Posted on 04/22/2016 3:31:32 PM PDT by george76
Marilyn Tavenner's crystal ball didn't foresee the initial epic flop of HealthCare.gov when she actually ran the agency in charge of the website. Now, as an insurance lobbyist, she sees big jumps in Obamacare insurance premiums next year.
...
HealthCare.gov was a disaster when it launched in the fall of 2013, and was essentially unable to sign up meaningful numbers of customers
...
customers, and new ones, could be hit with sticker shock when it comes to enrolling in 2017 plans, which go on sale next fall.
...
Tavenner also noted that there has been "churn" among plan customers, with some people signing up when they believe they will need health coverage and then dropping out of coverage, ending their premium payments.
"That churn increases premiums
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Miserable stonewalling turkey necked @&$%*^+%
Car insurance where folks could sign up with an already crashed car would be expensive too.
It would eventually cost more than the car would be worth after it was repaired.
It’s in its predicted DEATH SPIRAL.
ObamaCare Cost More Cover less CBO –Who knew that BiRacial Hussein obama just screwed the American people while lying to them too. ObamaCare Will Cost $136 Bil More, Cover Fewer People Than We Thought, CBO Says, lth Reform: ObamaCare has been taking lots of hits lately, but a new report from the Congressional Budget Office is a gut punch. It shows that ObamaCare’s outlook has worsened considerably as fewer people sign up and costs rise more than expected. To little fanfare and virtually no media coverage, the Congressional Budget Office sharply downgraded its forecast for ObamaCare in its latest report, issued in late March. By just about every measure, things are looking worse than they did a year ago. First, the CBO has cut enrollment goals for the ObamaCare exchanges. Its March 2015 report projected that enrollment would top out at 22 million. Now it puts the ceiling at 18 million. And given ObamaCare’s track record so far, even that’s optimistic. Lower enrollment numbers should mean lower taxpayer costs, since fewer people will be getting taxpayer-subsidized insurance. But higher-than-expected insurance subsidies are soaking up much of those savings. Last year, CBO projected that the average subsidy would be $4,040. Turns out, it was $4,240. CBO now thinks subsidies will average $4,550 next year instead of $4,250. That is likely a reflection of the fact that premiums leapt upward this year, and are likely to make another big jump for next year. As a result, even though the CBO expects that 4 million fewer people will be getting insurance subsidies in 2024, the total cost of those subsidies paid out that year will stay exactly the same: $99 billion. ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion is also turning out to be far more expensive than planned, forcing the CBO to hike its 10-year Medicaid cost projection by $146 billion. That’s largely the result of far more people signing up for Medicaid — 2 to 4 million more — than the CBO had previously expected. In addition, far more workers will find themselves without employer-provided benefits than promised. In its initial report on ObamaCare in 2010, CBO said 3 million workers at most would lose their employer health benefits because of the law. Last year it claimed that 7 million will have lost workplace coverage in a decade. Now it says 9 million will likely be forced off employer plans. And what about the uninsured? When Democrats shoved ObamaCare onto President Obama’s desk in 2010, the public was told that it would cut the number of uninsured by 32 million. That number has since dropped 25%. Looked at another way, ObamaCare is now slated to spend $1.94 trillion over the next decade, and yet still leave one in 10 Americans without insurance. Oh, and the revenues from ObamaCare taxes will be lower than expected over the next decade, either because they just aren’t producing as hoped, or because the White House has delayed various taxes for political reasons. CBO says the employer mandate will raise $12 billion less than they said last year, the individual mandate penalty $6 billion less, and the Cadillac tax $28 billion less. (The combination of higher costs and lower revenues, by the way, means those promises about how ObamaCare would not add a dime to the deficit have also proved unreliable.) Repealing ObamaCare wouldn’t mean forcing millions off insurance. What it would do is create the opportunity to enact free-market reforms that would actually deliver on ObamaCare’s promise of lower costs and expanded coverage. Hopefully, voters will understand this when they cast their ballots in Novemer. investors.com/politics/editorials/obamacare-will-cost-136-bill-more-cover-less-than-we-thought-cbo-says
I wonder how big this hack’s bank account has become since “working” on this pig.
“Affordable” “Care” Act, my hiney.
All your paragraphs were held to meet your deductible.
Actually, it should rightly be called sucker shock, instead!!!
The woman should be arrested, tried and exiled for her part this travesty..
We need term limits for Congress critters, and we need laws that slam the revolving door the bureaucrats and lobbyists use!!! It’s criminal that Tavenner — who 20 years ago was also on Hillary’s health care task force — is allowed to lobby on behalf of insurers so shortly after screwing them while she worked at HHS!!
My brother just dropped his, he couldn’t afford it anymore. So much for it being an “affordable” health care act.
Airport list.
L
Once you allow in pre-existing conditions, the risk-based model goes away. It’s no longer “insurance”.
Oh, this comes as such a surprise! Who could have predicted this? What bad luck! Guess we’ll just have to go to single payer!
Watch for Obama and Hillary to try to postpone it or eliminate it.
It's no longer insurance if it doesn't cover you once you get you get sick. Because, sooner or later, unless you are on MH370 or get run over by a truck, you will get sick.
So, how do you define "pre" in "pre-existing"?
Obviously, a responsible citizen should maintain insurance and be fully covered for life. And an irresponsible citizen should be left to die. Howz the polls on that? LOL!
And then there is the whole employer-provided insurance mess. Employers should not be involved in health-ensuring their employees. There shouldn't be anything special about 29 hours or 50 employees. Employees should be responsible for their own insurance, and it should be fully portable across employers, state lines, etc.
Any viable health care system will have to deal with the free-rider problem. One way or the other.
Single payer, here we come.
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.