This was found in a report from June 2010. And don't forget, one of the provisions is everyone over 30 has to have pregnancy coverage.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/31/obama-officials-in-2010-93-million-americans-will-be-unable-to-keep-their-health-plans-under-obamacare/ "The Departments' mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013," wrote the administration on page 34,552 of the Register. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their "grandfather status" and become illegal. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americansmore than half the populationwas covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013. . On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: > > It seems more like the insurance companies duped their clients into paying > for plans that they knew would not stand up after the ACA was passed. > > http://www.alternet.org/no-obama-didnt-lie-you-about-your-health-care-plans > > "First, it is important to note that the ACA grand-fathered all the > individual policies that were in place at the time the law was enacted. > This means that the plans in effect at the time that President Obama was > pushing the bill could still be offered even if they did not meet all the > standards laid out in the ACA. > > The plans being terminated because they don't meet the minimal standards > were all plans that insurers introduced after the passage of the ACA. > Insurers introduced these plans knowing that they would not meet the > standards that would come into effect in 2014. Insurers may not have > informed their clients at the time they sold these plans that they would > not be available after 2014 because they had designed a plan that did not > comply with the ACA. > > However if the insurers didn't tell their clients that the new plans would > only be available for a short period of time, the blame would seem to rest > with the insurance companies, not the ACA. After all, President Obama did > not promise people that he would keep insurers from developing new plans > that will not comply with the provisions of the ACA." > > "In this case also it is wrong to view the insurers as passive actors who > are being forced to stop offering plans because of the ACA. The price > increases charged by insurers are not events outside of the control of > insurers. If an insurer offers a plan which has many committed buyers, then > presumably it would be able to structure its changes in ways that are > consistent with the ACA. If it decides not to do so, this is presumably > because the insurer has decided that it is not interested in continuing to > offer the plan." > On 14 November 2013 13:16, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > How TF on earth can that not be a blatant lie? You need to re-evaluate > your > > friends methinks. > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:368623 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
