I agree with one thing he says there — that it is necessary to differentiate between states that have had heavy health insurance involvement all along - like California - from others. That’s what I said a few comments ago. OTOH, his “fudge the math” accusation doesn’t seem so persuasive. He is claiming that each one of these private companies is engaged in some sort of a conspiracy to affect public opinion. That seems silly to me.
To put it simply: Covered California is trying to make consumers think they’re getting more for less when, in fact, they’re just getting the same while paying more.
Yet there are many plans on the individual market in California today that offer a structure and benefits that are almost identical to those that will be available on the state’s health insurance exchange next year. So, let’s make an actual apples-to-apples comparison for the hypothetical 25-year-old male living in San Francisco and making more than $46,000 a year. Today, he can buy a PPO plan from a major insurer with a $5,000 deductible, 30 percent coinsurance, a $10 co-pay for generic prescription drugs, and a $7,000 out-of-pocket maximum for $177 a month.
According to Covered California, a “Bronze” plan from the exchange with nearly the same benefits, including a slightly lower out-of-pocket maximum of $6,350, will cost him between $245 and $270 a month. That’s anywhere from 38 percent to 53 percent more than he’ll have to pay this year for comparable coverage! Sounds a lot different than the possible 29 percent “decrease” touted by Covered California in their faulty comparison.
It sounds like they've jiggered the numbers. I don't know why you'd trust CA government. No conservative in CA does. Keep in mind the same mentality that let 4 people die in Benghazi, used the IRS to eliminate Obama's opposition, and sent guns to narcotraffickers resides in CA as well.
This was borne out years ago in the auto insurance market where the more libertarian states had lax enforcement on mandatory collision coverage. Rates were comparatively higher in those states.
One uncertainty for these Covered California rates is that ObamaCare creates a unique market that includes people who aren't accustomed to having insurance. I read somewhere that roughly 40 percent of users will be subsidized. Then there is an unknown number who will refuse to participate and others who enroll but later drop out. No doubt the insurers in the exchange have modeled all this.