Kaiser: Employers getting ready to dump workers into ObamaCare

posted at 9:21 am on May 8, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Who didn’t see this coming? According to Kaiser Health News, employers are increasingly looking at the benefits of getting out of the health-insurance delivery process. Fueling this interest are ObamaCare-related spikes in health-insurance premiums, plus the opportunity to fix costs and reduce vulnerabilities presented by employees who develop serious health issues:

Can corporations shift workers with high medical costs from the company health plan into online insurance exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act? Some employers are considering it, say benefits consultants.

“It’s all over the marketplace,” said Todd Yates, a managing partner at Hill, Chesson & Woody, a North Carolina benefits consulting firm. “Employers are inquiring about it and brokers and consultants are advocating for it.”

Patients with preexisting medical conditions like diabetes drive health spending. But those who undergo expensive procedures such as organ transplants are a burden to the company as well. Since most big corporations are self-insured, shifting even one high-cost member out of the company plan could save the employer hundreds of thousands of dollars a year—while increasing the cost of claims absorbed by the marketplace policy by a similar amount.

And the health law might not prohibit it, opening a door to potential erosion of employer-based coverage.

“Such an employer-dumping strategy can promote the interests of both employers and employees by shifting health care expenses on to the public at large,” wrote two University of Minnesota law professors in a 2011 paper that basically predicted the present interest.

One did not have to be UM law professors to see this coming. We have pointed out these perverse incentives in the employer mandate since before Democrats put the ACA up for a vote. Barack Obama and his supporters insisted that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” based in large part on the assumption that businesses would simply eat the exploding costs of mandate health insurance.

That, however, ignores the efficiency process and cost-benefit analysis that any business with a survival instinct uses. If it’s cheaper to pay the fine and dump the coverage, the only incentive that employers have to do otherwise is strictly competitive. And that will only last as long as the competition doesn’t make the same move. Once the first few employers looking to gain a tactical advantage on costs make the decision to get rid of that overhead, everyone else will follow to negate that advantage — and to push those costs off onto the federal government.  That will make a hash of the carefully managed cost analyses offered by ObamaCare supporters, and subsidy payments will explode far past the ability of revenues within the ACA to keep pace.

By the way, we should start seeing this phenomenon in just a few months. Even though the White House pushed the open-enrollment date for 2015 to mid-November to avoid having an ObamaCare shock just before the election, these businesses have to decide on whether to keep coverage as part of their budgeting process for the next year — and that will take place long before November 15th. Employees will start noticing that their employers aren’t holding their usual private-sector open enrollments on October 1st, even if employers wait to give them the bad news until November. That will not motivate voters to rush out and support Democrats, to say the least.

This report comes at an opportune moment. Sylvia Burwell will testify this morning at 9:30 at a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee hearing to discuss her nomination to replace Kathleen Sebelius as HHS Secretary, and to answer some questions about ObamaCare:

Before the Senate confirms Sylvia Mathews Burwell to take the helm of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department, lawmakers are sure to have tough questions for her.

On Thursday, when she appears before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, Burwell will find out whether those questions will focus on the partisan controversies surrounding Obamacare or more substantive policy matters. She’s likely to get a taste of both. …

The failure of Oregon’s Obamacare marketplace – which cost the federal government more than $300 million — has piqued the interest of not just lawmakers but also nonpartisan investigators, including reportedly the FBI. Other states such as Massachusetts are also struggling to run their own marketplaces.

While lawmakers Thursday are sure to bring up Obamacare’s existing flaws, there are plenty of other questions for Burwell about the law’s continued implementation.

For one thing, lawmakers may ask if she’s prepared to oversee the ongoing construction of HealthCare.gov. Insurers on Capitol Hill this week reminded Congress that the back end of the website has yet to be finished.

In February, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters it would take “several months” to finish the back end portion of the website, which will automate the transfer of federal subsidies from the government to insurers.

The HELP committee doesn’t actually get a vote on Burwell’s confirmation. Her official confirmation hearing will take place with the Senate Finance Committee, and the new filibuster rules makes it all but certain that Burwell will win confirmation in the end. Republicans will get two public hearings in which to press for answers on ObamaCare failures and the dishonesty of administration claims and promises — and probably should demand some answers on the real impact of the employer mandate, too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Lean Forward.

Bishop on May 8, 2014 at 9:28 AM

LOL Enjoy November democrats. This is all on you. Sadly, it wont be a complete wipe out for many places like mine have open enrollment in Nov.

Best option for the conservatives is stay the heck away from this. Dont go and give into the cries to help “fix” it, because once you do, the left will hang this whole mess on you. Either repeal or let it fester on its own. We dont need to do anything else with this pile.

watertown on May 8, 2014 at 9:28 AM

This is getting so confusing, which is the point, that people will just throw up their hands and say “whatever”.

People have a life to live, kids to raise, jobs, mortgage to pay, keeping track of this ObamaCare fiasco, along with the IRS, Benghazi, etc. Will just wear people down to the point that they don’t care, can’t take the time to care.

Everyday a new revelation about how corrupt or inept this administration is…

right2bright on May 8, 2014 at 9:29 AM

The whole mess of employers getting involved with employees healthcare was the result of government intrusion in the market anyway. Now everyone feels a company’s job is to be a daycare provider for adults. It is fitting that government incompetence lets them back out of that goofy role.

MechanicalBill on May 8, 2014 at 9:30 AM

I think we need to cancel all exceptions/exemptions right now and fully put this law into effect.
its being metered out o us to get us used to it.

dmacleo on May 8, 2014 at 9:31 AM

Lean Forward.

Bishop on May 8, 2014 at 9:28 AM

And puke.

Single-payer here we come. I hope commies like libiefree (an oxymoron) are happy with our final death spiral. Time to get some insecticide. And a mop.

Chuck Ef on May 8, 2014 at 9:31 AM

Yeah, but those employers were offering junk insurance plans anyway.

Doughboy on May 8, 2014 at 9:33 AM

See it coming heck, many of us have been shouting it.

Where are the stupid 0bama trolls who were crowing yesterday?

cozmo on May 8, 2014 at 9:34 AM

Seek Sanctuary when the light goes out.

Murphy9 on May 8, 2014 at 9:36 AM

“Such an employer-dumping strategy can promote the interests of both employers and employees by shifting health care expenses on to the public at large,” wrote two University of Minnesota law professors in a 2011 paper that basically predicted the present interest.

Cost shifting. Yes, that’s really going to make a difference.

rickv404 on May 8, 2014 at 9:38 AM

“Such an employer-dumping strategy can promote the interests of both employers and employees by shifting health care expenses on to the public at large,” wrote two University of Minnesota law professors in a 2011 paper that basically predicted the present interest.

I fail to see how this promotes the interest of employees.

tommyboy on May 8, 2014 at 9:38 AM

All is going as planned. Forward, to single payer…

Rix on May 8, 2014 at 9:38 AM

All is going as planned. Forward, to single payer…

Rix on May 8, 2014 at 9:38 AM

And rationing.

rickv404 on May 8, 2014 at 9:40 AM

IIRC, aren’t employer contributions to employee health insurance premiums now considered taxable income? Even if you’re not kicked to the Obamacurb, expect an unpleasant surprise on your next W-2 form.

fortcoins on May 8, 2014 at 9:41 AM

But hey, at least the rich white guy didn’t win, huh?

crushliberalism on May 8, 2014 at 9:43 AM

I’m sure my multi-millionaire, Obamacare-supporting Senator Warner is very concerned for his family over this development. Oh wait – he’s exempt.

crrr6 on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

It’s a natural progressions.

The system will collapse because the services rendered will not match up to the premiums working people are paying.
So naturally people will say “screw this” and stop paying their premiums.
That will lead to the inevitable collapse of the system and then single payer will become a reality.

