Linda Gorman describes how the so-called Affordable Care Act required one Coloradan to leave Colorado’s high-risk pool for a plan on Colorado’s health insurance exchange, Connect for Health Colorado. The premiums are similar, but the exchange plan’s a narrow physician network did not include her doctor. Read more: Colorado Health Exchange Premiums Roughly Equal to Those of High Risk Pool | John Goodman’s Health Policy Blog | NCPA.org.
Tag Archives: Linda Gorman
Colorado Health Exchange premiums ~ equal to high-risk pool premiums, and you can’t keep your doctor.
The Denver Post reports:
A key architect and a sharp opponent of national health care reform clashed in a debate Thursday over how much “Obamacare” limits consumer choice and holds hope of cutting costs. …
[Linda] Gorman of the Independence Institute said the subsidies and patient-managing plans of “Obamacare” wipe consumer choice out of the picture. By contrast, Gorman said, procedures where buyers know the price and have real choice, like Lasik eye surgery and urgent-care centers, have seen costs come down through true competition.
Also see Linda’s one-page issue backgrounder against ObamaCare: The Real Cost of ObamaCare: The End Of Reforms Promising Personal, Private, Portable, Affordable Health Care
Look forward to more costly errors at the expense of your tax dollars. The new health control legislation (HR 3590) expands Medicaid eligibility. Linda Gorman points out that Colorado Medicaid’s error rate in paying claims is much higher than private insurers. Her reference is the 2009 State of Colorado Statewide SIngle Audit. The section of Medicaid starts on page. 217.
A July 30 statement from a group calling itself “Colorado Deserves Better” said that Colorado Amendment 63 (Health Care Choice) “would isolate Colorado from health care costs savings by shrinking the risk pool in Colorado.” This is unlikely, and even so, it’s unethical.
Even if larger risk pools result in cost savings (for whom?), this no justification for mandatory health plans. How about legislation mandating that everyone who buys an iPhone also buy the extended warranty? A warranty is a type of insurance, after all. Mandatory warranties would expands the risk pool, and hence lower the costs of the warranty. But this exploits the people who prefer not to buy the warranty and insure against iPhone-related risks in other ways.
You might counter this by saying that a health plan is different, and that the uninsured are free-riders who increase everyone else’s health plan premiums when they don’t pay. As I’ve written before, this cost-shift from the uninsured is tiny, especially when compared to how much Medicaid and Medicare increase premiums.
Do you own a small business, or are you involved in its benefits administration? The new health control bill (HR 3590) has a small business tax credit. But you get it if you satisfy certain criteria, which are a bit complicated to follow. Representative Dave Camp (R-Mich) of the House Ways and Means Committee has put together a flow chart (pdf detailing how it works. It’s a fine illustration of how authoritarian politicians use legislation to control people’s behavior, as if they were puppets or pawns.
The above chart is from Connie Hair at Human Events, who quotes Dave Camp:
“The health care law is going to drive up premiums even further and, as this chart shows, it forces small business to work through an exceedingly complex set of calculations just to find out they may not be eligible to receive any help at all,” said Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. “No wonder the nation’s leading small business organization is suing to overturn the law. We need to repeal this law and replace it with health care reforms that lower costs for small businesses, families and taxpayers.”
(via Linda Gorman.)
The Heritage Foundation has a useful graphic showing the tax increases associated with ObamaCare, HR 3590, the so-called “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” It’s from a new report titled Obamacare: Impact on Taxpayers. Here’s the abstract:
The hodgepodge of new taxes that have already or will soon take effect as a result of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act may not all show up in the income tax tables, but their huge cost is still very real. This cost will become most apparent in lost wages and international competitiveness, and it reduces middle- and low-income families’ wages just as surely as an income tax hike would. These taxes break President Barack Obama’s promise not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year.
And the chart:
March a number of people and organizations* filed a Motion for Rehearing [pdf] in regards to the Colorado Right Health Care Choice Initiative. The Motion contains a number of arguments that claiming that the Title Board lacks jurisdiction over the measure’s contents, which I suppose would mean the its contents are not legally appropriate for a ballot initiative. I am not knowledgeable enough on this subject to comment.
Yet, I will comment on section 5(c):
The “right of all persons to health care choice” is misleading, as the measure prohibits certain “choices,” such as choices that have universal [sic] health care coverage or a single payer system.
But you have no right to make choices that prohibit other people’s choices to voluntarily exchange goods and services with others. Single payer health care does just this. Government is the single payer. Hence you may not legally choose to pay for your health care with your own money, or choose to purchase a health plan or insurance product that pays for your health care.
Even if nominally private method of payment are allowed under single-payer, your right to choose is still violated because government requires you to pay for the government plan. This is money you could otherwise spend on medical treatment or insurance according to your own best judgment, rather than the judgments of the ruling class.
If you want to address misleading phrases, how about “universal” health care? One of my first articles about health care was called, “Universal” health care kills. The term glosses over a major point of health care politics: having coverage doesn’t mean you get medical care.
* The movants are: Dr. Mark Earnest, Peter Leibig, Aleber Schnellbacker, Jr., AARP Colorado, the Colorado Community Health Network, the Colorado Coalition for the Medical Underserved, and the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative
(Thanks to Linda Gorman for the heads up.)