Republicans have long blamed President Obama’s signature health care initiative for increasing insurance costs, dubbing it the “Unaffordable Care Act.”
Turns out, they might be right.
For the vast majority of Americans, premium prices will be higher in the individual exchange than what they’re currently paying for employer-sponsored benefits, according to a National Journal analysis of new coverage and cost data. Adding even more out-of-pocket expenses to consumers’ monthly insurance bills is a swell in deductibles under the Affordable Care Act.
Health law proponents have excused the rate hikes by saying the prices in the exchange won’t apply to the millions receiving coverage from their employers. But that’s only if employers continue to offer that coverage–something that’s looking increasingly uncertain. Already, UPS, for example, cited Obamacare as its reason for nixing spousal coverage. And while a Kaiser Family Foundation report found that 49 percent of the U.S. population now receives employer-sponsored coverage, more companies are debating whether they will continue to be in the business of providing such benefits at all.
Economists largely agree there won’t be a sea change among employers offering coverage. But they’re also saying small businesses are still in play.
Caroline Pearson, vice president at Avalere Health, a health care and public policy advisory firm, said there’s a calculation low-wage companies will make to determine if there’s cost savings in sending employees to the exchanges.
“The amount you have to gross up their wages so they can get their own insurance and the cost of the penalties may add up to less than the cost of providing care,” she said.
It’s a choice companies are already making. The number of employers offering coverage has declined, from 66 percent in 2003 to 57 percent today, according to Kaiser’s study.
More at National Journal
Hmm…that’s why health care premiums are down in 11 states so far and people have already been receiving their rebate checks from insurance companies.? Nice try!
@This One: I got a rebate check for $381 and insurance for my employees and myself jumped 25% to $4,000 a month.
@This One:
Hey I’d like to know those 11 states and how much the health insurance premiums have dropped. Site the source with details.
@This One:
Riiiiight. So if health insurance rates are going down, why are companies like UPS and places like University of Virginia dropping coverage? Why are companies cutting hours to under 30 per week all over the place, claiming that the increased obamacare costs make it prohibitive for them?
It would make no sense for companies to do this if obamacare was actually bringing rates down.
UPS et al are dropping coverage in order to reduce cost and retain a higher profit. There is no connection in their decision and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Nothing. They are simply using ACA as a scapegoat. Several new sources have challenged UPS to explain precisely what ACA has to do with it and they’ve been unanswered. In reality, as the very report sited here tells us, health care costs have doubled in the past decade while actually slowing to 9% over the past 2 years.
And Pete, you’re still bellowing that debunked nonsense that the sky’s falling because of all those cut hours and lost jobs. Once again dude, it ain’t happening by any significant numbers which I’ve argued and gave links to which you continue to cover your ears and sing “la la la” to. Yes, there will be a few that may want to cut their nose off to spite their face but it’s not happening on any large scale or anywhere near that.
If ACA is guilty of anything, it’s of allowing the GOP to water the law down and not doing enough to keep health care cost down which in turn, forces premiums up. The goal seemed to be to bring more uninsured into the system immediately while focusing on more of a long term health care savings strategy. And when you tout all these people opposed to “Obamacare”, as many as a 3rd will tell you that this is an issue they have problems with. You remind be of a few years ago when right wing blogs went nuts over some businessman chanting “We are not hiring until Obama is gone”. From any rational business perspective, that simply defies logic.
But once again, our elected Republican officials don’t seem interested in resolving or correcting flaws in the law, many a product of their choosing, but rather insistent of ending it all together, returning us to a deficit exploding healthcare problem, allow premiums to rise unchecked, kick 33 + million out of health care access, allow carriers to return to the practice of denying coverage to people when they get sick, and bar people with preexisting conditions from acquiring insurance.
How precisely is it arguable that the prior Obama health care system wasn’t failing the very customers it was selling to, an overwhelming number of Americans, the economy, business growth, or even governments?
If that were true these organizations’ statements about the cause of their changes in healthcare would stand alone.
But….scan down….
Now, here you are.
How on earth do you rationalize THESE comments from LABOR LEADERS???
We all know that money is fungible, in that it can be moved from here to there in a business’ budget chart.
But those are LABOR LEADERS who are liberals and who WANTED ObamaCare…..until they found out what was in it.
Now they want exemptions to ObamaCare or they want ObamaCare gone.
They see what IT, not bottom line profits, is doing to the workers and their families.
Why can’t you see it?
@This One:
Well it looks like another hit and run fraud post…Still waiting for details….
@Ronald J. Ward:
That progressive koolaid will never cover the stench of inherent failure.
Mr. Ward, if obamacare was supposed to provide insurance to the alleged 30 million uninsured, why is the CBO saying that even under obamacare there will still be 30 million uninsured by 2022? You smugly assert that UPS is not dropping insurance to save money and not because of obamacare, despite their very clear statent that obamacare is the reason. They cannot afford to pay the higher costs of obamacare if they want to stay in business. The university of virginia stated they were cutting hours and coverage because obamacare would cost them an additional $7 million per year. Forever 21, the clothing chain, came out and cut hours for nonmanagerial positions to less than 30 hours and stated it was due to the additional costs of obamacare. These are not the only examples, and your persistent claim that companies aren’t cutting hours and benefits due to obamacare do not stand up to scrutiny.
Please explain how adding layers of government bureaucracy (including 15, 000 new IRS agents), hoardes of nonmedical no-background checked navigators but not one single additional physician can possibly bring down medical care costs and improve access to medical care. Please explain how even Richard Trumka, a screaming leftist labor mob boss, has to admit obamacare is a disaster, because it endangers the 40 hour work week and uts worker benefits, yet you insist companies are not cutting hours and benefits.
Not a single republican voted for obamacare, and with very good reason, as we can see from the results thus far. This socialist turd belongs solely to democrats, no matter how much progressives falsely squeal that the problems stem from republican recalcitrance in implementing this leftist boondoggle.
Obamacare was supposeded to allow us to keep our insurance and our doctors if we liked them. That has not turned out true. Obama told us taxes would not go up a single dime for people making less than $250, 000 and that is not true. Obamacare was explicitly defined as “not a tax” when the leftists were cramming it down our throats, but obama’s lawyers certainly argued it was a tax in multiple court actions, another lie fed us by Obama. Obamacare was necessary to ensure the alleged 30 million uninsured would have insurance, and now that is shown to be another lie. Based on so much falsehood, why would anyone be expected to believe anything obamacare supporters spew about the purported benefits of this disaster? Even in NJ, hardly a hotspot of conservatism, over 100, 000 people are being told that the low cost health insurance they have been using is going away because it doesn’t meet the obamacare criteria, so these people now have to buy more expensive insurance.
Obamacare makes me, a 48 year old man, pay for things I neither want nor need. I do not need birth control, nor maternity care, nor chiropractic care, nor breast exams. Neither does a woman need prostate exam coverage, or coverage for testicular exams. The way to bring costs down is to let individuals purchase insurance based on their actual risks, which obamacare most certainly does not do. Obamacare also does nothing at all to curb malpractice abuse.
You still cannot answer a simple question regarding employer provided insurance. If obamacare was capable of bringing costs down rather than making them rise significantly, then why are companies working so hard to cut health insurance benefits? If costs were going down, wouldn’t a company attract better workers by offering better benefits, especially if the cost of such benefits were lower under obamacare?
And as far as your so called cites….show me something that doesn’t come from Huffpo, some pro-obama cheerleading site, or a government organization that isn’t involved in cramming this socialist nightmare down our throats, and you might have some credibility. When I can get data from the CBO admitting that obamacare is looking to cost more than triple what the original propaganda claimed, your references are not believable. And no amount of your “blah blah blah” changes that.
And now Aetna has announced it is pulling out of a fifth obamacare state health exchange, NY.
United Health, Blue Cross and Aetna are all refusing to participate in California’s exchange. So much for bringing costs down as there will be less competition under Obamacare.
@Pete: It’s becoming increasingly difficult to try to have an adult conversation when one is so not only politically blind and consumed with abject bigotry, but simply invents their own facts out of thin air.
You dismiss reality if it doesn’t come from a source of your liking (“Huffpo, some pro-obama cheerleading site, or a government organization”) and you dismiss them when they do (I’ve linked Fox News, Redstate, et al) , making facts somewhat subject to your interpretation or for you to simply pretend they don’t exist. And in your world of believing what you want to believe, you matter-of-factly insist that my argument that UPS benefit cuts are directly related to ACA because, well, oh here’s the proof- UPS said so, making a “very clear statent(sic) that obamacare is the reason” so there. I mean, the hell with what overwhelming news sources point out, if a corporation says something, particularly one as big as UPS, well, it’s just gotta be true.
You completely ignore the consequences of a complete repeal while regurgitating as many negative aspects of the law that you can find, which our elected leaders should be working to correct.
Nan G, it’s rather funny that while I’m chastised for using sources not deemed credible, you convict ACA of forcing UPS to cut back benefits with a link to an editorial on Investers.com? And even that rant, much like the comments here, cannot rationalize or connect the insurance losses to The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They are using ACA as a scapegoat, an excuse. Nowhere is there math that justifies otherwise. It’s simply an opportune time for a major employee to exploit their workers while raking in record profits. And that trend will escalate under GOP/Corporate rule.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Shove your false bigotry claims. Richard. My opposition to Obama has nothing to do with his skin color, and everything to do with the marxist nature of his policies. Your pathetic attempt to brand me a racist only highlights the weakness of your argument.
Obamacare is an unmitigated disaster that should be repealed in its entirety. No amount of bandaid fixes will ever make it workable.
CBO claims it will cost roughly triple what was originally projected.
It will do nothing to decrease the number of uninsured, by government estimate.
It raises taxes on everyone, despite the false claims Obama made.
We were told we could keep our doctor and insurance plan if we liked them, which is not the case.
Multiple aspects of the law have been delayed beyond the next election, for purely political purposes. If these elements were going to have such a whizbang positive effect, then shouldn’t they be implemented when the law defines them to start?
Over 1000 waivers have been granted by Sebelius. If the law is so wonderful, why are these waivers necessary?
These are simple questions that cut to the heart of obamacare’s inherent failure. It cannot ever do what its supporters claimed it would do, but it damned sure is having every negative effect we who are opposed to it have said would happen.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Typical Socialist pabulum designed to fool the ignorant masses.
How is UPS “exploiting” their workers? Had you bothered to notice, it affects only those “white-collar” workers who are NOT the rank and file of UPS. UPS drivers, dock hands, et al, are all Teamsters with Teamster, not UPS, retirement and health insurance benefits. Oh, wait, the Teamsters Union are now complaining about Obamacare and how it will destroy the “40 hour” work week for its members.
This letter was signed by James P. Hoffa, President of the International Teamster’s Union.
You see, they got out the vote for a bunch of snakes that put the screws to them the first chance the D.C. elite could. This, in the reign of Obama, is what loyalty buys. But the white-collar workers of UPS and the staff at various universities are not the only ones that are going to take a hit.
When the ACA was written by Democrats, lobbyists and the union goons who are now complaining, the cost of health insurance given to an AT&T employee was valued at $10,400/yr for the employee only, not including any dependents. So the ACA was written that any health insurance benefit to be considered a “Cadillac” plan would be valued at $10,600/yr and over and will be taxable at 40%. Oooops, in four years, the value has increased to almost $11,000/yr for AT&T employers. Guess they will be happy that their union, the CWA, pushed for that law. Those plans are now subject to tax.
Another great piece of that legislation is that it allows for companies who do not provide health insurance for employees to be “fined.” Think about that; AT&T could decide to NOT provide health insurance to its employees any longer, pay the annual fine per employee (since they are NOT required to cover dependents), and save thousands and thousands of dollars on just that one employee alone. And what is the CWA going to do? Strike? The CWA did that before and wound up with less than they had before the strike.
Obamacare is a disaster in the making. People are going to lose their health insurance, their full time work schedules, the health insurance of their dependents, their doctors and all because we have become a nation that thinks we are owed something beside the right to seek a job. And God forbid companies that were created for making a profit for their creators want to stay in business and not become some charitable organization.
Health care insurance is not a right as claimed by Obama.
@Pete: As for your long list of unsubstantiated claims, I think we’ve been through that. You dismissed my claims because you felt my links were bias while your links were, uh, well, oh you didn’t include any did you??
Don’t confuse the definition of bigotry. While a racist can be construed as a bigot, bigotry isn’t confined to meaning racist. It’s kinda like one could be prejudiced because they favor their child in a beauty contest over their neighbor’s child but it has no bearing on them being a racist. Accordingly, I never called you a racist.
I addressed you on the ACA in my comment #20 on another thread, Ronald J. Ward. In that comment, I referenced a response to Pete, with links and documentation, for you to read in my comment #4 on yet another thread.
Using BLS, CBO and sundry other federal agency projections for the burden of a smaller labor force carrying the increased weight of financing those on Medicare, SCHIPS and the expansion of Medicaid that is the heart of the ACA, it is simply unsustainable in math. I also went thru the math with Tom back in Sept 2012 in my comment #65, providing more details.
I noticed that you decided to ignore the math and my links/references. Why is that?
The bottom line is irrefutable. There is nothing that any Congress can “correct” when the labor force and demographics prove that the ACA and increased Medicaid is unsustainable. The ACA needs repeal. What Congress should do is what they refused to do in the ACA… implement any possible measures that would make the delivery of medical care by providers more affordable.
Adding close to 30 million more people on Medicaid, and price fixing insurance premiums, does not accomplish that. Ergo, there is nothing to “correct” in the current law save for repeal, and going after the real problem… the costs of providing medical care that drive up the bills that private (or public) insurance carriers have to bear.
