Difference between revisions of "Obamacare"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(more)
 
(16 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
</hide>
 
</hide>
 
==About==
 
==About==
[[Obamacare]] is the colloqual name for the [[Affordable Care Act]] enacted in 2010 in response to reform initiatives in [[US/healthcare/reform/2009|2009]].
+
[[Obamacare]] is the colloquial name for the {{l/alias|Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act}} (aka ACA, {{l/alias|PPACA}}, {{l/alias|Affordable Care Act}}) enacted in 2010 in response to reform initiatives in [[US/healthcare/reform/2009|2009]]. It requires all health insurance plans to cover ten essential benefits:
 +
# Outpatient care
 +
# Emergency services
 +
# Hospitalization
 +
# Maternity and newborn care
 +
# Mental health and addiction treatment
 +
# Prescription drugs
 +
# Rehabilitative services and devices
 +
# Laboratory services
 +
# Preventative services, wellness services, and treatment for chronic diseases such as emphysema, MS, or cancer.
 +
# Pediatric services
  
It has been attacked by the [[political Right]], especially the [[free market libertarian]] subgroup, since it was first proposed, typically with distortions and misrepresentations.
+
It also prevents insurers from refusing coverage on the basis of "pre-existing conditions", which insurers were free to define however they liked (and could equate to basically anything ever recorded on your medical chart, such as a hangnail).
 +
 
 +
It has been attacked by the political [[right wing|Right]], especially [[free market libertarian]]s, since it was first proposed &ndash; despite being heavily based on a plan created by the right-libertarian [[Heritage Foundation]] think-tank and supported by the political right as an alternative to [[Clinton-Gore administration|the Clintons']] universal healthcare proposal in the 1990s. Attacks included:
 +
* distortions and misrepresentations (many people now believe popular {{l/sub|myths}} about it)
 +
* fighting various provisions of the law so as to make it less effective:
 +
** the Medicaid expansion mandate (successful, see {{l/wp|NFIB v. Sebelius}}); result:
 +
*** states no longer have to accept it
 +
**** leaving millions (who would otherwise have been covered) without healthcare...
 +
***** ...because they fall into the gap between those who can benefit from tax subsidies and those poor enough to receive Medicaid
 +
** the individual mandate (unsuccessful, see {{l/wp|NFIB v. Sebelius}}); results would have been:
 +
*** eliminating a major revenue source for insurers
 +
**** ...forcing them to raise insurance prices even more
 +
** tax credits to insured individuals outside of states which accepted the Medicaid expansion (unsuccessful, see {{l/wp|King v. Burwell}}); results would have been:
 +
*** many more individuals in Republican-controlled states who could not afford health insurance, thus:
 +
**** deepening criticism against it (the law itself is blamed for the problems caused by damage to it)
 +
**** removing a source of funding for it, increasing insurance costs
 +
**** creating many more uninsured emergency room visits, increasing healthcare costs overall
 +
** screwed around with the "risk corridors" mechanism
 +
*** causing difficulties which resulted in further rises in the price of insurance<ref>'''2016-05-24''' [http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/republican-guerrilla-warfare-obamacare Republicans Are Breaking Obamacare So They Can Declare It Broken]</ref><ref>'''2014-12-12''' [http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/obamacare-cromnibus-risk-corridors Republicans Dealt A Quiet Blow To O-Care In The CRomnibus]</ref>
 +
** ''see also {{l/wp|Constitutional challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act}}
 +
** further attempts to screw around with how insurers are reimbursed for high-risk loads (House v. Burwell, currently unresolved)<ref>'''2016-12-29''' [http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2016/12/29/rapid-developments-in-house-v-burwell/ Rapid Developments ''In House v. Burwell'']</ref>
 +
*** ...which would similarly increase insurance prices
 +
 
 +
==Pages==
 +
* [[/myths]]
 
==Links==
 
==Links==
 
===Reference===
 
===Reference===
 
* {{wikipedia}}
 
* {{wikipedia}}
 +
* [http://acasignups.net/ ACA Signups]: data
 +
* '''official''':
 +
** [http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/full.html timeline]: when each provision takes effect
 +
* '''reports''':
 +
** '''2014-02-21''' [http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Research/ActuarialStudies/Downloads/ACA-Employer-Premium-Impact.pdf Report to Congress on the impact on premiums for individuals and families with employer-sponsored health insurance from the guaranteed issue, guaranteed renewal, and fair health insurance premiums provisions of the Affordable Care Act] (PDF)
 +
*** [[John Boehner]] used the report as a basis for criticism of the ACA:
 +
**** '''2014-02-25''' [http://www.speaker.gov/general/obamacare-bad-small-businesses-worse-their-employees ObamaCare: Bad for Small Businesses, Worse For Their Employees] ([http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/obama-administration-two-thirds-small-businesses-see-premiums-spike-under-obamacare press release])
 +
***** [http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/on-small-business/obama-administration-health-laws-new-rules-will-increase-costs-for-most-small-businesses/2014/02/24/0623d01e-9d9c-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html Obama administration: Health law’s new rules will increase costs for most small businesses]
 +
****** [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/cm5eEx1HBy6 discussion/analysis]
 
===News===
 
===News===
 
{{links/news}}
 
{{links/news}}
 +
===Projects===
 +
* [http://savingthedream.org/about-the-plan/plan-details/ Saving the American Dream]: the current alternative proposal from The [[Heritage Foundation]]
 
===to file===
 
===to file===
 +
* '''2012-12-18''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2012/12/18/aetna-ceo-bertolini-get-ready-for-rate-shock-as-some-health-insurance-premiums-to-double-in-2014/ Aetna CEO Bertolini: Get Ready for 'Rate Shock' as Some Health Insurance Premiums to Double in 2014] by [[Avik Roy]]
 
* '''2013-01-07''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2013/01/07/obamacare-guarantees-higher-health-insurance-premiums-3000-higher/ Obamacare Guarantees Higher Health Insurance Premiums -- $3,000+ Higher] by [[Sally Pipes]]
 
* '''2013-01-07''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2013/01/07/obamacare-guarantees-higher-health-insurance-premiums-3000-higher/ Obamacare Guarantees Higher Health Insurance Premiums -- $3,000+ Higher] by [[Sally Pipes]]
 
* '''2013-02-09''' [http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/09/local/la-me-doctors-20130210 State lacks doctors to meet demand of national healthcare law]
 
* '''2013-02-09''' [http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/09/local/la-me-doctors-20130210 State lacks doctors to meet demand of national healthcare law]
 +
* '''2013-02-13''' [http://www.cnbc.com/id/100456557 Drop Coverage or Cut Hours? Big Companies Grapple With Obamacare] "For large retail and restaurant chains the big unknown in the year ahead is how much more they'll pay for health coverage. Employers with 50 or more workers who put in 30 hours a week will be required to provide health care coverage or pay a fine..."
 +
* '''2013-03-26/SOA''' [http://www.soa.org/News-and-Publications/Newsroom/Press-Releases/ACA-Driven-Changes/ ACA-Driven Changes in Individual Market Composition Could Lead to 32 Percent Average Increase in Cost; Wide Variability among States]: the SoA "predicts that expected changes in member composition of the individual health care market could drive up underlying claims costs by an average of 32 percent nationally by 2017"
 
* '''2013-03-26''' [http://www.naturalnews.com/039651_health_insurance_Obamacare_double.html Health insurance rates to double as Obamacare fully kicks in]: this site seems to be a [[woo]]-peddler
 
* '''2013-03-26''' [http://www.naturalnews.com/039651_health_insurance_Obamacare_double.html Health insurance rates to double as Obamacare fully kicks in]: this site seems to be a [[woo]]-peddler
* '''2013-05-24''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/24/unexpected-health-insurance-rate-shock-california-obamacare-insurance-exchange-announces-premium-rates/ Unexpected Health Insurance Rate Shock-California Obamacare Insurance Exchange Announces Premium Rates] by [[Rick Ungar]] "The jolt that I was experiencing was not the result of the predicted out-of-control premium costs but the shock of rates far ''lower'' than what I expected &ndash; ''even at the lowest end of the age scale.''"
+
* '''2013-03-27''' [http://watchdog.org/77079/affordable-care-act-inflates-insurance-costs/ Obamacare not so "Affordable," study finds] by [[M.D. Kittle]]: report on '''2013-03-26/SOA'''. (This was the only link I was able to find to that report in nearly an hour of searching.)
* '''2013-05-30/F''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/05/30/rate-shock-in-california-obamacare-to-increase-individual-insurance-premiums-by-64-146/ Rate Shock: In California, Obamacare To Increase Individual Health Insurance Premiums By 64-146%]
+
* '''2013-04-23''' [http://www.jwterrill.com/wp/?p=2255 PPACA's Impact on Affordability] refers to '''2013-03-26/SOA'''
* '''2013-06-01''' [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/01/the-shocking-truth-about-obamacares-rate-shock/ The shocking truth about rate shock]
+
* '''2013-05-14''' [http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/14/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/index.html Who will pay more under Obamacare? Young men]
 +
* '''2013-05-23''' [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/23/california-obamacare-premiums-no-rate-shock-here/ California Obamacare premiums: No "rate shock" here] by [[Ezra Klein]]
 +
* '''2013-05-24'''
 +
** [http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/24/unexpected-health-insurance-rate-shock-california-obamacare-insurance-exchange-announces-premium-rates/ Unexpected Health Insurance Rate Shock-California Obamacare Insurance Exchange Announces Premium Rates] by [[Rick Ungar]] "The jolt that I was experiencing was not the result of the predicted out-of-control premium costs but the shock of rates far ''lower'' than what I expected &ndash; ''even at the lowest end of the age scale.''"
 +
** [http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113289/obamacare-california-no-sticker-shock-here California Will Be Spared the Obamacare Apocalypse No sticker shock here &ndash; just affordable insurance premiums] by [[Jonathan Cohn]]
 +
* '''2013-05-26''' [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/opinion/krugman-the-obamacare-shock.html The Obamacare Shock] by [[Paul Krugman]]
 +
* '''2013-05-28''' [http://theweek.com/article/index/244759/californias-health-care-exchange-proof-obamacare-works California's health-care exchange: Proof ObamaCare works?] by [[Keith Wagstaff]]
 +
* '''2013-05-30/F''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/05/30/rate-shock-in-california-obamacare-to-increase-individual-insurance-premiums-by-64-146/ Rate Shock: In California, Obamacare To Increase Individual Health Insurance Premiums By 64-146%] by [[Avik Roy]]
 +
* '''2013-05-30''' [http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/30/obamacare-drives-up-insurance-premiums-by-up-to-146-percent-in-california/ Obamacare drives up insurance premiums by up to 146 percent in California]: promotes '''2013-05-30/F'''
 +
* '''2013-06-01''':
 +
** '''2013-06-01/WP''' [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/01/the-shocking-truth-about-obamacares-rate-shock/ The shocking truth about Obamacare's rate shock] [[Ezra Klein]] criticizes '''2013-05-30/F'''
 
** discussion: [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/TCDS8CtSRpG Tau-Mu Yi, Woozle, and others]
 
** discussion: [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/TCDS8CtSRpG Tau-Mu Yi, Woozle, and others]
* '''2013-06-03''' [http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2013/06/conservative-economics-fraud-re-obamacare.html Conservative economics fraud re: ObamaCare]
+
** [http://angrybearblog.com/2013/06/forbes-fight.html Forbes Fight] responds to '''2013-05-30/F''': "Avik Roy wrote an extremely misleading article on Obamacare in California. [...] Basically Roy compared Obamacare exchange rates (without subsidies) to the teaser rate from a web site which has received many extremely unamusing negative reviews for baiting and switching."
 +
** [http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/01/we-are-not-having-a-serious-discussion-obamacare-edition/ We Are Not Having A Serious Discussion, Obamacare Edition] by [[Paul Krugman]]
 +
* '''2013-06-02''' [http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/forbes-tells-truth-then-lies-about-obamacar Forbes Tells The Truth, Then Lies About Obamacare] by karoli responds to '''2013-05-30/F''' in a bulleted list
 +
* '''2013-06-03'''
 +
** [http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2013/06/conservative-economics-fraud-re-obamacare.html Conservative economics fraud re: ObamaCare]
 +
** [http://www.newrepublic.com/node/113362 Anatomy of a Bogus Obamacare Argument How an irresponsible Forbes writer distorted the debate] by [[Jonathan Cohn]] responds to '''2013-05-30/F'''
 +
* '''2013-06-04''' [http://news.yahoo.com/obamacare-double-health-insurance-premiums-084000445.html;_ylt=AwrNUbHMPbRRWEcAE9v_wgt. Will ObamaCare double your health insurance premiums?] by [[Peter Weber]]
 
