SHOCKER: “CBS: Healthcare.gov Lies to Customers About Their Insurance Premiums”
This is the kind of thing one has come to expect out of Hobbits ruthlessly using their nefarious powers to hold the President and the American people hostage, threatening them with extremist defaults, anarchical government shutdowns (which were clearly a cause for major concern, and a pressing issue in the lives of nearly every citizen), and the suicide bomb vests of political jihadis willing to let the country burn just so that they could stick it to the more cautious, savvy, “smart” true Madisonians.
But from the most transparent administration ever? Posh, I say! Posh!
CBS:
CBS News has uncovered a serious pricing problem with HealthCare.gov. It stems from the Obama administration’s efforts to improve its health care website. A new online feature can dramatically underestimate the cost of insurance.
The administration announced it would provide a new “shop and browse” feature Sunday, but it’s not giving consumers the real picture. In some cases, people could end up paying double of what they see on the website, CBS News’ Jan Crawford reported Wednesday on “CBS This Morning.”
As President Obama promises to fix HealthCare.gov, his administration is touting what it calls “improvements” in design, specifically a feature that allows you to “See Plans Now.” White House press secretary Jay Carney has said, “Americans across the country can type in their zip code and shop and browse.”
But CBS News has learned the new “shop and browse” feature often comes with the wrong price tags.
[...]
Industry analysts, such as Jonathan Wu, point to how the website lumps people only into two broad categories: “49 or under” and “50 or older.”
Wu said it’s “incredibly misleading for people that are trying to get a sense of what they’re paying.”
Prices for everyone in the 49-or-under group are based on what a 27-year-old would pay. In the 50-or-older group, prices are based on what a 50-year-old would pay.
CBS News ran the numbers for a 48-year-old in Charlotte, N.C., ineligible for subsidies. According to HealthCare.gov, she would pay $231 a month, but the actual plan on Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina’s website costs $360, more than 50 percent higher. The difference: Blue Cross and Blue Shield requests your birthday before providing more accurate estimates.
The numbers for older Americans are even more striking. A 62-year-old in Charlotte looking for the same basic plan would get a price estimate on the government website of $394. The actual price is $634.
[...]
Industry executives CBS News spoke with could not believe the government is providing these estimates, which they said were useless and could easily mislead consumers. They also said that the website repeatedly states the actual prices could be lower, but it makes no mention that they could be higher.
I can’t tell you much about this reporter, Jan Crawford. Only this. She’s a sick fucking racist who just wants to see the first ever historic Black President (or, you know, at least his Black half) fail.
Were I ABC’s Brian Ross, I’d be looking into her background as we speak to see if there are any teabaggers sharing her name. Either that, or just ask the IRS to share that info. You know, save him some time and get this vicious harridan’s political agenda out into the light as soon as possible so that people realize that it is she, not ObamaCare, that is a lying liar that lies.
(via PJ Tattler; h/t instapundit and JohnInFirestone)
Comments (17)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well, y’know, gingerpower.
His name is Crown, after all.
Blue Cross rep in North Dakota: The feds asked us not to reveal the number of people who’ve signed up for ObamaCare
I think Jan Crawford just doesn’t like her betters.
if you lie about someone’s premium you’re going to hell
simple as that
Jeff –
Any chance of a posting on how ‘Tea Party’ is much more of an adjective than a noun?
As a noun, it serves as kind of an automatic straw man – you can bash it all you want, and there’s no singular organization to respond (vs. say, the Democrat Party – you can point to their headquarters and show photographs of their leadership – which you can’t do for the ‘Tea Party’, since there is no such singular organization).
This puts the Tea Party political viewpoint (basically, ‘Taxed Enough Already’) at a disadvantage – straw men can’t punch back.
I thought this was enough in the language theft ball park that you would have a better take on it than me (certainly a better-expressed one).
And, you know, you’re the one with an armadillo…
When it comes to armadilloes, who owns whom?
Actually, Parker, the noun can also be used as a verb: “We are going to Tea-Party Boehner.” Synonym for another noun used as a verb: “primary”.
I don’t think that usage gets a lot of play – but it is certainly obvious in context.
Muddies the water a bit more, maybe – but at least it does not imply a straw man to attack.
And I like that it is evocative of the military jargon ‘blanket party’ – lots of politicians I’d like to see invited to one of those, for the motivational effect…
Tens of millions of Americans will be losing their insurance specifically because of ObamaCare, as the man who lied to them about “If you like your insurance, you keep your insurance” heads out on a five-week fund-raising swing. Progress!
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/millions-americans-are-losing-their-health-plans-because-obamacare_764602.html
http://www.jammiewf.com/2013/awesome-obama-heading-off-for-five-week-fundraising-blitz/
I have to say I like the evocation you bring up, Parker. Perhaps to “Tea-Party” someone should connote the more action-oriented understanding of the phrase. Well played, sir.
I look forward to all the breathless news coverage of the irate workers who’ve lost their insurance picketing outside the venues where the Pharaoh Jugears is collecting the tribute of his followers.
‘Cuz I’m sure the networks will be all over that.
Actually, I’m experienced in large systems development, and I know how to fix this.
First, pick it up by the clean end…
Don gloves first? Or are they unnecessary?
Why would you need gloves for the clean end?
I dunno. Maybe someone bumps into ya and the foul end swings about and yipes, suddenly ya got it on ya? Or who knows? It wafts an ill wind?
grover the rovester
Americans for Tax Reform’s Ryan Ellis Thinks Tea Party Activists Are “Freaking Retarded”