Type to search

How Many People Has Obamacare Helped? Millions And Millions

Memo Pad Memo Share Politics

How Many People Has Obamacare Helped? Millions And Millions


As the deadline to sign up for an insurance policy that takes effect in 2014 passes on December 23, the next crucial step in the debate about the future of the Affordable Care Act begins.

On January 1, Republicans will make the case that because of the estimated five million cancelation notices that went out last year, more people are uninsured under the president’s signature legislative accomplishment than newly insured.

The White House is preparing to rebut that argument aggressively. Last week, an administration official asserted that only about 10 percent of those who received those notices had not found a replacement plan, as most were offered another option by their current insurer. The remaining 500,000 or so have been offered a special exemption from the individual mandate.

But it will be almost impossible to know right away if the number of net insured went up in January, The Washington Post‘s Sarah Kliff explained on Friday.

“It’s the exact opposite of weather forecasting,” Stan Dorn, a senior expert at the Urban Institute, told Kliff. “There, you can be pretty confident of what will happen tomorrow but no idea about the future. Here it’s the reverse: Over time there will be significant gains, but that will take years, not months.”

All we have now is estimates, as some states are reporting signups and some are announcing actual enrollment numbers. As of Friday, 3.3 million people had signed up for insurance through the Affordable Care Act, with at least 970,000 of them having enrolled in private insurance plans, according to ACAsignups.net.

But these numbers don’t tell the whole story, Campaign for America’s Future’s Dave Johnson points out:

—71 million Americans on private insurance have gained coverage for at least one free preventive health care service such as a mammogram, birth control, or an immunization in 2011 and 2012. In the first 11 months of 2013 alone, an additional 25 million people with traditional Medicare have received at least one preventive service at no out-of-pocket cost.

—Up to 129 million Americans with pre-existing conditions—including up to 17 million children —will no longer have to worry about being denied health coverage or charged higher premiums because of their health status.

—Approximately 60 million Americans have gained expanded mental health and substance use disorder benefits and/or federal parity protections.

—41 million uninsured Americans will have new health insurance options through Medicaid or private health plans in the Marketplace. Nearly 6 in 10 of these individuals could pay less than $100 per month for coverage.

—Consumers have saved $5 billion over the past two years due to a new requirement that insurance companies have to spend at least 80 percent of premium dollars on care for patients (at least 85 percent for large group insurers). If they don’t, they must send consumers a rebate. In 2013, 8.5 million enrollees will receive rebates averaging $100 per family.

—Insurance companies must submit premium increases of 10 percent or more for review by experts. In 2012, 6.8 million Americans saved an estimated $1.2 billion on health insurance premiums after their insurers cut back on planned increases as a result of this process.

—Since the health care law was enacted, more than 7 million seniors and people with disabilities have saved an average of $1,200 per person on prescription drugs as the health care law closes Medicare’s “donut hole.”

—Over three million young adults have gained health insurance because they can now stay on their parents’ health plans until age 26.

—Individuals no longer have to worry about having their health benefits cut off after they reach a lifetime limit on benefits. Starting in January, 105 million Americans will no longer have to worry about annual limits, either.

—Using funds available through the Affordable Care Act, health centers are expanding access to care by building new sites and renovating existing sites. Health centers served approximately 21 million patients in 2012.

The millions and millions of people who’ve been helped by the law won’t be counted as the press tries to game out if Obamacare will reach the seven million private insurance signups the Congressional Budget Office predicted for its first year. But they’re definitely out there, and they’d be among the millions who would be affected if the GOP is ever successful in repealing the law.


Photo: Will1ill via Flickr

Chart via SwayWhat



  1. 4sanity4all December 22, 2013

    Thank you for the facts. I have enrolled and my daughter has enrolled. We are looking forward to coverage with no ‘pre-existing condition’ weaseling out of paying a claim. She is appealing a decision not to pay $23,000.00 that her insurance company said they would pay, then, they changed their mind after she had the surgery. Thank you, Mr. President, for making that kind of fraud a thing of the past. In the future, we will not have to waste hours of time fighting for a just decision on paying for services.

  2. Lynda Groom December 23, 2013

    I just confirmed that my daughter, son-in-law and grandchild have been covered by the exchange in California. They’ve been refused health insurance, or quoted ridiculously high rates for years…due to a pre-existing condition for the child. They are now covered by the gold plan at a cost of $483 per month. The last quote they got for just two of them last year was well over $1000 in the private market. ObamaCare is certainly OK with my family.

    1. Lovefacts December 23, 2013

      My daughter’s a chef and is counting the days until Virginia’s new governor is sworn in and a Virginia Exchange will open by mid-February. Also, the new governor has said he’ll expand Medicaid the day he takes office.

  3. Theodora30 December 23, 2013

    If Obama and the leadership the party were half as aggressive in promoting their positions the media would not get away with ignoring the millions who are benefitting from the ACA. For years Republicans have made sure their messages, no matter how dishonest, are heard by Americans. There is no excuse for Democrats – and not just their Presidents or candidates – not doing the same.

    1. Bill Thompson December 23, 2013

      You are absolutely right I have said same thing for years.

    2. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

      What planet are you from?

      1. Theodora30 December 23, 2013

        The planet of real hope and change.
        Hey, if the Pope can change get the discussion going about money being valued over human beings seems like Obama and Democratic leaders could make a difference. I have seen a really nasty ad against Kay Hagan and Obamacare on several occasions. How hard could it be for Dems to run ads specifically pointing the advantages of the ACA with testimonies from people who have benefitted? These ads should make it clear that everyone who is not wealthy was at risk of being bankrupted by the the old system, even those with good coverage. This is not rocket science, it’s common sense. Instead we have had years of Dems wringing their hands and hiding under the covers. They caved back in the 90’s when the dishonest Harry and Louise ads ran. The “liberal” mainstream media has also not done constitutionally protected of informing the citizenry about this and other important issues, allowing right wing propaganda to take root.

        1. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

          When are you going to learn that “Hope and Change” was nothing more than a political slogan to attract young voters. Obama is a proven socialist with proven socialist policies which BTW are not and cannot work.

          He may think that destroying capitalism by fiat will allow socialism to function but what will really happen is that it will collapse without any interference from ‘capitalist revolutionaries’ and the natural state of the universe will reset and capitalism will begin again from free men freely exchanging goods and services for a profit.

          1. rpg1408 December 23, 2013

            President Obama a “Socialist” who is “destroying capitalism” is the same right wing bullshit as” he is a Muslim, not born in the United States, wishing to impose Sharia law..”

          2. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

            Open your eyes. His maternal grandparents were communists, they enrolled Obama in a school with a socialist administrator, mom was a socialist who married a socialist and remarried a socialist and Obama’s self described ‘mentor’ was a socialist, Obama’s neighbor who launched his political career is still a socialist and progressivism is socialism with a new name.

          3. Bodine666 December 23, 2013

            Look at the bright side. It could have been worse. Romney could have been elected and the CONservatives would have been able to take up where bush / cheney left off and completed the total destruction of the middle class, completed the redistribution of wealth to the 1%ers, and had us at war with at least three more middle eastern nations.

            Why don’t you open your eyes? Parroting totally debunked right-wingnut talking points years after they have been debunked doesn’t exactly make you appear to have any credibility. If you must parrot debunked talking points can’t you at least make them something more recent? But then, living in the wingnut bubble these are probably the most recent debunked talking points you have.

          4. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

            Show me the debunk. Put facts where your mouth is. Look around you. The middle class is not working full time anymore. The banks are getting rich under your Hope and Change guy. The taxpayer lost money on the GM bailout. Who made money? GM and the union flacks.

          5. Lynda Groom December 23, 2013

            You’ve tossed a lot of stuff together against the wall. I will address just one at this time, part-time employment in its historical perspective. The data is not really very difficult to obtain on line and various sources in your local library.

            One good source is the Wall Street Journal article of October 22, 2013 entitled ‘Don’t Blame Health Law for High Part-Time Employment.’ It shows with both graphs and wording how part-time work numbers are falling, albeit slowly.

            Full time employment rose by over 1.6 million between September 2012 and September 2013, while folks saying they worked part-time for economic reasons–such as part-time being the only work available–fell by nearly 700,000 in that same period. Even Michael Staiin, a resident scholar at the ‘conservative’ American Enterprise Institute tweeted ‘not much evidence of Obamacare’s part-time America here.’

            History has shown us that employers have been cutting health benefits and worker’s hours long before Obama became president. Following major recessions part-time work tends to rise and eventually begin to fall. Nothing new here except the severity and magnitude of the problem.

