Posted on 11/04/2015 7:04:18 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Regardless of whether there is a President Cruz or a President Rubio in January 2017, regardless of the existence or size of a Republican majority in Congress, the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has failed. The grand vision of an efficient pseudo-market in health insurance under enlightened federal management â the heart of Obamacare â is not coming to pass. Obamacare, meaning the operating model that undergirded the law that Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed with great fanfare â is dead, and it will not be revived. What remains is fitful chaos.
A brief refresher:
The fundamental problem with ACA is that under it, insurance ceases to be insurance. Insurance is a prospective financial product, one that exploits the mathematical predictability of certain life events among very large groups of people â out of 1 million 40-to-60-year-old Americans, x percent will get in car wrecks every year, and y percent will be diagnosed with chronic renal failure â which allows actuaries and the insurance companies that employ them to calculate premiums based on risk, thus funding the reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by the insurance poolâs members. Insurance is, by its very nature, always forward-looking, considering events that have yet to come to pass but that may be expected and, to a reasonable extent, predicted with some level of specificity. Under ACA, insurance is retrospective. ACA mandates that insurance companies cover pre-existing conditions, meaning events that already have happened, which renders the basic mathematical architecture of insurance â the calculation of risk among large pools of people â pointless. Insurance ceases to be insurance and instead becomes something else, namely a very badly constructed cost-sharing program.
Not all cost-sharing programs are bad ideas. Medi-Share, for example, is precisely the sort of voluntary, privately administered mutual-aid program that could â and, I believe, will â end up displacing government-run health-care programs entirely. But Obamacare is a very different kind of beast: It creates a deeply perverse incentive structure by combining compulsory coverage of pre-existing conditions with a mandate that is enforced in theory more than in fact. The mandate is necessary to prevent the ruthless exploitation of the preexisting-coverage rules: If insurers have to cover you no matter what, then there's no point in buying insurance -- thereby sharing in the costs -- until you are sick enough to need it.
As James Freeman reports in the Wall Street Journal, the ACA's plethora of exemptions -- there are at least 30 of them -- ensure that a great many people -- 12 million last year -- will simply opt out. âIt is easy to avoid or limit exposure to the penalty with some simple tax planning,â he writes. In 2016, there were supposed to be 21 million people enrolled in ACA programs; the Obama administration currently predicts that the actual number will be somewhat less than half of that. This was entirely predictable; in fact, it was predicted in the pages of National Review, in my The End Is Near (and Itâs Going to Be Awesome), and elsewhere.
Many of Obamacareâs failures came fast and early. Strike one: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.â Strike two: Obamacare will save "the average family $2,500 a year on their premiums." Strike three: Obamacare will add "not one dime" to the deficit. We all knew that was coming, just as we knew that people would respond to the very strong incentives not to buy insurance by not buying insurance.
#share#Other failures took longer to become manifest. The architects of Obamacare are deeply distrustful of the role of for-profit companies in the health-care business because, in their nearly pristine ignorance, they falsely believe profits to be net deductions from the sum of the public good rather than measures of the creation of real social value. So they created incentives to set up co-ops, nonprofit enterprises that would administer Obamacare plans in particular states and jurisdictions. It was obvious from the beginning that if Obamacareâs perverse incentives created insurance pools that were older and sicker rather than younger and healthier, these co-ops wouldnât be economically viable: You need lots of young, healthy insurance subscribers to offset the costs associated with your older, sicker subscribers. Many of us â myself included â assumed that the federal government under President Obama would simply write these co-ops huge checks to keep them afloat. We were half right: The government is writing them huge checks, but they are failing anyway, so fundamental is their economic unsustainability. Half of the co-ops have gone belly-up already, including large, prominent, splendidly subsidized ones in Kentucky, New York, Louisiana, and South Carolina. Hundreds of thousands of customers have lost their coverage as a result. Hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayersâ money has been poured into these enterprises, to no avail.
Obamacare's partisans were confronted with the economic facts long before the law was even passed, and their answer was: "Never mind the economics, we're the good guys, and you want poor people to die." Democrats argued that Republicans literally wanted to kill poor people, that their plan was for the poor to "die quickly." This is a habitual mode of discourse among progressives: Reality doesn't matter; only the purity of Democrats' motives matters. Obamacare is what it is: Another damned five-year plan based on wishful thinking and very little else.
The fact is that Obamacare has fallen apart without Republicansâ dismantling it. Almost all of its basic promises have failed, it is an economic shambles, and it is a political mess: Unsurprisingly, people still don't like it. Less than a third of Americans support the individual mandate, three-fourths oppose Obamacare's tax on high-end health-care programs, and more voters oppose the law categorically than support it. A quarter of voters say the law has hurt them personally. The question isnât why Republicans havenât gotten around to repealing and replacing it â the answer to that question resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for a while, still â the question is when Democrats will get around to admitting that, purity of their hearts notwithstanding, they and they alone â not one Republican voted for Obamacare â have created a mess that has introduced nothing to American health care except chaos.
