Whether one was for or against Obamacare, we all knew it would be more expensive than the Administration or its supporters in Congress pretended. And now, a new U.S. Government study illustrates the depth of dishonesty and the blatant false advertising by politicians who claimed it would save money—their excuse for jamming this mess down our unwilling throats. From the story:
The Obama administration on Friday defended the new health insurance law after a report from its own Medicare services agency showed the provisions will increase the nation’s health care tab over the next 10 years instead of bringing costs down. The sobering assessment by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services concludes what Republicans had warned about during heated debate — that the double-counting of Medicare spending — as both savings and as a means to shore up the debt-ridden government fund for seniors’ health care — means the cost is unrealistic. The analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years, or $311 billion, up from the $222 billion previous estimated.
Here are some other specifics:
— About 14 million people would lose their employer coverage by 2019 as smaller employers terminate coverage and workers who currently have employer coverage become enrolled in Medicaid;
— The estimated reductions in the growth rate of health spending “may not be fully achievable” because “Medicare productivity adjustments could become unsustainable even within the next 10 years, and over time the reductions in the scope of employer-sponsored health insurance could also become an issue”;
— New fees and taxes on medical device makers will “generally be passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug and devices prices and higher premiums”;
— By 2011 and 2012 the initial $5 billion in federal funding for the creation of a national high-risk pool “would be exhausted, resulting in substantial premium increases to sustain the program; we anticipate that such increases would limit further participation”;
— It is reasonable to expect that a significant portion of the increased demand for Medicaid would be difficult to meet, particularly over the first few years”;
— Businesses would pay $87 billion in penalties between 2014-2019 for failure to offer insurance.
Sounds like a debacle to me: Rescind. Reform. Replace. Defund.
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…