Skip to main content

Cross-posted at The Makeshift Academic

I need $2,273 by midnight on Dec. 31, 2013. If I can get it, I win $440.

This is a strange story involving health insurance, a COBRA, the Supreme Court, several hundred members of Congress, a guy with Hussein for a middle name and Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s hair.

Fortunately for me, no matter what happens, it ends with my getting married to a lovely woman far above my caste—by which I mean she has a health-insurance plan – early in the spring of 2014. Until then though, I have quite an adventure lined up.

(Cue Bollywood theme music and follow me below the fold)

Here’s my story.  I graduated with a PhD. in Political Science from the University of Michigan in May. Since the lousy economy crashed the job market for aspiring professors, I found myself unemployed and my university health insurance (which I had thanks to these amazing people – pay your union dues folks) ran out in August. Currently, I’m on COBRA insurance and paying UM about $240 a month to continue my coverage.

Since I’m unemployed, I’m living off my meager savings and COBRA really takes a bite out of my budget. I’m not eligible to be covered by my fiance's employer until after we get married.

I made $9,217 in the winter semester at Michigan as a Graduate Student Instructor, teaching, of all things, a class on “U.S. Health Care Policy.”

Incidentally, that’s a really good wage for a grad assistant (remember these friendly folks? Yeah. If you don’t have a union, get yourself one.)

But if I don’t gain any income for the rest of the year, I technically qualify as “poor,” seeing as my income would be under $11,490 a year.  

Enter the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act aka “Obamacare.”  According to the terms of the law, passed by several hundred members of Congress and signed by one Barrack Hussein Obama, anyone with a household income of under 138 percent of the poverty line qualifies for Medicaid when most of the provisions of the law kick in on Jan. 1, 2014.  All the states had to expand their Medicaid programs, with the help of generous federal subsidies. Households with incomes between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty line qualified for subsidies to help them buy insurance.

Problem solved, right? I can ditch COBRA, enroll in Medicaid for a few months, then join my spouses’ employer plan when we get hitched and combine households.

Cue Ominous Gavel

Hmm, that sounds like the Supreme Court. Oh, right – in the summer of 2012 the court ruled that ACA was in fact legal. However, it also ruled that it would be coercive for the federal government to force the states to take oodles of federal dollars and expand their Medicaid programs, which made the expansion optional. Apparently, the federal government has no right to coerce the states, especially under circumstances in which the states are coercing their own citizens (Incidentally, this doctrine was upheld when in Shelby County vs. Holder the court gutted a key part of the Voting Rights Act, which had reined in certain states who liked to prevent black people from voting.)

Well, I now happen to live in Texas, where our esteemed Gov. Rick Perry took his magnificent hair on television after the court decision and announced that his state would not take the Medicaid expansion. In fact, to be really, really, clear he signed a bill from the legislature that made it illegal for any future governor to expand Medicaid without the legislature’s approval.

This turn of events opens up an interesting quandary for folks hovering around the poverty line. Anyone who is slightly above the poverty line is eligible to get generous subsidies on the exchanges. But, if you’re slightly below the poverty line, you can’t get subsidies. You see, when all those Congress people made the Medicaid expansion mandatory, they figured that it would be redundant to make people below the poverty line eligible for subsidies.  When the Supreme Court blew a hole in the law, it gave a whole bunch of governors the ability to extend a gigantic middle finger to poor people in their states. Needless to say, 19 Republican-dominated states gleefully took advantage of this fact.

To get back to my premise, that’s why I need to earn more $2,273 in gross income by midnight on Dec. 31, 2013 – I have to scrape up enough to reach the poverty line for this year. If I can hit $11,490, I can ditch COBRA, sign up for the exchanges, get a reasonable silver plan for two months and pay 2 percent of my income – about $20 a month, until I marry a beautiful, intelligent woman with access to employer-sponsored health insurance.

(Brief time out here – I can estimate my 2014 income will be above the poverty line, which will likely be true, and qualify for subsidies. However, you can see the bigger point of my quandary here.)

If I can’t, I’m out $440, which is the difference between paying my COBRA and paying for a Silver Plan. Ouch.

(Sad trombone)

But I think I can scrape up enough part-time work to get there.

(Cue traditional closing credits Bollywood dance number featuring John Roberts in judge robes dancing with a large COBRA)

Now here’s the real “ouch.” I’ve been quite playful in this post, because my situation is temporary. Life isn’t much fun right now, but my employment prospects aren’t bad, even if I don’t end up in my chosen field. And my fiancee has a good job. We’ll be OK and we’re pretty darn lucky. We’ll have health insurance – likely even if Obamacare gets repealed. And even if things don’t work out for me temporarily I’d have to pay a couple hundred bucks – which I really can’t afford, but I can make it work to prevent a coverage gap. In the long run, that’s no big deal.

But there are literally millions of people sitting between their states’ current income caps for Medicaid and 100 percent of the poverty line. They don’t have my long-term prospects. Because of a quirk in the law opened up through a bad Supreme Court ruling and the mendacious cruelty of some state public officials they get banned from funds – in many cases adding up to thousands of dollars every year – to which their somewhat richer peers get access.

These people are our fellow citizens and our fellow human beings.

Leaning on your state legislature, no matter how recalcitrant they may be, to accept the Medicaid expansion will save thousands of lives every year. This is the next phase of health reform – taking care of unfinished business in the ACA opened up by the court.

Originally posted to Fake Irishman on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 09:02 AM PDT.

Also republished by Kitchen Table Kibitzing and Community Spotlight.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I read on Kaiser a while back (11+ / 0-)

    that the majority of the people who will fall between the cracks in Obamacare will be older single woman.

    “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR

    by Phoebe Loosinhouse on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 09:12:25 AM PDT

  •  I'm one (19+ / 0-)

    I'm retired, and less than a year and a half away from Medicare, and my income has gone down since the first year I retired. I am now officially below the poverty level. But I have assets, lots of assets; I am living on savings. I make too little for the state program, but the state Medicare still says there is an asset limit. I thought that would change, but I can't find out anything. And I don't know how I would earn an extra couple of thousand to qualify for the ACA plans. This is insane!

    I know that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one... John Lennon

    by MagentaMN on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 09:43:26 AM PDT

  •  But... (14+ / 0-)

    1. There was no birthday cake
    2. Nobody (brother, mother, father, entire family) seems to be opposed to your marriage despite the difference in social strata
    3. No "item numbers" where you played songs that have nothing to do with the movie
    4. There really needed to be an oily, evil kingpin with henchmen crushing the poor people... oh, wait, you had Rick Perry...

    Bollywood could never come up with anything this appalling.

    I'll believe corporations are people when one comes home from Afghanistan in a body bag.

    by mojo11 on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 10:16:01 AM PDT

  •  In all seriousness, though, this probably explains (10+ / 0-)

    why Congressman Walter B. Jones (R, NC-3) is able to come up with three examples of people whose insurance premiums went up -- some of them drastically -- "because Obamacare".  If his test cases were just below the poverty line (likely since he represents the eastern part of the state) then they would have fallen into this same coverage hole you did.  Because the NC General Assembly gleefully refused to accept the federally funded Medicaid expansion, which not only closed down a hospital in Jones' district but now has left people with THIS mess. Whether or not the three cases he's citing were victims of this maneuvering by the NCGA or not, odds are very good that a number of his constituents have been or will be. (Eastern NC is historically and profoundly poor, especially in places like Pender, Dare and Craven Counties, where the three instances Jones cited came from.)

    I'll believe corporations are people when one comes home from Afghanistan in a body bag.

    by mojo11 on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 10:27:13 AM PDT

    •  Yep (8+ / 0-)

      I'm also sure he ignored the subsidies in other cases. It's one of the shady techniques Avik Roy likes to use when he's bashing the exchanges. (no I am not link to him)

    •  A lot of Republicans in Craven County, eh? (6+ / 0-)
    •  Premiums not the Whole Story (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chuckvw, kyril, ladybug53, asterkitty

      Beware of the Thin Plans!

      The past couple of days I’ve heard constant talk of the deals people are getting on the Obamacare Exchanges, (when the servers are up, of course). $120/month premiums, $500 or less deductibles. All of this sounds like a great triumph of liberal social policy. And if that were the whole story, I would definitely agree.

      However, buried in the slimy underbelly of all of it is the new paradigm shift that has been defacto, if not purposefully engineered by the law. That is, the plans on the Exchanges offer *drastically* thin provider networks. I know Lambert has talked about this, but I am not sure that he understood how bad it really is. I know I didn’t, and I have a degree in cynicism (aka Political Science). People may see this in the abstract and think, oh well, a few doctors will be left out. But what is happening nationwide and in my Seattle area is that the highest quality and most major research, teaching and cancer hospitals, as well as a large portion of the top doctors in areas are being left out of the in-network provider list in Exchange plans. As I’ve said, this is a paradigm shift in how health insurance works in our country. People think they are getting the same kinds of plans on the Exchanges that they’ve always gotten through work or the individual markets. They. Are. Not.

      [Update]Even Kevin Drum is saying this is going to be a festering sore. But he doesn't get how huge of a deal it really it is, especially how it DOES revive the Republican boogieman of rationed care. The provider networks for Exchange customers are thin. The thinning is done by eliminating research, teaching, and cancer hospitals and doctors of the same from the list, the orgs that provide cutting edge care. In addition, companies are dumping their employees onto these networks, so more people are going to be forced to access fewer and second tier networks of doctors and hospitals. Isn't this rationing of care? If you have difficulty picturing what will happen, Google Medicare and Medicaid doctor access problems. In addition, the thin provider networks coupled with the fact that out of pocket maximums for out of network providers are not CAPPED by the law means that effectively we are no longer financially protected by our insurance for catastrophe if we need to see an out of network provider, say, for cancer, for organ transplant, you know, the events that this law was supposed to save us financially from.

      This article should be printed out for reference when you start shopping for a plan.  The comments offer many details which are very important.
      •  Exchange Plan Networks are less robust! (6+ / 0-)

        Important to check providers included!

        To bring the issue into sharp focus, here is a list of MOST of the hospitals in the Seattle area that are OUTSIDE OF the NETWORK on the Exchange plans offered by Premera, our only Washington Blue Cross affiliate:

        Swedish Hospital (major Seattle Hospital with branches all over town and in suburbia)
        University of Washington Medical Center (Our teaching hospital)
        Providence Hospital (another major hospital)
        Harborview Medical Center (Major trauma center affiliated with University of Washington. People all over the state are flown to this hospital for trauma treatment.)
        Seattle Cancer Care Alliance (our Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center hospital).
        Veterans Medical Center
        I do not have a grasp of how many doctors in private practice have been dis-included, but I do know that no doctors at Polyclinic are included either. Polyclinic is a large Seattle area clinic, known for its rock-star doctors.

        I’m finding a similar situation from Bridgespan, which is the Exchange plan offered by Regence (our Washington Blue Shield affiliate) Cambria. However, I cannot reach a person on the phone to confirm. When I called the number on the Bridgespan web site, the person I reached had no idea why I called him. He forwarded me to “Seattle Customer Service,” which turned out to be one individual's voicemail. Figuring if she got back with me at all, it would be days, I gave up. [Update] Bridgespan does appear to offer Harborview Hospital as an option, but the other hospitals are excluded.

        At first, I thought, well, if a person is desperate they can just go to an in-area, but out-of-network provider. However, the new plans have 2 tiers of deductibles/coinsurance and out of pocket maximums, one for in-network and one for out-of-network providers. Out-of-network deductibles and copays on these plans are typically at least twice as high as their in-network counterparts, and they are not subject to cost sharing subsidies. In addition – and this is the greatest travesty – the law appears not to have regulated spending caps for out-of-network providers. Thus, the plans on Premera Blue Cross have an UNLIMITED out-of-pocket maximum for out-of-network providers. (Link to the Premera silver plan) Translated this means if you have emergency out-of-your-very-thin-network care needs, your cost burden is apparently UNLIMITED. [Update] The law does have a provision that insurers cannot charge more for emergency services using out-of-very-thin-network providers. However, they did nothing to prevent hospitals from balance billing, a policy that is legal in most states when you use out-of-network providers. And hospitals routinely do this. Remember that insurance companies pay very low reimbursements for care, so balance billing effectively makes your charge for an out-of-network ER unlimited. And assuming that you can afford to pay an unlimited cost, none of what you paid applies to your deductible, coinsurance or out of pocket maximum once you get to your home network. This all flies in the face of Pelosi's justification that Obamacare would stop people from contracting medical emergencies they can’t pay for. And of course, Obamacare cut funding to subsidize emergency care for the poor.

        That "costly" cobra plan might be cheap if it is more robust than the thin plans being offered.  The devil is in the details.
      •  A fair point (8+ / 0-)

        However, this might be interesting over the medium term -- if people who don't have insurance end up being OK with these thinner networks (Hey -- I get OK care at local general and don't need SuperFancy Univesity), you might start to see providers at places like Harvard to lower their rates to compete -- which would do a lot to bring costs in line. Shannon Brownlee has written a lot about different pricing between various hospitals -- and the more prestigious ones aren't necessarily better. Richard Mayhew has a great post on Balloon Juice about some of the trade-offs involved here.

        •  Unlimited Out of Network Costs + Balance Billing! (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ladybug53, asterkitty

          That is lose your house territory.  I can't quote the whole piece plus the one on balance billing but you should read them.  With no caps on provider costs OON and balance billing you must choose between bankruptcy and medical jeopardy if you can't get the care you need from a thin O'care provider network.
          This will be a huge fail if it is just ignored.  And why should we expect anything different from inaction when they had over three years to build this?  

          •  By "they" you mean the insurance cos, right? (4+ / 0-)

            they are the ones who put together the provider networks.

            The problem with the ACA is that it kept the insurance companies in business.  That's always been the problem with the ACA.

            "If there are no dogs in heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." - Will Rogers

            by Kentucky DeanDemocrat on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 08:31:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  A Detour to a Dead End. (0+ / 0-)

              So many were bamboozled by the "public option" ploy they let single payer be kept off the table.  This will not end well.  I wish there were more folks here writing about the details.  A little information can save a life.
              Instead we get constant fluffing of a bogus plan.  Sure some will no doubt be helped (usually in targeted demographics).  They become the hostages trotted out every time any discussion gets serious.

    •  this doesn't make sense. if they were just below (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the 138% of poverty, i don't believe they are currently purchasing on the individual market - that just doesn't seem feasible.  if they are not buying individual, then they have coverage through their employer, if they have anything.

      Me thinks these may be Joe the Plumber type stories, with as much truth.

      "Don't Bet Against Us" - President Barack Obama

      by MRA NY on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 03:01:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  One thing you might keep in mind is that (9+ / 0-)

    for low income households, there exists a limit to the amount you have to repay should you receive an overpayment of the tax credit.  In your case it would be only $300 (see Table 5, p. 13 of this CRS report.)  Since you're so close to the 100% FPL I think you may have a good chance for receiving premium and cost sharing assistance with the projection that you will meet the cut-off point.  As far as I know, there is no reconciliation process for the cost sharing assistance.

  •  I'm falling into the gap (6+ / 0-)

    We're at 75% of poverty level and Florida isn't expanding so far. I'm patiently waiting on the exchange to move more smoothly so I can find out if there's at least a bronze plan I could afford. I doubt it, but I can look.

    "Madness! Total and complete madness! This never would've happened if the humans hadn't started fighting one another!" Londo Mollari

    by FloridaSNMOM on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 11:16:33 AM PDT

    •  I'm sorry (6+ / 0-)

      Getting Rick Scott out would help (especially if you can take a dozen or so wingnuts in the lege with him -- then you might be able to get an Arkansas-style thing.)  But I know that's at least a year away (fingers crossed). IF you haven't already, you should seriously consider writing an op-ed for your local or regional paper. When people like us come out of the woodwork, it changes the discussion. Just call up the opinion editor and pitch the idea to him or her, if you think this is a good idea.
      (And I know there are reasons why you might NOT want to do this e.g. privacy, but consider this encouragement to take the plunge if you'd consider it)

      •  Rick Scott wanted to accept Medicaid expansion (7+ / 0-)

        he's in the healthcare racket, he knows how valuable it would be to hospitals and whatnot, especially if they allowed private insurers to administer the program here (and take a cut, of course). It's Will Weatherford, Speaker of the Florida House, who led the charge to refuse Medicaid expansion.

        "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

        by Alice in Florida on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:18:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  True (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyril, ladybug53

          Though there is a question if another governor might have pushed a bit harder with a bit less of a profit motive in mind (I'm thinking Rick Snyder here -- I"m not a fan (RTW, allowing gay bashing, gutting education funding, dumping on workers, corporate tax cuts at granny's expense etc. etc.) , but he did quietly work hard to get something through).

          When it comes down to it though, I agree with your analysis -- if a key legislative leader comes out against it, it becomes really, really tough to pass something. (I was stunned when Jase Bolger, Mich's speaker let the bill come up)

    •  We are too. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Throw The Bums Out, kyril, ladybug53

      Though it may get better if Bear does get this job.

      When you come to find how essential the comfort of a well-kept home is to the bodily strength and good conditions, to a sound mind and spirit, and useful days, you will reverence the good housekeeper as I do above artist or poet, beauty or genius.

      by Alexandra Lynch on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 03:29:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  There certainly is a (large) crack (5+ / 0-)

    that some people are falling into - Medicaid wasn't expanded in their state, and they don't make enough to qualify for the subsidy.  Only answer is to adjust the income for the ACA to cover these folks - but that would require our Congress to act, so nothing will be done.

    Pretty tragic that those who really need healthcare won't be able to get it.

    you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

    by Dem Beans on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 12:49:05 PM PDT

  •  I don't see the point of qualifying (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    guyeda, ladybug53, worldlotus, asterkitty

    for an exchange plan in 2013 when the exchange plans don't start until 2014 and you will end up on your spouse's plan for 10 months of 2014...the headaches involved in signing up for an exchange plan are not worth it.

    Have you thought of taking your fiancee to Vegas for the holidays, going to one of those get-hitched-quick chapels? then you can have your "real" wedding in the spring as planned? It's good of you  to point out the quandry people in places like TX (and Florida, and the rest), but no reason to go to all that trouble, especially as it appears these are mostly inferior plans.

    "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

    by Alice in Florida on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:14:17 PM PDT

  •  Well You Could Report The $2,273 You Made When (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fake Irishman, tofumagoo, kyril, ladybug53

    gambling with your buddies.  You know that income that the IRS always says you are suppose to report that doesn't show up on your W-2 and other forms that track your various sources of income.  You know those sources of income that people forget to report, usually under the table stuff.  Well looks like some of that needs to be reported this time to get that income up a little. Maybe you made some mowing a few lawns around the neighborhood.

    "I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman.” - Arnold Schwarzenegger 2003

    by kerplunk on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 01:30:25 PM PDT

    •  Yep (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kerplunk, ladybug53

      Seems like I know a lot of people in non-Medicaid-expansion states who had unexpected gambling windfalls or earned a bit of money doing odd jobs on the side this year. Maybe the diarist didn't, but I'm sure some of his/her friends did!

      "Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines." - Sgt. Maj Michael Barrett on DADT repeal

      by kyril on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 05:28:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tennessee will be closing its CoverTenn program (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tofumagoo, kyril, ladybug53, asterkitty

    which allowed working poor to obtain insurance and subsidies through their employers. My sister worked for a doctor and paid 1/3 of the premium, the doctor paid 1/3, and the state paid 1/3. When she lost her job she only had to pay the whole premium and was able to keep her insurance. She received letter saying Tenn is stopping CoverTenn program as of 12/31/13. She is below poverty level and since Tenn also did not go for Medicaid expansion she will not be eligible for premium assistance. Once again the working poor are forgotten by legislators in states and DC.

    I feel this is a major stumbling block and see how it could become a 2014 election issue. The decisions at the state level on this were all politically motivated and certainly did not consider effects on constituents. So glad I am not the only one concerned about this largely unknown loophole.

  •  As i understood it, you apply based on your (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kyril, ladybug53

    anticipated 2014 income, unless that is just what is done using the kaiser subsidy calculator (and the actual application process goes by actual current income?)

    you certainly might want to check on that.

    "Don't Bet Against Us" - President Barack Obama

    by MRA NY on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 02:57:56 PM PDT

    •  As I understand it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kyril, ladybug53

      you apply based on your last IRS filing, so 2013 income. As with so much, who knows? I haven't been able yet to access the web site here in WA.

      There's none so blind as those that will not see. --Jonathan Swift

      by chuckvw on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 03:21:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You apply based on what you anticipate for 2014. (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MRA NY, chuckvw, asterkitty, kareylou, guyeda

        If you make more than that amount, and took too much in subsidies, you make it up at tax time.  If you make less than that amount, and got too little, THEY make it up at tax time.

        Or you can wait and get whatever subsidies you're entitled to at tax time as a tax credit.

        "If there are no dogs in heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." - Will Rogers

        by Kentucky DeanDemocrat on Fri Oct 04, 2013 at 08:36:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  you'd think (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kyril, ladybug53, asterkitty

    They'd stuck a 'if this part is struck down' this other part will then include subsidies.  or did they think the SCOTUS was never going to rule on any part of the law?

  •  Governor Parnell of Alaska has finally announced (4+ / 0-)

    he will make an announcement, maybe mid-December about expansion of Medicaid in Alaska.

    No doubt folks in this underserved category are enjoying their time in limbo.

    GOP total fail.

  •  ACA is based on 2012 income, not 2013 income (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nance, kareylou

    you qualify for the ACA based on your adjusted gross income from 2012, which is the last year of tax records...not your 2013 adjusted gross income...which will not be filed until April 2014.  

  •  Best explanation yet on the Medicaid Expansion (0+ / 0-)

    doughnut hole.

    Fighting Liberal at
    “You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” --Gandhi:

    by smokey545 on Sat Oct 05, 2013 at 06:17:53 AM PDT

  •  I fell deep into that gap (0+ / 0-)

    when it was widely reported that they were going to use a person's 2012 income as the basis for 2014. I was below poverty in 2012. And even if I don't work another day in 2013, I'll be above that line.

    Some kind person here posted about the ACA chatline recently and I was officially given the word that the exchanges and subsidies will be based on 2013 income. Lucky for me, and probably a small percentage of other folks under similar circumstances.

    But the whole thing is so wrong. For the states not participating in the Medicaid expansion (I'm in PA for example), folks falling under that line should be allowed to buy into the exchanges and receive subsidies equal to someone earning 101% of poverty.

    No Medicaid expansion in PA, and I just got word that my super-crappy junk insurance (nearly $160 a month I can barely afford for 50% emergency coverage and four whole doctor visits a year) is being scrapped at the end of this year. More folks in PA falling into being uncovered. I'm lucky. My income is inching upwards. But for so many freelancers and other folks, wavering above and below that line from year to year is common.

    curious portal - to a world of paintings, lyric-poems, art writing, and graphic and web design

    by asterkitty on Sat Oct 05, 2013 at 08:45:41 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site