Let's put it this way...my insurer hasn't. The ones in the article have. Apparently they're unable to remain competitive.
67 House Dems cross the aisle to help pass Obamacare website security bill Now let's see if Harry Reid blocks this one.
You really do take the cake sometimes. Republicans: "We DEMAND people get the right to keep their subpar insurance!" quickly followed by "People are opting to keep their subpar insurance and this has changed the risk pool for insurance companies so... OBAMACARE = BAD!" If you're not capable of figuring out the cause and effect relationship with this then I don't know what I can say which would help you and instead will just note critical thinking isn't one of your strong points.
WH delays another ObamaCare deadline http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...n/195468-wh-delays-another-obamacare-deadline Why can't they just delay the whole thing? Delay the individual mandate already. With all these alterations and delays, if the law wasn't already unconstitutional (which it it is), it definitely is now due to the uniformity clause.
One must wonder, if the Obamacare Website were a business venture, the Usual Suspects would be so quick to encourage people to use it: As someone who considers risk, particularly online, I wouldn't go to a Website that industry experts say is full of vulnerabilities anyway and I certainly wouldn't if it were a high value target, given that the majority of Americans are legally required to use it and to reveal their most personal data on it.
No, they aren't. They can also apply by phone, or through virtually any health insurance company, or independent insurance agent, as well as the patient services office of virtually any hospital or clinic or Dr's office. It's all still private insurance, purchased from, and managed by, private insurance companies. All the government does is regulate the industry, (which is something they've always done).