            Back in August the Federal Researve of San Francisco released it finding regarding the historical perspective regarding part-time work. Here is a quote of great interest. ‘Before the law was passed, most large employers already faced IRS rules that prevented them from denying health benefits to full-time workers. These rules gave employers an incentive to create part-time jobs to avoid rising health benefit costs.’

            Further; ‘Moreover, recent research suggest the the ultimate increase in the incidence of part-time work when the ACA provision are fully implemented is likely to be small, on the order of 1 or 2 percentage points increase or LESS.’

            The findings of the study concluded that the recent increases in part-time employment were similar to patterns that followed past recessions. The share of part-time jobs has risen from 17% in 2007 to nearly 20% and remained there. The paper shows that part-time employment after the 1982 recession comprised a slightly larger proportion of the overall jobs market.

            ‘In particular, on a consistent basis, the part-time employment share peaked at 20.3% in 1983, slightly above the recent peak of 19.7% in 2010. By this standard, the level of part-time in recent years is not unprecedented, although its persistence during the ongoing recovery is unusual.’ (Perhaps the fact our recession is only surpast by the great depression is severity in the last 70+ years)

            Take a look at the Federal Reserve of San Francisco economic letter on line for more details.

          6. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

            work force participation is at an all time low. Once3 people lose their unemployment benefits, they are considered “not looking for work”. Wives take in laundry, husbands stay at home and mow neighbors ‘ lawns. Family income levels are dropping.

            Are you seriously telling me everything is OK? College graduates can not find work. Degreed workers are flipping hamburgers. I read the news and companies are laying off and moving to partime workers because 1) the economy is such they have to find savings and 2) the impending cost of Obamacare.

            In a free and invigorated economy there would be a demand for qualified workers such that wages would be rising and benefits offered in order to attract the workers. If the economy was in a growth stage, companies would not be looking in every corner to find cuts, they would be more concerned with raising productivity and pushing out . more and more widgets. They would be hiring and not laying off and they would be building more facilities and not closing them. In your insular world you cannot see the people who have taken a hit in this economy. And yet you continue to support a fool. Beats the hell out of me.

          7. Lynda Groom December 23, 2013

            Family income has been dropping for decades. How is that Obama’s fault? Indeed things are not hunky dory and I never said otherwise. I just pointed out that your belief that Obama is the cause of people working part-time is just not true. Sure some companies are using the excuse of ObamaCare for their reason for part-time employees. History has shown that is not the case. BTW, your use of hyperbole is not a very effective counter-argument.

          8. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

            There has indeed been an increase from the likes of WalMart, yet the rate of increase is much more rapid under Obama. The real unemployment rate is staggering. I suppose you will now tell me the benefits of stimulus spending vs tax cuts. The cash for clunkers should have fixed everything. Tell me how under Obama, drilling has increased under PRIVATE leases–not under public leases.

          9. Lynda Groom December 23, 2013

            You should really think about the things you say before hitting the enter key. Really you should.

            It is very clear that you have little understanding of the success of drilling on private and public lands. Here is a little info from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, Science News the U.S. Accounting Office, the gas and oil industry and a Congressional Reseach Service.

            In particular you should read the Congressional Research Service paper released by Marc Humphries in the first week of March 2013. This report was given to Congress and made the same point as the Center for Western Priorities made earlier.

            Here is the conclusion from the CWP report for your use. ‘Depressed natural gas prices and high oil prices incentivize profit-driven companies to drill for crude oil over natural gas. In a quest to expand oil operations, companies have moved away from less profitiable natural gas plays towards oil plays that are largely located on NONDEDERAL land. The shift away from drilling on public lands is market driven.’

            ‘In the future, price volalit and market dynamics could lead to a renewed demand for drilling on federal public lands. However, so long as natural gas prices remain low and oil prices remain high, companies will continue pursuing development of shale oil where the best resources exist–on NONFEDERAL lands.’

            It has to be pointed out that a full 89% of the shale formations in the West that hold either oil or a mixture of oil and gas on on PRIVATE land. Only a very small percentage of high-value oil resources lie beneath federal lands. Approximately 44 million acres of the Rocky Mountain West emcompass a shale oil or mixed play. Of that only 5 million acres—or 11%–is FEDERALY-owned.

            The CWP took maps of the shale formations–such as the Marcellus in Pennslvania, the Bakken in North Dakota and the Niobrara in Colorado–and overlaid maps of federal public lands. This may surprise you but that nationally 93% of the shale oil and mixed oil plays and 90% of the pure shale natural gas were NOT on FEDERAL land.

            From the Congressional Research Service report; ‘Any increase in production of natural gas on federal lands is likely to be easily outpaced by increases on non-federal lands, particualrly because shale plays are primarily situated on NONFEDERAL lands and is where most of the growth in production is projected to occur.’

            All of these varioius reports make it clear that the latest boom in oil/gas in the lower 48 states is due largely to an unconventional resource known as ‘shale oil.’ The vast majority of both ‘shale oil’ and ‘shale gas’ is found under private and not PUBLIC lands. The location of these resource explain the shift in drilling from public to private lands.

            Before I close this long-winded reply I have to point out that even with this major shift away from public to private land drilling oil production has also increased on PUBLIC lands by 19,000 barrels per day.

          10. jmprint December 26, 2013

            So why didn’t we see any of this in the BUSH era?

          11. Theodora30 December 23, 2013

            So Obama the socialist bails out the banks saving all those capitalists and you scream socialism? Wow!!

          12. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

            Just because banks have capital does not mean they are capitalists. Ever hear of crony socialism? I doubt it. Bottom line, money is being swindled out of the private sector to bail out BANKERS who are in bed with Obama (the revolving door between Treasury and Goldman) so they continue the looting furthering Obama’s socialist redistribution effort.It is not rocket science, my friend. You just refuse to examine things in perspective.

          13. Ann Snyder December 26, 2013

            Actually, bankers are in bed with the GOP. Banks are the ultimate capitalists. Credit unions are the socialists. And I’m a proud credit union member.

          14. Independent1 December 23, 2013

            Show you debunk?

            How about Obama has been the cheapest spending president since Eisenhower with a 1.4%/yr budget increase average compared to over 8%/yr for both Reagan and Bush and 5.5% for BushSr!!

            How about his bailout of the auto industry along with the Stimulus saved America from the GOP’s 2nd created world-wide depression say virtually every non-right-wing economist in America!!

            How about he followed through on his promise to get Americans out of fighting in Iraq saving hundreds of soldiers lives and billions of dollars from being added to our debt!!

            How about the fact that Obama has reduced deficit spending faster than any president since Truman right after WWII; keeping his promise to cut the 1.9 trillion deficit spending in Bush’s last budget to around 680 Billion within 4 budgets!!

            How about despite GOP obstruction, Obama cut banks out of the student loan process, making it easier to get loans and cutting the rates, allowing hundreds of thousands more HS seniors to get to college!!

            How about the Obama administration has pursued and rounded up and deported more troublesome illegal aliens than any previous president, far more than Bush ever did and more than those for 2 presidents!!

            How about the fact that Obama started a war on fraud in the defense and healthcare sectors and has brought more crooks to justice while recovering more fraudulently charged monies back to government coffers than any 2 previous presidents!!

            How about unlike Bush and Cheney, who not only allowed the 9/11 attack to happen by forbidding the CIA to try and stop it after they asked 7 times and then deliberately letting bin Laden get a way, Obama not only kept up the pressure on al Qaeda, doing so resulted in the perpetrator of 9/11 being killed and al Qaeda so weakened it’s just a shell of its former self!!

            How about the fact that the economy has been creating jobs for over 46 straight months such that the Obama administration has created more jobs in less than 5 years than the Bush administration created in 8!!

            How about the fact that under Obama, oil and gas drilling and production have increased such, that America is poised to dethrone Russia as the largest producer of these products on the planet!!

            How about the fact that as a buy product of saving the auto industry, the government coffers have taken in more than 150 billion in taxes from auto industry related taxpayers (personal and corporate) that would have been lost if the industry had gone bankrupt. And not only that, bailing out the industry prevented Mitt Romney and his crooked cohorts from buying out GM and Chrysler themselves, destroying all the unionized American jobs and basically shipping the American auto industry to China!!

            Had enough wacko!! I could go on for quite a while with accomplishments of the President who has done more for America than any other president in American history.

          15. Make it go away December 23, 2013

            middle class is not working full time and you heard that where? maybe if the repiglicans would let us pass a jobs bill, instead of wasting 40+ votes on ACA a law there would be more jobs. Or instead trying to control women, pass a job bill. Or shut down the government, could of passed a jobs bill. hmm I think I see a theme!!!

          16. jmprint December 26, 2013

            People have to take part time job to subsidize their full time pay from Walmart and likes that are greedy and don’t compensate their employees what they are worth. Many employees are still employed because of GM.

          17. Ann Snyder December 26, 2013

            What you’re referencing is the result of uncontained capitalism, whereby the owners take more of the profits away from the workers who made those profits possible. Had the minimum wage kept pace with productivity, as it did pre-Bush, the minimum wage would be $18 an hour. Instead, Congress has lifted restrictions that let banks get away with shafting everyone through bad investments and high user fees, and let business owners get away with keeping more and more of the profits and reducing hours and pay for workers. All of this was caused by capitalism, not socialism.

          18. Make it go away December 23, 2013

            don’t forget his proctologist is a socialist too..

          19. shawnthesheep December 24, 2013

            By your definition, Nixon and Eisenhower would be “socialists.” Obama is the elected president of a representative democracy with a capitalist economy. He has done nothing to change the fundamental system of government or the economic system. You should spend less time repeating “scary” words you hear on Fox News and more time educating yourself.

          20. OneOut December 23, 2013

            Did You have a point ?

          21. Make it go away December 23, 2013

            don’t forget his children, their still waiting to see their birth certificates too. GOP=collosal waste of our time..

          22. Theodora30 December 23, 2013

            Only on planet Fox would a socialist design a health care system with for-profit insurance companies playing a hughe role. Socialized medical system are single payer with the government employing the doctors.

            You are most likely confusing Communism with socialism which is alive and well in many western democracies. Finland is a social democracy with a very strong economy and education system. Instead of listening to right wing propaganda try informing yourself by travel, talking with people from other countries, etc.

          23. LibertyWriter December 23, 2013

            Do you understand the difference between a command economy and a free economy? I think not. The debate the last two weeks is how are the for profit insurance companies make a profit when Obama keeps altering the law in order to protect vulnerable democrats while commanding certain people to buy something that is not of the same value they had before. Picking winners and losers is the socialist way . Applauding the winners and encouraging the losers is the capitalists way. Hell, people can’t even feed themselves under Obama without a government bailout.

          24. Allan Richardson December 23, 2013

            Capitalism without conscience will destroy itself and most (if not all) of humanity with it, in the long run. Capitalism WITH a small semblance of a conscience, as we have enjoyed from the New Deal until Reaganomics (and which some people falsely call “socialism”), has produced a prosperous middle class and a steadily reducing poverty class. Since Reaganomics these trends have reversed DRAMATICALLY, because free-market fanatics have influenced our policies to do exactly the WRONG things.

            Google “banned ted talk job creators” for the personal testimony, backed up by statistics, of Mark Hanauer, a multi-millionaire entrepeneur who freely admits that HE is not a job “creator” because only CUSTOMERS create jobs, and people at his income level cannot possibly spend enough on consumer products to make up for middle class people becoming too poor to buy enough products to create jobs.

            It sounds good to describe completely unfettered capitalism as “free men freely exchanging” goods and services, but the fact is that those with less power “freely” pay whatever it takes for what they absolutely MUST buy (food, shelter, medicine) while those with more power “freely” take advantage of the misfortunes of their fellow human beings. If trying to limit the damage that such a system can do to the innocent, while facilitating HIGHER total profits and the best outcome for everyone, is “socialism,” then I would also refer you to “Comrade Jesus” as quoted in Matthew 25.

          25. Ann Snyder December 26, 2013

            Unfettered anything — socialism and capitalism being good examples — is dangerous. Good government in a democracy reins in the worst excesses of capitalism, such as finding a way to prevent people from suffering and dying because they cannot afford profit-based health insurance. A dash of socialism is just what we need to improve the flavor of today’s excessive greed so that we can ensure a humane floor for all of our citizens.

      2. Make it go away December 23, 2013

        The planet that is sick and tired of the scare tactics and fear mongering the slimy, narcissistic GOP seems obsessed with because of their bigotry toward Obama. They’ve wasted this country’s time for way to long.

