Comments on: HERE’S WHAT IT WILL COST YOU IF YOU DON’T HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE IN 2008

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 01:10:49 +0000

Did anybody here catch Mitt Romney’s performance about healthcare in the NH debates yesterday?

He said something along the lines of people who don’t want to buy healthcare make $100,000 per year and his healthcare plan is offering plans starting under $200 per month.

What a sleazeball.

He also praised the success of his plan because over 300,000 people in MA now have “health insurance.”

By: Beth Vance

Beth Vance — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:16:26 +0000

These figures are fro the HCFA blog:
“Categories 2, 3 and 4 apply only to individuals:
1. Who are eligible for MassHealth or Commonwealth Care, the state’s new subsidized insurance program; OR
2. Who are eligible for employer sponsored coverage, AND whose premium contribution is no higher than comparable CommCare premiums.”
__________________________________________________

So, if an employer offers a plan that is higher that the Comm. Care plan, the employee will not be penalized for not taking the boss’s plan? They are still not eligible for C. Care for 6 months, so will they be penalized or not?

EXAMPLE: Franny is a single 45 year old clerk in a large grocery chain. She makes $8.00 an hour and works as schedualed by the company (usually 25-30 hours per week = about $10,000/yr). They have offered her insurance, but it amounts to 35% of her take-home pay, and so has necessarily declined the offer.

What does “affordable employer coverage” mean? Is Franny’s employer plan affordable? Will she be penalized or not? Who says what is affordable?

If she is not eligible for affordable employer coverage, MassHealth, or CommCare and lack coverage, does she face penalties?

Also, where does one go to figure if the employer plan “premium contribution is no higher than comparable CommCare premiums”? Is this the burdon of the employer or the employee?

What about self-employed persons or those employed by the “less than 11 full-time equivalent” rule? I do not see this addressed here.

Another observation: $912 per year for the >300% bracket is a whole lot less expensive than buying insurance ($617 to $1843 per month). Where is this going to promote “universal” coverage?

EXAMPLE: A 52 year old couple making $42,000 ($3500/mo). from SE Mass. is offered Comm. Choice plans from $617 to $1843 per month.

With a $1900 per month mortgage, car loans and mandatory insurance amounting to $575/mo, property taxes of $325/mo, income taxs $230/mo, utility bills (oil, electricity, water, trash) of $400/mo they are left with exactly $70 for everything else. It’s already a terribly tight squeeze. Food and incedentals are left to ‘creative financing’ and credit cards. Sometimes bills just don’t get paid as it is.

There is no room for even the lowest priced Connector plan, much less the $152 ($76 x 2)($1,824/year)
for the penalty.

One other important question: What will happen to them next year if they can’t pay for the penalty?

In all honesty, does the government think that they are doing these people a favor?

Happy New Year to whom?

By: Norma

Norma — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:39:33 +0000

In response to Ron Norton’s post,
The State shocked and disgusted me with this chapter 58 but to do this when residents can’t afford to pay for day to day basics and even make living wages in this State is lunacy.Where are the lawmakers and Governor?Why aren’t they stepping in?Who gave DOR the authority to do this?These questions must be answered.Who do we turn to when EVERYONE in this State has gone mad?Is this even LEGAL?Won’t someone answer these questions?Being “uninsured” is CRIME in this State and that is not right.

By: Ron Norton

Ron Norton — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:24:03 +0000

Chapter 58 is nothing more than corporate welfare for the insatiably greedy health insurance industry, and the individual mandate is a tyranny that will not stand. As citizens, our first order of business in the new year should be to aggresively target every politician who supported this misbegotten legislation and eject them from power. Look for the fines to add impetus to Carla Howell’s campaign to abolish the state income tax. If passed, this question would likely devastate state services, but people can hardly be blamed for supporting such a measure in the face of such strong evidence that our legislature no longer represents us.