Tuesday, July 23, 2013

California and New York See Huge Obamacare Savings



We all know how the opponents of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) predicted the destruction of the universe, and the restaurant at the end of it, if it passed. And we all know how many times the Republicans in the House have voted to repeal it.

But has the Republican Noise Machine bothered to tell their Chicken Littles anything about the good news that's been reported concerning the ACA?








Other than the sound of their heads exploding over President Obama's remarks after the Zimmerman trial, I've heard nothing.


Report: Obamacare's '80/20' rule has led to nearly $4 billion in savingsAs "Obamacare" continues to be one of the most controversial pieces of legislation ever implemented, a new report shows that Americans saved nearly $4 billion in 2012 due to a key provision in the Affordable Care Act. 

 The American people have often been divided by the new health care reform, and with all Americans required to be covered with insurance by January 2014, uncertainties are up in the air. While "Obamacare" is controversial, a new report shows that it has saved consumers billions of dollars. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the new "80/20" rule, which requires insurers to spend 80 percent of every dollar earned on medical services, helped saved American consumers $3.9 billion in 2012. 

 The savings were divided into two areas. About $3.4 billion was saved by insurers keeping their premiums lower in order to comply with the new law and $500 million came in the form of rebates being sent back to consumers who overpaid for their premiums. The total cost wasn't solely the result of the "80/20" rule, but it was the leading cause of premiums being kept at a lower level. 

 While some states have seen a rise in premiums, the result has not been pinpointed. Premiums often increase with each passing year, but "Obamacare" being the sole reason for the increase is not factual. A new report released last month noted that premiums in California will see a large decrease due to subsidies from the federal government. 

 "Rates will vary by region, age and level of coverage, and many lower-income Californias will qualify for federal subsidies that will greatly lower the premiums. The plans will come in four tiers, ranging from bronze to platinum. The former will charge lower premiums, but carry higher out-of-pocket benefits, and the latter will have the highest premiums but have the lowest out-of-pocket costs."


Here is Paul Krugman, Nobel Laureate in Economics:


"Still, here’s what it seems is about to happen: millions of Americans will suddenly gain health coverage, and millions more will feel much more secure knowing that such coverage is available if they lose their jobs or suffer other misfortunes....
 So yes, it does look as if there’s an Obamacare shock coming: the shock of learning that a public program designed to help a lot of people can, strange to say, end up helping a lot of people — especially when government officials actually try to make it work"


And here's an opposing view by Peter Ferrara of Forbes:


"He overlooks the equal millions of Americans that will suddenly not get health coverage under “universal” Obamacare, the millions more who will choose not to get health insurance “secure knowing that such coverage is available” if they get sick later, the tens of millions who will lose their employer provided health insurance, regardless of whether they like that coverage or not, the millions more who will lose their full time jobs for part time jobs with lower incomes and no benefits, becoming truly middle class in the Obama/Krugman era, where middle class is just another word for declining real incomes." 


 Though opinions might vary on the new health care reform, millions of Americans will now have access to affordable health care. Whether you think the government should have a role is an open question and one that may or may not fit into your political ideology."

Here's another thought:  The Republicans in Congress  made a pact on the night of Mr. Obama's inauguration in January of 2009 to obstruct any and all proposed legislation, appointments, and programs so that his presidency will be a failure.

If they had worked with President Obama to help fine tune and implement what they themselves had proposed as an answer to our national health care crisis, perhaps a plan with fewer problems could have been hammered out through compromise.  But the GOP, in thrall to extreme ideologues, did all they could to scare the American people into believing that the passage of the ACA would be tantamount to treason and the descent into totalitarianism led by the America-hater, Kenyan Usurper, Barack Hussein Obama.

A list of those hideous totalitarian governments that provide universal coverage for  their citizens is HERE.

And here is a list of the countries from the World Health Organization that are better than the USA [ranked at 38] at providing health care to their citizens:

France
Italy
San Marino
Andorra
Malta
Singapore
Spain
Oman
Austria
Japan
Norway
Portugal
Monaco
Greece
Iceland
Luxemborg
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Ireland
Switzerland
Belgium
Columbia
Sweden
Cyprus
Germany
Saudi Arabia
UAE
Israel
Morocco
Canada
Finland
Australia
Chile
Argentina
Denmark
Dominica
Costa Rica
United States of America

Here's another ranking from Business Insider that ranks the USA better than WHO.  In their ranking we're not #38, we're #37!



U.S. Ranks Last Among Seven Countries on Health System Performance Based on Measures of Quality, Efficiency, Access, Equity, and Healthy Lives


"New York, NY, June 23, 2010—Despite having the most expensive health care system, the United States ranks last overall compared to six other industrialized countries—Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom—on measures of health system performance in five areas: quality, efficiency, access to care, equity and the ability to lead long, healthy, productive lives, according to a new Commonwealth Fund report. While there is room for improvement in every country, the U.S. stands out for not getting good value for its health care dollars, ranking last despite spending $7,290 per capita on health care in 2007 compared to the $3,837 spent per capita in the Netherlands, which ranked first overall."



New Health Rankings: Of 17 Nations, U.S. Is Dead Last


Throughout the battle to pass legislation to bring the United States in line with other developed western democracies, President Obama received not one vote for the ACA from the GOP.  And yet that same political party has offered nothing as an alternative except to vote to overturn the only legislation that addresses our health care crisis. That's not political opposition; that's self-destructive obstinancy and insanity.


The GOP will pay dearly for it as the benefits of Obamacare continue to be reported. 
 