The basic principles of meaningful health-care reform are these: Let insurance be insurance; understand that ordinary, regular medical procedures, such as physicals and prostate exams, are not insurable events, and account for that in your calculations; the only way to mitigate the effects of scarcity on health care is to make it less scarce by expanding the supply of medical practitioners and facilities; the only way to make insurance more competitive, and therefore more affordable and more responsive to consumers, is to increase the number of players in the markets; the best way to deal with people who are, for example, profoundly disabled, children, or otherwise unable to provide for their own care, is direct, clear-eyed subsidy of their medical expenses, rather than laundering those payments through the insurance market; so long as practicing medicine pays less than filing frivolous lawsuits against doctors, there's going to be a lot of politically induced inefficiency in the system.
Of course markets work for most people, and of course there are exceptions to that. For 93 percent of the population, the solution to health-care reform is: Let markets do their thing. The only real argument is how big a check to write to those looking after the other 7 percent, and how to structure the payments. That's a real fight, too, but it isn't the one weâre having. Right now, the Republicans and the Democrats are two political coroners arguing over what time and cause of death to put on the paperwork; rigor mortis set in long ago.
-- Kevin D. Williamson is roving correspondent at National Review.
It was never intended to work. And my corporation just notified us today of huge upcoming health insurance increases. I’m interested to hear how they’ll spin it in our benefit meeting - especially since our CEO is a big Zer0 lover (but aren’t most of them).
Well, our new Speaker is supposed to be an expert on this so let’s see what he does. Cough!
It may be dead, but, by the Lord Harry, I’m still paying for it via my inflated health insurance rates.
They’ve doubled since this Obama Frankenstein was brought to life
It may be dead, but it is still there causing untold destruction to our economy and to our citizens. Trump will kill it in a quick few days. Confusion with the corrupt insurance companies will be the norm for a while until the insurance companies realize that they will get crushed by Trump. The rest of the candidates will take years to kill Obamacare. Sudden death or slow kill, which would be better?
All you need to know is that we’re much, MUCH closer to Single Payer Commie Care, which was the plan all along.
*SPIT*
Regardless of whether there is a President Cruz or a President Rubio... How presumptuous!-)
“Right now, the Republicans and the Democrats are two political coroners arguing over what time and cause of death to put on the paperwork; rigor mortis set in long ago.”
THAT is a great line, and it can easily be applied to ANYTHING this Worst Congress Ever deems to touch. Grrrr!
Nice to see Kevin take a day off from bashing Trump.
There is an opportunity for the Speaker to make good on some of the promises and insinuations he's made over the past few years, starting with Obamacare.
One of the reasons Boehner was horrible as Speaker was that he couldn't articulate a conservative principle, and how conservative ideas would work better than liberal ones when it came to healthcare.
Here is Ryan's chance. Let's see if he's up for it. He's already laid some groundwork with his, "not blaming, wiping slates clean" speech. Follow that up with the declaration that the ACA is not working for America, and that he's not looking to blame, but to correct the situation.
My insurance went up $1000 for annual deductible and increased $1000 max out of pocket. It now costs me $12,000 a year for the right to pay an additional $7500 a year before I see any real benefit.
“Here is Ryan’s chance.”
Yep, it will be a crystal ball into the future.
They broke the healthcare insurance market to create more vagaries in a bureacracy that was created to redistribute wealth.
Intentionally, it leads to “single payer”. Commies win again. There are traitors in our midst...they are our “leaders”.
OC doesn’t work for the same reason a racetrack would not stay in business if the races were run, completed, and then track rats could place their bets.
(There’s a reason pre-OC insurers didn’t cover “pre-existing conditions”.)
And 47% can bet using an IOU.
Everything Obama does distills down to fitful chaos. If we think it’s bad now, just wait. The transition to explosive chaos is about to go full throttle.
Well at least you have mandatory maternity coverage, just in case you decide to acquire ovaries and a uterus and get pregnant.
I call social democrats on their moronic use of the term “single payer”. There isn’t a single payer system in the world outside of Cuba, North Korea, and a few other totalitarian states whose idea of medical innovation is experimenting on political prisoners.
“Single payer” Canada has a public/private expenditure split of 70/30, and “single payer” UK is 83/17. “Single payer” China is 55/45. Meanwhile, the “radical free market” US is 47/53.
Even in a “single payer” system, affluent people pay out of pocket for a higher grade of care. “Single Payer” systems simply codify and emphasize the distinction is quality of care and outcomes in the two tiers of their respective health systems.
Obamacare is doing exactly what it was designed to do:
Punish America for not endorsing single payer and then ensure that single payer is the only available solution.
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.