Maryland

Affordable Care Act: `Do As We Say, Not As We Do Act` (AETNA Pulls Out of Maryland Exchanges)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Via HotAir:

Much like California, the state of Maryland has been almost ostentatiously gung-ho about the implementation of the Patient “Protection” and “Affordable” Care Act. Also like California, Maryland is encountering some most unfortunate problems the likes of which only they and their fellow esteemed Democrats seem not to have seen coming.

For instance: Maryland would really very much appreciate it if the insurance companies operating in their state could offer rates that the state arbitrarily deems to be affordable and attractive offers, the better to lure potential participants into the state’s ObamaCare exchanges. Insurance companies, meanwhile, would really like it if they could avoid operating at a loss. It’s selfish, really.

Aetna Inc pulled out of Maryland’s health insurance exchange being created under President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform law after the state pressed it to lower its proposed rates by up to 29 percent. …

[….]

….“Unfortunately, we believe the modifications to the rates filed by Aetna and Coventry would not allow us to collect enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans, including the medical network and service expectations of our customers,” Aetna said in the letter to insurance commissioner Therese Goldsmith.

According to online documents, Aetna had requested an average monthly premium of $394 a month for one of its plans and the agency had approved an average rate of $281 per month.

And it was just the other day that ObamaCare’s supporters were touting Maryland’s lower rates as proof of the health care overhaul’s success….

…read more…

Chris Christie’s MSNBC’s “Gay Debate”

Published by Papa Giorgio

Via HOTAIR:

It passed the House last week and the Senate tonight, and the governor’s signature is a fait accompli:

The final vote by the state Senate ended a yearlong drama in Annapolis over the legislation, and marked the first time an East Coast state south of the Mason-Dixon line has supported gay nuptials…

Despite one of the largest Democratic majorities in any state legislature, backers of gay marriage in Maryland had to overcome fierce opposition from blocks of African American lawmakers and those with strong Catholic and evangelical views to cobble together coalitions big enough to pass both chambers.

The bill didn’t become viable until two more Democrats were elected to the Senate in 2010, which finally gave them the votes to move the bill out of committee. Next up: The inevitable popular referendum to see whether the law should be blocked. According to Ballotpedia, polls taken in early 2011 and 2012 show roughly 50 percent support for gay marriage in the state versus opposition in the low 40s. Much will depend on turnout, but the true significance of the referendum is that potentially it applies a bit more pressure to the Supreme Court to take this issue up constitutionally. That’s probably a done deal anyway thanks to the Ninth Circuit’s recent ruling on Prop 8, but if Maryland’s gay-marriage opponents win the referendum and gay rights activists sue to have it thrown out, that’ll be two cases in two different states in two different regions involving a question of majority rule pitted directly against minority rights. Hard for the Court to resist.

[….]

Christie’s wrong too, though, in claiming that Obama’s trying to have it both ways on gay marriage while he’s standing on principle by resolving to veto the gay-marriage bill when it gets to his desk. Christie’s trying to have it both ways too by consistently talking up the referendum as a way around him. He knows full well that it’s likely to pass if it happens — according to a poll taken a few weeks ago, the public supports gay marriage 54/35 — but he wants to keep his ducks in a row on social issues in case he ends up on the national GOP ticket someday. By supporting a referendum so effusively, he’s basically encouraging New Jerseyites to legalize gay marriage for him so that he doesn’t have to get his hands dirty doing so. Which, of course, makes the scolding from Capehart and others ironic. Christie’s not booting the issue to the public because he wants the majority to crush the minority’s rights, he’s booting it because he expects the majority will affirm the minority’s rights and thereby nullify his politically expedient veto.

…read more…