[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Cruz Knocks Trump as Non-Conservative, Trump Admits It

So now, you'll pay the bank to allow them to keep your money

DARPA Plans to Launch 132-Foot Unmanned Warship in April

Surprise: Trump goes positive, yanks ad attacking Cruz in South Carolina

Halt called in Syria

Worker who pulled gun to stop stabbing attack at GM Tech Center says he was fired

Harry Reid on Dem Superdelgate System: Wrong to Rely on High White Populations of Iowa, New Hampshire

Car theft ends in beating of teen suspect; photos of boy spark debate

Notes After New Hampshire

New Jersey Man Slays Child–The Christie/Rubio Debate Takedown

America Trumped

The libertarian case for Kasich

The Disturbing Evolution of SWAT Teams in American Cinema

NYPD Cop Who Retired With Knee Injury, $66G Pension Regularly Runs Triathlons

EPA Rule To Ban Car Modification

Warning: The dirty tricks are about to start [in South Carolina]

'7,000 retweets and I'll smash this b****'s computer': Outrage at student who publicly threatened classmate over Trump sticker

Reagan’s populist lessons for tea-partyers

Is Cruz the frontrunner now?

Group Therapy Session at the Institute for the Politically Insane

Trump Baja venture leaves buyers high and dry

Not a Dime’s Worth of Difference

Cliven Bundy arrested (Portland Airport - PDX) by FBI, jailed in Multnomah County

Oregon Standoff Heats Up

80,000 Ineligible ACA Enrollees Cost Minnesota Millions [also AR/NE/NY/OH/IL/PA/MA fraud]

and now to more important things

New Trump ad on Ted Cruz "What kind of man" released in South Carolina

Carly Fiorina: I suspend my candidacy today

Houston Couple Forced Nanny Into ‘Slavery’

TSA: Thousands Of Illegal Aviation Workers (73 Of Them “Terrorism-Related”) Make For A “Total Security Abyss”

Bloomberg vs. Trump? “Run, Mike, Run!”

Montana Judge Refuses To Convict Anyone of Marijuana Possession

Creepy Business – Ted Cruz Father: My Son “Annointed” To “Take Control of Society”..

‘Really Honorable’: Why Jeb Bush Is Still Running - family sucide mission against Trump

New “Traffic Violations Agency” Brings Buffalo Extortion Racket To All Time High

Hillary Clinton gets stomped in NH yet still gets as many of the State's delegates

It’s on: New Cruz ad ridicules Trump as fake Republican

Maine required healthy, childless food stamp recipients to work, and...

Supreme Court Puts Hold on Obama’s Green Power Plan

It’s A Revolution: Donald Trump More Than Doubles the Competition in New Hampshire

Ted Nugent Criticized From All Sides For Anti-Semitic Facebook Post

Prosecutor Sent Innocent Man to Death Row. Now, Payback

Why is Milwaukee so bad for black people?

Federal Court Says North Carolina’s Racially Motivated Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

BREAKING NEWS: Trump claims victory in New Hampshire with a third of the vote in early counting

NH: Cruz, Kasich, Trump tied at 24.3% with 1% reporting

The Great Prentender

EXCLUSIVE– Donald J. Trump First Candidate to Reply to the ‘Sessions Test’

Supermom puts kids to bed

Ted Cruz's National Security Advisor Has Zero National Security Experience


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles

Title: Even with a High Court win, Obamacare won't work
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012 ... 22/health-care-reform-hurdles/
Published: May 22, 2012
Author: By Shawn Tully
Post Date: 2012-05-24 23:14:48 by We The People
Keywords: None
Views: 966
Comments: 3

A new study shows that the basic requirements of President Obama's health care plan have been tried, and failed, in many states in the past two decades.

FORTUNE -- The Obama administration maintains that its Affordable Care Act is a complex construct that's endangered if the Supreme Court finds its central feature -- the requirement that all Americans buy health insurance -- unconstitutional. It's certainly true that eliminating the "individual mandate" will immediately expose the plan as unworkable. It can only succeed by creating a broad, universal insurance pool that collects big premiums from the young and healthy. If the young and healthy aren't required to sign on, they won't. Hence, the pools won't be remotely large enough to pay for the older, sicker folks who get the best deal, and are bound to flock to the state exchanges.

In reality, the reform plan's success doesn't depend on the Supreme Court's decision at all. Its faulty design virtually guarantees that all the things the administration warns will happen if it loses will happen anyway. Even if it stands, the legislation will spawn insurance plans crowded with high-cost folks, driving premiums higher, hobbling competition as carriers abandon the exchanges, and leaving tens of millions of Americans uninsured.

Here's the reason the Affordable Care Act's future is predictable: Its basic requirements have been tried, and failed, in many states in the past two decades. A new study, prepared by Milliman, Inc. for AHIP, the group representing America's healthcare insurers, examines the experience of eight states, including Kentucky, Maine and Washington, that adopted the two basic pillars of the Obama plan in the 1990s.

MORE: If Obamacare survives, employers may do it in

Those two measures are Guaranteed Issue, and Community Rating. The former requires that insurance companies accept all patients regardless of their medical condition, at any time they want to sign up. Community Rating dictates that insurers cannot charge different premiums based on health status, and face limits on how much they can vary premiums according to a person's age.

All eight states encountered similar problems. People who'd been previously uninsured bought coverage as soon as they suffered a heart attack or contracted diabetes. Pregnant women entered the plans, then dropped out after giving birth. Premiums for young, healthy people soared. Typically, a 60-year old's medical care runs about six times that of someone in their twenties. But in New York, insurers must charge exactly the same premiums for both. For many years, Maine limited the difference to just 20%.

So the young Americans needed to make the plans work mostly dropped out. Instead of shrinking the ranks of the uninsured -- the goal touted by the states -- their numbers often increased, rising 30% in Washington from 1993 to 2000. Premiums jumped as the insurance pools became dominated by older, sicker patients. From 1996 to 2002, for example, premiums in the individual market rose 44% in Maine. Carriers fled. By 2000, 31 out of 39 counties in Washington didn't have a single insurer offering coverage to people not covered by their employer or a federal plan.

By the early 2000s, most states either abandoned or radically changed the two provisions that caused the damage. Kentucky and New Hampshire repealed both guaranteed issue and community rating. Washington substantially loosened its provisions. New Jersey and Maine both expanded the range insurers could charge for patients of different ages, with Maine going from a limit of 20% to a band that expands to five-to-one by 2015. South Dakota and Iowa repealed guaranteed issue in 2004 and 2003 respectively.

MORE: Where CEO political dollars go

The Affordable Care Act is embracing the provisions that many states tried, and then rushed to escape. It imposes guaranteed issue, so that patients with any pre-existing condition must be granted coverage any time they apply. It also limits differences in premiums according to age to a three-to-one range. That would force insurers to raise premiums for 20-year olds by at least 50%, and lower them for 60-year olds to far below their actual costs, forcing the young and healthy to subsidize older, sicker Americans.

That goal may sound laudable, but it won't work. The Affordable Care Act professes to ensure that all Americans buy insurance, but undermines its own goals by setting penalties so low that the young and healthy, and many middle-aged and healthy, will not buy coverage. The penalties start at 2014 at either $95 a year, or 1% of income, whichever is higher. They reach a maximum of 2.5% of income in 2016. Those small penalties may be irrelevant anyway. The measure also provides that anyone who can't find a policy priced at 8.5% of their income or less is exempted from buying insurance.

The plan's champions argue that it will work where the state plans didn't because of the big subsidies it provides. But that's not what the math shows. Take a 30-year old, single person earning $50,000. He or she would get no subsidy under the Obama plan. A policy would cost our candidate, say, $10,000 a year, far more than that person is paying now--again, courtesy of community rating. The penalty for foregoing coverage is just $1250 a year in 2016.

MORE: We're having the wrong debate about rising health care costs

But remember, if the policy costs over 8.5% of income, you can drop your insurance and pay no penalty, and the $10,000 more than qualifies. So our healthy 30-year old is making a rational economic choice by going uninsured. In fact, he or she is really "insured" after all since a non-payer can sign up for coverage, no questions asked, any time they get sick.

It may be true that the Obama plan would work if it pulled all Americans into the insurance pools, even though that would force the young to pay more than their costs. But it doesn't come close. The Supreme Court drama is a distraction from the real issue: A "reform" plan that the experience of the states, and its own jerry-rigged system of penalties and subsidies, guarantee will fail. (1 image)

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: We The People (#0)

Good analysis, WTP.

buckeroo  posted on  2012-05-24   23:24:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: buckeroo (#1)

Agreed.

This quote really stuck with me:

It can only succeed by creating a broad, universal insurance pool that collects big premiums from the young and healthy.

That sounds like Social Security. We're *forced* to pay in. If I had the option, I would drop out, because I know I'll never collect the *purchasing value* back. A lot of others, I believe, would do the same, and force the Ponzi scheme to finally collapse.

Rational buyers, dontcha' know... ;)

LoonyMing: I brandish my ignorance like a crucifix at vampires.
Translation: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

'It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?' —Stephen Fry

Capitalist Eric  posted on  2012-05-25   0:12:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: We The People (#0)

.

I mean it's NOT like the entire history of humanity has proven over and over that COLLECTIVISM IS DEATH.

It's NOT like so called libTURDS/progressives have ever TRIED any of this nonsense before in any human population.

It's NOT like this entire socialist DELUSION of a free lunch has ever been proven in action to be an ACTUAL REAL FAILURE.

I mean ROME and the CCCP NEVER existed ?

Oh wait, actually yeah, YEAH they sure F'ing did.

gooberment FAIL = FAIL

Duh.

Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.

Mad Dog  posted on  2012-05-25   2:18:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com