Don’t Believe The Hype About Massive Obamacare Premium Hikes

[Cigar]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/shutterstock_obamacare-money-638x425.jpg

The Obama administration successfully signed up more than 8 million people in coverage through the Affordable Care Act’s health care exchanges during the first open enrollment period, but the law’s next big test will come later this summer, when insurers unveil health care premiums for the next coverage year. Will customers experience double digit increases? Could premium hikes push younger and healthier enrollees out of coverage all together, or will the market stabilize, as millions more obtain health care coverage?


Those questions can’t be answered until insurers unveil their premiums (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/report/2014/05/19/90053/putting-2015-health-care-premium-rates-into-context/) later this year and will vary across the country, but on Monday, a new analysis (http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2014/rwjf413410) from The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute put some of the loudest hysteria to rest, finding that that “premium increases will be moderate (in line with underlying cost growth) rather than growing by double-digits.”


The brief’s author, health economist John Holahan, concedes that the rate of increase will depend on the state of the local health care market. Customers living in areas with few insurance options, for instance, may experience higher premium growth, while those residing in competitive areas could see smaller increases. Yet Holahan argues that on average, the market forces that created lower-than-expected premiums in 2014 (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/04/14/3426408/cbo-obamacare-cheaper/), “should be even stronger in 2015 with increased enrollment and a more stable risk pool.” Here are four reasons why:



1. “The underlying rate of growth in health care costs remained slow through 2012.” Lower than expected health care spending means that premiums — which traditionally keep up with underlining health care spending — could be lower. Even though preliminary evidence suggests that spending increased in the first quarter of 2014 from all-time-lows, health care prices (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/erp_2014_chapter_4.pdf) are still continuing to grow at low rates.


2. “Enrollment in Marketplace plans should be substantially higher in 2015 than 2014.” The Congressional Budget Office anticipates that 7 million people will sign up for health care coverage in 2015 and experts predict that with all of the early website problems fixed, the 2015 open enrollment process will prove smoother. Health insurers also reported a rush of younger enrollees in the final days of the first open enrollment period and expect that since sicker enrollees signed up in the early months of open enrollment, healthier than average beneficiaries will join in 2015.


3. “Cost sharing in the silver tier, the plans most often selected, are high enough to dampen utilization.” Economists have long found that higher cost sharing and narrower networks of doctors and hospitals could keep premiums lower and decrease unnecessary health care spending.


4. “Increasing size and attractiveness of the nongroup markets could intensify the amount of competition from insurers.” The marketplaces appear to be attracting greater insurer participation for 2015. “In Washington state, four insurers plan to sell for the first time on the exchange next year, including UnitedHealth. In Virginia, a local health plan owned by a hospital and physicians in Lynchburg has proposed to join Aetna Inc., Kaiser Permanente and WellPoint Inc. in 2015. And in Indiana, the health exchange’s offerings may double to eight companies,” Bloomberg reported (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-16/insurers-joining-more-obamacare-exchanges-for-next-year.html).


http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/05/19/3439186/why-obamacare-premium-increases-will-be-lower-than-you-expected/

[Matty]

How did they know about it? They read it in the newspaper.

[hanger4]

So, Obama lied when he told you you'd save $2500 on your premiums !! Who'd a thunk.

[lynn]

Insurance companies will raise rates as they have always done. The only difference this time is the government promises a bailout if they fall short. If they cannot submit the evidence to award them a bailout, they will instead raise rates.

[hanger4]

Insurance companies will raise rates as they have always done. The only difference this time is the government promises a bailout if they fall short. If they cannot submit the evidence to award them a bailout, they will instead raise rates.I see you too are OK with all of Obama's lies concerning ACA.

[Paperback Writer]

I find it laughable, as do my countrymen, the American liberal glee with the ACA. They act as though they've implemented a national health insurance when the reality is that they've just forced millions of people to buy insurance whether their budget can sustain it or not.

Truly a bizarre accolade they bestow upon themselves and when you query them, their responce at being caught red-handed in the cookie jar of corporatism is that it is "the first step".

What utter rubbish!

