Was The Affordable Care Act Ready for Prime Time?

Your next video will start in

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments


Oct. 18 (Bloomberg) – Manhattan Institute Center for Medical Progress Director Paul Howard and Center for American Progress Action Fund Tony Carrk discuss how the Affordable Care Act is really going with Trish Regan and Adam Johnson on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Certainty about where the rules work and how they were being set of given all the dynamics of congress and the supreme court might follow that happened earlier that certainly would have been helpful.

Customers continue to have a whale of complaints about the government site.

Technological which is in delays and some major positions caused critics to argue that maybe affordable care was not ready for prime time.

Our panel is looking at how it is really going.

Paul howard, director of the manhattan institute center for medical progress and the health care director at the center for merrick and congress action fund.

-- the american congress action fund.

You said the rollout is a disaster, why?

This is a glitch, i would hate to see what a real problem looks like.

Everyone is saying that this has been a failure created is not mean that the law will be a failure.

The exchanges are a failure in terms of allowing people to have access and shop for coverage and they have been enrolled.

Insurers have said they cannot tell who is enrolled because they're getting bad reports and duplicate reports.

This can create problems in january.

They can walk into a doctor's office thinking they have coverage but not really have it.

Doesn't put obamacare in a position where does not get a fair shot at taking off because people are not going to do the basic issue of signing up for it?

It is a black box.

We do not know how deep the problems are.

We know they're very serious and ongoing.

They have not been able to fix them after two wait five weeks.

If they can get things running by mid-november, concerns die down.

Insurers are very worried that if only the desperate people who might be more sick sign up for the exchanges -- you have to have a healthy risk pool.

It is an issue.

What is at risk here?

Do you think that these exchanges can technologically get there within the next few weeks and also -- enough so people feel comfortable and you go and sign a question mark the idea that only one percent of the people that are logging on our signing up for this, that is a problem.

I want to echo a couple of points that would just made.

The website is different than a lot of there are problems and everyone from the president on down have acknowledged the website needs to work better but the law itself is doing what it is supposed to be doing.

Providing options for people to get quality affordable coverage area and for looking at the traffic sites, millions of people are going on because they want to find quality affordable health care.

They cannot sign up for it.

There is technological problems.

We are asking the question did get rolled out to soon, is it not going to have a fighting shot because people cannot do the basics of setting up question mark rex we need to put in perspective where two weeks in to a six-month open enrollment and the fact that people are continuing to go and you're seeing people signing up for coverage, people are saving $300 a month and their health insurance, people who had pre- existing condition saying this is the first mike get coverage.

Bikes there is plenty of people who want to sign it.

Question is whether or not they can sign of what happens, what is the long-term damaging effect of the fact that so many people have been talking about this or went on the website and tried.

Usually forget it.

It is the risk pool problem.

If the insurers and end up with an unhealthy pool, they will take a beating.

You will see even sharper remember increases.

Thus people are shopping on their own dollar and they will see premiums skyrocket.

The more people drop out the more you will see what is called a death spiral.

Help the viewers understand why this apparently simple website will not work.

You can go to lendingtree.com and you want to buy mortgage and it will shop your information to a number of different banks and get a bunch of different answers.

It is real simple.

Why can't the government figure out how to do that with health care and shop you to the insurers?

We should look at what is happening in the beginning and now.

There are vast improvements need to the website.

It is still not where it needs to be and i do not think anyone should be satisfied until everyone can go on and get coverage but there are fixes being made and the administration is working around-the-clock to do them.

I do not know all the technical terms and everything that is happening but the call centers that are available to sign up for coverage, people are getting coverage that way.

There are people going to the website and getting through and signing up for coverage so that is happening and it is happening war and more as we go on.

This is the six-month open a roman period.

-- and rule meant to andenrollment period.

I think the white house has to bear the blame and say we rushed it out and put the patients and contractors in a bad position.

We need to take a hit.

Aside from the issues these websites are facing, a lot of small business owners will confront is whether they add the extra hours or reduce the hours has part-time employment means you do not have to pay for health care.

The minute they move beyond a certain number of hours they do.

There are concerns about how much part-time employment has been growing.

You cannot necessarily lame affordable care just at because it has not kicked in.

What do you think this chart is going to look like a couple of years down the road?

It depends on what happens with the employer mandates.

The administration delayed the mandate by a year.

It starts to take up the closer you get to actual implementation so employers when they see the deadline looming will cut back on hours and get those part-time employees below 30 hours.

One bipartisan change it might look at is to raise that to 40 hours or get rid of the employer mandate altogether.

Full-time, full time.

You were part of the team that helped prepare president obama and the debates.

How much of that preparation and the analysis you did has found its way into the current law as stated?

I want to go back to the small business thing.

If there is a small business that has under 50 full-time employees they are exempt from providing coverage.

Why would i grow?

Because this law is going to provide economic security for families that have not had quality affordable health care.

There's a lot of people working who do not have access.

I am talking from the small business owners standpoint.

The danger being the minute that 51st person, you will be subjected to all of this.

We need to look at their his choices out there.

Small businesses that are signing up on the exchanges that are trying to get coverage for their workers.

There are tax credits that are available to help lower the cost.

What we want is we want a healthy workforce that we can have a more productive workforce and that will help the economy overall.

One thing i would agree with, there is no reason to lock health insurance together with employment.

You can give it to individuals.

The problem is the law sets of these different categories.

You can get it tax credit and only if you smaller than 25 employees.

If you are 50 euros and a coke for a penalty.

If you have a franchise you will

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.


BTV Channel Finder


ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change