        1. rpg1408 December 23, 2013

          I’ve been following Politics for over 60 years, and I never have seen such a disgusting bunch as today’s GOP…Even during the awful times of Joe McCarthy, and the worst of the Nixon and Reagan years. there were members of the GOP who were moderate,and willing to work with Democrats. and to speak out against the worst of their Party But now, where are the members of the GOP willing to challenge the racism, obstructionism,and meanspiritedness of their most extreme members?

  4. Lovefacts December 23, 2013

    Great to see the facts. Unfortunately, the Republicans have never let facts or the truth to stop them.

    1. ralphkr December 23, 2013

      Unfortunately, Lovefacts, there is a large segment of the populace who are unable to recognize the difference between facts and Conservative propaganda. if you have perused the above posts you shall quickly be able to ascertain which of the posters only recognize the lies of the right-wing as “facts” and that those same people just “know” that anything that does not conform with their stupidity must be a liberal lie even when it is published by WSJ.

  5. gq phillips December 24, 2013

    Without the polling parameters and data gathering methods and from where the data was gathered and how it was generated and sample sizes and from whom the samples where gathered and last the methodology of making sense from these numbers.All I can say is thanks for a bunch of numbers. Do hope no taxpayer monies where used on this exercise in number generating!! A concerned citizen,aligned with no political party. No one worth following!!

    1. Independent1 December 25, 2013

      My hunch is that it was the author of the article, Jason Sattler, who devoted the time and pulled together all the statistics he quoted which are available on line if you know where to look: from the CDC and other agencies that provide and monitor medical services and are required to keep the statistics as part of what they do. The numbers had nothing to do with polling – they are a actual statistics – not guesses contrived by polling organizations.

  6. elw December 24, 2013

    As with all the Republican false scandals and lies, their lies about the ACA will not hold up to the truth. The truth is simple, the ACA will end up helping far more people than it will hurt; and those it hurts will only be hurt in the pocket book, because only those who can afford it will end up paying more. Everyone one knows people, good, hard working people, could not get health coverage because they have a preexisting condition, and they will see them get coverage. So many people will be touch by the good of the ACA whether they buy it personally or know someone who does; so in the long run the only people paying attention to the Republican smear campaign will be their base, which would vote Republican even if their candidate stood naked in front of the polling place.

  7. Mikey7a December 24, 2013

    Short answer, NO. Sadly, I live in the putrid State of Florida. I have Medicare, and something called Medically Needy(share of cost) Medicaid. My mark to make each month is $679. That is before Medicaid will pick up the 20% that Medicare doesn’t pay. Oh, this is monthly, and is not a running total. Example: I had to have Vascular surgery. The bill was $33,000+. Somehow, Medicare paid for all but $437. I don’t understand it, as 20% would be at least $660. Anyway, I see 4 or 5 doctors, they all want their 20% Medicare won’t pay too. But, the amounts do not accumulate toward the $679 minimum before Medicaid kicks in. So, as you can see, every month, I am receiving bills, that I have no possible way to pay. I make $879 a month SSD. After rent, Utilities, misc necessities, upkeep on my 15 yr old vehicle, medicine co-pays and food, as I only receive $69 a month in food stamps, there isn’t much left.

    So no, the ACA hasn’t helped me at all, and will never, unless I figure a way to move to a Blue State. That in itself, is just a wish, and not a serious consideration. I truly believe Florida wishes, that I will just hurry up and DIE!

    1. Lynda Groom December 24, 2013

      Your insurance coverage no longer has a cap, so you’ve been helped even if it does not seem so. Also the ACA helps extend the life of Medicare so that is another way you’ve been helped. I had this same conversation with mom a couple of days ago and she felt the way.

    2. Independent1 December 25, 2013

      I’m sorry to hear that you’re having such a struggle. Somehow, it doesn’t seem right to me that given your income, that you should be faced with the medical expenses that you are incurring. Are you sure that you’ve applied for full Medicaid benefits on-line via Access Florida?

      Please see the attached on Florida Medicaid for the Disabled:

      Medicaid for Aged or Disabled

      Medicaid for low income individuals who are either aged (65 or older) or disabled is called SSI-Related Medicaid.

      Florida residents who are eligible for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) are automatically eligible for Medicaid coverage from the Social Security Administration. There is no need to file a separate ACCESS Florida application unless nursing home services are needed.

      Individuals may apply for full Medicaid coverage and other services using the online ACCESS Florida Application and submitting it electronically. If long term care services in a nursing home or community setting are needed, the individual must check the box for HCBS/Waivers or Nursing Home on the Benefit Information screen. HCBS/Waiver programs provide in-home or assisted living services that help prevent institutionalization.

      Medicare Savings Programs (Medicare Buy-In) help Medicare beneficiaries with limited finances pay their Medicare premiums; and in some instances, deductibles and co-payments. Medicare Buy-In provides different levels of assistance depending on the amount of an individual or couple’s income. Individuals may apply for Medicare Buy-In coverage only by completing a Medicaid/Medicare Buy-In Application.

      Print the form, complete it and mail or fax it to a local Customer Service Center.

      Individuals eligible for Medicaid or a Medicare Savings Program are automatically enrolled in Social Security’s Extra Help with Part D (Low Income Subsidy) benefit for the remainder of the year. An individual may also apply directly with Social Security for the Medicare Extra Help Program. Individuals who do apply directly for the Medicare Extra Help Program have the option of having the same application consideration for the Medicare Savings Program. If the individual takes the option of having the Medicare Extra Help Program application considered for the Medicare Savings Program, the Social Security Administration will send information electronically to Florida and the individual will be contacted.

    3. charleo1 December 26, 2013

      Well, Mickey, I have a few suggestions. First, since you have Medicare, you
      are not eligible to enroll in ACA. However, since you’re disabled, and eligible for Medicare, parts A, B, & D and, if indeed your $879 per month is your total income, you qualify for the lowest, SOC, or, “Share of Costs,” in Florida’s,
      “Medically Needy Medicaid.” Which assigns the out of pocket costs on a
      sliding scale. I strongly suggest you call Medicare. For one thing, Part A of
      Medicare, (the part that covers your Dr. visits,) has a very low, annual, out
      of pocket deductible. It used to be $110.00, total. Then, your visits are 100%
      covered, for the year, for all your visits, to all of your Drs. by Part A. Or the
      the part of Medicare, that pays your doctors. The 20% number is about part
      B, of Medicare, That pays 80% of all approved costs, if you need to be put
      in the hospital. And the 20% of just the hospital bill, (not the doctor’s bill at the
      hospital.) The doctor/doctors continue to be paid by the part A Medicare.
      This might account for your confusion, that of the $33,000 bill, your out of
      pocket costs were, $437.00. And not 20%, as that would amount to $6,600,
      and not $660.00.

      1. Mikey7a December 26, 2013

        I am totally confused. My SOC is, in fact, $679. per month Charleo1. That must be met before Fla Medicaid will kick in, and pay the portion of bills that Medicare do not cover. This has to be one bill, not multiple bills adding up to said amount. All I know is, that if I lived in California, or even Nevada, NY, or a few other states, I’d have full medicaid, with my Medicare. After reading your reply, I am more confused about ACA than ever. I thought it was to help folks like me, low income, with ongoing health problems. I AM calling Medicare today, to see if I would do better not having Fl. Medicaid at all. Thanks for trying to help.

        1. charleo1 December 26, 2013

          Not much help, I’m afraid . But a good idea to call Medicare. These Medicaid, SOC options were made available to States on a discretionary basis, in a bill
          passed in 2005, called the Deficit Reduction Act, or some such. You may find it at, medicaid.gov. I’ll post a partial bit of it, As it relates to Florida Medicaid recipients. And the GOP’s determination to balance the budget on the backs
          of the poor.
          Table 2 illustrates that the estimated impact for Medicaid enrollees as a result of all of the cost sharing provisions of the DRA are $105 million for 2007, $155 million for 2008, $255 million for 2009, $375 million for 2010, and $455 million for 2011. Although these estimates reflect an increase of costs to beneficiaries, we do not believe this will pose a barrier to accessing health care. The law provides that States can impose alternative cost sharing. We believe through the use of alternative cost sharing, States will help recipients become more educated and efficient health care consumers

  8. Fat Hubie January 1, 2014

    Oh boy! Free stuff…

  9. shalipadilla46@gmail.com August 30, 2016

    Great Article. I learned a lot from the facts ! Does someone know where my assistant could locate a template USCIS I-9 document to type on ?


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Next Up