December 5, 2013
The 2017 Project study (online at 2017project.org) examines premiums and subsidies for plans sold through Obama-care exchanges in the 50 largest counties in the United States (excluding Massachusetts, which Obama-care allows to play by different rules, and Hawaii and Maryland, where the state-based exchanges weren’t working and thus did not allow for data-collection). Those 50 counties comprise more than 29 percent of the U.S. population. The study compares the costs and subsidies under Obamacare for various ages and incomes, in 5-year and $5,000 increments, starting with a 21-year-old making $20,000.
The findings are striking. Consider a 26-year-old (newly ineligible for Mom and Dad’s coverage) making $30,000 a year. Across these 50 counties, the average cost of the cheapest subsidized plan—the cheapest “bronze” plan—available to someone of that age from the Obama-care exchanges would be $2,134 a year. That’s roughly three times the cost of the cheapest plan this person could have bought pre-Obamacare, according to figures from the Government Accountability Office. Meanwhile, this 26-year-old’s taxpayer-funded subsidy, on average, would be $482, or just 23 percent of the premium. By contrast, a 61-year-old making that same $30,000 would, on average, get a subsidy of $4,018, covering 82 percent of the $4,885 premium for someone of that age.
via Wise Beyond Their Years | The Weekly Standard.
November 24, 2013
These days the word is particularly toxic at the White House, where it has been hidden away to make the Affordable Care Act more palatable to the public and less a target for Republicans, who have long accused Democrats of seeking “socialized medicine.” But the redistribution of wealth has always been a central feature of the law and lies at the heart of the insurance market disruptions driving political attacks this fall….
“If you like your current insurance, you will keep your current insurance,” Mr. Obama said the day he signed the legislation in March 2010, a promise he made repeatedly as the Oct. 1 opening day of the online health insurance marketplaces approached.
Now some of that redistribution has come clearly into view. The law, for example, banned rate discrimination against women, which insurance companies called “gender rating” to account for their higher health costs. But that raised the relative burden borne by men. The law also limited how much more insurers can charge older Americans, who use more health care over all. But that raised the relative burden on younger people.
via Don’t Dare Call the Health Law ‘Redistribution’ – NYTimes.com.
October 30, 2013
During President Obama’s Boston visit to talk about the ACA and the Massachusetts experiment, it is important to remember some context. Here are a few pictures that help to illustrate the successes and failures of Mass reform.
However, caution should be used when expecting the same results under the two laws, since the laws are different, and Massachusetts is not the same as Arizona, or Texas, or Alabama, or Ohio, or etc…. For example, read five reasons why employer behavior will not be the same under the ACA as it was under RomneyCare, Part 1 and Part 2. But before we begin, let’s pause to recognize that the ACA will impact Massachusetts in some significant ways.
via In Pictures: 15 Facts Pres. Obama Needs To Know About Mass.’s Healthcare Reform | Pioneer Institute.
October 28, 2013
Monday, November 04, 2013 | 8:30 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
AEI, Twelfth Floor
1150 Seventeenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
About This Event
This is the first event in an AEI breakfast series discussing the implications of developments in Obamacare implementation.
One month into the Affordable Care Act’s rollout, where do we stand? From the website malfunctions to the ongoing federal court cases to the delay in the individual penalty, many aspects of the law have yet to be settled.
How are these developments affecting Obamacare’s long-term viability, and what do they mean for Americans now attempting to access insurance through the exchanges? What implications do they have for stakeholders — such as insurance companies, businesses, and providers — who are affected by the law? And what problems have yet to appear?
Join AEI scholars for the first event in a discussion series of the promises, problems, and implications of the Affordable Care Act rollout.
If you are unable to attend, we welcome you to watch the event live on this page. Full video will be posted within 24 hours.
via Obamacare, month one: Monitoring the vital signs – Health – AEI.
October 23, 2013
But eventually, software can be fixed. Obamacare’s epic policy flaws can’t.
The problems increasingly are going to be up close and personal, as people see for themselves the impact it has on their lives and pocketbooks. The top ten debacles to come:
via Top Ten Obamacare Disasters to Come | National Review Online.
October 16, 2013
Unfortunately, the Affordable Care Act seems to be aimed solely at the middle group – the 29% of the uninsured who are sick and worried. This is the stereotype rolled out by politicians who want to show off how much they care.
But their compassion seems to extend only to less than a third of the 16% of the population currently without insurance coverage – i.e. about five percent of the American population. So 95% of the country is being put through the wringer to benefit the 5% this law was written for.
via Obamacare’s Mandatory Health Insurance: Wrong Diagnosis, Wrong Remedy.
September 4, 2013
The worst problem in the Affordable Care Act, Clinton said, is a provision related to healthcare coverage for families.
In some cases, one family member might be able to affordably insure himself or herself through an employer, but not the rest of the family. And the rest of the family could not receive tax subsidies to buy coverage through the healthcare law’s exchanges.
“It’s obviously not fair, and it’s bad policy,” Clinton said.
He said he believes the provision was a drafting error.
via Bill Clinton says GOP has duty to help fix ObamaCare ‘glitches’ – The Hill’s Healthwatch.
August 16, 2013
Last week, the White House Office of Personnel Management said the government would keep paying its share of premiums for lawmakers and affected staffers who must leave the federal employee health care system by Jan. 1. That eased a major anxiety for several thousand staffers accustomed to getting the same benefits as other federal employees.
But the proposed regulation did not explicitly address abortion coverage. Under the health care law, insurance plans in the new markets may cover abortion unless a state passes a law prohibiting them from doing so. Plans offering coverage for abortion, however, may not use federal funds to pay for it and must collect a separate premium from enrollees. Federal tax credits to help the uninsured afford coverage must also be kept apart.
Abortion opponents say the proposal from the personnel office would circumvent a longstanding law that bars the use of taxpayer funds for “administrative expenses in connection with any health plan under the federal employees health benefits program which provides any benefits or coverage for abortions.” Unlike many private corporate plans, federal employee plans only cover abortions in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.
via Abortion coverage for Congress under health law? – Yahoo! News.
August 13, 2013
If a regular citizen makes $100,000 a year working for a private company and loses his insurance because of Obamacare, he must pay out of his pocket for the insurance he will be forced to purchase from the exchanges.
However, if you are a sainted congressional staffer earning $100,000 a year and enter the exchanges, guess who picks up the tab for your new insurance plan? That’s right, your employer, the federal government, the lowly taxpayer.
In other words, under Obamacare, the only people forced into the exchanges whose insurance will still be paid for by their employer will be members of Congress and their staff.
via HURT: Obamacare exemption — none dare call it treason – Washington Times.
July 10, 2013
Some smokers trying to get coverage next year under President Barack Obama’s health-care law may get a break from tobacco-use penalties that could have made their premiums unaffordable.
The Obama administration—in yet another health care overhaul delay—has quietly notified insurers that a computer system glitch will limit penalties that the law says the companies may charge smokers. A fix will take at least a year to put in place.
via A Break for Smokers? Glitch May Limit Penalties.