E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe new health care reform law is not going to provide health insurance for as many people, at least not as quickly, as the Obama administration had hoped, according to the latest look at the economy from the Congressional Budget Office.
That’s mostly because of the deal Congress made last month to keep the country from going over the fiscal cliff, the CBO says. About 8 million people who would have been insured by their employers will probably lose their coverage because of tax changes, the CBO projects.
It takes away some of the tax breaks that employers get for providing health insurance to workers and their families. The change “will lead to a greater reduction in such coverage and higher enrollment in insurance exchanges than previously estimated by CBO,” the report reads.
Some of those affected are likely to buy health insurance themselves on the new insurance marketplaces, called exchanges, that are supposed to be up and running by October, and some will become newly eligible for Medicaid, the joint state-federal health insurance plan for the low-income. The new law encourages states to expand Medicaid so more people can qualify -- subsidized by the federal government for the first few years.
But overall, instead of 32 million to 34 million new people getting health insurance by 2017, probably only about 27 million people will be covered by then, the CBO projects.
One of the main objectives of the 2010 Affordable Care Act was to get people signed up for health insurance. About 18 percent of Americans under the age of 65 don’t have health insurance, according to the non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation. That means they don't get medical care when they need it, instead waiting until they are really sick, and using emergency room and other last-minute services that cost far more than if they'd received routine care.
About 55 percent of Americans get health insurance provided by an employer. Others have Medicaid, Medicare, Tricare for military families, and other government insurance.
Starting in 2014, many more are supposed to buy their own health insurance on the exchanges, which will be heavily regulated to ensure they get good coverage.
The CBO projects that 26 million people will buy health insurance on the exchanges by 2022. And it predicts that 12 million people will become newly eligible for Medicaid in the states that choose to expand their offerings by 2022.
“In the current projection, the number of people gaining coverage through the exchanges rises from 7 million in 2014 to 24 million in 2016, and the number gaining coverage through Medicaid rises from 8 million in 2014 to 11 million in 2016,” the report reads.
There’s some good health care news for the administration in the CBO report. “In recent years, health care spending has grown much more slowly both nationally and for federal programs than historical rates would have indicated,” the CBO says.
So it’s made “technical adjustments” to how much Medicaid and Medicare will cost. “From the March 2010 baseline to the current baseline, such technical revisions have lowered estimates of federal spending for the two programs in 2020 by about $200 billion—by $126 billion for Medicare and by $78 billion for Medicaid, or by roughly 15 percent for each program,” the CBO says.
Related stories:
- Fewer to pay for skipping insurance
- Americans pay more for less health insurance - report
- US health care is officially a mess- report
Leave a Comment:
He said affordable. I said if its not, i wont consider it. Simple and plain.
Then when you get sick and go to the emergency room you have a choice we let you die or you sign all your future income over to the government until your bill is paid in full.
This is they key joke with obamacare. "Affordable" is now defined by the government. I think it is great all those people who buy fancy cars and live in expensive houses that they can only "afford" because they "choose" to not buy insurance.
We need less health insurance. Health insurance should only cover big things, like getting cancer or surgery. The reason why health care costs keep rising faster than inflation is because we have too much insurance and too much government in health care. If people shopped around for the best deal then prices would have to drop because hospitals would have to actually compete.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnS96NVlMI
Regardless of whether you have insurance or not, the vast majority of US citizens wait until they are sick to seek medical care. That is the reason costs are so high.
We, as a country, specialize in accessing and providing tertiary care.
Regardless of what law is passed and whether or not you have insurance, it doesn't guarantee that you will go to the Dr on a regular basis or access care in a preventative medicine sort of way.
Which means, the ACA will do very little to lower health care costs.
Well it looks like the Dems and Obama lied again, doesn't it. Oh and BTW, relative was informed the first week of January that his employer was cutting everyone back to 30 hours because the mandated coverage would have negative impact on the company's profits. So now it looks like food stamps for his family. Obamacare just forced a family from making a living into near poverty with the stroke of Obama's pen.
Everyone probably won't get insurance but everyone is going to pay more taxes to pay for and support this nonsense.
That's why we need to divorce health care from employment. We need some sort of independent system, public or private, that includes everyone and that everyone pays for. Once employers are freed from health care requirements, they can afford to pay more so their employees can buy it for themselves.
If you remove the incentive for employers to provide health care, you also remove a tax break from them. That will leave them with less money to pay you with or the number of people it can employ.
its not as easy as what you laid out.
Harry, there are so many other tax breaks that businesses would rather put their money into than health insurance, I assure you. If businesses didn't have to pay for health care, they would be free to invest in product development, technology, upgrades, expansion, etc. the list goes on....
i didn't get a raise this year becuase our employer-covered healthcare went up. i see the same thing happening this year as well. and only I am covered, not my family.
TruthComesHere--AND I (while I have admittedly not read the whole health care bill) wonder if the money that people will pay in penalty for not buying insurance will go straight to a 'separate' fund to help offset the cost of Medicare.
Like that has worked so well to put Social Security in a 'separate fund'.
Or will Congress as usual see it as MORE money to spend on some new 'entitlement'.
It depends on whether the coverage available through the exchanges really is affordable, even for working people already having to stretch every dollar, and is decent enough coverage that people feel it's worth the cost. I'm looking forward to having that option, but extremely skeptical about what it will actually look like. If it's not clearly a good deal, people just won't do it.
Employers are also signalling that they will do whatever they have to in order to avoid buying coverage for workers -- reduce hours, reclassify even more workers as "independent contractors," pay people under the table. Sooner or later we need to completely get health coverage separated from employment. It's a historical accident that is messing up the job market as well as health care.
Yep, this thing was made of smoke and mirrors. Its gonna be chaos for a lot of people.
ObamaCare is a half-baked attempt at universal coverage. Better solution is to put a tax (that can't be robbed like they robbed the medicare fund) on each and every head in this country from birth to death and provide true health coverage for everyone.
Better yet make the insurance companies COMPETE for our business - and have them do it in plain English with no pre-existing denial of service crap.
Why is it crap to deny coverage for a preexisting condition. If an individual has cancer, needs a transplant, needs surgery and they sign up for an insurance policy once they know that, why should that company be forced to take on as a customer who will cost more than the premium they will generate? Would you buy a car that you know had a broken axle? Would you go on a vacation to Syria during the uprising? Of course not, because you have the right to make a decision that is best for you and your bottom line. So should companies. An auto insurance company can deny someone coverage that has ten speeding tickets and a DWI, a health insurance company should have the ability to do the same. If they cannot, bc of government rules, they will just make the price higher for us all.
And that's one of the main arguments for govt-run healthcare. Why should a private company be forced to lose money on one of its customers? The govt will end up paying for their cancer care anyway so why not make it universal? Medicare recipients seem to love that program and it's govt-run.
"Better yet make the insurance companies COMPETE for our business..."
What do you think the Health Insurance Marketplaces being set up are for? They make insurers compete for business. That IS Obamacare.
Health Insurance companies already compete for our business and it is neither affordable or decent coverage. Insurance companies are all about rationing care (to those who can pay of have better plans) and making money. Unless there are some tax benefits to the Insurance companies to do so, I hardly see them willing to lower monthly premiums in order to "compete". I remain highly skeptical.
instead, they should just remove insurance from basic care completely, such as going to doctor with some minor problems, and people pay out of their pockets for the upfront listed fee.
then make insurance cover only the major medical needs (surgeries or expensive tests), on optional basis, or pay cash. such insurance should be available in open market (not employment based) so that insurance companies have to compete for it on national market.
this way, insurance companies/3rd party middle men will be out of pictures for many people who don't need major care, and therefore lower their total medical bill.
Justoutsidedc - I am one of the people has currently has a so-called pre-existing condition that occurred after I got insurance. When it came to renew my policy, I was denied. They didn't even offer me the opportunity to pay a higher premium. What's worse, is that my condition isn't even permanent. I was denied because it was perceived that sometime in the future it may become an issue again. BTW - the condition...a fractured vertebrae caused during a fall. No loss of nerve activity or motion. Nothing. Yet some over-paid doctor on the payroll of the insurance company decided, without looking at my medical records or x-rays, that I was a health risk. Insurance companies are becoming a racket that needs more regulation. I am not in favor of a majority of Obamacare, it could have been better crafted, but as Pelosis said: " We have to vote on it to see what's in it".
Nancy Pelosi actually said, "We need to pass this bill so the American people can see what's in it." Implying that when people saw the good things that she knew was in the bill, they would come to accept and appreciate it more and more which is exactly what has happened. I would like to see this misquote dissappear.
Sandy--GOOD IDEA. A head tax on EVERYONE from birth might have the accidental benefit of encouraging poor people to NOT have so many babies!
WHAT a win/Win that would be!
i know of quite a few people who would love to have medical insurance,but when those companies raise their prices or have had costly plans to begin with,then theres really nothing they can do but to put their ailments off until they absolutely HAVE to go in to the E.R. unless someone makes the companies lower their prices,there's going to be a lot of people getting hit with fees.they say they cant make you pay it,but thats the same with taxes,they cant make you pay it but they sure can suspend any licenses such as driving,fishing,hunting as well as garnish your wages if you get a check until they get what you 'owe' them.kind of sounds like those gangsters you see in movies right?
Employers have already been reducing health benefits while premiums have sky rocketed for their workers once the Affordable Care Act was passed.Just one example, is my best friend. Who said in December,her husband finally decided to get hearing aids, his old bifocals updated,and both had their teeth cleaned. Because their insurance was dropping these benefits next year.
What many people haven't realized, is employers providing insurance benefits to employees, are providing packages which are stripping many benefits to the bone, while raising premiums drastically.My premiums last year went up more than $330 per month.I also used to have access to any doctor in any specialty I needed in any hospital, whether general,specialty or university. But last year, was switched to a handful within one system,handed a list of doctors.
It included specialists for children, elderly, male/ female issues like pregnancy, psychological, cancers, nutritional. cardiac,liver,stomach,orthopedic and other such medical conditions. But then,when I ended up needing a specialist, none were listed for it. Obviously managed care means hit the basics, but skip the more unusual-expensive.
I learned, if you do happen to need something special not on your list, good luck trying to find one. You will be grilled by your insurance company, who will do everything in its power to prevent you from getting to those names, even lying about billing practices.Telling me to just go to anyone, they will send the bill and cover.But when I insisted they give me a name then, I was sent to someone who forced me to justify why the doctor required the specalist repeatedly, until nearly in tears about what they found and what I needed, repeatedly, they gave a very limited authorization. It was so stupid, they wouldn't let the doctor do their job. So you had better cover your bottom and stick up for yourself.Write down names, dates and times.Their bottom line is what they care about.
Ultimately,I am not surprised, there will be more left uncovered.And those that are, will end up with less then they expected as well.After all, insurance companies have been in this business for decades and will teach people to make stone soup.Even as they feast on banquets in their castles.
As self employed parents, we pay a small mortgage payment for health insurance for our family. Besides covered routine dental care and yearly physicals, it's all practically worthless since it's still has a high deductible for basically a major medical plan. If what we pay and receive, is any indicator of the cost/quality of the new insurance exchanges, it's going to be a tough sell for Americans already struggling. Universal Healthcare is the only solution that most of the world has recognized for some time now.
Universal health care has been achieved through different means, including having insurance companies compete for consumers business. Just like Obamacare.
We hardly have universal healthcare with so many uninsured. What is your definition of Universal Healthcare and how have you determined we have achieved it? Are you talking about the theory of Obamacare? Insurance companies already compete for our business and it surely isn't affordable and/or adequate coverage.
You should be deducting the costs of that health care from your business. Its a tax break that is not just available to large corporations. That should offset the amount that you are spending to provide health care for your family.
The end cost to you would be the same as the employee of any company that is working full time.
If you are not deducting this, you are not taking advantage of the tax code and what is your right as a business.
We're already deducting it, thank you. But sorry, that doesn't make it affordable. I would much rather invest that money into other aspects of our business than pay top dollar for lesser quality insurance when regularly employed people get much better quality insurance for a mere pittance.
timesfour - "Affordable" is relative term. My brother-in-law can't afford to pay the premiums to add his wife to his insurance. The premiums are so high that if he did he would effectively be working to pay the premiums and not living expenses. My son-in-law was notified that his insurance was cancelled by his employer and his hours cut back to 30 hours a week because of Obamacare. Just one more family placed in the government foodstamp line by politicians who make laws without considering the negative impact of their actions.
AvgJoeTX - Exactly! It appears that the policy wonks and congress with their free health insurance benefits FOR LIFE are making these assumptions. Until EVERYONE pays the same amount for the same quality of insurance, we will not have anything close to "Universal Healthcare".
TimesFour--I hate to tell you this, but Universal Health care, in many other countries, is bare bones health care. Last year, England started allowing the wealthy to buy 'extra coverage' that gives the ones able to afford it the ablility to buy 'luxury' insurance that covers more, allows unlimited access to specialists, etc.
France already had such a policy--their universal health care is absolutely bare bones, and those that can afford it buy their own extra coverage. Germany has a similar situation, and even 3 years ago, Germany's "universal health care" was bleeding red ink.
Like it or not, there will ALWAYS be perks for being wealthy. It's one of the main motivators to working hard to GET wealthy.
I hear ya, MOmaid, but it's not that way in every country with "socialized medicine". My family comes from Sweden and they have had great health care for DECADES and a healthy economy. Japan, Canada, the Netherlands, Iceland and most other industrial countries have universal health care as well. Most of these countries understand that taking care of the health of their population will lead to greater worker productivity and helps new businesses and startups as well. This helps the economy is many obvious ways.
Unless, you like the idea of living in a post-industrial wasteland, like The Hunger Games, then perhaps you're fine with "the haves" preying upon the "have-nots". We have a predatory economic system here in the states, where those with the money, get to write the rules in their favor. Not everyone approves of WEALTH at any cost, even though all the cool kids want to be rich. Have fun trying!
