Facebook Moments Gets Its Own Website


The Facebook Moments photo-sharing app made its way to the web in a limited capacity late last year. The company basically added a link to Moments in the desktop version of Facebook. It’s now doing things properly by giving Facebook Moments its very own website. Users can head over to this website if they want to view online albums that they’ve shared or those that have been shared with them in Moments with their Facebook friends.

The feature set is limited as far as the capabilities beyond viewing albums go. It’s the same stripped-down version of Moments within Facebook.

The standalone website will display the full list of albums you’ve shared and albums that have been shared with you in Moments but the buttons for favoriting or comment on photos inside those albums don’t work.

Clicking on them actually, brings up a pop-up which directs you to download the Moments app on your phone. The website does allow users to create and share new albums, add or delete photos in existing albums.

It remains to be seen if Facebook is going to add more functionality to the Moments website or if it’s going to act as a marketing website for the Moments app. Facebook did acknowledge that it has launched this standalone website but hasn’t shared any plans of what it’s going to do with it down the road.

Facebook Moments Gets Its Own Website , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Facebook Messenger Now Has 1.2 Billion Users


Feels like it was only yesterday that Facebook Messenger was launched as a standalone app and Facebook users were encouraged to download it to keep in touch with their friends and family. Messenger has come a very long way since then and it’s much more capable now than it ever was before. It has picked up hundreds of millions of users along the way, 1.2 billion to be precise, according to the latest figures shared by Facebook.

This is a significant milestone for the company given that Facebook Messenger is now as big as WhatsApp, another cross-platform messaging app that’s owned by Facebook. While both allow you to essentially do the same thing, there are countless users out there who have both the WhatsApp and Messenger apps on their smartphones.

Facebook Messenger is also miles ahead of a plethora of other cross-platform messaging apps that aren’t owned by Facebook. It goes to show that Facebook made the right call when it decided to take the built-in messaging feature of its app and spin it out back in 2014.

Facebook’s main app is closing in on the 2 billion users mark as it currently sits at 1.9 billion. Instagram has quite a bit of catching up to do before it hits the one billion milestone as it’s currently at 600 million users.

Facebook Messenger Now Has 1.2 Billion Users , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

2018 Hyundai Sonata brings minor changes, new transmission for Turbo model

The 2018 Hyundai Sonata broke cover at the 2017 New York Auto Show, and while the changes to the strong-selling sedan aren’t extensive, they are noticeable to anyone who has been keeping track of the four-door’s evolution into a major family car player. Most obvious is the Sonata’ styling, which now features a bolder grille – reminiscent of the Elantra … Continue reading

Burger King tricks Google Assistant with clever and creepy ad

It’s not often that mentions of Burger King appear on websites dedicated to technology and gadgetry, but Burger King has forced its way in nonetheless. A new ad from Burger King is causing quite the stir and a lot of discussion today, which is pretty impressive considering it’s only 15 seconds in length. 15 seconds, as the ad you see … Continue reading

Trump's White House No Longer Gets Benefit Of The Doubt On Anti-Semitism

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Intentionally or not, Donald Trump’s White House has been trafficking in anti-Semitism since Day 1 of his presidency, and throughout his campaign before that.

Considering that history ― a remarkably long dossier of insensitive comments, marketing materials and unsavory associations ― it’s impossible to view White House press secretary Sean Spicer’s recent remarks about Syria and Nazi Germany as a mere misstatement.

Spicer told a roomful of reporters on Tuesday that Adolf Hitler never used chemical weapons against his own people. He actually coined a new euphemism ― “Holocaust centers” ― to refer to Nazi gas chambers.

Spicer’s comments overlooked the fact that German Jews ― Hitler’s own people ― were murdered using poison gas. This could have been a sort of unconscious slip on Spicer’s part ― maybe he doesn’t really see German Jews in Nazi Germany as citizens. More likely, it was just a bad analogy. Never compare atrocities, conventional wisdom advises. Spicer has since issued several apologies

Regardless of Spicer’s mindset or intent, we can’t simply write off his comments as an isolated incident.

Let’s look at the context. Within the first hour of his presidency, on Jan. 20, Trump used his inauguration speech to revive a slogan ― America First ― that was cooked up by Nazi sympathizers before World War II. the Anti-Defamation League pointed this out to Trump during the campaign and asked him to stop using the slogan. He didn’t. 

Just one week later, Jan. 27, the White House put out a statement honoring Holocaust Remembrance Day that omitted mention of Jewish people. And for days afterward, various members of Trump’s staff (including Spicer) defended the statement as being “inclusive,” saying it wasn’t just Jews who suffered during the Holocaust.

The next month, Trump and his administration were so slow to acknowledge what looked like a coordinated campaign of bomb threats against Jewish community centers that the president found himself telling an Orthodox Jewish reporter that he’s “the least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life.”

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_2’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

The reporter, Jake Turx, was trying to ask Trump what the administration was doing about the bomb threats. He never got a chance, however. Mid-sentence, Trump cut him off and said it wasn’t “a fair question.” He told Turx― who was wearing traditional Hasidic garb and sporting side curls and a yarmulke ― to sit down. It was a remarkably insensitive exchange with a Jewish man who was obviously concerned with the safety and security of his own people. 

In response to growing criticism over anti-Semitism, Trump’s defense has been, essentially, that some of his best friends are Jewish. Son-in-law Jared Kushner, daughter Ivanka and his grandchildren all are Jews, he points out.

But this defense rings hollow when you consider not just the abundance of careless flubs and insensitive comments, but some of Trump’s other “friends.”

Many of Trump’s biggest supporters are virulently anti-Semitic white nationalists and neo-Nazis ― including former KKK leader David Duke and white nationalist leader Richard Spencer, who’ve been supporting him since the earliest days of his presidential run. Steve Bannon, Trump’s senior strategist, used to lead Breitbart.com, which traffics in white nationalist articles. A top Trump adviser, Sebastian Gorka, reportedly has ties to a Nazi-aligned group in Hungary.

Trump also has a disturbing history of using Jewish stereotypes, reportedly once saying, “The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

More recently, the closing TV ad of his campaign trafficked in abhorrent Jewish conspiracy theories about billionaire George Soros, bankers, and the “globalist threat” (a coded anti-Semitic insult more recently deployed by Bannon as a slur against two Jewish members of Trump’s staff). During the campaign, there was retweeting of white supremacists and a one-time tweet with a photo of Hillary Clinton and a Jewish star, surrounded by cash ― all images embraced by a certain kind of anti-Semite.

When some of your biggest fans and most crucial staff members are outspoken white supremacists, when your campaign and election have revived hatred against Jewish people, when you hire as your chief strategist a guy who runs a website that caters to white nationalists, and when your administration repeatedly makes unforced errors talking about the Holocaust, you have an obligation to do better or we must de facto assume this is on purpose. 

At a minimum, Jewish issues are something that Trump’s White House should know to treat with care and seriousness. At a minimum, maybe Trump should have shown up at Monday’s White House Passover seder.

Spicer should understand the problem, and just leave the Holocaust out of his daily talking points.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

This Artist Will Make You A Teeny-Tiny Version Of Your Wedding Cake

Artist Rachel Dyke is taking couple’s big day memories and turning them into itty bitty keepsakes.

Dyke, who is based in Los Angeles, recreates life-size wedding cakes on a miniature scale, making intricately detailed models small enough to fit into the palm of your hand. They’re made using polymer clay, acrylic paint, bits of jewelry and other flea market finds, so no, you can’t eat these little beauties. 

Clients send Dyke a photo of their cake, and she estimates the time it will take her to recreate it, as well as the cost of the materials she’ll need to purchase. The price for the miniature varies depending on the level of detail, but Dyke estimates the median cost is probably somewhere between $150 and $200.

“Simple cakes with minimal detail I can make in an afternoon, while others that take more time and engineering can take a week,” she told The Huffington Post.

Dyke previously worked as a cake decorator under Duff Goldman of “Ace of Cakes” fame, and learned many of the techniques she uses today from her time at Goldman’s Charm City Cakes West in West Hollywood, California.

She even made an appearance on Food Network’s “Cake Masters” last year.

Dyke’s obsession with miniatures started young. From an early age, she was fascinated with Barbie accessories and toy trains. At 6 or 7, she began creating her first miniatures. When she turned 20, Dyke shifted her focus to wedding miniatures specifically and has turned it into a business. 

“I was working retail and picked up some polymer tools with one of my first paychecks,” she told HuffPost. “I actually read a Tarina Tarantino article ― she’s my idol ― and became inspired again to make minis. I made my co-worker’s mini wedding cake, then she wanted one for her friend and the friend wanted one and so on.”

While working on such a small scale might be painstaking for some, Dyke finds tremendous pleasure in it. 

“I find accurately miniaturizing an item super satisfying,” she said. “When it’s difficult to differentiate [the mini] from the original photo is when I feel best. I also really like making art for people. Their reactions are great ― people have told me they’ve cried when receiving their mini wedding cake.”

The waitlist for Dyke’s services is currently two months long, but she’s accepting new business inquiries through her Instagram direct messages. Head over to Insta to see more of her mini masterpieces

H/T Brides

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Russia Vetoes UN Resolution On Syria Attack

UNITED NATIONS, April 12 (Reuters) – Russia blocked a Western effort at the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday to condemn last week’s deadly gas attack in Syria and push Moscow’s ally President Bashar al-Assad to cooperate with international inquiries into the incident.

It was the eighth time during Syria’s six-year-old civil war that Moscow has used its veto power on the Security Council to shield Assad’s government.

In the latest veto, Russia blocked a draft resolution backed by the United States, France and Britain to denounce the attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun and tell Assad’s government to provide access for investigators and information such as flight plans.

The toxic gas attack on April 4 prompted the United States to launch missile strikes on a Syrian air base and widened a rift between the United States and Russia.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that trust had eroded between the two countries under U.S. President Donald Trump.

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson echoed that comment after meetings with Russian leaders in Moscow, saying that relations are at a low point with a low level of trust. Tillerson called for Assad to eventually relinquish power.

China, which has vetoed six resolutions on Syria since the civil war began, abstained from Wednesday’s U.N. vote, along with Ethiopia and Kazakhstan. Ten countries voted in favor of the text, while Bolivia joined Russia in voting no.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, warned Moscow against protecting Assad, who relies on support from Russia and Iran in his conflict with mostly Sunni Muslim rebels.

“To my colleagues from Russia – you are isolating yourselves from the international community every time one of Assad’s planes drop another barrel bomb on civilians and every time Assad tries to starve another community to death,” Haley said during a Security Council meeting earlier on Wednesday.

Haley added: “Iran is dumping fuel on the flames of this war in Syria so it can expand its own reach.”

ATTACK INVESTIGATION

A fact-finding mission from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is investigating last week’s attack in a rebel-held area of northern Syria.

If it determines that chemical weapons were used, then a joint U.N./OPCW investigation will look at the incident to determine who is to blame. This team has already found Syrian government forces were responsible for three chlorine gas attacks in 2014 and 2015 and that Islamic State militants used mustard gas.

Britain’s U.N. Ambassador Matthew Rycroft told the Security Council that samples taken from the site of the April 4 attack had been analyzed by British scientists and tested positive for the nerve gas sarin. He said Assad’s government was responsible.

During a heated Security Council exchange before Wednesday’s vote, Russia’s deputy U.N. envoy Vladimir Safronkov told the 15-member body that Western countries were wrong to blame Assad for the gas attack.

“I’m amazed that this was the conclusion. No one has yet visited the site of the crime. How do you know that?” he said.

Syria’s government has denied responsibility for the attack.

Diplomats said that Russia has put forward a rival draft resolution that expresses concern at last week’s gas attack and condemns the U.S. strike on Syria. It was unclear if Moscow planned to put the text to a vote.

Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari said Syria had sent dozens of letters to the Security Council, some detailing “the smuggling of sarin from Libya through Turkey on a civilian air plane by using a Syrian citizen.”

“Two liters of sarin were transported from Libya through Turkey to terrorist groups in Syria,” he said, adding that the government does “not have these weapons.”

Western powers say the April 4 gas attack was carried out from the air and that Syrian rebels do not have any aircraft. 

(Reporting by Michelle Nichols; Editing by Alistair Bell)

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Activist Who Helped Unseat Sheriff Joe Arpaio Has Advice On How To Fight Trump

The same day Donald Trump won the presidency of the United States, Sheriff Joe Arpaio lost his bid for a seventh term leading Arizona’s Maricopa County. 

Marisa Franco was one of the activists who helped unseat Arpaio. The former sheriff had built his career on cracking down on illegal immigration with controversial methods that a judge ruled as racial profiling in 2013.  

In an AJ+ video shared Wednesday on Twitter, Franco spoke about why she became an activist and gave advice on how others can resist the Trump administration.

“I think the one thing that was absolutely critical in Maricopa County to beat Sheriff Arpaio was that the people, the very people that he was attacking and persecuting, were the very people who stood up, and took him on, and took him out,” Franco said.

The Chicana, who was born and raised in Arizona, is the co-founder and director of Mijente, a national organization of Latino activists. She feels her work fighting against Arpaio can be applied to pushing back against Trump.

“Some of us have already been living in Trump’s America,” she told The Washington Post in November. “There is a bright spot in Maricopa County, and I think there are significant lessons to be learned: We don’t make excuses for bigotry, and we don’t normalize the abuse.”

Based on her experience mobilizing against Arpaio, Franco shared some advice with AJ+ viewers who are interested in challenging the Trump administration. Watch the activist outline her two key points in the video above. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Is Trump's Infamous Chocolate Cake Really The 'Most Beautiful' You've Ever Seen?

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

When it comes to desserts, Donald Trump thinks his takes the cake ― to the point he bragged about it while talking about a missile strike in Syria

Many viewers were left dumbfounded after the president’s bizarre narration, in which he described informing China’s president that the U.S. bombed a Syrian airstrip as the two ate “the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake that you’ve ever seen” during dinner at his Mar-a-Lago estate last week.

Why Trump thinks the quality of cake is relevant to the rundown of this serious event, we cannot guess, except to note he loves promoting Mar-a-Lago. It’s also unclear if he was referring to the chocolate cake that appears to have been served in the Mar-a-Lago dining room since at least 2015, or a singular creation (the event’s menu lists chocolate cake with vanilla sauce and dark chocolate sorbet, but Mar-a-Lago didn’t respond to an inquiry about specifics). 

However, we do know that “most beautiful you’ve ever seen” is a pretty bold declaration to make, considering all the gorgeous cakes in the world. Let’s do a little comparing, shall we?  

Here’s the chocolate cake served in Mar-a-Lago’s dining room.

This slice fits the description, so let’s just assume the cake Trump referred to probably looked somewhat similar, the work of the same pastry chefs. 

…and here are a few celebrated cakes from other kitchens.

A much-celebrated chocolate mousse cake by Dominique Ansel, who was recently named the world’s best pastry chef

@dominiqueansel, 2017 best #pastry #chef by @theworlds50best. #chocolate #mousse #cake

A post shared by Traveleatworld (@traveleatworld) on Apr 7, 2017 at 12:45pm PDT

Lady M’s Couronne du Chocolat, which is Vogue-approved as one of the “chicest chocolate cakes in New York”: 

The ridiculously moist souffle cake at New York institution Sarabeths: 

The chocolate cake from Sweet Lady Jane, named one of the best chocolate cakes in L.A.

 

This baby from Little Cupcake Bakeshop, named to Food & Wine’s list of best chocolate cakes in the U.S.

Thank you @foodandwine ❤️ available at all locations

A post shared by Little Cupcake Bakeshop (@littlecupcakebakeshop) on Aug 18, 2016 at 7:51am PDT

Francois Payard’s signature Louvre Dome Cake, also a Food & Wine fave: 

…and the mini versions!

A multi-tiered glory from Momofuku Milk Bar: 

The salted caramel chocolate cake at Republique, aka L.A.’s second-best slice, according to LA Weekly: 

The impossibly oozy warm chocolate cake by Jean-Georges

@chefjgv’s signature Warm Chocolate Cake

A post shared by Jean-Georges (@jean_georgesnyc) on May 5, 2016 at 12:50pm PDT

And Lady M’s chocolate mille, a layered chart-topper: 

#chocolate #millecrepes #mondaymotivation #yum #Lifestyle #Luxury #LadyM

A post shared by Lady M Confections Official (@ladymcakes) on Mar 28, 2016 at 6:32am PDT

Who’s the fairest of them all? Let us know. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Right Now The Big Threat To Obamacare Isn’t Repeal. It’s Sabotage.

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

President Donald Trump and his congressional allies could still wreak havoc with the Affordable Care Act’s private insurance markets, even though the effort at full repeal has stalled.

