Posted on 07/11/2014 5:25:11 AM PDT by MichCapCon
The Manhattan Institute has just released an interactive map comparing on a county-by-county basis the least expensive individual health insurance policies available before and after the federal health care law went into effect.
To make the analysis more fair, the earlier rates are adjusted to reflect higher prices paid by individuals with pre-existing conditions (the methodology is explained here). These are then compared to the lowest rates currently available on the federal exchange.
In Michigan, statewide average rates for men ages 27, 40 and 64 rose 107 percent, 73 percent and 52 percent, respectively. For women of the same ages, statewide average rates rose 119 percent, 57 percent and 66 percent, respectively.
Those changes vary widely by county, however. Here is a sample:
InsurancePolicies
These are the rates of the underlying insurance policies. Individuals in households with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty rate are eligible for the law's sliding-scale subsidies. However, even with subsidies it appears many or most households are paying more. The map's website also provides the statewide average income level at which insurance costs for representative households exceed the pre-Obamacare rates even when subsidies are included.
For example, the break-even point for a 40-year-old man in a household of three is a family income of $37,226. Above that level, insurance costs are higher even with an Obamacare subsidy. Statewide, the median income level for such households is $61,700. In other words, far more households of this size may be paying more under the new law than are benefitting from it. In many, if not all parts of the state, this is certainly the case.
For women age 27 in a household with three people, the statewide break-even point is $32,262. The median income level for such households is $37,100 in Michigan.
On a statewide basis both men and women age 64 at the median income for this group appear to be net winners under the law. With subsidies, their insurance costs are the same or less under the new law as before it went into effect. In many counties that may not be the case, however.
According to recent press reports, Michigan rates are about to increase even more. Blue Cross Blue Shield, which controls more than 70 percent of the market for those who buy their own insurance rather than getting it from an employer, says these rates will increase more than 9 percent in 2015. (According to one analysis, the really big increases will happen in 2017.)
Barring another extra-legal administrative fiat further suspending enforcement of Obamacare's employer mandate, the number of individuals affected by these individual rates may expand as the mandate phases-in in 2015 and 2016. That's because the law's penalty for employers who don't provide insurance is considerably less than the cost of providing it, creating an incentive to drop insurance and let employees find their own coverage on the federal exchange.
Forbes senior editor Avik Roy provides more details about the interactive map here, and responds to criticism from supporters of the federal health care law here.
no no no..
Obama said I’d save 2500 bucks!
Where’s my 2500 bucks?!?!?!
/s
Now, why in the world is the GOPe NOT beating him and the rat party senseless with this information?
Everything is costlier under Obama...now many sure enough can’t afford health care or anything else for that matter.
becsuse the GOP wants to fix it with more mess. This is just another money glut that does no one any good.
Mine went up 160%.
Mine went up $2500 !
And I can’t afford it.
119% increase for a 27 year old female.
How’s that free birth control working out for ya?
I hear ya..
‘Everything is costlier under Obama...now many sure enough can’t afford health care or anything else for that matter.’
Let me tell you what I think. According to this and other stories the bulk of the rise in insurance costs hit the youngest workers, workers with little resources and maybe a young family to support. Obama and his crew knew who it would effect most. The question then becomes why did they do it to that particular group?
The young are the most capable of being physically fit enough to fight. The oldest among us have the least rise in cost and are also the least likely to be in physical condition to fight.
That the young are being hit hardest means they will not have the cash to buy what they need to push back. They will not have the money to travel to trouble spots. Financially they are becoming a non factor.
When you look at the border protests who do you see? A large group of old farts not able to defend themselves and least likely to mount offensive threats to Obama’s young paid thugs on the other side. They have the resources to travel and purchase things that would be needed in a CWII but not the ability. Their heart is in the right place but they pose little threat to the regime.
Just my 2 bits but IMHO I think I am right.
you nailed it. so this is all about the defeat of the USA.
The Republicans in Congress won’t work with Obama.
It was worse under Bush.
Obama didn’t do it. Nobody saw him do it. You can’t prove anything.
buh-dum-tish
‘you nailed it. so this is all about the defeat of the USA.’
Whatever Obama and his minions say is only smoke, they always have another true purpose behind their actions. Listen to what they say but always notice what they do and then ask yourself what is the true purpose of this or that action. It always sounds good but watch for the left hand while his right is in motion. I take nothing at face value with these people.
Much much higher cost and you either lose your job or have your hours reduced to 29/hrs.
Congress exempted themselves from this law they passed in the middle of the night on a holiday.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.