By Alan
Caruba
Can anyone remember how awful the U.S.
healthcare free market system was that it needed to be replaced by the
Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as ObamaCare? Can’t remember? That’s because it was
ranked one of the best of the world and represented 17.9% of the nation’s
economy in 2014. That’s down from the
20% it represented in 2009 when ObamaCare was foisted on Americans.
One of
the best ways to follow the ObamaCare story is via Health Care News, a monthly
newspaper published by The Heartland Institute. The January issue begins with an
article by Sean Parnell, the managing editor, reporting that ObamaCare
enrollment is overstated by 400,000.
“The U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) once again lowered its estimate of the number of Americans
enrolled in health plans through government exchanges in 2014. The 6.7 million
enrollees who remain are far lower than the eight million touted in May at the
end of the last open-enrollment period.”
ObamaCare has been a lie from
the moment it was introduced for a vote, all 2,700 pages of it, to the present
day. Everything President Obama said about it was a lie. As to its present
enrollments, they keep dropping because some 900,000 who did sign up did not
make the first premium payment or later stopped paying.
Michael Cannon, director of health
policy studies as the Cato Institute, said the dropout rate is a troubling
trend. “It means that potentially hundreds of thousands of Exchange enrollees
are realizing they are better off waiting until they get sick to purchase
coverage. If enough people come to that conclusion, the exchanges
collapse.”
Elsewhere in this month’s edition,
there is an article, “States Struggle to Fund Exchanges”, that reports on the
difficulties that “states are experiencing difficulty in paying the ongoing
costs of the exchanges, especially small states. “’The feds are asking us to do
their jobs for them. We get saddled with the operating costs,’ said Edmund
Haislmaier, senior research fellow for health care policy studies at The
Heritage Foundation.” Some are imposing a two percent tax on the insurance
companies which, of course, gets passed along to the consumer. Even so, the
exchanges are not generating enough income to be maintained.
Why would anyone want ObamaCare
insurance when its rates keep rising dramatically? In Nebraska the rates have
nearly doubled and another article notes that “A 2014 study finds large numbers
of doctors are declining to participate in health plans offered through
exchanges under the Affordable Care Act, raising questions about whether people
buying insurance through exchanges will be able to access health care in a
timely manner.” One reason physicians gave was that they would have to hire
additional staff “just to manage the insurance verification process.”
Dr. Kris Held, a Texas eye surgeon,
said ObamaCare “fails to provide affordable health insurance and fails to
provide access to actual medical care to more people, but succeeds in
compounding existing health care costs and accessibility problems and creating
new ones.”
Health Care News reports what few other news outlets
have noted. “In Section 227 of the recently enacted ‘Cromnibus’ spending
measure, Congress added critical but little-noticed language that prohibits the
use of funds appropriated to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to
pay for insurance company bailouts.” William Todd, an Ohio attorney, further
noted that “Congress did not appropriate any separate funding for ‘bailouts.’”
Todd predicted that “some insurers are likely to raise premiums to avoid losses,
or they will simply stop offering policies on the exchanges
altogether.”
The picture of ObamaCare failure
emerging from these excerpts is a very true one. Its momentum, in fact, is
gaining.
In mid-December, the
Wall Street Journal opined that “With the Supreme Court due to rule on a
major ObamaCare legal challenge by next summer, thoughts in Washington are
turning to the practical and political response. If the Court does strike down
insurance subsidies, the question for Republicans running Congress is whether
they will try to fix the problems Democrats created, or merely allow ObamaCare
damage to grow.”
“King v. Burwell will be heard in
March with a ruling likely in June. “Of the 5.4 million consumers on federal
exchanges, some 87% drew subsidies in 2014, according to a Rand Corporation
analysis.”
The Wall Street Journal recommended
that “The immediate Republican goal should be to make insurance cheaper so
people need less of a subsidy to obtain insurance. This means deregulating the
exchanges, plank by plank. Devolve to states their traditional insurance
oversight role, and allow them to enter into cross-border compacts to increase
choice and competition. Allow insurers to sell any configuration of benefits to
anyone, anywhere, and the private market will gradually
heal.”
Or, to put it another way, eliminate
ObamaCare entirely and return to the healthcare insurance system that had served
Americans well until the White House decided that socialism was superior to
capitalism.
The problem with the Affordable Care Act is that the cost of the insurance sold under the Act is not affordable and ObamaCare is actually causing hospitals and clinics to close their doors, thus reducing healthcare services for those who need them.
The problem with the Affordable Care Act is that the cost of the insurance sold under the Act is not affordable and ObamaCare is actually causing hospitals and clinics to close their doors, thus reducing healthcare services for those who need them.
ObamaCare must go. If the Republicans
in Congress did nothing more than repeal ObamaCare, the outcome of the 2016
election would be a predictable win no matter who their candidate will be. If
not repeal, some separate actions must be taken such as eliminating the tax on
medical instruments.
If the Republican Congress fails to
take swift and deliberate action on ObamaCare between now and the 2016
elections, they will have defeated themselves.
© Alan Caruba, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment