ObamaCare is more formally known as the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which was passed in 2010. From an article published March 5, 2020, at The Hill:
In its first decade, ObamaCare has failed to solve many of the health care problems it was supposed to address. Even worse, it has compounded many of the issues it was meant to fix — the law of unintended consequences in action.
First, then-candidate Barack Obama said his namesake act would “cut the cost of a typical family’s premiums by up to $2,500 a year.”In reality, the opposite has occurred. According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), “premiums have doubled for individual health insurance plans since 2013, the year before many of Obamacare’s regulations and mandates took effect.”
Third, President Obama repeatedly assured voters, “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.” After ObamaCare was enacted, millions of Americans were unable to keep their pre-ObamaCare health insurance plan.
Individual market premiums were $2789/year in 2013, compared to $5712/year in 2017.
Obamacare proponents promised that the plan would drastically reduce the number of uninsured folks. Wasn’t it 30 million uninsured? But there are still 28 million uninsured. And it’s probably going to get worse since citizens are no longer forced to buy something they don’t want or can’t afford.
Nearly all of Obamacare remains in effect except for the mandate to purchase health insurance whether you want it or not.
The author of the article is affiliated with The Heartland Institute.
Source: ObamaCare: 10 years of distress and disappointment | TheHill
Steve Parker, M.D.
PS: Avoid the medical-industrial complex by getting and keeping as healthy as possible. Let me help:
Imaginary view from my office
Healthcare costs represent almost 20% of the U.S. economy, a much higher percentage than seen in other first-world countries. And we’re not getting our money’s worth (judging from average lifespan, for instance).
The Republicans just rolled out a healthcare reform plan to replace Obamacare and address other issues. I haven’t read it. But I have zero confidence in those clowns being able to solve this problem.
Denninger has sussed out a plan that you may enjoy considering if you’re a policy geek. In brief:
- If you sell “insurance” to anyone in a given state, you must accept all persons in that state on the same terms and at the same price. to open. For acute conditions where adverse selection becomes most important this restriction resolves the problem.
- All “insurance” companies must offer a true insurance policy covering only unlikely-but-catastrophic events on the same terms as their “full service” policies.
- All health providers must publish a price list and may not bill or accept payment at anything other than that price; doing so becomes a violation of Robinson-Patman and exposes the provider to civil suit for treble damages.
- No event caused by the provision of your treatment may be billed to you. Period.
- If you show up without insurance or ability to pay with a life-threatening condition, you will be treated, but the hospital cannot cost-shift the bill – it instead bills The Federal Government.
“Five points and a fully free-market solution that brings affordable health care coverage to all who can buy it, yet protects those who cannot, while, to the greatest possible extent, forces everyone to bear the cost of their own decisions.
If you choose not to be insured and pay cash you are free to make that choice. If you have a catastrophic illness or injury, insist on treatment but have no means to pay then you are subject to attachment of wages and assets by the IRS, a debt that is only discharged by your death.
Simple, fair, free-market and this path will dramatically control costs as free market competition will be forced to the forefront among health providers who will be compelled to make available their pricing schedules to everyone before they show up for treatment and are presented the bill.”
One of two bridges over the Colorado river in the Grand Canyon near Phantom Ranch
Karl says that U.S. healthcare and health insurance are way too expensive because of:
- monopolistic practices
- collusion among the major players (e.g., insurers, labs, Big Pharma, politicians, doctors)
- ignored violations of the Sherman, Clayton, and Robinson-Patman Acts (15 USC)
- ignored violations of state consumer protection laws
- absence of market forces
Eliminate those problems, and you’d cut the cost of healthcare by 80%, the point at which you would need only catastrophic health insurance coverage, if at all. We’d have enough money left over to stop our federal deficit spending and eventually retire the entire federal debt. According to Karl.
What are examples of an absence of market forces?
- Have you ever seen health insurance companies or hospitals compete on the basis of cost? Doctors rarely do it, either (and only when insurance isn’t involved).
- Have you ever tried to get a firm estimate on the total cost of a proposed procedure before you have it done? Good luck with that.
- The consumer of healthcare services usually isn’t the one paying for it. Your insurance company or the government (e.g., Medicare) is paying. You’ll get no thanks for your time spent shopping around for the best deal.
- Scorpion antivenom costs $100 in Mexico, but if you get it in an emergency department in the U.S., you’ll be billed $40,000 for it. And don’t think you can go to Mexico and stock up then sell it to emergency departments for $150—that’s illegal.
Karl sings the praises of the Surgical Center of Oklahoma. They post their prices up front, work on a mostly cash basis, and eliminate the bill-padding and wasteful bureaucracy of other facilities. Their prices are a fifth of what others charge.
One possible fly in Karl’s ointment is that insurers are exempt from federal antitrust laws per 1945’s McCarran-Ferguson Act. Only a handful of industries are exempt. Karl doesn’t mention that. Nor does he talk about the cost of medical malpractice insurance and defensive medicine, wherein doctors order excessive testing to protect themselves from lawsuits.
I appreciate Karls’ efforts. He’s a smart guy with many good ideas.
Steve Parker, M.D.
The Wall Street Journal has a sad article about end-of-life care and being in control. Some statistics caught my eye:
This disconnect has ruinous economic costs. About a quarter of Medicare’s $550 billion annual budget pays for medical treatment in the last year of life. Almost a third of Medicare patients have surgery in their last year of life, and nearly one in five in their last month of life. In their last year of life, one-third to one-half of Medicare patients spend time in an intensive care unit, where 10 days of futile flailing can cost as much as $323,000. Medical overtreatment costs the U.S. health care system an estimated $158 billion to $226 billion a year.
But you don’t care about the money because you’re not paying for it, right? Remember that physicians are much less aggressive with end-of-life care when it comes to their own lives. It’s not about the money.
Read the whole thing.
Steve Parker, M.D.
For the argument, click through for an article at The Heritage Foundation. A quote:
The United States does not have a private-sector health insurance system, let alone a functioning competitive market for insurance or health services. In fact, the federal government has been the dominant force in American health care for decades, long before the recent massive expansion of the government’s role in the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) [Obamacare]. Through overly restrictive policies, Medicare, Medicaid, and tax subsidies, the federal government has dominated the operation of the U.S. health care system for the past half-century. It is primarily federal policies that are responsible for driving up costs and making health insurance unaffordable for so many Americans.
You’ll read how Democrats helped deregulate the airline and trucking industries, leading to lower consumer costs.