* '''2013-06-05/NR''' [http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113392/obamacare-rate-shock-debate-subsidies-make-huge-difference Un-rigging the Rate-Shock Debate The truth about what those healthy 25-year-olds will pay] by [[Jonathan Cohn]]
 
* '''2013-06-05/NR''' [http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113392/obamacare-rate-shock-debate-subsidies-make-huge-difference Un-rigging the Rate-Shock Debate The truth about what those healthy 25-year-olds will pay] by [[Jonathan Cohn]]
 +
* '''2013-06-05''' [http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/05/higher-health-insurance-premiums-the-oba Higher Health Insurance Premiums: The Obamacare Debate We Didn't Have] by [[Peter Suderman]] "that still leaves roughly three quarters of the market who will see far higher rates." -- not clear at all how he figures this.
 +
* '''2013-06-06/ODI''' [http://insurance.ohio.gov/Newsroom/Pages/06062013ACAProposedRates.aspx Health Insurance Costs to Increase Significantly Under Affordable Care Act]
 +
** as of 2013-06-11, there is no request listed [http://companyprofiles.healthcare.gov/states/OH/rate_reviews?search_method=rate_reviews here] for 2013 that is anything over 23%. The most recent request was March 31.
 +
** the 88% figure is apparently derived by comparing '''2013-03-26/SOA''' with rate-hike proposals submitted to the ODI.
 +
** Analysis: [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/3f6i4oDReEM Woozle]
 
* '''2013-06-06'''
 
* '''2013-06-06'''
** [http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/06/06/obamacare-insurance-exchanges-creating-roadblocks-to-enrollment-while-wasting-millions-in-taxpayer-money/ Obamacare Insurance Exchanges Creating Roadblocks To Enrollment While Wasting Millions In Taxpayer Money?] by [[Rick Ungar]]: responds to 2013-05-30/F, but brings up a new criticism
+
** [http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/06/06/obamacare-insurance-exchanges-creating-roadblocks-to-enrollment-while-wasting-millions-in-taxpayer-money/ Obamacare Insurance Exchanges Creating Roadblocks To Enrollment While Wasting Millions In Taxpayer Money?] by [[Rick Ungar]]: responds to '''2013-05-30/F''', but brings up a new criticism
** [https://thelonggoodbye.wordpress.com/2013/06/06/debunking-the-myths-of-obamacare-rate-shock/ Debunking The Myths of Obamacare Rate Shock]: discussion of 2013-06-05/NR
+
** [https://thelonggoodbye.wordpress.com/2013/06/06/debunking-the-myths-of-obamacare-rate-shock/ Debunking The Myths of Obamacare Rate Shock]: discussion of '''2013-06-05/NR'''
 +
* '''2013-06-10'''
 +
** [http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/06/10/ohio-dept-of-insurance-obamacare-to-increase-individual-market-health-premiums-by-88-percent/ Ohio Dept. Of Insurance: Obamacare To Increase Individual-Market Health Premiums By 88 Percent] by [[Avik Roy]] - reporting on '''2013-06-06/ODI'''
 +
** [http://watchdog.org/89443/obamacare-costs-soaring-in-recent-rate-checks/ Obamacare costs soaring in recent rate checks] by [[M.D. Kittle]]: reporting on '''2013-06-06/ODI'''
 +
* '''2013-06-22''' [http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2013/06/22/even-with-obamacare-health-inflation-falls-to-historic-lows/ Even With Obamacare, Health Inflation Falls To Historic Lows] ...although some people will still see their premiums go up
 +
* '''2013-10-24''' [http://americablog.com/2013/10/original-1989-document-heritage-foundation-created-obamacares-individual-mandate.html Original 1989 document where Heritage Foundation created Obamacare's individual mandate]
 +
* '''2013-11-12''' [http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2013/nov/15/ellen-qualls/aca-gop-health-care-plan-1993/ Is the ACA the GOP health care plan from 1993?] "[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/t2GPO/http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-103s1770pcs/pdf/BILLS-103s1770pcs.pdf The bill she had in mind] did have a strong roster of Republicans behind it, and it did share many major features with the Affordable Care Act. There were some significant differences but in a side-by-side comparison, the similarities dominate. [..] However, to call it the Republican plan, as though a majority of Republicans endorsed it, goes too far."
 +
* '''2013-12-06''' [http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2013/12/the-aca-v-the-heritage-plan-a-comparison-in-chart-form The ACA v. the Heritage Plan: A Comparison in Chart Form]: argues that Obamacare and the [[Heritage Foundation|Heritage]] healthcare plan have only one thing in common: an insurance requirement. This is clearly wrong in at least one regard: they both specify an ''individual mandate'', the very feature most objected to by the GOP and other opponents of Obamacare.
 +
* '''2014-02-14''' [http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/new-gop-health-care-plan-is-a-starting-point-for-a-conversation-not-a-replacement/2014/02/14/e145c5be-9377-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html New GOP health-care plan is a starting point for a conversation, not a replacement]
 +
==Footnotes==
 +
<references />

