Obamacare enrollees having trouble finding specialists

[Sbane]

I never said that all plans by one insurer have the same network. BlueCross of TN has several, and I believe all of them are available on the exchange. My point, and I don't think you get this, is that my network is shared with other insured people and not all of them bought their policies on the exchanges. There are people who have their policies sponsored by their employers who have the exact same network I do. There is no such thing as an Obamacare network. But even if there were, it would be incumbent on you to mathmatically demonstrate that the problems are substantially more severe than for the same population, many of whom had no legit insurance at all, before the ACA. Otherwise, your headline may as well say "Chinese people having trouble finding specialists." In some cases, it may be literally true because it's an issue for everybody, but there is a profoundly misleading issue of connectivity implied.

Sigh. Some plans are narrow network and some are not. I don't understand why this is so hard for you to get, although I should not be surprised. Even BCBST, who you say is your insurer, has a P network and a S network.

And before you say both networks are available on the exchange, in order to get the better network one must pay more. My point is that even the cheapest plans on the exchange with the crappy network has a high premium and high deductible.

And this is different than employer sponsered plans because? Restrictive networks are an issue. I agree with you on that. My concern is that you are suggesting it's a problem primarily for the "Obamacare" crowd. Many employers also give a few options with different (subsidized) prices for insurance, even if they are within the same insurer. Before the exchanges were in operation, I had a policy that I bought individually and I also had to choose my network carefully then. What is the specific connection between the ACA and the network issue? 

It's not a good value considering the premium, especially for the young.

[7,052,770]

I never said that all plans by one insurer have the same network. BlueCross of TN has several, and I believe all of them are available on the exchange. My point, and I don't think you get this, is that my network is shared with other insured people and not all of them bought their policies on the exchanges. There are people who have their policies sponsored by their employers who have the exact same network I do. There is no such thing as an Obamacare network. But even if there were, it would be incumbent on you to mathmatically demonstrate that the problems are substantially more severe than for the same population, many of whom had no legit insurance at all, before the ACA. Otherwise, your headline may as well say "Chinese people having trouble finding specialists." In some cases, it may be literally true because it's an issue for everybody, but there is a profoundly misleading issue of connectivity implied.

Sigh. Some plans are narrow network and some are not. I don't understand why this is so hard for you to get, although I should not be surprised. Even BCBST, who you say is your insurer, has a P network and a S network.

And before you say both networks are available on the exchange, in order to get the better network one must pay more. My point is that even the cheapest plans on the exchange with the crappy network has a high premium and high deductible.

And this is different than employer sponsered plans because? Restrictive networks are an issue. I agree with you on that. My concern is that you are suggesting it's a problem primarily for the "Obamacare" crowd. Many employers also give a few options with different (subsidized) prices for insurance, even if they are within the same insurer. Before the exchanges were in operation, I had a policy that I bought individually and I also had to choose my network carefully then. What is the specific connection between the ACA and the network issue? 

It's not a good value considering the premium, especially for the young.

That's why there are subsidies for those making less than 400% of the FPL.

You can make the argument that the people who make 401% of the FPL are really screwed, and I would agree with you, but I don't think that's your argument. I would certainly support extending the 9% cap past the 400% level on to everyone. It would peter out pretty quickly anyway.