an hour of running statistically lengthens life expectancy by seven hours, the researchers report.
The combined effect means that mortality rates of whites with no more than a high school degree, which were around 30 percent lower than mortality rates of blacks in 1999, grew to be 30 percent higher than blacks by 2015.
No matter what happens to the Republicans’ troubled health bill in Congress, Trumpcare is here to stay.The Trump administration has already begun to transform the health insurance market, wielding executive power to rewrite coverage rules, slash Obamacare’s marketing budget and signal an all-out assault on his predecessor’s health care law. And Republicans have high expectations the administration will take additional measures to unwind Obamacare, such as targeting its contraception coverage requirement at the center of two recent religious liberty cases at the Supreme Court.
Precisely because the CBO relied on research while the liberal critics of the CBO relied on managed care folklore, the CBO’s predictions of how the managed care fads in the ACA would perform were far more accurate than those of Obama, Baucus, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Peter Orszag, et al. The CBO’s December 2008 report estimated ACOs would cut Medicare’s costs by a tenth of a percent (see my discussion of this report in this THCB post ). That was remarkably accurate. Today (almost a decade later) we know CMS’s Pioneer ACOs have cut Medicare’s costs by a magnificent one-tenth to seven-tenths of a percent over their first four years (that’s not counting the costs the ACOs incurred) while the much larger MSSP ACO program has raised Medicare’s costs by about two-tenths of a percent (again, not counting the costs the ACOs incurred) over the same period.
For better or for worse, it is nearly impossible for the ACA’s insurance exchanges to implode to the extent that its detractors have long predicted. To understand why, it is important to understand how the subsidies and regulations in the ACA work. The ACA employs “price-linked subsidies.” That is, the premium subsidy consumers receive is based on the actual prices for insurance on the exchanges. In addition, the ACA’s regulatory framework caps the out-of-pocket expenses faced by consumers.
All in all, there’s reason to believe that the real decrement in coverage of the AHCA relative to the ACA is closer to 5 million, not 24 million. Furthermore, that 5 million decrement can be fixed with a few technical changes to the bill. I detail all of this in a new piece over at Forbes.
The basic issue is the movement in Obamacare from hypersensitivity to the immense geographic variation in the price of healthcare and health insurance in the United States to the complete insensitivity of the current Republican plan, the American Health Care Act (AHCA). Neither extreme is a good idea. Instead, the federal government, to the extent it is subsidizing health insurance, ought to be sharing the burden created by a failure or inability to control healthcare costs and health insurance premiums with the states and those who elected its representatives.