They have in one fell swoop made it next to impossible to create a national health programme by distributing health records across various data pools using various billing codes. It will take a decade to sort but this group of blathering idiots feel they've won some great victory.

[Captain Obvious]

Hype - lol, it's already happening.

[Refugee]

I find it laughable, as do my countrymen, the American liberal glee with the ACA. They act as though they've implemented a national health insurance when the reality is that they've just forced millions of people to buy insurance whether their budget can sustain it or not.

Truly a bizarre accolade they bestow upon themselves and when you query them, their responce at being caught red-handed in the cookie jar of corporatism is that it is "the first step".

What utter rubbish!

They have in one fell swoop made it next to impossible to create a national health programme by distributing health records across various data pools using various billing codes. It will take a decade to sort but this group of blathering idiots feel they've won some great victory.

But doesn't it sound nice?

Wait till the subsidies end and the true price kicks in. You'll see some howling here in a few years time. :laugh:

[Mainecoons]

It won't take years for the howling to start. And our group of liberal clowns will deny to the bitter end.

Count on both.

[nic34]

I find it laughable, as do my countrymen, the American liberal glee with the ACA.

Wrong. There is no liberal "glee" silly boy.

We're simply glad of finally regulating the bastard insurance industry...

I'll save my glee for when the rest of the country adopts a Vermont-style single payer....

[Paperback Writer]

But doesn't it sound nice?

Wait till the subsidies end and the true price kicks in. You'll see some howling here in a few years time. :laugh:

They're very thick, American liberals. I'd rather have low health prices, but in the absence of that I prefer our system to theirs if I'm to be "middle class".

[Bob]

Insurance companies will raise rates as they have always done. The only difference this time is the government promises a bailout if they fall short. If they cannot submit the evidence to award them a bailout, they will instead raise rates.

My doctor told me Friday the 16th that he is getting more patients that before could not get insurance.

My doctor may be an Obama supporter because he says Obama care is a very clumsy way to deal with health care. My Cardiologist must have voted for Romney since his remarks were more scathing.

Those are who i expected to sign up. That to me explains the 2 million new people now making the insurance agents rich. The idea all along was to force us to pay insurance companies for the coverage. The real hikes in prices happen next year.

Obama lost 6 or more million due to cancelled policies and recovered those. But those are not new, they are merely scrambling for insurance when your company had cancelled you or the company dropped paying for insurance.

It is a joke that 8 million all new people covered themselves.

[Paperback Writer]

Wrong. There is no liberal "glee" silly boy.

We're simply glad of finally regulating the bastard insurance industry...

I'll save my glee for when the rest of the country adopts a Vermont-style single payer....

It was regulated previously. You just didn't like the regulations.

You'll not see single payer for a decade now that you've completed this farce on the population. Each state, each insurance programme, each hospital system in the United States has its own formula for billing providers and the government so that it may maintain internal accounting.

That means to consolidate this data you have to verify each code, find its correlating codes, and then convert before you can even begin to reconcile names, SSNs, etcetera.

In short, and not to be rude, you haven't a clue a to what level of effort that would take to have your "Vermont style" of single payer. We've always been doing this the same way and it still has its issues. What's more we don't even have your population size or illegal problem.

Do you even realise the monstrosity of reconciling all the Jose Rodriguez' in your future system? No, you don't.

That's why you're happy that the ACA exists at all. You just wasted the last four years and set back the progress of single payer for a dozen more.

[Bob]

I find it laughable, as do my countrymen, the American liberal glee with the ACA. They act as though they've implemented a national health insurance when the reality is that they've just forced millions of people to buy insurance whether their budget can sustain it or not.

Truly a bizarre accolade they bestow upon themselves and when you query them, their responce at being caught red-handed in the cookie jar of corporatism is that it is "the first step".

What utter rubbish!

They have in one fell swoop made it next to impossible to create a national health programme by distributing health records across various data pools using various billing codes. It will take a decade to sort but this group of blathering idiots feel they've won some great victory.

Democrats tossed more profits to insurance companies.

Hope they are proud.

[Bob]

Wrong. There is no liberal "glee" silly boy.

We're simply glad of finally regulating the bastard insurance industry...

I'll save my glee for when the rest of the country adopts a Vermont-style single payer....

3000 pages to tell them to accept the ill the same as the well?

All you guys did was make the insurance industry rich.

3000 pages it took?

Give me a break.

[Paperback Writer]

Democrats tossed more profits to insurance companies.

Hope they are proud.


Rewarding the master that beat them. Brilliant approach. Why they purport to be anti-Big Corporation and support these measures is beyond any sane comprehension.

[Bob]

It was regulated previously. You just didn't like the regulations.

You'll not see single payer for a decade now that you've completed this farce on the population. Each state, each insurance programme, each hospital system in the United States has its own formula for billing providers and the government so that it may maintain internal accounting.

That means to consolidate this data you have to verify each code, find its correlating codes, and then convert before you can even begin to reconcile names, SSNs, etcetera.

In short, and not to be rude, you haven't a clue a to what level of effort that would take to have your "Vermont style" of single payer. We've always been doing this the same way and it still has its issues. What's more we don't even have your population size or illegal problem.

Do you even realise the monstrosity of reconciling all the Jose Rodriguez' in your future system? No, you don't.

That's why you're happy that the ACA exists at all. You just wasted the last four years and set back the progress of single payer for a dozen more.

The did not drive down the cost of health care. They moved the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

[Bob]

http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Bob http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=623309#post623309)
Democrats tossed more profits to insurance companies.

Hope they are proud.


Rewarding the master that beat them. Brilliant approach. Why they purport to be anti-Big Corporation and support these measures is beyond any sane comprehension.

Democrats are not smart people. It is ironic that the more Obama explains, the more people like me notice he helps the rich the most. Look at the rich cats playing with the stock market.

[Bob]

They're very thick, American liberals. I'd rather have low health prices, but in the absence of that I prefer our system to theirs if I'm to be "middle class".

The formula for low costs is either the Government hires and fires doctors and supplies hospitals, to get rid of insurance companies or plain brutal price control.

Obama made insurance companies super happy. My doctor says the plan is clumsy at best.

[nic34]

It was regulated previously. You just didn't like the regulations.

You'll not see single payer for a decade now that you've completed this farce on the population. Each state, each insurance programme, each hospital system in the United States has its own formula for billing providers and the government so that it may maintain internal accounting.

That means to consolidate this data you have to verify each code, find its correlating codes, and then convert before you can even begin to reconcile names, SSNs, etcetera.

In short, and not to be rude, you haven't a clue a to what level of effort that would take to have your "Vermont style" of single payer. We've always been doing this the same way and it still has its issues. What's more we don't even have your population size or illegal problem.

Do you even realise the monstrosity of reconciling all the Jose Rodriguez' in your future system? No, you don't.

That's why you're happy that the ACA exists at all. You just wasted the last four years and set back the progress of single payer for a dozen more.

Wrong again. There WAS no regulation....not that protected consumers.

The ACA is a step toward SP and it will come about state by state as it did in the provinces of Canada.

Canadians strongly support the health system's public rather than for-profit private basis, and a 2009 poll by Nanos Research found 86.2% of Canadians surveyed supported or strongly supported "public solutions to make our public health care stronger."[9] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-9)[10] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-10) A Strategic Counsel survey found 91% of Canadians prefer their healthcare system instead of a U.S. style system.[11] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-http-11)[12] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-blogs.chicagotribune.com-12) Plus 70% of Canadians rated their system as working either "well" or "very well".[13] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-Gallup.com-13)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada


People won't go back to being kicked off for getting sick, or the preexisting crap... or paying extra for simple preventative care...

Remember, the ACA was passed in a very conservative climate here.... it won't always be that way....

[Bob]

Wrong again. There WAS no regulation....not that protected consumers.

The ACA is a step toward SP and it will come about state by state as it did in the provinces of Canada.

Canadians strongly support the health system's public rather than for-profit private basis, and a 2009 poll by Nanos Research found 86.2% of Canadians surveyed supported or strongly supported "public solutions to make our public health care stronger."[9] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-9)[10] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-10) A Strategic Counsel survey found 91% of Canadians prefer their healthcare system instead of a U.S. style system.[11] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-http-11)[12] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-blogs.chicagotribune.com-12) Plus 70% of Canadians rated their system as working either "well" or "very well".[13] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-Gallup.com-13)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada


People won't go back to being kicked off for getting sick, or the preexisting crap... or paying extra for simple preventative care...

Remember, the ACA was passed in a very conservative climate here.... it won't always be that way....

Insurance has long been heavily regulated.

They stand to gain massive profits due to the ACA

[Bob]

Insurance has long been heavily regulated.

They stand to gain massive profits due to the ACA

Another thing, people seen to pay no attention to premium costs along with the super high deductables. While high deductables can work, with a personal health savings account backing it up, to find the deductable for too many it claims to help will be an undoing.

My personal doctor has more business. But he says these new patients are from the ill the insurance industry used to reject. For those types, it helped them a lot.

I would estimate such a law to help those types might consume all of 5-6 pages and not 3000 pages.

[Matty]

Wrong. There is no liberal "glee" silly boy.

We're simply glad of finally regulating the bastard insurance industry...

I'll save my glee for when the rest of the country adopts a Vermont-style single payer....


I love your idea of regulating. Force Americans to buy. Force Americans to buy for those who cannot buy, Force Americans to subsidize those who "say" they can only partially buy, subsidize the insurance companies if their profits don't meet expectations, yep, that's some effen grand regulations. Who in the hell do you think you're kidding? "The VA debacle is the harbinger of obamacare and what happens when you put layers of bureaucracy between you and your health care." Dr. Ben Carson. Yes, you liberals better savor your "glee" for this will be held against you. ​not a single solitary Republican voted for obamacare. democrats own it lock stock and barrel.

[patrickt]

I don't believe the hype. I believe the guy who said, "If you like your health insurance, you'll keep your health insurance."

[Mainecoons]

Regulating the health care insurers includes guaranteeing their profits.

Nic, you seem to get more deluded and brainwashed by the day. Don't you know who wrote ObamaCare?

Those "bastard" insurance companies, that is who.

Amazing. You really are amazing.

[lynn]

I see you too are OK with all of Obama's lies concerning ACA.


That statement couldn't be farther from the truth. The ACA is the biggest extortion scam on the public in the history of the U.S.

[lynn]

Insurance companies are not regulated enough to protect the consumer and that is the biggest problem, especially now that we are mandated to buy it from them.

Insurance companies are loyal to their stockholders, not their customers who buy coverage from them. If our government really cared about people actually getting affordable healthcare they would put regulations in place on lowering deductibles that an average family could afford if they got sick.

The ACA is mandating we have coverage but made it harder for us to actually afford health services. It rewards people for staying healthy which that in itself is difficult with all of the pollutants we are exposed to, lack of nutritional value from our food products, etc. God forbid you actually get sick because you have a large deductible to meet before the insurance will begin paying their percentage of the claims.

[Professor Peabody]

So, Obama lied when he told you you'd save $2500 on your premiums !! Who'd a thunk.

About six in ten American voters think Barack Obama lies to the country on important matters some or most of the time, according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.


(http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/fox-news-poll-many-voters-say-obama-lies-to-country-on-important-matters/?vgnextrefresh=1)

[Mainecoons]

When I see this in a Gallup poll, it will have more credibility for me.

That day is coming IMO.

[Cigar]

You Lost ... Get Over It :laugh:

[patrickt]

You Lost ... Get Over It :laugh:

When Cigar has nothing to say, this is what he posts. America lost and he's happy about it.

[lynn]

Thanks to Obamacare, many states now have a higher number on Medicaid then there are on medicare. What is worst is some of these states the total number on government insurance is higher then the number employed in that state. How long do you think that will be sustainable?

[Perianne]

Will customers experience double digit increases? Could premium hikes push younger and healthier enrollees out of coverage all together, or will the market stabilize, as millions more obtain health care coverage?


Those questions can’t be answered until insurers unveil their premiums (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/healthcare/report/2014/05/19/90053/putting-2015-health-care-premium-rates-into-context/) later this year and will vary across the country, but on Monday, a new analysis (http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2014/rwjf413410) from The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute put some of the loudest hysteria to rest, finding that that “premium increases will be moderate (in line with underlying cost growth) rather than growing by double-digits.”