Latest revision as of 00:33, 20 September 2021

About

Obamacare is the colloquial name for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ActA (aka ACA, PPACAA, Affordable Care ActA) enacted in 2010 in response to reform initiatives in 2009. It requires all health insurance plans to cover ten essential benefits:

  1. Outpatient care
  2. Emergency services
  3. Hospitalization
  4. Maternity and newborn care
  5. Mental health and addiction treatment
  6. Prescription drugs
  7. Rehabilitative services and devices
  8. Laboratory services
  9. Preventative services, wellness services, and treatment for chronic diseases such as emphysema, MS, or cancer.
  10. Pediatric services

It also prevents insurers from refusing coverage on the basis of "pre-existing conditions", which insurers were free to define however they liked (and could equate to basically anything ever recorded on your medical chart, such as a hangnail).

It has been attacked by the political Right, especially free market libertarians, since it was first proposed – despite being heavily based on a plan created by the right-libertarian Heritage Foundation think-tank and supported by the political right as an alternative to the Clintons' universal healthcare proposal in the 1990s. Attacks included:

  • distortions and misrepresentations (many people now believe popular myths about it)
  • fighting various provisions of the law so as to make it less effective:
    • the Medicaid expansion mandate (successful, see NFIB v. Sebelius); result:
      • states no longer have to accept it
        • leaving millions (who would otherwise have been covered) without healthcare...
          • ...because they fall into the gap between those who can benefit from tax subsidies and those poor enough to receive Medicaid
    • the individual mandate (unsuccessful, see NFIB v. Sebelius); results would have been:
      • eliminating a major revenue source for insurers
        • ...forcing them to raise insurance prices even more
    • tax credits to insured individuals outside of states which accepted the Medicaid expansion (unsuccessful, see King v. Burwell); results would have been:
      • many more individuals in Republican-controlled states who could not afford health insurance, thus:
        • deepening criticism against it (the law itself is blamed for the problems caused by damage to it)
        • removing a source of funding for it, increasing insurance costs
        • creating many more uninsured emergency room visits, increasing healthcare costs overall
    • screwed around with the "risk corridors" mechanism
      • causing difficulties which resulted in further rises in the price of insurance[1][2]
    • see also Constitutional challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
    • further attempts to screw around with how insurers are reimbursed for high-risk loads (House v. Burwell, currently unresolved)[3]
      • ...which would similarly increase insurance prices

Pages

Links

Reference

News

Related

Video

Projects

to file

Footnotes