There is a political duty to prevent the coming bailout of big health insurers if Congress is serious about achieving repeal of ObamaCare. Individual Americans who have been harmed by the health care law aren’t eligible for an administration-provided bailout. Nor did doctors get help with the increased costs of bureaucratic compliance. Instead, the administration gave top priority to the interests of its corporate friends and supporters. This is crony capitalism at its worst.
Federal officials said Monday that if uninsured people don’t obtain coverage within the health law’s official enrollment period, which ends Jan. 31, they won’t get an extension to avoid the law’s penalty for going without insurance this time around. Earlier this year, the Obama administration offered uninsured people a reprieve if they missed the sign-up deadline for 2015 coverage, originally set at Feb. 15. People were given through April to sign up if they said they had learned about the penalty for going uninsured only when they filed their taxes.
Cigna CEO David Cordani says the individual market created by the 2010 health law would be better off if insurers were given more flexibility in designing coverage, as well as a more compressed, focused open enrollment period. Just days after UnitedHealth Group’s CEO said their move into the new marketplace was a mistake, Cordani reaffirmed that Cigna remains committed for 2016, although the firm is so far losing money on that business.
The penalty for failing to have health insurance is going up next year, perhaps even higher than expected. Among uninsured individuals who are not exempt from the ObamaCare penalty, the average household fine for not having insurance in 2015 will be $661, rising to $969 per household in 2016, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis.
The Affordable Care Act will make the labor supply, measured as the total compensation paid to workers, 0.86% smaller in 2025 than it would have been in the absence of that law, the Congressional Budget Office estimates. Three-quarters of that decline will occur because of health insurance expansions, which raise effective tax rates on earnings from labor—for instance, by phasing out health insurance subsidies as people’s income rises—and thus reduce the amount of labor that workers choose to supply.
Everyone knows ObamaCare subsidizes low-income individuals, but few are aware it also subsidizes big insurance companies. Corporate welfare payments to insurers under the risk corridor and reinsurance programs (both of which are slated to expire in 2017) amounted to $10.4 billion for the 2014 benefit year. In ObamaCare’s first year, “excess” losses outpaced “excess” gains by $2.5 billion. The White House wants taxpayers to make up the difference.
The ObamaCare program for small business in Illinois—known as SHOP—has been troubled from the start. Only two insurers sold health plans on the online marketplace to Chicago small businesses: startup Land of Lincoln Health and Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Illinois. Now there’s just one. Facing massive financial losses, Chicago-based Land of Lincoln has stopped signing up new small-business customers.
ObamaCare is expected to cost the U.S. workforce a total of 2 million jobs worth of hours over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office said Monday. The total workforce will shrink by just under 1% as a result of the new coverage expansions, mandates and changes in tax rates, according to the report.
An increasing number of preferred provider plans (PPOs) offered under the health care law have no ceiling for out-of-network costs, leaving policyholders facing unlimited financial exposure. Forty-five percent of the silver level PPO plans coming to the market for the first time in 2016 provide no annual cap for policyholders’ out-of-network costs, an analysis by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation finds.
To stay on the path of repeal and replace, ObamaCare opponents need to address three critical aspects of the effort. First is the question of risk-corridor payments under ObamaCare. These are the payments made to insurers with “excessive” losses from the plans they offer on the exchanges. A second important question is the “Cadillac” tax, which imposes a 40% excise tax on plans with premiums above certain dollar thresholds, and which would be fully repealed by the bill Congress will send the president. A third important question concerns another key feature of any credible replacement plan: tax credits.