From the Los Angeles Times:


The Obama administration has quietly adjusted key provisions of its signature healthcare law to potentially make billions of additional taxpayer dollars available to the insurance industry if companies providing coverage through the Affordable Care Act lose money.

The move was buried in hundreds of pages of new regulations issued late last week. It comes as part of an intensive administration effort to hold down premium increases for next year, a top priority for the White House as the rates will be announced ahead of this fall's congressional elections.


http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-insurance-bailout-20140521-story.html#page=1


The LA Times reports that late last week hundreds of pages of new regulations were added to Obamacare. Their reporters went through it and found a few key paragraphs. The change in regulations essentially provides insurers with another backup: If they keep rate increases modest over the next couple of years but lose money, the administration will tap federal funds as needed to cover shortfalls. This could be hundreds of billions of dollars!


This is a classic bait and switch. The middle class will feel like they're getting a break on insurance premiums. As long as they don't look at the governments check book, they'll believe the Affordable Health Care Law is working. It only unravels if they realize they are paying double for their insurance, because the increase is being charged to their account in the form of more debt.


http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/05/23/obama-administration-just-got-caught-massive-lie


So, not only was Obamacare unworkable as passed, the administration simply writes new laws - not the CONGRESS - to make it appear that the law is not only workable, but also affordable.

The LA Times piece is an excellent read.... by a Democrat newspaper.

[Kalkin]

So, Obama lied when he told you you'd save $2500 on your premiums !! Who'd a thunk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsLuhqQCDJ4

[Kalkin]

I'll save my glee for when the rest of the country adopts a Vermont-style single payer....
http://watchdog.org/132835/end-single-payer/

Now, even Democrats say that plan, called Green Mountain Care, isn’t ready for its proposed 2017 rollout, and Rep. Jim Condon told Vermont Watchdog it’s time for Gov. Peter Shumlin to shelve the ambitious plan immediately.
“The deadlines for proposing financing have been missed two years in a row now, so to me that’s very disappointing. It’s becoming clearer and clearer that there is no financing plan,” Condon told Vermont Watchdog.

[Bob]

Why don't they get it. Obama did it FOR insurance companies.

My doctor told me that he has more patients who prior had no insurance due to illness.

But how many sentences does it take to say this

Insurance companies will not disallow any person for pre-conditions.

Hell, spice it up for a lawyer and it won't fill a page.

[Kalkin]

You Lost ... Get Over It :laugh:
The game is still on, and you're losing.
You're like a fighter that used up all his energy in the first couple rounds. Now you're gassed and getting your ass handed to you. A knockout is looming.

[Perianne]

So, not only was Obamacare unworkable as passed, the administration simply writes new laws - not the CONGRESS - to make it appear that the law is not only workable, but also affordable.

Peter1469, Alyosha

You guys are attorneys. How can they just make up new regulations? Doesn't it have to be passed by Congress?

[lynn]

Insurance companies should be lowering premium rates if they weren't so greedy. More people paying into the pool is suppose to lower rates not increase them. I don't care if now they have to cover people with pre-existing conditions, they still protected themselves by making everyone pay a high deductible if they get sick. They are not losing money there.

[Kalkin]

Insurance companies should be lowering premium rates if they weren't so greedy. More people paying into the pool is suppose to lower rates not increase them. I don't care if now they have to cover people with pre-existing conditions, they still protected themselves by making everyone pay a high deductible if they get sick. They are not losing money there.
Instead of telling insurance companies what we think they should do, we should, as free people, be able to decline doing business with them. I don't care how overpriced a Lamborghini is as long as I'm not being forced to purchase one.

[Peter1469]

@Peter1469 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=10), @Alyosha (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=863)

You guys are attorneys. How can they just make up new regulations? Doesn't it have to be passed by Congress?


If Congress rolls over and does not assert its authority.....

[Perianne]

If Congress rolls over and does not assert its authority.....

Isn't there anyone who has the guts? Or is that just how things are done now since we have a black president?

[Matty]

They cannot do a thing until they have the majority in the Senate.