is in office (my opinion based on my observations.). Obama is the one who gave up the public option and agreed to the phase in. I don't understand what you are talking about with the 30 hours. I think that was many moons ago. Can you clarify that? By the way, were you born in 1963?

SassySue1963 on April 30, 2013:

"The phase-in to 2014 is part of what Obama had to compromise in order to get the bill passed by the GOP controlled house. It gives them more time to spread their propaganda, before all features of the bill are in place. Thanks for your comments."

from your own comments section. I commented that you were spreading mis-information and there was no compromise with the GOP.

You said..."what do you call the single payer option?"

Then you said hours weren't cut because of the Law and show you where in the Law it called 30 hours full time. I did so.

Opinions are fine. Twisting facts and ignoring others is what I take issue with in these cases.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 30, 2013:

lovemychris : What nice comments. I'm glad somebody appreciates what he has done and can appreciate that it is going to be phased in. Thanks for dropping by.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on April 30, 2013:

What a nice hub about Obamcare!.....and it's true that a lot of the benefits won't start showing until 2014.

The best parts to me besides the pre-existing condition are 1: that it's preventative.

And 2: it gives women credit for having the brains to figure out their own lives, not have the church/state dictate what they can and can't do.

I also love that the screenings are free!

I can't tell you how many times my dad had to go for the same test, just w different dr's. All so the insurance co could collect.

We really escaped a big, big catastrophe when Obama got a second term.

Thank the good people of America.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 30, 2013:

SassySue1963: In your zeal to prove everybody wrong, you have misunderstood what I said. I did not say the GOP compromised. I said the democrats and Obama had to compromise by giving up the public option in order to get the bill passed. I'm through. I don't know how many other ways to say it.

SassySue1963 on April 30, 2013:

Are you seriously imitating a brick wall right now?

YOU claimed the compromise was with the big bad GOP because you said any rise in the cost of insurance was because there was no public option. You blamed that on a compromise with the GOP. I didn't say there was no compromise. I only corrected you about the GOP part. It was with the Democrats.

Those statements are from 2009 when Reid was trying to get the 60 votes. It was Lieberman who would not vote yes if the public option remained. It was a meeting of conservative and liberal Democrats who compromised. Big deal. He compromised with other Democrats in order to shove a bill down the throats of the American people who did not want it at the time and that close to 60% still do not want. Kudos to the President. Personally, I don't think ignoring the will of the people is a good leadership trait.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 30, 2013:

Sassy: In your 2nd paragraph, there is no public option. The public option was removed in order to pass the bill. What part of compromise don't you understand. I was Obama who wanted the public option. As the president he can veto the bill and send it back to congress, but he didn't that's a compromise...end of story.

SassySue1963 on April 29, 2013:

Sorry, but that is not correct information.

The single payer option was removed to get Lieberman's vote. Period. They had to move him over to their side for the 60 votes. It wasn't done "in committee" it was done after the bill came out of committee. You don't get to re-write historical fact just because it suits your position. That simply isn't how it went down.

"Today all that has changed as Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) has once again bucked the party by announcing that he will support a Republican filibuster unless the public option is removed from the bill."

source: http://archive.truthout.org/10270911

"Under the compromise developed by a group of conservative and liberal Democrats, the Senate legislation would no longer include a new government-run insurance program, or "public option," for Americans who do not get coverage through their employers."

You'll notice it was conservative and liberal DEMOCRATS. Not Republicans.

source: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/09/nation/la-...

It just is what it is, or in this case, was in 2009. Factual and verifiable. There was no compromise with Republicans.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 29, 2013:

SassySue1963: No, they were compromises for democrats and Obama. The democrats and Obama wanted the public option. But they removed it in order to get the bill passed. That's the compromise. It started out with having a health care plan that was very similar to what congress has. But the republicans didn't want that so that was removed and then they had the public option removed. Those were the compromises that were done by the democrats. Boehner and Cantor said compromise is not in their vocabulary!

There is no need to get 60 votes unless there is a filibuster. It requires a super majority. If their was no filibuster a simple majority would do.

SassySue1963 on April 29, 2013:

What does the filibuster have to do with it? Stop changing the subject.

You claimed that the bad thing about the bill, removing the single payer option, and the phase in period, were compromises for Republicans. They were not. They were compromises for Democrats to obtain the 60 votes (among some other things that really could be construed as "bribes" for those senators) in order to break the filibuster. It makes no difference who did the filibuster (and actually, I'm not certain one ever took place once they had the 60 votes) but if the GOP tried to kill this monstrosity, good for them.

JON EWALL from usa on April 29, 2013:


There is a lot more that occurred to pass the healthcare bill. NELSON and LANDRIEU were promised funding for their states.The President signed an executive order that abortion would not be covered under the bill, we know that was not too factual.The rules of both houses were not followed to the letter of law.Congress ( a DEMOCRAT super majority in both houses ) passed a bill that still is being written today, unheard of in present day Washington.The law gives the President ALL the power to administer it as he sees fit, hence why the pages in the bill is constantly increasing.

H.R. 3590 (111th): Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (On the Senate Amendment)


H.R.4872 makes a number of health-related financing and revenue changes to this bill. Read


Message on Senate action sent to the House.

3/21/2010 10:31pm:

Mr. Spratt moved that the House agree to the Senate amendments. (consideration: CR H1854

text as House agreed to Senate amendments: CR H1920-2152)


Cleared for White House.

On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 3590 as Amended )

this was a vote to pass a bill or agree to a resolution.


OBAMACARE http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR359...

Senate vote 12/25/09 #396

House vote #165 in 2010 3/21/10

President signed 3/23/10

Became Public Law No: 111-148.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 29, 2013:

Sassy: Who did the filibuster? I'll betcha dollars to doughnuts, it wasn't a democrat!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 29, 2013:

Jon: You really don't expect to read everyone of those links, do you? I'll leave them there for others to read. But thanks for the comments.

SassySue1963 on April 29, 2013:

With all due respect, negotiations to remove the single payer option were made to obtain the vote of Senator Lieberman, an independent who caucused with Democrats and another with Senator Nelson, a Democrat. There was no compromise with any Republican for anything. The compromises were made to get the 60 votes (which are only needed, btw, to break a fillibuster, not to pass any bill) from within their own Party.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 29, 2013:

JON EWALL : Imagine that, you telling the truth and being banned. I can't understand why!!! As far as congress goes, we all know that congress is made up of two houses. The compromise comes when the bills are in committee and being negotiated, not after the bills are passed. That's when the filibusters come into play and it requires a super majority of more than 60 votes to pass a bill. That's where the blockage and compromise comes into play.

JON EWALL from usa on April 28, 2013:


''Because Health Care Reform brings more people into the system, the health care costs are lower.''

Ryan and Van Hollen Debate Medicare Proposals 6/3/11


Medicare is WAISTING more than $8 billion on an experimental program http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2012...

overhaul-induced sticker shock


How Will the New Health Law Affect Your Premiums?


IRS to play major role in Health-care system ( penalty/ tax)

CBO estimates that 4 million people will pay the penalty




Social SecutityDisability system 'in crisis'



The interest on the national debt is $1 billion a day and rising. The unfunded

liabilities of the country is $104 trillion.

The national debt recently rose to $15.5 trillion .

Senator Coburn has identified $9 trillion of waste in the United States government. The President lacks CREDIBILITY? Obama's 2014 Budget Proposal


Just wondering why we can't get the same information.

SassySue1963 on April 28, 2013:

I'm going to put it in plain sight for you peoplepower because it just isn't sinking in. Not one single Republican in either House or Senate voted yes for ObamaCare. His compromise was within his own Party.

Here is a roll call list of every Congressional member that voted for ObamaCare. Only one Republican Representative voted "yes" and that was Congressman Cao of LA. He was the most liberal Republican in Congress (and he lost his job at re-election). You say you deal in facts, here they are in black and white. The actual vote.



Now, as for how many Congressional members, meetings are with the majority leaders of both chambers and the President. So far, I've heard only 2 voices speaking out against such a move. McConnel and Tom Graves, both Republican. It does appear that the political fall out has perhaps put the plan on hold.

JON EWALL from usa on April 28, 2013:


''Republican Congress'' FORUM. Sorry I can't be a part of the forum. HUBPAGES HAS banned me from forums '' posting the truth''

Many hubbers as well as yourself need to understand and get by the distortion. CONGRESS is made up of the House and the Senate, Congress is not only one house as Obama misrepresents in his public DISTORTIONS OF THE truth.

Obama did not compromise with anyone in getting the healthcare passed, he played Chicag politics .

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 28, 2013:

SassySue1963: How many congressional members are we talking about? Obama care is going to phased in over many years. That was part of the compromise he had to make in order to get it passed. Now you and the congressman have to give it a chance before you can pass judgment. The reason they wanted it phased in is so the republicans would have time to kill it. They didn't think he would ever be a two term president. But he sure fooled them!

SassySue1963 on April 26, 2013:

Nothing to be right or wrong about with that, it is just fact. In rare bi-partisan agreement Congressional members want no part of the exchanges.

Good luck with your Hub!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 26, 2013:

Sassy: Yeah your are right. I don't have time for you right now. I'm trying to develop a hub on Gun Control that you can tear apart. But thanks for your comments.

SassySue1963 on April 26, 2013:

ObamaCare is so great, Congressional members want nothing to do with it. lmao

The talks — which involve Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Obama administration and other top lawmakers — are extraordinarily sensitive, with both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides. Discussions have stretched out for months, sources said.

Sure, it is a bi-partisan thing. The GOP gets a little (and I mean a little) pass on this though since not one Republican voted for this disaster and they have introduced over 30 bills to repeal this monstrosity.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 13, 2013:

SassySue1963: Why is it that I'm not surprised that you think they are telling lies. As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. I'm through. If you want to keep posting your reality on my hub, I'll approve it, so others can read it. But I'm not going to argue with you anymore. We are reaching the point of diminishing return. i'm not going to convince you and you are not going to convince me.

SassySue1963 on April 13, 2013:

That is what they spoon feed you peoplepower, but the people in the know, the small businesses, the large businesses, the elderly trying to find new doctors, the doctors themselves, they say different. Whitehouse.gov is going to tell you exactly what they want you to believe. You realize that right? Regardless of what President is in power.

I already spoke about the 80/20 rule, and it being a good thing. I have admitted the good things contained in the Law. However, that does not erase the bad it brings with it.

You want to live in the fantasy they provide you, that it's all peaches and cream, and that simply is not the case. Their own estimates for the base cost have already doubled and we haven't even implemented half of the Law yet in most states.

You simply cannot add a debt burden of an additional 30 million odd people on Medicaid and expect it comes at no increased cost. It is completely illogical.

You cannot reduce payouts to doctors for Medicare by some 60% and expect doctors to be able to even break even, let a long make a profit. In light of that, you can't expect doctors to continue to take on new Medicare patients. Again, it is illogical.

Tax credits do not pay your bills each month. They are given at the end of the year. I guess in order to pay out the year for health care, and wait for that tax credit, they can just not eat, or go homeless, or go without clothes. Besides, the eligibility for that number is ridiculously low. You should check it out.

I realize that these things might not affect you on a personal level but I thought we were talking globally here. I thought that was the sort of person you were.

It's already happening. It isn't hard to find. Layoffs galore. Hours cut galore. Businesses already talking about the rise in prices because of the cost. It's just fact.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 13, 2013:

SassySue1963: Look, I'm not going to get off on a tangent with you. All things being considered, I believe that the populous is better today with Obama Care than without it. It is going to be phased in over many years. This is just the start. Do you deny that insurance companies were exploiting people without Obama Care and now with Obama care they can't do that? That's the bottom line. Here are some myths that are de-bunked. My source is the law from white house.gov. You won't read so I'm going to spoon feed it to you.

There's a lot of misinformation out there. For too long, too many hard working Americans paid the price for policies that handed free rein to insurance companies. President Obama’s health reform law gives hard working families the security they deserve. The Affordable Care Act holds insurance companies accountable, lowers health care costs, gives Americans more freedom and control in their health care choices and improves the quality of care.

Myth de-bunkend:

Health insurance reform will NOT use your tax dollars to fund abortions.


The health insurance reform legislation maintains the status quo of no federal funding for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the woman is endangered. A federal judge recently wrote "the express language of the [Affordable Care Act] does not provide for taxpayer funded abortion. That is a fact and it is clear on its face."

Myth de-bunked

Businesses will NOT suffer under health reform


Health insurance reform lowers costs for American businesses - especially small businesses - who are struggling to remain profitable and competitive under the status quo. The independent Congressional Budget Office confirmed that the bill would lower health insurance premiums for the same insurance plan by up to 4 percent for small businesses and 3 percent for large businesses, and estimates indicate that reform could save businesses $2,000 per person in health costs.

Myth de-bunked

The Affordable Care Act will help bring down the cost of health care.


The health policy experts and economists who have looked at this legislation have said we are pursuing every possible mechanism to reduce health care costs. The Congressional Budget Office found that health insurance reform will reduce the deficit by $210 billion in this decade and by more than $1 trillion over the following 10 years. And a family of four would save as much as $2,300 on their premiums in 2014 compared to what they would have paid without reform.

Myth de-bunked

Health reform will NOT lead to a government takeover of health care.


One independent group actually called this myth the “lie of the year.” The Affordable Care Act puts people, not health insurance companies or government, in charge of health care. The new law strengthens the existing employer-based health insurance market while making the market fair for consumers by implementing landmark consumer protections. Families and individuals that don't have access to affordable coverage can receive tax credits to help them purchase coverage in the private health insurance market. There is no government-sponsored, public, or "single payer" plan in the law.

Myth de-bunked

The Affordable Care Act‘s individual responsibility requirement IS constitutional.


Legal experts and federal judges appointed by Democrats and Republicans agree that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional.

SassySue1963 on April 13, 2013:

Oh please. The biggest propaganda rag on the internet, quite possibly. Let's be clear. Not one Republican voted for Health Care. Not one in either House or Senate. They did not need them. They did not talk to them. They simply bypassed them. The compromise was for his own Party. Period. Reid could not deliver the votes of the Moderate Dems. Without them, the Bill does not pass the House.

Talk about trying to link cause and effect that are unrelated. Republicans threatened a filibuster, meaning Reid needed his 60 votes to bring the measure up, but it was the Democrats who demanded the change or they would not vote for it.


Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 12, 2013:

SassySue1963: Here you go again connecting events that you really don't know were cause and effect. You make it sound like Obama fired the congressman because of the votes. It turns out the house is up for re-election every two years and so is one third of the senate. If they didn't get re-elected, it's because they didn't get the votes. I get it. You don't like Obama and his administration. Well I don't like the republicans and their party of NO. Here is a link that will back my claims. Be sure to watch the video with it. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/16/1132504/-...

SassySue1963 on April 12, 2013:

he compromised on it peoplepower but it was not with the evil GOP as you proclaim. It was to get it past his own Party's opposition. Many Democrats were against the Bill from the start and were strong armed by Pelosi & Reid to vote for it. Many also lost their jobs as a result at re-election time.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 12, 2013:

SassySue1963: What do you call the single payer option that Obama compromised on? He didn't get half of what he wanted in the bill! I approved both of your comments but I'm not going to argue with you anymore. It requires analyzing the links that you post and I just don't have the time to do that, but I will let everybody else see what you posted. Thanks for playing.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 12, 2013:

I'm approving this and let all my readers come to their own conclusions.

SassySue1963 on April 12, 2013:

Oh btw, you claim to deal in facts and yet, even when I've already proven this one false, you continue to use that spin:

"cynthtggt : The phase-in to 2014 is part of what Obama had to compromise in order to get the bill passed by the GOP controlled house. It gives them more time to spread their propaganda, before all features of the bill are in place. Thanks for your comments."

There was no compromise with the GOP on Health Care Reform. Zero, zip, nada. It was shoved down everyone's throat by the Democrats who controlled both Chambers of Congress. It received not one solitary GOP vote. Please stop spreading that misinformation.

"Republicans opposed the Affordable Care Act during passage. Not a single representative in the House or Senate voted in favor of the bill"

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in

SassySue1963 on April 12, 2013:

About 17.6 million state residents received employer health benefits in 2011, nearly 1.3 million fewer than a decade earlier.

The report issued Thursday by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation also shows that the premiums for family coverage through work shot up 146% over the same period to $14,828 annually in California."

I chose California because they have already partially expanded their Medicaid rolls and implemented the pre-existing conditions clause in ObamaCare. Those are the results, in just one state. Now multiply that over the entire country.


Currently 14 states have stated they will not expand Medicaid rolls because the tax burden going forward (ObamaCare only covers the initial set up costs and 11% of all associated costs going forward) would be too much of a tax burden on their state's residents. There are an additional 3 states that are considering opting out of the expansion.

"(4) Full-time employee

(A) In general

The term “full-time employee” means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week."

That is the exact wording from the Law itself.


That is a link to Section 1513 of the Law itself. You have to scroll down through the definitions until you get to the definition of "full time employee".

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 11, 2013:

SassySue1963: I presented you with plenty of facts. You just don't buy them. I deal in facts, You are the one that is playing the "what if game and the slippery slope." You keep talking about a law about the 30 hours. Can you show me the actual legislation that states that? In CPAC Mitch McConnell rolled out a platform that had a stack of papers on it that was 8 feet tall and said here is the new Obama care. It's over 20,000 laws and people bought it. It was all over the internet. But it turns out it was just a stage prop, but people bought it anyway because he presented it as fact. I'm not going to convince you and you are not going to convince me. I've been there and done this with others. It just gets to the point where one or both parties get tired and quits. Just don't tell me I put my head in the sand.

Here is another propaganda technique you use. it's called Faulty Cause and Effect.

This technique suggests that because B follows A, A must cause B. Remember, just because two events or two sets of data are related does not necessarily mean that one caused the other to happen. It is important to evaluate data carefully before jumping to a wrong conclusion.

As an example of how logic can be abused, consider the following argument:

Premise 1: Joe Smith supports gun-control legislation.

Premise 2: All fascist organizations have passed gun-control legislation.

Conclusion: Therefore, Joe Smith is a fascist.

SassySue1963 on April 11, 2013:

The old liberal line when they can't find an answer for facts: well, you live in your own reality or you live in fantasyland. I'm surprised at you peoplepower. I did think you were above such rhetoric.

The ladies of Wendy's exist, whether you take your head out of the sand long enough to see them or not. There is no other reason that their hours were cut other than a Law that now requires they receive a benefit they did not even need if they work over 30 hours. That is the real world my friend.

Enjoy your fantasy land under the sand.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 11, 2013:

SassySue1963: It's obvious you live in your own reality, which is not the same as mine. Anybody can find anything they want on the internet to support their argument and their interpretation of what they think are facts. The difference between you and me is I see Obama as the glass half full. You on the other hand see Obama as the glass half empty. But in Obama's case it takes a lot to fill the glass because of all the opposition to his agenda and compromise he has had to make. And I will continue to call it propaganda. Most of what you have given me is called a "False Analogy." It goes like this:

In a false analogy, two concepts or events are associated with each other without any specific evidence indicating a cause and effect relationship. An example is: People who drink caffeinated coffee don't sleep well, Nancy drinks caffeinated coffee, therefore she does not sleep well.

When examining the comparison, ask yourself how similar the items are. In most false analogies, there is simply not enough evidence available to support the comparison.

SassySue1963 on April 11, 2013:

Please don't even call anything propaganda when the entire ObamaCare fiasco is nothing but such. Costs HAVE risen. Perhaps not for you personally, I can understand the concept of it not affecting everyone the same way. But really, it's a fact. Just check it out. Insurance premiums have been on the rise and are still rising, and every report says they will rise more as the Law is fully implemented. Which is natural and to be expected. After all, you can't add a burden of debt without increasing costs. It was illogical to even buy that load of crap. He did lie.

The costs of set up has already doubled just as an estimate. What do you really think it's going to be when it's all said and done? The original estimate was $2 billion and it's already up to $4 billion.

It's a complete lie that those over $200,000 will be the ones affected. How? If they are bringing home that much they have a very good job, which I'm certain has benefits. No penalty for them. The poor are the poor, they'll come in under the ridiculously low $11,000 for an individual and $20,000 for a family and be fine as well. Yep, it's your Middle Class that are going to foot the bill. Those that fall just above that amount but don't have that great job with benefits, or, as is increasingly becoming the case these days, are forced to work 2 part time jobs just to make ends meet. No benefits from work, no free lunch at the government's teat for them. Nope. They'll just have to pony up and go without some luxury like, I don't know, food? rent? It'll be alright.

Oh and enjoy those current Medicare benefits. The President's already put you on the chopping block in his new Budget plan. Including your social security. Yep he lied about that too.

I see you've completely chosen to ignore those ladies that work at Wendy's to supplement their income. You know the real rub? There was no reason to make it 30 hours. None. Other than you have a vested interest in making sure your population stays on the government teat. Know why? Because those with part time jobs are generally high school kids or college kids, still on Mom and Dad's insurance, or, as in the case of the ladies from Wendy's, supplementing a meager allotment in retirement, and have Medicare. They don't NEED coverage at work.

But keep sticking your head in the sand as it all goes to seed, which it is pretty quickly now. I suppose the economy is all still Bush's fault right? Give me a break.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 11, 2013:

SassySue1963: I'm going to comment on each one of your links.

Link 1: Is a great example of propaganda. This is what Poor Richard's referenced to the actual source: "In a later section focusing on the Philadelphia district, the beige book said that "Health insurance costs are mixed, ranging from very high increases to no change." Therefore Poor Richards said Obama lied. Which is a lie in itself!

Link 2: Is written by insurance actuaries who project risks for insurance companies. The key word here is could increase costs.

Link 3: Would you rather have a slight increase by businesses or pay for the uninsured going to ER's when they have a cold?

Link 4 is old news dated June of 2012. It says the same thing my comment said. If your are earning over 200K adjusted gross than it will affect you more than people in lower income brackets.

I have medicare. I have no co-payments. I get free lab work and I get a free physical every year. Thanks to Obama care. I take four prescription medications, two of which I don't pay a dime on. Obama care has reduced the doughnut hole for seniors and will continue to do so until it is closed. Would you rather have insurance companies that can raise premiums to the stratosphere or have some control of them? Before Obama care, insurance companies profits were in excess of 200% and there were pre-exsisting conditions. Do yourself a favor and instead of researching what could happen, look at what is really happening. If you say insurance premiums are going to rise, it's a matter of how much they are going to rise compared to what we would have paid for premiums without Obama care! Read this link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/20...

SassySue1963 on April 11, 2013:

lol@employers' choice

ObamaCare sets full time hours at 30 hours for insurance purposes. There have been part-time workers who do not get benefits since work began. They were given anywhere from 20-35 hours per week. ObamaCare is the one who has forced the employers to cut hours because of it's 30 hour set.

Now you are just being obtuse. "we can't see it if it hasn't happened". C'mon. You are better than that peoplepower. Papa John's, Denny's, convenience stores, grocery stores, it's been all over the news. The only reason it hasn't happened yet, and this has been in there as well, are the umpteen exemptions that were issued by the Government that are about to run out. You don't live in a cave, I know you're aware of exactly what I'm talking about.

Let's not forget all the promises of lower insurance costs blah blah blah. Lies. Premiums and out of pocket costs are both going to rise (and have) as a result of ObamaCare.





Just a few.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 10, 2013:

SassySue1963: I asked for valid source. In your first paragraph, it was the employers choice that he reduce the work hours to 28. There is nothing in Obama care that tells employers to do that. In your second paragraph, you make it sound that layoffs are caused by Obama care. When you say have you seen the price increases that are going to have to be made. That means they are not made yet. How can one see the price increases that are going to have to be made? You are just projecting something that hasn't happened. The lay offs were caused by the financial meltdown, not by Obama care. Business operate on short term loans from banks. Today the banks are not loaning money to business because they can earn more from investing in the derivatives markets. You convince yourself by making false equivalence statements. That's a propaganda technique. You may not even be aware that you are doing it. You should read my hub on propaganda techniques. Here is the link. https://soapboxie.com/world-politics/The-Anatomy-o...

SassySue1963 on April 10, 2013:

What claim am I making? That the negative effects have already begun? That one?

I happen to know some very nice elderly ladies that previously worked 35 hours (not full time, so no benefits) for Wendy's. It kept them out of poverty, but not rich. Since Obamacare defines full-time (for health insurance purposes) as 30 hours, they are now only allowed to work 28 hours. That is $200 a month they are losing. But...the best part is....it all looks good on paper because now that business "creates" yet another part-time job, so a job created, a worker hired....those unemployment numbers don't look too bad. Pulls the wool over everyone's eyes. All we're doing though is making people poorer and more dependent on the Government (ah but don't the Dems LOVE that!) and making even more under-employed people. This I know for an absolute fact because I know them.

As for the rest, just take a look around you. Have you seen how many layoffs businesses have already made due to ObamaCare? Have you seen the price increases that are going to have to be made in order to cover the costs for businesses? Oh...but they are supposed to eat that aren't they? Yeah...join reality. People own businesses to make a profit. Anything that decreases their set profit margin is going to get passed along to the customer. That's everything, because it's every business.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 10, 2013:

SassySue1963: What I meant is the people that are saying the CBO could be wrong are the ones who don't have anything conclusive (iol). Do you have any valid sources to back up your claims?

SassySue1963 on April 10, 2013:

Of course there isn't anything conclusive. Is there ever with the CBO? lol

There is (or there was at the time I pulled it up) a link at the bottom of that article that will take you to the report from the CBO itself. They aren't predicting sunny times as a result of Obamacare I'm afraid. Those who were misled and supported it can continue to put the blinders on, but the effects are already being felt among the population.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 10, 2013:

SassySue1963: There is nothing conclusive in that article. It's not about the CBO estimate. It's about how the CBO estimate could be wrong. Yeah well college studies have shown that drinking milk could make you sterile too. The key word here is "could."

Here is what CNN Money says:

Under the health care overhaul, which legislators passed in March, most U.S. residents will be required to purchase health care or pay a fine. By 2016, the penalty will be either a flat $695 per person a year, or 2.5% of household income -- whichever is higher. The fines are capped based on income.

The CBO report noted the majority of the uninsured will not be subject to these fines because they belong to exempt groups including extremely low-income households, some religious sects and unauthorized immigrants.

Penalty revenue by income level:

Of the 4 million people who will pay the fine, about 9% will have annual income below the poverty line: $11,800 for individuals and $24,000 for a family of four. Fees paid by that segment of the population will make up 4% of the total money collected from penalties. In contrast, households with income above 400% of poverty level -- more than $96,000 -- will comprise 36% of people paying the penalty, and 66% of the total penalty revenue.

Not everyone is convinced that the penalty will be enough to get people to buy insurance.

"The penalty is much too small to be effective," said Paul Ginsburg, president of the Center for Studying Health System Change, a nonpartisan policy research group. "It's a real Achilles heel that could raise risks for the success of the entire reform."

Ginsburg said the problem is two-pronged: The penalty is not high enough to convince the uninsured to throw in a few extra dollars to buy a policy, and the removal of pre-existing conditions means they can wait to purchase insurance until they need it.

SassySue1963 on April 10, 2013:

Here is another link for the CBO estimates


Face it peoplepower, while your personal intent is noble, this law is not what you were led to believe. It's a farce and a disgrace and is only about to get worse.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 10, 2013:

Jon: I googled it and it still didn't come up. I think they took it off of their server.

JON EWALL from usa on April 09, 2013:


that's what one calls censorship. Try gooogling off of the hub, it works. please advise if you got it.


Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 09, 2013:

Sorry Jon: Still not working.

JON EWALL from usa on April 09, 2013:


Sorry about that, try this one, it should work

have a great day.CBO estimates that 4 million people will pay the penalty


Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on April 09, 2013:

This link doesn't work: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2012/07/07/

JON EWALL from usa on April 09, 2013:


An update to Obamacare.



Obamacare Will Cause Medical Claims Costs To Jump 32 Percent: Study



Partial list of taxes and fees in health overhaul


3/13/13 obamacare

Insurers warn of overhaul-induced sticker shock


3/22/13 Obamacare

How Will the New Health Law Affect Your Premiums?


IRS to play major role in Health-care system ( penalty/ tax)

CBO estimates that 4 million people will pay the penalty


Will you deny your hubbers?

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on February 28, 2013:

Healthexplorer : Thank you so much for your comments to help in the understanding of this very controversial subject. Thanks for dropping by.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on September 23, 2012:

cynthtggt : The phase-in to 2014 is part of what Obama had to compromise in order to get the bill passed by the GOP controlled house. It gives them more time to spread their propaganda, before all features of the bill are in place. Thanks for your comments.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on September 23, 2012:

Jillian Barclay; What a nice compliment. I guess I get my perseverance from being a technical writer for so many years. When I worked at Toshiba, we were taught how to define problems and analyze down to the root cause and it must have stuck with me. Thanks for sharing this on Facebook. I liked what you said about GOPDON'TCARE. Take Care

Cynthia Taggart from New York, NY on September 23, 2012:

I can't wait until it's in full throttle in 2014. That is because I can't wait for the underground!

Donna Lichtenfels from California, USA on September 23, 2012:

Dear peoplepower73,

I will be posting this on Facebook- I envy your ability to never tire of the back and forth from those who have no idea what is in the bill or who is at the bottom of the high cost of medical care. It is not Obama, it is the pharmeceutical companies, the health insurers and yes, sadly, the doctors and hospitals who are all complicit.

I want everyone in this country to have access to medical care. The GOP will NOT stand for it. If they are elected in November, they will repeal ObamaCare and replace it with GOPDON'TCARE!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on September 23, 2012:

Medicare beneficiaries have saved a total of about $4.5 billion on prescriptions because of the 2010 health care law.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on July 23, 2012:

SassySue1963: Whatever!

SassySue1963 on July 23, 2012:

lol @ peoplepower

That simply is not the case though. It was not a Republican controlled Congress. The Dems held both houses when the Health Care Reform Bill was passed and it was passed without one single solitary GOP vote. So nothing that is faulty in it can get blamed on the Republicans. Sorry. It is entirely a Democrat thing.

"Republicans opposed the Affordable Care Act during passage. Not a single representative in the House or Senate voted in favor of the bill"

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in...

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on July 23, 2012:

SassySue1963: Sorry I took so long to reply. But I do have a life outside of hub pages. You are right about everything you said, but the reason it is because Obama had to comprise and accept a watered down bill in order to get it passed by the republican controlled congress. Remember, he started out with the single payer option and ended up with this. That's why if you look at the real bill, you will see so many revisions to it. Oh, oh, I think I might have opened up another can of worms by mentioning the Single Payer Option...be kind my fingers are getting sore from all this typing.

SassySue1963 on July 22, 2012:

I've already conceded that the pre-existing conditions part is a good thing.

If it restricts premiums, then how is it that premiums have risen? It only states that 80% must go to cover you; and that is a collective you btw, that only 10% can be used for administrative purposes. There is no fail safe that will prevent the rise of premiums to offset the cost of covering all those pre-existing conditions and the exchanges and expansion of Medicaid rolls, which were intended to cover some of those who fall through the cracks, will be non-existent in most states. Further, it completely ignores all those who are unfortunate enough not to be eligible there anyway. We offer them no help and then hit those who have no recourse and cannot afford insurance, with a tax penalty. Good plan. That should set the economy rolling.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on July 22, 2012:

It's very simple. Remove the law and go back to what you had before where insurance companies could raise premiums to whatever they wanted,and pre-existing conditions and just general exploitation of consumers. Insurance companies don't produce a product. They are in between men.

SassySue1963 on July 22, 2012:

@peoplepower I have a Hub on this as well and I mention the good in the Law, as you do here, such as the pre-existing conditions and not being denied coverage.

However, I would like to know where you get your cost of premiums information. The only place in the Law that would control premiums is the expansion of the Medicaid rolls and the State exchanges. Seventeen states have already stated they will opt out of this portion of the Law, and as the Supreme Court has ruled that the Federal Government cannot withhold other monies to penalize them for opting out, there is nothing to stop them from doing so. Further, it is expected that more states will join those seventeen. So the cost control that you refer to here is moot. There will be no cost control. You fail to mention as well that there is no cost control above the 133% poverty line. One person, on their own, will be forced to purchase health insurance making only $15,000 per year. How do you propose they manage it? A family of four making only $2,000 more annually than your example of $33,000 will also get no benefit from cost control but be forced to either pay a tax penalty (that is what I call the mandate now because the Supreme Court ruled it a tax, the Dems still want to call it a penalty even though it was ruled unconstitutional as a penalty) or purchase insurance. What about them? There are good things within the Law, though they are few, and they do need to be continued. However, there are so many bad things about it as well. Doctors have already said it will restrict care, and many are thinking of leaving medicine. Health Care Reform needs to deal with health care and not insurance. As for everyone paying for those people who go to ERs, who do you think is going to pay for the cost of covering all these additional people? Premiums have risen, not dropped, since implementation of this Law began just in part. It does nothing to address the actual costs of health care. If you think it will be the insurance companies who eat any loss from this Law, think again. It will be you, me and Joe down the street who will ultimately pay the price and it will be higher than any price we currently pay for those who use ERs.

JON EWALL from usa on July 13, 2012:


Just add the link to open your eyes as to what is burried in the law.

IRS to play major role in Health-care system

CBO estimates that 4 million people will pay the penalty that year.


Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on July 10, 2012:

Paul Revere: That' because even though, it's a bill, it's also legislation. It's not an insurance policy. It has laws in it that protect the consumer from exploitation from the insurance industry. Thanks for dropping by.

Paul Revere from Michigan on July 10, 2012:

We had to pass the bill to know what was in it.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on July 02, 2012:

LauraGT: My hope is by breaking it down into its component parts, that people will understand it much better. I'm beginning to realize that one of the problems is that so much of it will not be implemented until future years. This was done so that Obama could get it through the opposition in congress. This may work against him because it gives the Republicans a long window to prove that it's not working. Thanks for stopping by. I appreciate your comments.

LauraGT from MA on July 02, 2012:

Thanks for this clear, concise explanation of many of the major provisions of this Act. It is really hard to understand why so many people are against it. As you said, when broken down, people do like the individual aspects of it. It's funny that people pretty much can agree that we need roads and schools, but they can't agree that we need a good healthcare system for all.

Nice hub.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 28, 2012:

I'm not going to read all of that. But your point is well take.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on June 28, 2012:

Ha! Just showed up on twitter again!!http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c...

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on June 28, 2012:

Rats...must have copied it wrong....and it's from twitter...I'm not going back to try to find it.......it's long gone over hours ago. But I think screaming has a thread with a link to the justice's opinions.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 28, 2012:

The link didn't work.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on June 28, 2012:

Here's a good comment:

"Modifying behavior with tax incentives and penalties is nothing new. Those who have been free-riding on the high insurance premiums that insured people pay might have lost their ability to free-ride without consequence, but seriously, this isn't a bad thing. Read the opinion before over-reacting. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c...

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 28, 2012:

And let me guess,he was born to one black, parent and one Asian parent who are both socialists. That's why his skin is that tan color all the time Too funny!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 28, 2012:

LetitiaFT: I'm glad I could help. I think Obama needs to use PowerPoints to sell this, not stand in the hallway of congress and look presidential as he makes his speech. Thanks for stopping in.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on June 28, 2012:

Oh MY!!...

Andy Borowitz-

"Fox News Reports: New Evidence Suggests John Roberts Born in Kenya"

LetitiaFT from Paris via California on June 28, 2012:

What terrific news! Thanks for explaining the main points of this complex issue in such clear concise fashion.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 28, 2012:

lovemychris: I'm with you kid. This is my updated version of the hub "Health Care Reform if it is Repealed." It did my heart good to see this was upheld by the Supreme Court. Thanks for dropping by.

Leslie McCowen from Cape Cod, USA on June 28, 2012:

I think it's wonderful. And we haven't really begun to feel the positive effects yet. It's like a seed planted in the earth. The fertile ground of growth. One small step forward, and thank the stars we didn't go backwards! Kudo's to Justice Roberts! He showed a lot of guts, because he will be skewered. But when his wife cried at the confirmation hearings, my heart went out to her....and look: her husband has a heart! Remember, it's not Obamacare, it's Obama Cares. And now we do too. CONSTITUTIONALLY. and By law. No more death for profit. Halleluya.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 25, 2012:

JON EWALL: Thanks for the comments. I looked over your links including Dr. Coburn's. It's a lot to digest in one sitting, but I will look at it tomorrow. I believe both government and big moneyed interests including corporations are the culprit. They are in bed with each other and that's why these bills don't get passed. Congressman are in a perptual campaign to get re-elected mode and big moneyed interests are funding congressman, so that they can get their agendas passed. This is all explained in one of my hubs called the Triangle of Influence. Thanks for dropping by.

JON EWALL from usa on June 25, 2012:


‘’greed and corruption. That's what caused the financial meltdown. "Officials in the government were well aware of what was happening in 2005, instead of following REGULATIONS, they and members of Congress looked the other way. Dodd and Frank for Freddie and Fannie and the leaders in Congress .


‘’When the middle class and poor don't have money to spend a downward spiral or "blackhole"is formed and nothing short of miraculous can bring it back’’

In Nov. you can decide with your vote, Poverty or Prosperity. A CHANGE IS NEEDED.

‘’Corporate America knows only one vision, "Money",and that is the cold truth of our society.’’ Corporate America is where the jobs come from for the middle class and the poor. The problem is that the government is wasting and spending too much of the taxpayers money. The drug industry ,if you investigate, are taxed heavily for their product. Taxing business sounds good IF a company makes a profit.

The Senator Coburn report '' WASTE IN GOVERNMENT'' http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/rightnow...

January 26, 2010,

Democrats vote down Senator Coburn’s amendment to return unspent $120 billion back to the US Treasury.


Potential impact of Obama's 'Buffett rule ' President Obama’s

2011 tax returns rate was . 20.5 % , a lot less than his secretary


Be the judge!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on June 24, 2012:

rjbatty: Thanks for your comments. Fear can be a great motivator and with the propaganda techniques that are used today, it can be used to get people to vote against their own best interest without them realizing it. If you were to ask people who believe in the propaganda if they would like to be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions and would like to pay unliminted amounts for insurance coverage, and have their insurance cancelled because they were sick, they would say no. If you asked them if they would like Obama care, they would also say no, because they have been told it's bad and contains provisions for death panels.

rjbatty from Irvine on June 24, 2012:

To quote you: " I believe that many people in this country have been brainwashed by the notion that any form of socialism is bad. This has been caused by the propaganda from the right that still associates any form of socialism to communism. I'm more afraid of unfettered capitalism than socialism. If free market enterprise is not regulated, it opens the door for greed and corruption. That's what caused the financial meltdown. "They don't want socialism, but don't take away their social security or medicare.""

-- Boy, you really hit the nail on the head. I'm wondering... how do you account for the success of this propaganda? Is it illiteracy? How does the right wing manipulate Americans to support their own worst interests? I read an article within the last few days that stated most Americans liked the components of health care reform, but they were against the legislation. Contemplating the lack of logic is enough to give someone a brain hemorrhage. I can understand the American spirit being resistant to excessive and wasteful taxation, but how did our countrymen become so obsessively paranoid about "big government?" It's not like the US was ever under a dictatorship. We've never had to suffer the side effects of fascism. If this were Germany or Italy or even Spain, I could imagine the resistance to government based on past history. Are the misanthropic philosophies that propel republicanism so efficient that the mental faculties of our middle class simply swept aside or overwhelmed? There is a national-scale psychological problem contained in your observation that needs to be rooted out. I understand how the republicans absorbed many middle-class Americans by camouflaging their political agenda and focusing on "moral" issues (the effectiveness of which I read is slipping). But, I'm not sure I will ever comprehend how they managed to delude so many people into thinking that unfettered private enterprise was going to be any type of panacea. How would you explain this gullibility on the part of middle-America? Why are Americans either so easily manipulated or naïve?

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 15, 2012:

Gemini Fox: Thanks for your comments/questions. I think an expansion of Medicare would have been the way to go. I believe that congress has a version of Medicare for their insurance. The problem is controlling corruption. I think the reason health insurance is tied to the employer is because group insurance rates are cheaper than individual rates. Insurance companies, like any corporation, have to answer to their share holders and board of directors. They will do anything to increase their profits and lower their risk. People are afraid of socialized medicine because the right wing has equated it to communism. They have been brainwashed by right wing propaganda. Thanks for dropping by.

Gemini Fox on May 15, 2012:

Interesting hub - haven't really tried to wade into the ins and outs of Obamacare. Probably like everyone else I feel rather overwhelmed by it but your hub was a starting point (am for socialized medicine, btw).

Have various random comments/questions:

- On the one hand you said that the insurance companies would not be able to raise their rates more than 10% but then per Au fait's comment and your response it is apparently actually true that their rates could skyrocket? That will put citizens between a rock and a very hard place! I did hear that Obamacare in actuality hands the insurance companies a gift on a platter - this is perhaps what that was referring to. This part is very, very scary!! This is going to break the system right there.

- An expansion of Medicare would have been so much simpler - true?

- We will still have the insane concept of tying health insurance/health to our employer!

- If companies are still allowed to make a profit from people being sick, and you can bet that somewhere, somehow the insurance companies are going to make a profit, then the system is still broken.

- It's too funny that so many people are against socialized medicine when in reality it's already socialized to a certain extent!

Sorry - long one there . . .

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 14, 2012:

Kathleen: Thank you so much for your comments. Many people in this country are led to believe that socialized medicine somehow leads to communism. But don't take away their Medicare!

Kathleen Cochran from Atlanta, Georgia on May 14, 2012:

I appreciate your effort in providing this information. Heard recently a comment by Clark Howard that Americans pay at least twice as much for our health care as any other industrialized nation.

When this bill was being passed I worked for the American Cancer Society, which, while trying to maintain it's nonpartisan credibility, was desperate to see these changes go into effect for the benefit of cancer patients who had enough to face fighting their disease without the hindrances we place on healthcare in this country.

People need to be informed and not just blindly take sides politically.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 13, 2012:

JON EWALL: I started to read your article by George Will and suddenly, a pop-up of Ann Coulter appeared. It nearly scared the hell out of me! The No New Taxes ploy is a shell and pea game. Sure when they say no new taxes, they take away deductions. Bush 1 took away the credit card interest rate deduction and mortgage interest deduction. Bush 2 raised the standard deduction. The real reason companies are not hiring in this country is because they are being outsourced to other countries. Thanks for dropping by.

JON EWALL from usa on May 12, 2012:


My last response apparently never got thru. I'll try a shorter one this time.


Obamacare, Taxing jobs out of existence

WHY are companies not hiring?



Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 10, 2012:

philabustah: Thanks for the comments.

JON EWALL: Let's not forget. Bush added 16 trillion to the deficit by not funding Medicare Part D.

philabustah on May 10, 2012:

Let's not forget, it's those lovely lobbyists who want stuff stuffed in the bill, and the lobbyists who are ex-Senators,and the Senators who are ex-lobbyists, etc. Isn't it sickening? I need healthcare just thinking about it. All orchestrated by the right...but you notice there wasn't one single squeal for President Bush's drug program? Hmmmm. Is this a logical discussion or must we still waste so much time with ideologues?

JON EWALL from usa on May 09, 2012:


'',I agree with a regulated health care system. The cost of service and medications in the US are embarrassing.''

US Government regulations and laws contribute to high healthcare costs. There are 12.7 million unemployed who may not BE CONTRIBUTING by not having a JOB, hence the pool of insured citizens is a related problem to insurance cost. Obamacare forces everyone to BUY INSURANCE in order to make the numbers work.


Study claims Obama's health care law would raise deficit


Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 08, 2012:

timetraveler2: I read your hub page on "The Healthcare War." You and I are pretty much on the same page. So I hope you don't mind, but I linked to your hub page from mine with a referral tracker. Now if someone clicks on that link, you and I both earn money from it. You can do the same thing to mine, if you want. Thanks for the comments. We have to wait and see what the Supreme Court ruling is going to be.

Sondra Rochelle from USA on May 08, 2012:

Peoplepower: I really enjoyed this hub. My own hub, "The Healthcare War", covers some of the same information, but it not nearly as detailed as yours. For those who worry about being "forced" to buy health insurance or who consider this part of the law a violation of their constitutional rights. 1) There is financial help in the law for people who truly cannot afford the insurance and 2)there have been three precedents set in the past that directly relate to the individual mandate that prove it is indeed constitutional. We really need this law to remain in place as it will greatly benefit many people. Those who have fought against it don't realize that doing so hurts them. Very sad...but great hub!!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 08, 2012:

Thank you Au fait. The reason there are no cost controls is because that is one of the many things that Obama had to give up in order to get the bill passed. I hope it doesn't get to the point where you have to live in your car under a bridge. I understand that the feds and the states will help you with premiums if you qualify. Go to this website and see what they say. http://www.healthcare.gov/law/index.html

C E Clark from North Texas on May 08, 2012:

I think it's great that you have explained so much about this program and how it works. I hope people who are confused about ObamaCare will read your hub and find answers to many if not all their questions.

My concern is that there are no cost controls in the bill. Insurance companies may not be able to drop you, but they can raise your premiums up out of this world. Also, I don't like being forced to buy health insurance. If I could afford it, I would have it already. Forcing me to choose between rent and health insurance will only raise my healthcare cost higher. People who live in tents, in their car, and under bridges tend to have more health problems. That's where I'll be if I'm forced to pay for health insurance instead of rent or electricity.

Great hub. Voted you UP, interesting, and useful. Thank you for SHARING!!

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 08, 2012:

idratherbe: Thank you for your comments. I'll vistit your profile after this.

Mike Russo (author) from Placentia California on May 08, 2012:

Sooner28: Wow! Thank you for the wonderful compliment. I'll try my best to not let you down. Let's hope the Supreme Court acts in the best interest of the people.

Related Articles