Charles Blahous of the Mercatus Center and Hoover Institution describes how the ObamaCare he made in 2010 have proved correct, and the predictions of Obamacare supports have proved false. The predictions include:
- States will make a variety of decisions with respect to expanding Medicaid.
- Expanding Medicaid will cost the states money, in part because of the “woodwork effect.”
- The ACA will significantly worsen the federal budget deficit.
- Expanding health insurance coverage will increase health service consumption and costs.
- There was a substantial risk that cost savings projected for several ACA provisions would not fully materialize.
Read more: I Was Right About the ACA | e21 – Economic Policies for the 21st Century.
John R. Graham writes:
This result is important for anticipating the consequences of ObamaCare. About half of the 30-plus million people expected to get health insurance under ObamaCare will be enrolled in Medicaid, not private health insurance. Already, the Administration asserts that four million new Medicaid enrollees have signed up via ObamaCare (but this estimate has been questioned).
Nobody should be surprised: Despite politicians’ assertion that Medicaid coverage increases the likelihood of using primary care, rather than an ER, the evidence points clearly to the contrary. For example, in Massachusetts, ER use soared by 17 percent two years after Gov. Romney’s law mandating insurance coverage came into effect.
Read more: Least Surprising Health Research Result Ever
See also “Medicaid Expansion Drives up Visits to ER,” Wall Street Journal, January 2, 2014.
From the Wall Street Journal:
In many states, an elderly person may own a home valued at $802,000, plus home furnishings, jewelry and an automobile of uncapped value while receiving long-term Medicaid support. In addition, they are allowed to have various life-insurance policies, retirement accounts with unlimited assets, $115,920 in assets for a spouse, income from Social Security, and a defined-benefit pension plan. By most standards, such a household would be considered wealthy.
via Mark Warshawsky: Millionaires on Medicaid – WSJ.com.
via the National Center for Policy Analysis
On December 30, Michael Booth of the Denver Post writes:
Free money now, untold costs later.
That’s the dilemma facing Gov. John Hickenlooper, state officials and legislators in 2013 as they contemplate one of the biggest questions in Colorado’s health future: Should we jump into the historic expansion of Medicaid that is a key element of health-care reform?
Read more: Will Colorado go all-out to broaden Medicaid pool?
Health economist John C. Goodman summarizes the poor medical outcomes on people enrolled in Medicaid, compared to those with commercial insurance or the uninsured. He notes:
[Austin] Frakt points to some studies finding that Medicaid makes a positive difference over being uninsured. But the results would probably have been just as good or better if we spent the money giving free care to vulnerable populations. Moreover, even with their Medicaid cards, enrollees turn to emergency rooms for their care twice as often as the privately insured and the uninsured.
Read Goodman’s whole post: How Bad Is Care under Medicaid?
James Capretta and Yuval Levin of the American Enterprise Institute in the Wall Street Journal:
Champions of ObamaCare want Americans to believe that the president’s re-election ended the battle over the law. It did no such thing. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act won’t be fully repealed while Barack Obama is in office, but the administration is heavily dependent on the states for its implementation. …
Talk of the law’s inevitability is intended to pressure these governors into implementing it on the administration’s behalf. But states still have two key choices to make that together will put them in the driver’s seat: whether to create state health-insurance exchanges, and whether to expand Medicaid. They should say “no” to both.
Read the whole article: James Capretta and Yuval Levin: Why ObamaCare Is Still No Sure Thing – WSJ.com.
From the American Enterprise Institute:
In “A Nation of Takers,” author Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute draws on an impressive array of data to detail the exponential growth in America’s entitlement spending, which today accounts for a full two-thirds of the federal budget. Eberstadt shows in unflinching detail how this runaway spending is having a very real, long-lasting, negative impact on the character of our citizens.
John C. Goodman writes:
It’s painful to read Paul Krugman when he writes about health care. Makes you wonder how he ever won the Nobel Prize. Previously, he made the absurd claim that in repealing health reform Mitt Romney would allow “tens of thousands” of people to die. In his latest venture into the field, about which he knows embarrassingly little, he has this to say …
Read more: Krugman Flunks Health Econ 101 | John Goodman’s Health Policy Blog | NCPA.org.