Page 1 of 4
Posted on October 29 at 2:40 p.m.
I completely agree with howgreenwasmyvalley. My health plan was terminated last year due to Obamacare. The Obamacare plan they offered me was 70% more expensive with a very narrow network of providers and a much more restricted drug formularly.
This law has ruined the individual marketplace in Ca, as you cannot find a plan that includes most of the specialist physicians in SB or elsewhere in Ca. Also, if you don't qualify for subsidies, these plans are exorbitantly expensive with very high deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums.
What really irks me about her is this statement she made on Sept 9, 2009 and many other times: "If you like the plan you have now, you can keep it even though the new plans will lower your costs". If this isn't a boldface lie, I don't know what is.
If this wasn't enough, in Oct of 2010 she spoke before an audience of doctors at Cottage Hospital and admitted that Obamacare is a big gamble. She asked rhetorically whether this new law would work. Her answer: "time will tell".
Well, now we know how this high stakes gamble worked out. If there is any justice in the world, Ms. Capps will lose her job on Nov 4 and have to get an unsubsidized Obamacare plan, just like many of her constituents.
On Mitchum’s Biggest Role Yet?
Posted on October 12 at 8:03 p.m.
Proposition 45 does not address the real problems with the healthcare system in Ca. The fact of the matter is the implementation of Obamacare is a cancer on the entire medical care system and will continue to plague us in Ca., regardless if this referendum is approved.
People in the individual market who had their policies cancelled last year were forced to enroll in Obamacare policies with much higher premiums, higher deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. More importantly, their healthcare provider network was slashed in some cases by 2/3 of the number of doctors and hospitals that were available to them under their old policies.
If you are forced to buy an Obamacare policy and you don't qualify for the subsidies, you will pay much higher premiums (prop 45 or no prop 45) and will most likely be denied medical care by the provider of your choosing.
Everyone who is insured in the employer group market should not feel complacent about this trend to make all insurance policies look like HMO's. Your turn is coming. Many employers, particularly smaller ones, will inevitably cease to provide insurance to their employees and will tell them to seek insurance on the Obamacare exchanges, where the coverage is far less generous.
On Stop Health Insurance Rip-Offs
Posted on September 3 at 12:45 p.m.
I wonder how much it costs to take private lessons from Steve Clarkson? I bet we are talking 4 digits at least.
On High School Fall Football
Posted on June 7 at 11:15 p.m.
Did anyone predict that Lebron would not be able to finish game 1 because of cramping?
On Hoop Heroes
Posted on April 5 at 7:18 p.m.
Unlike some of the posters who think Obamacare plans are better than the individual plans that were sold in Ca, based on very biased articles from Mother Jones and Huffington Post, I actually had my policy cancelled so I think I know what I am talking about.
I use to have an individual policy with Blue Shield for my wife and me. It had a $5,200 deductible per person and a similar out of pocket maximum. It had a very robust network of providers, essentially covering every doctor and hospital in Ca, as well as most providers out of state. It had no lifetime or annual limits and all preventative care was free. It also covered non-formulary drugs. It cost me $679 a month
The Obamacare policy has a $5,000 deductible and $6,350 out of pocket maximum. The network of doctors and hospitals is pitifully small compared to what I had. None of my doctors take it. Sansum won't take it and UCLA or Cedar Sinai in LA won't take it. What good is the policy if I can't find a decent doctor or specialist to treat me if I get sick. If I need specialized care outside of Santa Barbara, I am screwed. The drug formulary is about 2/3 the size of the old one and it doesn't cover non-formulary drugs. So If i need an expensive drug for a serious condition, I am probably out of luck. This super duper Obamacare policy costs $1,110 a month, far more than my pre-Obamacare policy.
Now I know I wasn't the only one in the individual market who got screwed. Most people who didn't qualify for subsidies were shocked when their plans were cancelled and they were told the new sticker price. Yes, people who have employer health plans were unaffected but their time is coming when they have to face the same issues I dealt with in the last few months.
So please don't tell me I don't know what I am talking about. You can read your Mother Jones and other nonsense, but that doesn't mean you have any more than a superficial understanding of the subject. If you're going to defend this law at least educate yourselves as to what is really happening instead of repeating the political talking points of the partisan supporters.
On Covered California Deadlines Bumped Two Weeks
Posted on April 4 at 10:58 p.m.
"The reason why "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" was not true in about 3-?% of cases, was because those people had signed up for junk insurance plans. Under ACA they could not keep them, because they were junk - ACA sets the standard higher than junk."
As someone who had his plan cancelled and offered an Obamacare plan, I can promise you the above statement is totally false. The plan I had was far from junk; in fact, it was much better than any of the plans on the state exchange. The premium for the Obamacare plan was $500 per month more than my existing plan; and it had a higher out of pocket maximum and most importantly the network of doctors and hospitals were about half of what I previously had access to. In addition, I use to have coverage for out of state providers and non-formulary drugs, both of which I lost when my plan was cancelled.
Most people (like the above poster) have no idea what is included in the Obamacare plans and end up saying ridiculous nonsense, demonstrating their ignorance of the subject.
Posted on February 21 at 2:09 a.m.
^^^^That analogy is absurd. It is not even remotely analogous to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
On Talking with Former Head of Israeli Spy Agency
Posted on August 22 at 3:50 p.m.
Dr Dan, trust me, I have nothing against local businesses, safe neighborhoods, or efficient transportation. My problem is that it is very easy for a politician to support these things without really meaning it. The devil is in the details. Most politicians are expert at running their mouths without saying anything of substance. I am sure everyone on the city council is for safe neighborhoods and local businesses, but when you analyze their votes it becomes apparent that (for the majority) their actions contradict their stated intentions.
On Megan Diaz Alley Running for City Council
Posted on August 21 at 10:57 p.m.
"Alley emphasized the importance of efficient transportation, safe neighborhoods, local businesses, and a sustainable environment."
And she is also for motherhood and apple pie. Most of these candidates will say anything to get elected. In other words, how can I discuss the issues without saying anything meaningful and/or offending anyone. I give her an "A" for political pandering. She is well on her way to becoming a sycophantic politician, modeling the people who are endorsing her.
Posted on May 28 at 3:58 p.m.
Ken, I have no clients who have any interest in charter or private schools in Santa Barbara or anywhere else. Although in some instances I think it would be advantageous for parents and their children to have a free choice or competitive school model as an alternative to the current govt school monopoly, I am not an ideologue regarding this issue.
I know it may be hard for you guys to believe, but my only reason for running for the school board was because too many of our children are graduating our schools without the requisite skills to succeed in life. For instance, over 70% of the students who continue their education at SBCC are unprepared for college courses and are required to take remedial courses in math and English. Most of these kids drop out and make up the vast majority of the unemployed or underemployed.
I have many ideas for reforming our schools to improve student outcomes. At the minimum, I would expect that every kid who graduates from our high schools can read, write and perform basic math at a proficient level. If you google me, I am sure you can read a number of articles where I have discussed these reforms. It will require changing the culture, expectations and reforming some of the labor practices and rules which are antithetical to successful student academic performance. Unfortunately, the education labyrinth in Sacramento and its many school districts throughout the state have become a bureaucratic nightmare that are operating under decades-old mandates and archaic rules.
Finally, I wish people could depoliticize this issue. The solutions need not be defined as left or right. It is the interest of everyone, no matter where they stand on the political spectrum, to fix our schools so every kid has a chance to succeed in life. A good education is the best chance to escape poverty for many of our socioeconomic disadvantaged residents.
On Santa Barbara Teachers Association Elects New Union Boss