We all knew this was the basis for ObamaCare health agenda from the very outset, that is, all of us that was paying attention. When the rest of the population wakes up to find that their employer based benefits are gone, and their health care that they took for granted now is decided by a committee, the howling will be heard only the hollow parts of their empty heads.
What do you think is happening in Massachusetts with their health exchanges? This an example right before our eyes but we pay no attention to. Reality is no substitute for "hope and change".
Why won't the protest be heard by our most benevolent rulers? Easy. They won't hear them as they are laughing so hard at the shear stupidity of the general public for believing that the government will take care of them. What a hoot!
Hey, the government is taking care of them - our leaders have decided that an early grave is better then spending unnecessary moneys that should go to those that showed support for ruling classes in Washington. Nah - can't be. Right? Just wait and see what happens if this makes it to 2014.
State Health Exchange Will Slash, Not Boost, Choice
Source: John R. Graham, "State health exchanges will slash, not boost, choice," San Francisco Examiner, September 9, 2010.
Unless repealed, the new health reform law will require every American not dependent on government health plans like Medicaid or Medicare, or enjoying employer-based benefits, to purchase health insurance in a state-based "exchange" as of January 2014, says John R. Graham, director of health care studies at the Pacific Research Institute.
Massachusetts provides an example of what to expect from these exchanges: An April 2006 law created an exchange called the Commonwealth Connector, which deploys a politically appointed board to limit people's choice of coverage.
Not surprisingly, limited choice means higher costs.
Economists John Cogan and Daniel Kessler of Stanford University, and R. Glenn Hubbard of Columbia University, found that premiums in Massachusetts increased by 6 percent more than in the rest of the country, and 14 percent more for small businesses, between 2006 and 2008.
California's Legislature has proposed an exchange similar to Massachusetts': Its most important power would be to "selectively contract" with insurers to offer policies in the exchange. This is fundamentally different from traditional insurance regulation, which concerns solvency, fraud and good-faith claims processing by insurers.
The exchange's bureaucrats would choose the policies available to Californians that Obamacare will force into the exchange.
Worse, the California exchange would persist even if Obamacare is repealed.
Most of us throughout the country will be facing exchanges like Massachusetts' and the one proposed in California, says Graham.
Indeed, John Goodman, president, CEO and Kellye Wright Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis concluded that any household earning less than $80,000 annually will lose its employer-based benefits and be driven into an exchange.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment