If they're so great why aren't more people signing up for them? Do you understand what the deductibles are for these new and improved plans? A lot higher than the old plans, smaller networks mean less doctors and heck I can't blame them. I am around chicago and some doctors up here stopped seeing medicare patients because of the payback..a procedure costs 100 dollars to do and govt only pays 30, guess they doctor gets to eat the cost normally, sure they can bill the patient but good luck getting that cost back. Say you have 30 doctors in a network where this year they have 100 patients but then 200 next year..those networks aren't getting bigger, the lines just get longer which means less time with your doctor as they have to prioritize their time for patient care, one of the most common complaints from patents are that they feel their doctor doesn't listen to what they have to say, can you imagine the reality with double the patients on these small networks?
1) People are signing up for them - unless you're not counting millions of people - which you apparently REALLY want to.
2) On deductibles, absolutely - and coverage caps are a much more important thing which are ridiculously higher - top end is when insurance really matters, having a slightly higher deductible is no big deal especially considering how drastically better coverage overall is. [Additionally deductibles are something you can itemize on your taxes - so really at the end of the day the cost is negligible]
3) You're talking about Medicaid not Medicare with those types of figures -
As Medicaid Fees Push Doctors Out, Chicago Patients Find Fewer Choices - New York Times- Medicaid is administered by the local government and some are good and some are terrible. Medicare pays better than most private insurance due to the easier time with filing since Medicare doesn't play games. (about 80-85% of private insurance rates - but they accept almost every claim that fits the criteria so rarely needs refilings - average private insurance policy takes 1-1.5 hrs of front office work before it's accepted because they fight so many - so you end up having to pay $15-20 on average to get the reimbursement from private insurance vs. about 10-15 min of work for Medicare generally making Medicare MORE profitable - there are some exceptions though since some of the care standards for specialties do have minimum visit times and such that can turn some off to Medicare though - but rarely do they refuse them completely [often they'll limit it to X Medicare patients on their patient list so they have Y amount of consistent money that they know they'll see in 4-6 weeks versus having to wait for up to 12 months for a private insurer to reimburse them])
4) On network size - they have been shrinking for ages - the insurance conglomerates wanted HMOs to be the big new thing a few years ago, when people didn't take them by and far they went back to normal PPO plans mostly and now they're trying to push back to something that's a hybrid. To anyone who understands the insurance industry they knew this was coming - the ACA did nothing to prevent it, but also did nothing to cause it either.
5) The ACA actually puts in place minimum visit times for many different codes - so your final assertion is something the ACA prevents - Medicare visit times are still a bit stricter, but private insurance has a number in the ACA as well as a rule in there that they must follow any guidelines the AMA puts forth for visit times. (Which to my knowledge the AMA hasn't added anything beyond the ACAs - but still, it's allowed)
Again, FOXNews would be proud, you've bought alot of horseshit line and sinker. You don't even seem to understand Medicaid isn't Medicare like a true FOX soldier. And honestly Medicaid shouldn't be that great, it should be restrictive as it's something that is offered for FREE. (Or next year I believe - for super low cost for those that want to buy into it for many states)
