The Bottom Line on Obamacare Repeal

by Jon N. Hall7/7/17
In 2014, Obamacare took effect. It was the year that Line 61 in the “Other Taxes” section of our beloved 1040 tax form began to read: “61 Health care: individual responsibility (see instructions) Full-year coverage,” which was followed by a box to check if you had health insurance for the entire year and a space to enter the amount you owed if you didn’t. That line hadn’t appeared on the 1040 for 2013, nor had it appeared on any prior 1040.

In “Health Insurance Coverage of the Total Population” at the Kaiser Family Foundation, we see the percentages of Americans in insurance categories and what they were in 2013 and in 2015. “Non-Group” is the individual market, which has been taken over by the Obamacare exchanges and “Other Public” is mainly military, the VA. Here, then, are the percentages by category in 2013, the year before the ACA took effect, and in 2015:

Employer 50-49

Non-Group 4-7

Medicaid 18-20

Medicare 13-14

Other Public 2-2

Uninsured 13-9

Of the non-military categories, those who bought insurance in the individual market (Non-Group) were by far the smallest category in 2013. Although it’s still the smallest such category, the individual market has had the largest percentage growth. Non-Group enrollees grew from 13.8 million to 21.8 million. The next largest percentage growth of the non-military categories was for Medicaid, and its numbers went from 54.9 million to 62.3 million.

In “The Future of the Affordable Care Act” at the JAMA Network in August of 2016, Stuart M. Butler writes that “the ACA might be more appropriately labeled the ‘Medicaid Expansion Act’ [because] enrollment in the ACA exchanges [i.e. Non-Group] has been disappointing, with an estimated 10 million fewer people enrolled compared with earlier projections.”

And Non-Group is not the same group it was. In 2013, the category consisted of those who paid the full price for their health insurance, but now the category also consists of those receiving federal subsidies to buy that insurance. Most of the new enrollees are only paying part of the price, as 8 in 10 receive tax credits.

The final numbers for 2016 may not be available yet, but in a study released in September of 2016 by the National Center for Health Statistics, “Health Insurance Coverage: Early Release of Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, January–March 2016,” we read this: “In the first 3 months of 2016, 27.3 million (8.6%) persons of all ages were uninsured.” That contrasts with the 41.7 million uninsured persons in 2013.

Democrats took over the nation’s entire healthcare system for the sake of less than 5 percent of us. Democrats often say that healthcare is a “right.” But Obamacare didn’t even halve the number of uninsured in America. What about the “rights” of the 27.3 million Americans who still have no health insurance?

Of the five insured categories in 2013, three were public, i.e. run by government, and two were private. But now government has intruded itself further into private sector healthcare, and not only by creating public subsidies to buy private health insurance, but by dictating what private insurance policies must cover. All new health insurance policies sold in America must be Obamacare-compliant, and cover every conceivable condition, which has made insurance more expensive.

In July of 2016, Forbes ran “Overwhelming Evidence That Obamacare Caused Premiums To Increase Substantially” by Brian Blase of the Mercatus Center:

S&P Global Institute found that average individual market medical costs increased substantially between 2013 and 2015, up an estimated 69%. […]

Instead we see adverse selection in the individual market, with spiraling premiums, sizeable insurer exits, and enrollees generally attracted to ACA plans only if they are either highly subsidized or relatively old or unhealthy.

Obamacare is a basket case, requiring constant infusions of more funds, as in the “risk corridor” bailouts of the insurance companies, and the bailouts for policyholders who can’t pay their deductibles. Even so, Republicans in Congress often seem to lack the wherewithal to replace it, (maybe they’re thinking about reelection). But there is one change the GOP must get done, and it involves what was the issue back in 2009 when the ACA was being debated; it’s the mandates. Whether in a stand-alone bill or in some “comprehensive” replacement for Obamacare: the individual and business mandates must be repealed.

Repeal of the mandates in this session, preferably in 2017, is a bottom line. If the mandates are not repealed, it would be a serious betrayal of voters, and grounds for mounting primary challenges to incumbents. D.C. politicians don’t seem to grasp that the mandates, as originally conceived, are fascistic. Justice Roberts seemed to understand that in NFIB v. Sebelius when he wrote that the Commerce Clause doesn’t allow Congress to command Americans to buy things. But then he concluded that the command (i.e. mandate) was really an option, and that the penalty was really a tax, thus saving Obamacare (while creating a whole new chapter in American jurisprudential incoherence).

If the mandates are repealed, many young folks will opt to go without health insurance. But that can be a rational decision. A young person wishing to amass funds to buy a house, or start a family or a business might decide that taking the risk of having no health insurance is worth it. Maybe youngsters would decide differently if health insurance weren’t so damned expensive.

But why is government insurance so damned expensive? One of the reasons is fraud. On July 2, National Review ran “The Great American Rip-Off,” a terrific article by Kevin Williamson that turns a cold eye on entitlement fraud. Another reason might be the cost of care itself.

If you were in an industry that had a customer base that was 91 percent of the population, and the government accounted for much of your income and provided payments that were automatic and not limited by budget, and your private sector customers were coerced into buying insurance that paid for your products whether they needed them or not, then, with assured streams of revenue like that, you might charge whatever you thought you could get. After all, you’re improving folks’ lives; even saving them. And besides, you got that huge student debt to pay off, and your malpractice insurance to pay, and your support staff to pay, and all that new technology to pay for. Hell’s bells, you need to jack up prices again.

Democrats speak of repealing Obamacare as though it would be some monstrous crime against Americans. But we’ve only had Obamacare for three and a half years; was our situation intolerable back in 2013? We still have millions of citizens without insurance coverage, prices are still rising sharply, some folks can’t afford to use their ACA insurance because of their high deductibles, and the deficit is going the wrong direction again. Now, what’s so wonderful about Obamacare?

What the Dems are really concerned about is the embarrassment they’d suffer were the GOP to succeed. If Republicans actually created a system that cost less and was less coercive and covered everybody, Obama’s and the Democrats’ mendacity in passing Obamacare would stand out in high relief. But then the IRS could simplify our taxes a bit: by deleting Line 61 on our beloved 1040s. Yippee!

Jon N. Hall is a programmer/analyst from Kansas City. • (316 views)

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Bottom Line on Obamacare Repeal

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    I went through most of my adult life without health insurance, and during the brief period when I had it, spent more on insurance than I saved on bills. A catastrophic care policy would have been nice, but in fact I never actually needed even that until my health took a very bad turn in 2012.

  2. Steve Lancaster says:

    When will progressive/communists/socialists/snowflakes ever learn that insurance is not health care? We had a system that allowed even the very poor access to basic health care. Granted it was creaky and bureaucratic but it did work. What we have now has all the disadvantages of the California DMV and you can’t even get your car registered.

  3. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Go to the half-way point on this page and you will see that Dr. Gruber, the man who sold Obamacare by lying about it, is not only a liar, but also a crook. Even the left-wing haven Vermont had to get rid of him after he submitted fraudulent invoices for work which he never did.

    Such are the “elite” of this country.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      But how many will ever hear about this, or make the connection between the crook and the lying architect of Obamacare?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *