CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 15, 2013 08:29 AM UTC

Yes, Trolls, The Insurance Exchange is Working

  • 45 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Rep. Cory Gardner (R).
Rep. Cory Gardner (R).

AP's Kristen Wyatt reported yesterday:

Officials with Connect For Health Colorado said 226 people have signed up for insurance using the exchange, for a total of 305 people getting coverage. That's the tally from the exchange's first week, Oct 1-7.

It's a smaller number than reported in other states running their own exchanges. Kentucky, for example, had more than 18,000 people signed up by Oct. 9, and tiny Rhode Island had 580 signed up by Oct. 3…

Republicans were predictably quick to jump all over on this "failure."

A Republican critic of the new health care law, U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner of Yuma, said Colorado numbers are an embarrassment given how much the state spent marketing and explaining Connect For Health Colorado. Gardner cited ads at Denver Broncos games and TV campaigns.

"Look, if you spent $21 million on a bake sale and sold 10 dozen muffins, that would be a complete disaster," Gardner said. [Pols emphasis]

Except, as FOX 31 reports, the lowball figure of Coloradans who have actually completed a purchase of health insurance in the first week of operation of the insurance exchange isn't the whole story:

Connect for Health Colorado, the marketplace associated with the federal Affordable Care Act, saw 162,941 unique visitors during the period between Oct. 1 and Oct. 7, operators reported. Of those, 18,174 people created accounts. [Pols emphasis]

The thing to remember is that consumers shopping for health insurance on Colorado's new insurance exchange are shopping for coverage that begins in 2014. The number of people who sign up in the first few days the site is available, particularly as the inevitable startup kinks are worked out, is not really relevant at all. Far more important are the 18,000+ accounts created by consumers now in the process of selecting plans. A more accurate yardstick of the plan's success will be the number of people covered through exchange-purchased insurance policies by January 1st. By that we mean both 2014 and 2015, by which time officials have set a goal of 136,000 getting coverage through the exchange. The only purpose in harping on the numbers from the first week of shaky operations is to misleadingly disparage the system for political motives.

And really, folks, likening the sale of health insurance to muffins is just an insult to your intelligence.

Tweet
Share

Comments

45 thoughts on “Yes, Trolls, The Insurance Exchange is Working”

  1. Neither of you are using the right number. The key metric is how many people hit errors trying to move through the system. If that number is under 1% then it's going great. If that number is over 10%, then it's a mess. And if over 30%, then it's a disaster.

    What's that number?

    1. Well, if you include  user error, well over 50%.

      If you only count legitamate system error – less than 3.

       

      And how do you want to count the shoppers who end up calling and doing most of their registration/shopping by phone?

      The real right numbers will be how many people bought insurance through the exchange. How many uninsured remain after Jan 1. And of the uninsured how many remain uninsured due to intentional choice vs. just didn't know how to access the sxchange.

      Wew won't know those number until Feb. Just about the time the gov't shuts down again.

    2. I guess that's worth considering, Dave, but I agree the 18,000 accounts are what matters more. Ralphie explains below some possible reasons for the delay. We have to wait for January 1st.

    3. I was close to pulling out my hair when I initiated a chat with somebody there.  Five minutes later all my questions were answered.  Turns out better if employees sign up for one version individually and I help cover their fees.  So no insurance yet, but by Jan 1, all of my employees will have health insurance  for the first time since 2005.

      2. That's great. The insurance exchanges are not a new idea, in fact they predate Obamacare. That's why opponents of Obamacare like the NFIB supported it. Republicans are making an off-base argument attacking the exchanges, when they should be focusing on the IPAB, the individual mandate, etc.

        What you're taking advantage of is a bipartisan idea. I think it's great and hope it works out for you and your employees.

        1. BWAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.

          Serioulsy?

          THe GOTp has branded all things ACA "OBAMA care"

          Work or fail, it's all his in the eyes of his oppsition.  And the voters.

          IPAB as concern ~ do you mean death panels? Or are you just concerned about cost controls in general?

           

        2. Obamacare predates "Obamacare" you fucking nitwit — Ok, in fairness to your small mind, it used to be called Heritage(foundation)Care when it was a Republican idea, and then a little later it was RomneyCare . . . It wasn't until you numbskulls wanted to try to make it an insult that it became "Obamacare" and then tried to kill the program you guys brought to the table!!  (BTW, how's that working out for you???)

          (And, seriously, I apologize to all the other fucking nitwits out there who just were offended by be lumped together with this fool.  Goddamn I'm really statrting to get tired of this all this nonsense . . .)

          1. It's only starting, Dio.

            By early next year, all the cool Republicans kids will be strutting around claiming credit for the the exchanges while continuing to slam "Obamacare".

            Soon after, they'll embrace the mandate, too. It's only a matter of time.

        3. I have no problems with Republicans taking credit for any part of the ACA. If they'd done it earlier,  and embraced it, as the party in control of the US House of Reps, we could have saved months of aggravation and millions of dollars.

          1. If these clowns don't get their act together by tomorrow, the cost will start with a B.  And what do we get for it ?  Absolutely nothing.  Poof.  Billions of taxpayer money instantly squandered.  Where are those fiscal conservatives now ?

            We've got a spending problem !  So lets make it cost more to borrow for what we spend !  Sound economic policy.

        4. You idiot mistaken person, Moderatus.  We had a consortium up until 2005.  When the consortium ended, the fees to insure my employees tripled in 3 months from $5k a month to over $14k a month.  I haven't had access to anything like the SHOP in years.  It's true that Republicans used to be in favor of something like ACA until recently when they realized that this would be Obama's legacy.  Then they were against it, because, oh noes, he's bla-a-a-a-a-ck.

           

          In their zeal to make Obama a one-term president, they lost their chance to take back the Senate.  Now, in their zeal to deny Obama a lasting legacy, they may well lose the House as well.

           

          Serve them right.  ACA is the law of the land, upheld by the Supreme Court,and they need to get over themselves.  (Had this same conversation with my hairstylist today, who gets her information from the Drudge.  But I like my hairstylist a lot and haven't seen much to like from you, Immoderatus.)

           

          But whoever it was on this site who predicted that soon the Repubs would be taking credit for ACA instead of submarining it was obviously prescient.

  2. Breaking radio silence to (hopefully) add a little to this discussion.  I am two weeks into this process and think I understand why the number of signups is so low.  It really has little to do with the exchange or performance of the exchange software, although that could be a little snappier.  I think there was only one day, maybe the first Wednesday or Thursday, when I was shut out of the system entirely; that was only for a couple of hours.

    Without apologizing for what people have encountered so far, let's at least calibrate our expectations a little.  I think most people expected that buying insurance on the exchange would be a slick as buying something on Amazon.  It should be.  And one day, it might be.  But Amazon has been at it for 15 years and the exchange has been at it for only 15 days.  Let's be realistic.

    The real reason signup numbers aren't higher is that if the income you list is low enough to be considered for a tax credit/subsidy, you are then shunted into CBMS/PEAK to apply for Medicaid before you can go further in the Obamacare process (unless you want to pay full price, of course).  The Medicaid application process can be done in a few ways–over the phone or in person with a County Human Services employee, or on line. 

    Any way you do it, if you do it honestly, there's a lot of data you have to have at your fingertips that it took me a couple of days to round up out of my files.  I chose to do it online (because it has a "save and continue" function that let me do it in steps), and I had a question that took three days to get answered because each of the four phone numbers I called shoved a voicemail to some poor guy in Mesa County Human Services who was on vacation.  There was a backup person listed on the PEAK site, but they had her phone number wrong and it rang into Mesa Moving.  Once the primary contact called back, he was very knowledgeable.  Now that part is done.

    The real holdup for me is that by law, Colorado has up to 45 days to deny me Medicaid, which they probably will. But until they do, I can go no further in the process.  A friend who is an Obamacare-certified insurance broker said that they told him in his training that the reason to complete the full Medicaid application is to avoid "double-dippers" — people who are already on Medicaid but also try to get tax credits.  We shall see.

    At any rate, although I have encountered few, if any, problems with either software system, I sit here in limbo waiting for consideration of my Medicaid application.

    I expect the number of people who sign up for Obamacare to increase substantially as the Medicaid applications work through the system.  I hope the State is staffed to handle it.

    It there was one thing I would change based on my experience in the process so far, it would be to more tightly associate the income questions/standards to people's tax returns.  The government, at both the Federal and State levels, already knows how much money I make.  Why not simplify the process just by asking me to provide easily-verifiable numbers from certain lines of my Federal and State tax returns?

    Perhaps other people can share their experiences.

    I'll be crossposting this or something like it at my FB page, so no one should think I'm plagiarizing myself.

      1. It sounds like its not as bad as some like Cory Gardner would have it.  Its not like he has anything constructive to offer anyway.  He's just going to blow any problem associated with Obamacare way out of proportion, or outright lie about it, to make his corporate supporters happy.  Democracy in action.

      2. Come on David, you're getting more like Dwyer everyday — repetitive fearful speculation-wise. 

        Just give it a little rest, maybe have a nice blueberry muffin?? (It's what Cory would do . . . )

        1. Hey, why not give more ammo to assholes like Gardner, so they can kill this thing before it has a chance ?  Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

          It kind of reminds me of the Ryan plan for Social Security.  There are problems, and it isn't perfect, so lets destroy it.  Problem solved !

    2. Thanks for the insight.  I visited the site last week and created an account.  I started through the process, and, like you, was transfered to the medicaid application.  I stopped.  I am not going to qualify for medicaid, but will likely qualify for a subsidy. I am waiting for my insurance broker to get back to me, but it sounds like the medicaid application is what is really slowing this process down.

      1. Believe it or not, you might qualify for Medicaid under the Expanded Medicaid Guidelines.  I'm hoping I don't because the provider universe is quite small.  When applying for health benefits, Medicaid looks only at your income, not your assets (although you have to exhaustively list your assets anyway.)  The only time assets figure into the process is if you're applying for long-term care.

        Broker or not, you will probably have to apply for Medicaid anyway.  And you SHOULD go through your broker.  The broker's cut is built into the price.  If you use the broker, at least he'll get the money.  If you don't, it will go to someplace unknown, probably the insurance company.

        And David–if you're curious as to how it works or how well or poorly it's working, sign up for an account and go shopping.  You don't have to buy anything.

        1. Without getting into me specific circumstance, generally, you can qualify for medicaid if you make less than 138% of poverty level (I think).  You can qualify for a subsidy if you make less than 400% of poverty level.  I might between these two numbers depending on how they define income for subsidy purposes.  I imagine a lot of people do and they are waiting to be processed before they get their subsidized policies.

          1. Yes, "depending how they define income for subsidy purposes" is where I see an unnecessary disconnect in the system.  For example, I have some Social Security income.  Does Obamacare care about that?  As I get further along in the process, I suppose I will have to call someone and get an answer to that question.  It would be so much simpler if the application just asked, "Please enter the total income from line 22 of your Federal Form 1040" or, "Please enter the adjusted gross income from line 38 of your Federal Form 1040."  That's simple and unambiguous.  But it doesn't.  And that's where I think the Obamacare application can be simplified and impproved.

            ending on how they define income for subsidy purposes – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/50671/yes-trolls-the-insurance-exchange-is-working#sthash.xDGVOz8d.dpuf

    4. I posted about the diversion to Medicaid application a few days after the exchange opened, and also said that, in my experience, the Colorado Health connect site worked fine.

      But I guess that no one actually reads my comments.

       

        1. Another cranky old fart???? It's an epidemic!

          Ralphie, I wasn't saying anything about your post. But yeah, as someone else waiting for a yea or nay from Medicaid, thanks for the backup.

          I have noticed that I'll put much effort into posting links to info, or whatever, and people just ignore it, or comment with something completely off-topic.  Not just the usual under-the-bridge dwellers, either. Goes with the territory, I guess.

          Just feeling sorry for myself today. Nevermind.

          1. Just so you know, Mama. 

            There are quite a number of old timers who read more than we post.

            I read everything you write. And enjoy it all.

            keep writing.   smiley

             

            1. Thanks, Duke.  I aspire to be a cranky old-timer fart someday.  It's hard to think of anything intelligent to post with this mindless bullshit brinksmanship going on. It's all been said….it's , um, mindless bullshit brinkmanship for supposed political gain.

              And they won't even get the political gain. "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." (for all the Vietnam-era pols).

  3. My husband is one of those who has not yet purchased insurance through the exchange. Our experience was that it was a little dicey those first 4-5 days. We encountered problems setting up his account and submitted a request through their website. They explained the problem and it was fixed when they said it would be.

    We picked two plans through Kaiser that are similar to what we have now. Since he was laid off three years ago, I have covered my husband on my health insurance through work. He has been working the last year or so through a temporary agency, no benefits, and it's a fairly expensive proposition to cover a spouse on your insurance. (I like to not-so-jokingly tell people that I could cover 10 kids on my health plan for much less than one spouse, even though he only visits the doctor 2-3 times a year and most of my co-workers' kids seem to be at the doctor every few weeks or so.)

    Anyway, the reason we haven't yet selected a plan is because I'm waiting to find out the rates for my health insurance beginning January 1. I work for a small non-profit that will start covering its employees through the exchange. Once I get a quote on that coverage, we can determine if it's cheaper to sign him up on an individual plan or continue to cover him via my employer. I suspect an individual plan will be cheaper (my own estimate is that we will save about $100 per month) but I have to find out exactly what our work coverage will provide to compare properly.

    P.S. (long-time reader, first time commenting…)

  4. My Congressman is becoming more of an embarrasment each day this shut-down drags on. The related faux-hysteria ginned up by the caucus would be funny – if it wasn't so …  not funny.  Breaking news yesterday: in a "midnight gerrymandering" of the House rules on Oct. 1, democracy in the House of Representatives was effectively suspended.  Read it and weep. Patriots, indeed. Remind we again why we're paying these clowns $174k annually? 

  5. What's not getting mentioned amid all the bashing of the technical aspects of the roll out is the quality of the products.  Did the private insurance corporation come through with some affordable insurance plans?  If the plans are marketplace worthy than the technical problems are minor and easily corrected.  If the plans suck then it doesn't matter how smooth the roll out is.

    1. I was under the impression the plans have been vetted by the state insurance commission earlier this year.  I'll see if I can find the reference.

      Also for general information: Medicaid elegibility is 138% of the poverty and for 1 person thats $15,856 and for two its $32,499.  What that includes, I don't know.

  6. Seems to me that lots of people doing research this first week but not signing up immediately is a sign of intelligence. For a decision this important, with months to sign up, I certainly wouldn't commit until I had all the information, thought about it for a good long time, did some additional research, and mulled it over some more.

    A high number of early sign-ups would indicate a lot of quick decisions that, upon reflection, might not be the wisest decisions. I see nothing but pluses from high interest, a high level of research on the exchanges, and a slow, careful pace for actually completing the process.

  7. Googling around about this I found a positive comment from Colorado Springs' very own Rep. Bob Gardner.  Good for Bob.  From all of our other gop house and senate critters it seems to be a train wreck and a big mess.  Excepting Miss Amy, of course.

    Even if she doesn't prevail in the primary in 2014, she will still be some one to watch.  If Halter doesn't beat Lamborn, and I hope he does, (hope springs eternal) and the feelings for Amycare have gone all warm  and fuzzy, she would be in a good spot to primary Lamborn or even run against Halter if he does win.  We're going to need more popcorn.

     

    http://capsules.kaiserhealthnews.org/index.php/2013/09/colorado-exchange-watchdog-likes-what-it-sees/

  8. Maybe Colorado should sell their software to the feds. Seems to be working much better here. From CNN (written by someone who is a clear advocate for Obamacare):

    I'll be going back to Healthcare.gov every day to see how it's doing. I hope to get no more error messages, no advice to try again later, and goodness knows, no twirly things.

    1. Colorado's health care exchange software does work well. The website design on ConnectforHealth Colorado is flawed, however.. Most people need to make multiple trips back to the site to complete an application – and one has to click around through multiple layers of menus to find a button which allows one to "continue your application".

      Better would be some kind of "Welcome back…Continue?" or "existing users sign in" button on the front page. A nice feature of the site is the "Our team" page with  email addresses for all of the responsible team, and I did email my suggestion, which by now they've gotten multiple times, i'm sure.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

213 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!