This is mainly due to the fact the even poeple with insurance have to really started to cut back on the number of times they visit their doctor and seek medical care since the middle class is being squeezed at every turn, there is no money left to pay doctor visit copays and hospital copays.
Not affordable to some
Affordable at $2,000 a month with $10,000 deductible. Maybe to some, but not for me.
if you have to pay $2000/month for insurance, you might as well to pay cash directly to your medical care. it just makes no sense of having such insurance at all.
Several healthcare features linked to public exchanges may impact how health insurance plans conduct business. http://www.healthcaretownhall.com/?p=6362
I'm opting out and paying the fine. Its much cheaper.
If too many people opt out, then the Gov will end up raising the fine or meting out punishment. Should be interesting. I wonder what Progressives will say then? Oh yeah, it's Bush's fault.
The dems wrote this bill 100%, let them wallow in it. Until the delivery of services ---aka rationing grandma's end of life issues instead of worring about the pithy costs of smokers....-as well as doubling the amount of doctors and providers ---aka-- get rid of the ama and medicare as monopolistic training schools, this thing aint going anywhere.
Does anyone still think the Federal Government is capable of running our healthcare system efficiently and effectively, or at all? I'm sure most Obama backers still believe it. I guess we'll have to wait for more proof later this year and next, or maybe only after the system collapses.
Just for the record the CBO has never been able show how Obamacare could be funded as promised. Never mind, just forge ahead anyway.
Let's just pass the law so we can find out what is in it.
As long as we depend on the for-profit healthcare insurance industry to finance our healthcare we will never be able to provide the financing of healthcare for all Americans and we will never get costs under control.
We need to enact a national government financed single-payer healthcare financing plan such as what H.R. 676 would do. Please research H.R. 676 for yourself. It would provide the healthcare financing for ALL Americans from the womb to the tomb AND at a much lower per capita cost.
First, The Law of TANSTAAFL still holds true:
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free lunch. Some one will have to pay unless you know of doctors, nurses and pharmacists who work for free. The government can't take care of its medicaid patients now. Many doctors, at least in MI, will not take the government health insurance because they almost never receive payment.
Secondly, as soon as I get my law degree I'll read the full of HR 676.
A real plan was spoken before Obama by Dr. Benjamin Carson of John Hopkins Hospital at the prayer breakfast :
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/07/prayer-breakfast-speaker-praises-jesus-gets-political-calls-political-correctness-dangerous-hammers-fiscal-irresponsibility/
You are correct Luther-6812388. Someone will have to pay. Right now we are all paying far too much through our healthcare insurance premiums. If we were to take all the revenue from our premiums, the taxes we pay to fund Medicare, Medicaid, VA Medical Administration, etc. and establish H.R. 676 we would have more than enough revenue to fund the program. With the elimination of healthcare insurance premiums, even with an increase in the Medicare tax, we would still have more money left in our take-home pay. It's just that with a single-payer healthcare plan we would all in the same risk pool and would all be paying our fair share.
I am certainly willing to pay a little more in a Medicare tax if I no longer have to pay any healthcare insurance premiums. Businesses would also be money ahead as they would no longer be providing their employees healthcare benefits. They too would be paying a little more in Medicare taxes, but not as much as the premiums they are currently paying. It would be a win-win situation.
The CBO has determined that Healthcare costs have been slowing over the past 3 years, yet no one is willing to admit that this may be due to "Obamacare". It could be that the ACA is actually bringing the cost curve down as promised and designed and will continue to do so. I haven't seen any "goverment takeover" or any "death panels" that the right wing was so ardently insisting. I have seen them instead accepting the Medicaid expansion, elimination of pre existing conditions, and establishment of insurance pools - all good parts of ACA.
One other thing I don't understand, if Obama is such a socialist communist and against business how has the DOW managed to double during his first term?
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/liberal-economic-guru-death-panels-and-middle-class-taxes-are-how-we-do-this/
Paul Krugman, Obama's economic guru says himself:
"My vision, how I want it to be done is, we’re going to need more revenue, we’re going to need more and probably in the end, surely in the end will require some middle class taxes . We won’t be able to pay for the kind of government the society will want without some increase in taxes… on the middle class, maybe a value added tax… And we’re also going to have to make decisions about health care, doc pay for health care that has no demonstrated medical benefits . So the snarky version… which I shouldn’t even say because it will get me in trouble is death panels and sales taxes is how we do this."
The last time I checked Paul Krugman wasn't any part of President Obama's administration, and has never been asked to be ...I'd also like to point out that Mr. Krugman has a very quirky sense of humor. So, I would have to find a reliable source without a teaparty, President Obama hating agenda to read the ENTIRE quote in context. That would definitely NOT be frontpagemag. The other point I would like to make is that Obamacare limits the amount of profit Insurance companies can make and not spend on your actual healthcare, a lot of people actually got refunds this year. That is definitely a good thing.