They could do so through some combination of neglect and sabotage ― and it could all start more quickly than most people realize.

Right now, insurance companies that sell individual policies through the law’s exchanges are trying to figure out what premiums to charge next year and, in some cases, whether to keep selling on the exchanges at all. They’re making these decisions without key information, because the Trump administration has sent mixed signals about its intent to enforce the law and to continue paying critical subsidies to insurers.

In just the last week or so, industry officials have started to raise a fuss, warning that they need some clarity ― either from the administration or Congress ― on how Obamacare is going to work in 2018, assuming it remains on the books. But the insurers aren’t getting much of a public response. This has made them even more anxious, increasing the chances that they’ll raise premiums a lot more than they would have otherwise ― or abandon the markets altogether.

Trump, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and other high-profile critics of Obamacare have been arguing for years that its private insurance markets are collapsing. The reality is that they’ve been working fine in some states and struggling in others, with signs of gradual improvement overall, as a recent report from S&P Global Market Intelligence showed.

But that had a lot to do with aggressive management under President Barack Obama. Now the Republicans are in charge. They can turn their predictions of collapse into a self-fulfilling prophecy, threatening insurance for a significant portion of the people who depend on the law for coverage.

All The Uncertainty Is Upsetting Insurers

The most pressing issue today is the future of so-called cost-sharing reductions, or CSRs. Under the Affordable Care Act, insurers that sell directly to individuals through the exchanges must offer special plans, with lower out-of-pocket costs, to customers with incomes up to 250 percent of the poverty line. That’s $61,500 for a family of four, by this year’s standards. 

The money to reimburse insurers for the extra cost of these plans comes from the federal government ― or, at least, that’s what the law’s architects intended. But in yet another example of its poor drafting, the statute does not appropriate the money for this expense explicitly. The Obama administration paid the money anyway, claiming it had the authority to do so. House Republicans disagreed, sued and won in U.S. district court last year ― throwing the future of those payments into doubt. 

The Obama administration appealed the decision and the district judge stayed it, so the money could keep flowing to the insurers while the case proceeded. But now it’s the Trump administration defending the CSRs, and it hasn’t said whether it will pursue that appeal. It has simply said it will make the payments as long as the case is active ― a vow that insurers consider pretty close to meaningless, since the administration could decide to drop the appeal at any time.

“Plans need more certainty,” Kristine Grow, spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, said this week, following administration statements that left its position on the lawsuit ambiguous.

The CSR issue is “huge,” according to Sean Mullin, a senior director at the health care consulting firm Leavitt Partners. “You cannot understate how big a deal they are” to insurers, he told The Huffington Post.

The danger is immediate. If the administration were to pull back the appeal, then the district court ruling would take effect right away and the federal government would stop writing those checks. Insurers would have a huge problem because they would still be legally obligated to provide those plans with the low out-of-pocket costs. They’d have two choices: Swallow the losses or drop such coverage midyear, which is something that most states would allow them to do under those circumstances.

We are already feeling repercussions. Frankly it’s an easier decision for a health plan not to play next year because of the lack of clarity.
Sean Mullin, senior director at Leavitt Partners

“We can’t absorb ― this year it will probably be $400 million ― we simply can’t absorb that kind of loss if they decide not to fund the CSRs for 2017,” Mario Molina, chief executive officer of Molina Insurance, told HuffPost last week. “So if they don’t fund the CSRs for this year, we would consider that a breach of contract. We would notify our members of a 30-day intention to cancel their contracts and then probably sue the federal government for the money.”

Insurers also face a dilemma over what to do for 2018. They’re setting premiums for next year right now. If they can’t count on that extra federal funding, they’ll have to raise premiums for their standard, silver-level plans by an average of 19 percent, according to a new analysis from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Keep in mind that would be 19 percent just to make up for the loss of the CSR subsidies. That hike wouldn’t cover the usual 4 to 7 percent in rising medical costs every year, nor would it account for other sources of uncertainty ― of which there are suddenly many, thanks to some confusing signals from the Trump administration.

Early on, the Trump administration proposed some regulatory tweaks to the Obamacare enrollment process, like making it harder for people to get coverage midyear because of a divorce, lost job or other special qualifying event. Insurers had long sought those changes, because they feared consumers were gaming the system, and took that proposal as a sign the administration wanted to keep the program functioning even as it sought repeal. The administration has also signaled to states that it would help them develop “reinsurance” programs, which subsidize insurers for their most expensive beneficiaries, in order to keep premiums from rising too high.

On the other hand, Trump’s very first act as president was to sign an executive order instructing federal agencies to find ways of reducing the regulatory burden of the Affordable Care Act. That sounded a lot like an instruction to ease up on the individual mandate, or at least the financial penalty designed to encourage healthy people to sign up for coverage. A few weeks later, the Internal Revenue Service announced that it was canceling an Obama-era plan that would have made it more difficult for people to evade the penalty.

In January, the Trump administration also canceled some advertising that the Obama administration had planned for the end of the open enrollment period. “We aren’t going to continue spending millions of taxpayers’ dollars promoting a failed government program,” a Trump official said. The number of signups over the final two weeks of enrollment ended up substantially lower than it had been the previous year.

Republicans have a history of trying to undermine the Affordable Care Act. Three years ago, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) led a conservative crusade that succeeded in killing a provision of the law that was supposed to insulate insurers from big losses. Now, with the threat of outright repeal still looming and Trump musing that Republicans would benefit politically from an Obamacare implosion, insurers are understandably nervous about how the program will be managed in 2018 and beyond ― and how consumers will react to the tumult.

“We and our members are a bit confused most days,” said Ceci Connolly, president of the Alliance of Community Health Plans.

Mullin thinks the uncertainty is already influencing insurer behavior. “I would say we are already feeling repercussions,” he said. “Frankly it’s an easier decision for a health plan not to play next year because of the lack of clarity.” 

What Insurers Need To Hear And When They Need To Hear It

It’s no secret what the insurers feel like they need. Priority number one is getting a commitment on the CSR subsidies, ideally more than vague reassurances from the administration.

What insurers really want is some kind of action from Congress ― an appropriation, whether short- or long-term, so that insurers know the money will be there for the next few years. Congress has to pass a spending bill to keep the government operating past the end of April. An appropriation for the cost-sharing reductions could be added to it.

Timing is critical, given that insurers’ planning for 2018 is already underway. Molina said his company needs a commitment by the end of month.

“The vehicle [for funding CSRs] doesn’t really matter,” Molina said. “What matters to us is that they continue to meet their contractual obligations and pay that money. … If President Trump and the Republicans in the House want to stabilize the marketplace, they need to continue funding them.”

After that, insurers are calling for more concrete assurances that the Trump administration is seeking to manage the Affordable Care Act successfully. That could mean clearer statements about enforcement of the individual mandate. It could also mean something much more basic, like filling some key Department of Health and Human Services posts ― those officials who, in theory, would be overseeing the marketplaces and working with insurers to make sure they stay in the program.

One such position is the chief executive officer of the federal marketplace that 37 states use. That job has been vacant ever since Kevin Counihan, the Obama administration’s appointee, left in January. 

“Running a marketplace for 37 states requires active management and leadership that can speak for the new administration,” said Jon Kingsdale, who ran the Massachusetts state exchange and is now a senior strategy adviser at the Wakely Consulting Group. “Temporary and junior holdovers from the last administration simply carry no heft with issuers, brokers and others that [the agency] must work with day in and day out.”

Of course, the president and HHS Secretary Tom Price might be happy to see the Affordable Care Act struggle, figuring they can blame any new complications or even a full-blown crisis on the Democrats ― and then use those circumstances as the pretext for repeal.

The Affordable Care Act’s rising popularity and the backlash against this year’s repeal effort suggest Republicans are wrong about that. In a new Kaiser Foundation poll, voters said by a 2-to-1 margin that they would hold Trump and the Republicans, not Obama and the Democrats, responsible for future problems with the law. It’s safe to assume more outspoken insurance executives, like Molina, would encourage that perception.

“If they stand back through inaction and allow the marketplace to collapse,” Molina said, “the trail leads right back to their door.”

He’s probably right. The last few weeks have made clear that Obamacare, for all of its problems, provides financial security and access to medical care that Americans value. If Republicans preside over the program’s unraveling, they are likely to face the voters’ wrath ― although not before causing a great deal of human misery.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.