“The ACA is a classic illustration of placing a persuasive title on a controversial statute to conceal its deep internal weaknesses. There is no way that one can “protect patients” by restricting, either through private employers or public exchanges, the choices they have in the type of plans they can join. It would be impossible for the statute to make health care more affordable when it piles major mandates on private plans, which could make them too costly to operate at all.”

“Before ObamaCare was enacted, the health sector was coiled for a 21st century transformation. But entrepreneurs moved to the sidelines, frightened by the huge hurdles from hundreds of new boards and commissions, thousands of regulators, and tens of thousands of pages of regulation spawned by ObamaCare. With the new financial incentives conservatives are proposing, the health sector would build on the core strength of our market economy, with consumers demanding better choices of more affordable health care and health coverage.”

“Holtz-Eakin points out that this unconventional tax structure will dramatically skew the health care market in favor of non-profit providers. Insurers subject to the free will have to make up for the expense it imposes on their business somehow, either by cutting their costs or by raising their premiums. Those not subject to the fee will obviously not face this dilemma, and hence they won’t face any financial pressure to raise their premiums. However, the for-profit insurers subject to the fee will suffer the most, as their losses will be compounded by the fee’s non-deductibility. Holtz-Eakin calculates that for-profit insurers subject to the tax will have to raise their premiums by $1.54 for every $1 imposed on them by the fee just to break even.”

“But it’s not supposed to provide more coverage for the same dollars. It’s supposed to provide it for fewer dollars. Remember all the talk about how ObamaCare would ‘bend the cost curve down’? No doubt many of ObamaCare’s backers would prefer that you forget. When the cost curve remains the same or, as will almost surely happen, bends upward, they’ll be taking cues from the backers of RomneyCare in Massachusetts.”

“Very soon, the Supreme Court will be rendering judgment on the constitutionality of ObamaCare. It is one of the most highly anticipated decisions in decades, and for good reason. Whatever the outcome, it’s going to be a political earthquake. The only question is the degree to which it will shake up the political and policy landscape.”

“An annual fee to raise money for President Obama’s healthcare law will increase insurance premiums by billions of dollars on the whole, according to a new report by a conservative think tank. The American Action Forum, led by former Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, argued that the annual fee from insurers starting in 2014 amounts to a tax on the middle class.”

“IPAB’s unelected members will have effectively unfettered power to impose taxes and ration care for all Americans, whether the government pays their medical bills or not. In some circumstances, just one political party or even one individual would have full command of IPAB’s lawmaking powers. IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.”

“This year the biggest looming question has been whether fledging payment revisions in Obama’s law, also mirrored by private insurance plans, are succeeding in holding costs down. The rate of growth the past three years has hovered under 4 percent, historically low. That’s coincided with a shift to paying hospitals and doctors for better quality, not just their sheer volume of tests and procedures. Obama has argued that his overhaul would begin to ‘bend the cost curve’ to more affordable levels. The analysts remained skeptical.”