10 comments:

  1. Nobel laureate -- hah! What does he know. He probably doesn't get his opinions from Fox. You should know that facts don't matter, it's whether something substantiates the faith or not that matters, so even when taxes go down they're up and if crime goes down it goes up and if something doesn't work it we have to do more of it.

    Whaddaya, some kinda Commie or somthin?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can't have misery and death without a Republican. Bring 'em on.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Here's what I know personally: Before this legislation I was at the mercy of the health insurance companies who saw fit to stick me with a "pre-exisitng condition" that might cause cancer. I have an immune disorder that causes hypothyroidism. Because some study links an increase risk of cancer with hypothyroidism, the insurance companies have always slapped me with an exclusion - their logic? I have never had cancer, in any form, but I MIGHT get it.
    With Obamacare I can now rest easier knowing my insurance can't screw me should I actually one day be diagnosed with cancer. This really kept me up nights imagining how quickly we would be wiped out if I had to be treated for cancer. We should not have to worry about such things and thanks to the President we no longer have to.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gonna be interesting. The pro ObamaCare folks are raving about the early returns in California and New York. BEFORE FULL IMPLEMENTATION KICKS IN.

    I say let the whole damn piece of legislation kick in (yep, the law we had to pass to find out what was in it as Ms Pelosi advocated) and five or so years after FULL implementation lets talk again.

    Cause nobody knows what it will be bring for certain. I mean. we just gotta try it to find out. Right?

    Deal?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Let me preface my remark by saying that I fully supported and continue to support the president and the congress in their efforts to reform healthcare insurance in this nation. The PPACA has some wonderful features which have been mentioned by the author of this post as well as rockync. Yet it is far too complicated of an issue and a little bit too early to trumpet huge savings. Savings was never the immediate goal of this reform. The idea was to eliminate the injustices suffered by those who fell between the cracks. The other side of the coin was to simultaneously provide new coverage for the uninsured as well as provide a larger pool for the insurers. The biggest losers in the healthcare system we have today, now as it has always been for the last forty years, remain the uninsured who are faced with catastrophic and very real enormous bills which they remain obligated to pay usually by losing their homes, savings and tangible assets. That hasn't changed. Obama can't pretend to be King David or Charlemagne. As you pointed out, we could have hammered out a better deal if we had not been trying to court Olympia Snowe and that sickening traitor, Joe Lieberman.

    I can't speak for the great state of New York. But to say that California has seen huge savings is simply not true. Neither for business, medical practices who insure their employees or for private individuals who pay their own way with their own, and sometimes meager, resources. The opposite is true in many cases. An example. Blue Cross of California raised it rates twice in the last two years on private pay plans. Amounting to a 50% increase in the premiums that I personally had to pay for Blue Cross Anthem PPO insurance. I'm talking from $495/month to a whopping $752/month beginning January 1st, 2013. That's right. I was lucky enough to be in a position to cancel this insurance. It felt good. The guy on the telephone told me I was a fool to do it. I was "grandfathered in" after continuous coverage for the last twenty-eight years. That doesn't mean much. Only that they wouldn't be able to cancel me or refuse to start my insurance again after a period of inactivity. He told me that I would be under "Obamacare." I almost peed my pants. Under Obamacare, they would have been forced to take me back or prevented from cancelling me NO MATTER WHAT. You guessed it. The ONLY reason I saw my premiums go up was in direct retaliation to the passage of PPACA.

    Some nice things about PPACA? No refusal for pre-existing conditions. No arbitrary cancellation. Family coverage for dependent children up to age 26. Want to know why the 80/20 rule is nice on paper but really means nothing? Because the insurers and providers are blood brothers and partners. Just re-read Bitter Pill and thank your lucky stars that you have never personally been destroyed by the chargemaster. Hospitals routinely charge double the value of their services and then "negotiate" the price down with their insurance providers by as much as 50%, if not more.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Again, I go back to my comments where I've said that had the GOP worked together with this president on forging a workable universal health care law, perhaps all the glitches and downside of the ACA could have been avoided.

    I hold the GOP solely responsible for what the law lacks.

    The GOP had no interest whatsoever in working to give the American people universal health care, even when President Obama incorporated much of the right's ideas into the ACA.

    The present GOP is a rogue party that doesn't govern. It sabotages.

    It could almost be seen as the enemy of the American people.

    Their main goal, as we've seen since the ACA passed, is to repeal it and, thereby, plunge into disaster the American people currently enjoying its benefits.

    The GOP has not proposed anything comprehensive to replace what has passed into law and what the Supreme Court has said is constitutional.

    Again, that behavior from an opposition party reminds me of the anti-abolishionists of the 1850s who used everything in their legislative power and more--murder even--to defeat any movement against slavery.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anne,

    Had it not been for Massachusetts' Romneycare, I don't know what would have happened to me when I discovered I had breast cancer and that the health coverage my soon to be ex had provided covered almost nothing toward my care.

    As a result of the humane Massachusetts health care coverage, I went into my treatments not fearing I would lose my home and everything I had worked for in my life.

    And I didn't get thrown off of the Mass.Care either. Fortunately for me and my family when I had to fight another cancer battle 3 years later.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I remember and I imagine it must have been a great relief to know you were covered while you fought the battle of your life - for your life. So many others did not have that security under our prior health care system.
      The old system was broken and while this first attempt may indeed have problems, it certainly is a step in the right direction and it can be revised.

      Delete
  9. "The present GOP is a rogue party that doesn't govern. It sabotages."

    Isn't that the truth, Shaw. Look at what happened the last time there were in power.
    The biggest terrorist attack on American soil.
    Two wars.
    A destroyed economy.

    Since then, nothing but bitching, moaning, and obstructionism.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.