Posted by Kromey at 3:20pm Jan 9 '11There was a lot of noise made by the Democrats, Obama's administration, and the liberals on this very site about the various projections and predictions made about the health care law.
How are those panning out?
Not well, in fact. "According to the Medicare actuary, 375,000 people should have already signed up for the new high-risk pools for the uninsured, but only 8,000 have." Ouch, high-balled that one by more than 4,687%!! But that means that costs are lower than projected, right? Actually, "New Hampshire's plan has only about 80 members, but the state has already burned through nearly double the $650,000 that the federal government allotted to help run the program."
Yikes! Not looking good for the health care plan that wasn't supposed to cost a whole lot, is it? " The Congressional Budget Office projects that 19 million people will move to the exchanges at a cost of $450 billion between 2014 and 2019. But according to the economists Douglas Holtz-Eakin and James C. Capretta, costs could soar to $1.4 trillion if those who would be better off in the exchanges actually moved to them."
And to top it all off, the courts have begun weighing in on the law, and so far they're saying exactly what I've been saying the whole time: The individual mandate, integral to the while thing, is unconstitutional.
So all this means "Repeal!", right? Well, yes, but more specifically it means "Replace this unworkable monstrosity with something that actually has a snowball's chance in Hell of working."
How are those panning out?
Not well, in fact. "According to the Medicare actuary, 375,000 people should have already signed up for the new high-risk pools for the uninsured, but only 8,000 have." Ouch, high-balled that one by more than 4,687%!! But that means that costs are lower than projected, right? Actually, "New Hampshire's plan has only about 80 members, but the state has already burned through nearly double the $650,000 that the federal government allotted to help run the program."
Yikes! Not looking good for the health care plan that wasn't supposed to cost a whole lot, is it? " The Congressional Budget Office projects that 19 million people will move to the exchanges at a cost of $450 billion between 2014 and 2019. But according to the economists Douglas Holtz-Eakin and James C. Capretta, costs could soar to $1.4 trillion if those who would be better off in the exchanges actually moved to them."
And to top it all off, the courts have begun weighing in on the law, and so far they're saying exactly what I've been saying the whole time: The individual mandate, integral to the while thing, is unconstitutional.
So all this means "Repeal!", right? Well, yes, but more specifically it means "Replace this unworkable monstrosity with something that actually has a snowball's chance in Hell of working."
Under ["defined contribution"], Republicans would say that the federal government has a role in subsidizing health insurance -- a generous role, but not unlimited. The government would provide needy citizens with a predefined amount of money to spend on insurance and allow them to shop in a transparent, regulated, but not micromanaged marketplace.No reasonable person disputes that health care reform is necessary, but it's quickly becoming apparent that the critics of Obama's plan have been right all along.
Link: Buckle Up for Round 2
Health Care Reform: How 'bout them projections? - Kromey