There are things the government can do to lower costs…
1: provide for private (and public) entities to buy equipment, drugs and medical supplies in warehouse bulk so that pools of providers can access these for lesser costs
2: Address the malpractice laws that require medical providers to deliver treatment based around litigation risk, eliminating useless treatments and tests that aren’t necessary save for lawsuits
3: Consider a pay for results vs piled on hit and run treatments that drive up costs
4: Allow all health carriers to provide basic plans nation wide, and offer riders to the base plan to accomodate for State mandates (this way you’re portable. just swap riders when you relocate)
5: Allow for ala carte/tier based insurance coverage on a VERY basic plan. There’s no reason I should be paying for family planning services, abortion and other unnecessary services at my age save to subsidize those that do want that coverage. Homeowners insurance already does this in a similar way by providing riders for jewely etc. This way people can customize their insurance for their needs, adding on catastrophic or other services as their needs change.
6: Allow for easy creation of private nationwide “groups”, thereby eliminating the need for “individual” plans to exist. Power in numbers.
7: And knock off this “you have to see a primary doctor before you see a specialist” crap. If I have a derma problem, or ENT problem, why do I have to see one doctor just so he can send me to another? Just middle man $ waste.
Don’t mind the exchanges… sort of a Lending Tree/Travelocity/Priceline type shopping. What I mind is that they are government run (local or federal), and that government decides what the base plan needs to include… most of which a bulk of boomers don’t need.
Added: I forgot that basic care/primary doctors and patients should be encourage and allowed to negotiate fixed monthly payments for basic check ups, minor injuries, not paid out of insurance policies, but cash. Thus HSAs should be encouraged, and tax deductible.
One more observation:
If you want to make this about partisan politics… and I prefer to keep this focused on fiscal reality instead… I’ll play that game for a moment.
If private industry is using the ACA as a scapegoat, then the party that enabled that scapegoat is the Democrats with the ACA. Why you think this would “worsen” under a GOP doesn’t make much sense.
The fact is, both parties are short sighted and have enabled unsustainable fiscal debt first via the SSA, followed by the creation of Medicare decades ago. They are just piling on to that short sightedness with the expansion of a third entitlement, Medicaid. As I keep pointing out, both the trend for the labor force and demographics obviously show this to be foolhardy.
As for private industry using the “outs”, the ACA provided the biggest by pass when they told employers (of minimum size) that they had one of two choices… provide an insurance plan, or don’t provide an insurance plan and pay a fine… er, tax. Prior to the ACA, employers willingly provided insurance as an incentive to attract higher quality employees. So the ability to jack around their employees was a gift from the Dems with the ACA.
Now each company will use the ACA, not as a “scapegoat”, but as the convenient bypass to take the lesser costing option and drop their plans… again with this loophole courtesy of the Dems and their ill constructed ACA. Fabulous idea, eh? /sarc
United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS)’s
decision to drop health benefits for 15,000 of its workers’
spouses may be a sign of the future, as U.S. businesses grapple
with rising medical bills and the added burdens of Obamacare.
The nation’s fourth-largest employer said yesterday that it
will no longer offer health coverage beginning Jan. 1 to spouses
who can get it though another company. UPS cited the 2010
health-care law as part of its thinking, saying it would
increase costs and provide other insurance options for spouses.
http://news.gnom.es/news/ups-ending-health-coverage-for-spouses-signals-cost-cuts?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ups-ending-health-coverage-for-spouses-signals-cost-cuts
NEWS.GNOM.ES is a nationally syndicated newswire service that delivers daily news, current events and the latest press releases to a wide variety of national media, business and consumer audiences.
Based in Chicago, Illinois, the NEWS.GNOM.ES newswire service is a leading source of breaking news, consumer information and original news content, dedicated to the development and free distribution of top-quality news content.
The pdf of UPS’s 19 page memo:
http://capsules.kaiserhealthnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/UPS-Spousal-Coverage.pdf
As I said money is fungible.
That’s why UPS said ObamaCare is only PART of the reason they are dropping spousal coverage.
BUT what I wrote about UNIONS stands.
Unions are led by LIBERALS.
THEY are scared over ObamaCare.
They want exemptions and it looks like Obama wants to give them the money (exemptions) originally meant for the poor!!!!
White House Considers Awarding Obamacare Subsidies, Intended For The Uninsured, To Labor Unions
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/30/white-house-considers-awarding-obamacare-subsidies-intended-for-the-uninsured-to-labor-unions/
See also:
Think Obama gives a damn about ”the poor?” Think again!
@Ronald J. Ward:
Nice dodge. I have included links to all the claims I made on multiple other threads on this topic. You can google them for yourself. CBO obamacare cost estimate is a great search term. Others on this thread have also already provided you with cites that support my claims, so I don’t need to be redundant.
The primary definition of “bigot” in the online Mirriam Webster dictionary refers to a bigot as having racial or ethnic prejudice. You are defining bigotry as tbe same thing as having preferences now that I called you on your shenanigans. Words mean things, Mr. Ward. Being opposed to Obama’s policies is not bigotry.