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

Unexpectedly.

talkingpoints on May 8, 2014 at 9:46 AM

It’s a natural progressions.

The system will collapse because the services rendered will not match up to the premiums working people are paying.
So naturally people will say “screw this” and stop paying their premiums.
That will lead to the inevitable collapse of the system and then single payer will become a reality.

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

Is that when you begin slaughtering the undesirables?

Murphy9 on May 8, 2014 at 9:47 AM

Ref O’care, the ‘frog’ (American people) will be boiled and served up long before the Nov deadline. Most will either think O’care is ‘The Answer’ (MSM/True Believers), or just roll over and play dead, while voting for the first ‘female’ Prez.

vnvet on May 8, 2014 at 9:47 AM

I just did this with my business. Since I only have 35 employees, the business is exempt from OCare. However, we were not exempt to the impact that it had on the insurance market. Last month when our new rates came out raising cost by 30%, I made the decision that I didn’t need to be involved in the insurance racket. So, we dumped insurance for everyone and gave each person a raise that would cover the entire cost of a bronze plan. They’re free to get a silver or gold plan if they wish, but they have to pay for the difference. I’ll probably give each employee a “health insurance” raise every few years, but I won’t cover 100% of the price increases. Now I can focus on running my business, instead of shopping for insurance. I see a lot of small (less than 50 people) businesses doing the same thing in the very near future.

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 9:49 AM

If you think what is happening at the VA is bad just wait till its multiplied by millions. Death panels will be the rule not the exception. Single payer is coming too.

neyney on May 8, 2014 at 9:49 AM

“Such an employer-dumping strategy can promote the interests of both employers and employees by shifting health care expenses on to the public at large,” wrote two University of Minnesota law professors in a 2011 paper that basically predicted the present interest.

I fail to see how this promotes the interest of employees.

tommyboy on May 8, 2014 at 9:38 AM

I wonder if Big Mooch could provide consultation in this practice? Wasn’t she a patient-dumping specialist in the last somewhat-real job she held?

slickwillie2001 on May 8, 2014 at 9:50 AM

…and then single payer will become a reality.

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

And you wonder why people know you are a liberal.

cozmo on May 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM

I’ve long advocated employers not providing health insurance to every employee but instead offering the option of either health insurance or the cash equivalent as salary and letting the employee buy their own policy on the open market.

Obamacare will cause companies to dump their plans without having to raise salaries to compensate.

Obamacare delenda est!

Charlemagne on May 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM

Single payer is free right? The other guy pays for everything?

/mind-numbingly stupid leftists.

Murphy9 on May 8, 2014 at 9:53 AM

All you peeps are goin’ on Medicaid.

/”They should be thanking me” BHO

Key West Reader on May 8, 2014 at 9:53 AM

This is getting so confusing, which is the point, that people will just throw up their hands and say “whatever”.

People have a life to live, kids to raise, jobs, mortgage to pay, keeping track of this ObamaCare fiasco, along with the IRS, Benghazi, etc. Will just wear people down to the point that they don’t care, can’t take the time to care.

Everyday a new revelation about how corrupt or inept this administration is…

right2bright on May 8, 2014 at 9:29 AM

That’s how we got into this mess in the first place; nobody cares and nobody is paying attention. We got a bunch of low info voters; what’s it going to take for them to wake up? Our republic depends upon a well informed and educated electorate.

Kat_man on May 8, 2014 at 9:53 AM

“Such an employer-dumping strategy can promote the interests of both employers and employees by shifting health care expenses on to the public at large,” wrote two University of Minnesota law professors in a 2011 paper that basically predicted the present interest.

Who do they think the public at large is?
Is there some mythical creature that has deep pockets that exists to pay for other peoples healthcare?
If it’s the taxpayer-News Flash-Employees are the ones that pay the taxes. The freeloaders (citizens that don’t work and don’t pay taxes aren’t going to contribute) don’t pick up the difference in employee benefit expenses.

So, employee dumping into the exchange means it is paid for by the employee and the taxpayer (ie the employee) with an extra bit added to the price to support the government infrastructure for the exchange.

Oooh I can see the savings like a vision in my mind.

Are all academics stupid?

Are all academics stoned?

talkingpoints on May 8, 2014 at 9:54 AM

The system will collapse because the services rendered will not match up to the premiums working people are paying.
So naturally people will say “screw this” and stop paying their premiums.
That will lead to the inevitable collapse of the system and then single payer will become a reality.

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

So…people will get the services they expect under single payer?

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 9:54 AM

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 9:49 AM

I can understand why a business owner would make that choice, given the structure of Obamacare.

You did tell your employees that this “raise” is taxable, right?

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM

That will lead to the inevitable collapse of the system and then single payer will become a reality.

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

I think you’re on to something here, we could have used your deep insight 5 years ago.

So what’s your take on the whole reset-button thing with Russia, you think it will keep Putin from making any moves against his neighbors?

Bishop on May 8, 2014 at 9:56 AM

That will make a hash of the carefully managed [carelessly retarded, intellectually offensive jokes of] cost analyses offered by ObamaCare supporters, and subsidy payments will explode far past the ability of revenues within the ACA to keep pace.

That’s okay. The Fed will just have to fire up some new printing machines. The Fed and the feral government have been looking for reasons to do that, anyway. Win-Win!!

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on May 8, 2014 at 9:56 AM

Last month when our new rates came out raising cost by 30%, I made the decision that I didn’t need to be involved in the insurance racket. So, we dumped insurance for everyone and gave each person a raise that would cover the entire cost of a bronze plan.

This was always the point, to use financial levers to force a mass exodus into the marketplace. We just saw it with individual policies, which were dismissed as “a small number” because it was like 5% (never mind that the gay population is about 2% and we have to drop everything we’re doing whenever someone doesn’t get the photographer they wanted).

With employers the effect will be tenfold or more, because now it’s not just the insurers getting squeezed, it’s the businesses as well. That’s why the administration surmised that as much as 60% of the ESI market could get dumped.

They have wanted to kill ESI from the outset. But they couldn’t do that by making a truly portable insurance framework, they had to keep hammering that square peg until it “fit”, impact on the private sector be hanged.

The Schaef on May 8, 2014 at 9:56 AM

Single-payer here we come. I hope commies like libiefree (an oxymoron) are happy with our final death spiral. Time to get some insecticide. And a mop.

Chuck Ef on May 8, 2014 at 9:31 AM

They are.

Steve Eggleston on May 8, 2014 at 9:57 AM

The system will collapse because the services rendered will not match up to the premiums working people are paying.
So naturally people will say “screw this” and stop paying their premiums.
That will lead to the inevitable collapse of the system and then single payer will become a reality.

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 9:45 AM

Of course the services rendered don’t match up with what they’re paying; they’re also paying for some one’s freebie.

Kat_man on May 8, 2014 at 10:00 AM

Steve Eggleston on May 8, 2014 at 9:57 AM

Any thoughts on what having the healthcare industry go into a tailspin will do to our economy?

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 10:00 AM

Separating health insurance from employment is actually one of the very few things Leftists and rational people can agree upon.

Unfortunately that’s where any agreement ends. Leftists want total control of the health insurance market, either through “single payer” (socialism) or over-regulation regulation/domination of the private market (fascism). These type of plans could never work in a country like the US. It would even fail at the state level.

Conservatives and Libertarians argue the opposite: open up and free up the insurance market with pro-consumer, pro-competition reforms. This the only way to bring costs down and make insurance affordable to the most amount of people. This is the only plan that could work in the US in this day and age. We’re far too large, too culturally diverse, and too much in debt to try anything else.

visions on May 8, 2014 at 10:01 AM

Of course they will. They don’t have a choice.

crankyoldlady on May 8, 2014 at 10:02 AM

ObamaCare – the gift that keeps on giving.

GarandFan on May 8, 2014 at 10:03 AM

You did tell your employees that this “raise” is taxable, right?

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM

No. I told them they were losing insurance due to increase costs from OCare and that I would raise their pay to cover a bronze plan. I hope they are smart enough to know that an increase in pay will mean higher taxes. However, I suspect in the next few years, employer provided coverage will be taxed as a fringe benefit anyway, especially now that we already have to include the cost of their insurance on W2s. All the government has to do is flip a switch are start collecting the money.

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 10:06 AM

Absolutely the companies are looking very hard at this very thing. The uncertainty and ever changing rules make it a necessity. Most corporations exist to make money, not be charitable institutions. And most have fiscal years that begin on Oct. 1, not Jan. 1. That means they have to look into this NOW, their 3rd quarter of the business year, to be ready for the 4th quarter beginning on July 1. Prepare for the howling!

graywaiter on May 8, 2014 at 10:06 AM

Any thoughts on what having the healthcare industry go into a tailspin will do to our economy?

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 10:00 AM

You answered your own question – tailspin.

Steve Eggleston on May 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 10:06 AM

Interesting thought on shifting employer-provided health insurance to the after-tax bracket. Quite possible.

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 10:13 AM

Obama nominates new Health and Human Services secretary

22m
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., compares Sylvia Mathews Burwell as nominee to take over the Department of Health and Human Services to a captain taking command of the Titanic ‘after it’s hit an iceberg’ – @toddzwillich
end of alert
===============

https://twitter.com/toddzwillich

canopfor on May 8, 2014 at 10:15 AM

Steve Eggleston on May 8, 2014 at 10:10 AM

You’re smarter than I am on economic matters. Just checkin’ ;-)

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 10:16 AM

But I thought it was a “right” for everyone to have healthcare??? How could they be dropped???

My rights! My rights!

/

Deckard BR on May 8, 2014 at 10:22 AM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

How’s the weather in Canada, everdiso?

rogerb on May 8, 2014 at 10:26 AM

I remember when I was an apple-cheeked student doing my clinical rotations at the VA when we had this frail Korea vet in the emergency room with a fractured hip. I wasn’t aware of all the particulars of his case, but for whatever reason, he could not stay there and they would not give him a room. I’ll never forget the controlled desperation in the eyes of his tiny wife as she looked from us, to his doctor, to us again, trying to reason with someone that he needed to stay another night till his son could fly in. She told us many times she could not afford an ambulance to take him home. I’ll never forget her look as we loaded him into a wheelchair and took him out to the loading dock to put him in his truck. She had no idea how she was going to get him back out.

I hated myself then for not being able to do anything for the man and didn’t know who to talk to about it. I have thought of that incident time and time again as this Obamacare mess gains steam. Our medical decisions are being taken out of our hands, and it will be the most vulnerable – the very ones the Democrats claim to champion – who will suffer the most.

JoseQuinones on May 8, 2014 at 10:26 AM

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

You wrote something jawdroppingly stupid two days in a row.

cozmo on May 8, 2014 at 10:27 AM

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

You wrote something jawdroppingly stupid two days in a row.

cozmo on May 8, 2014 at 10:27 AM

When is he signing up?

CurtZHP on May 8, 2014 at 10:28 AM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

Another headline: Millions of Americans to Lose Direct Access to Talk With Person Who Decides Health Insurance: Now Bound to Whims of Faceless Bureaucrats Who Hand Out Favors to Middlemen Cronies

JoseQuinones on May 8, 2014 at 10:32 AM

I just did this with my business. Since I only have 35 employees, the business is exempt from OCare.

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 9:49 AM

I remember reading somewhere that most companies in France have 49 employees because 50 is their threshold for all their socialist policies. I guess we’ll soon see the same thing here.

Occams Stubble on May 8, 2014 at 10:34 AM

But… Free Contraception!

socalcon on May 8, 2014 at 10:35 AM

And in addition to the steady march of hefty annual premium increases, I also have to pay an additional “re-insurance fee” every year to keep my employees insured.

Docnova on May 8, 2014 at 10:36 AM

As the Honorable Hillary Clinton might comment:

What difference, at this point, does it matter?

socalcon on May 8, 2014 at 10:36 AM

I choose to incite the Libs ‘go to’: Unintended Consequences

And the corollary: We have to pass the law to see what’s in it.

socalcon on May 8, 2014 at 10:38 AM

And for those with employers who pay for/subsidize health plans, do you think they will shift their contribution back to your salary? No. You’ll lose your health benefit AND have to purchase 0′care with no change in salary. You brought this, America!

freedomfirst on May 8, 2014 at 10:47 AM

I remember reading somewhere that most companies in France have 49 employees because 50 is their threshold for all their socialist policies. I guess we’ll soon see the same thing here.

Occams Stubble on May 8, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Already happening here. I interviewed with a company last week and the president admitted to me at their peak production a few years ago, she purposely did this. When she had 49 employees, she would tell everyone they couldn’t hire anyone else no matter how busy they got.

ladyingray on May 8, 2014 at 10:47 AM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

You’re killing it Rywall!

HumpBot Salvation on May 8, 2014 at 10:48 AM

When reality conflicts with the narrative, reality must yield. This is always the modus operandi of Liberalism, and the Boko Haram case is Liberalism applied to diplomacy. (AKA “Smart Power”)

Socratease on May 8, 2014 at 10:49 AM

buy their own policy on the open market

Charlemagne on May 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM

First, you have to have an open market……..

GWB on May 8, 2014 at 10:57 AM

Our medical decisions are being taken out of our hands, and it will be the most vulnerable – the very ones the Democrats claim to champion – who will suffer the most.

JoseQuinones on May 8, 2014 at 10:26 AM

Otherwise known as “Hope and Change.”

visions on May 8, 2014 at 10:57 AM

….it will be the most vulnerable – the very ones the Democrats claim to champion – who will suffer the most.

JoseQuinones on May 8, 2014 at 10:26 AM

I’m dreading it as well. My elderly father is a Vet. He’s in decent health, although he does have some long-term health issues.

He’s not a naïve person, though, and he’s been taking it upon himself to learn as much as he can about his health conditions, his limitations, what kinds of treatments are out there, etc. So at least he can help himself as much as possible and not be totally beaten down by the system.

It’s more a psychological thing for him than anything else.

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 11:04 AM

And you wonder why people know you are a liberal.

cozmo on May 8, 2014 at 9:51 AM

I never said it was something I supported. I’m just showing you why liberals passed this abomination called ‘obamacare’

weedisgood on May 8, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Obama nominates new Health and Human Services secretary
2m
Sen. Richard Burr, R-NC, on Health and Human Services Secretary nominee Sylvia Mathews Burwell: ‘She comes with a portfolio of experience’ – @jbendery

canopfor on May 8, 2014 at 11:07 AM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

More accurate alternate headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Higher Premiums, Higher Deductibles, Smaller Networks, Higher Tax Burdens, Dependency upon Government Largesse.

stvnscott on May 8, 2014 at 11:09 AM

Are all academics stupid?

Are all academics stoned?

talkingpoints on May 8, 2014 at 9:54 AM

Both, but most of all, they are leftists. Please read:

Obama Unleashes the Left

climbnjump on May 8, 2014 at 11:14 AM

Burwell’s job is to shut up and look pretty while Obama’s bureaucratic zealots manipulate the health care law to get to single payer before O-care can be repealed.

PattyJ on May 8, 2014 at 11:23 AM

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

How’s the weather in Canada, everdiso?

rogerb on May 8, 2014 at 10:26 AM

And by the way everditso, why don’t you tell us of your experience with single payer in Canada? One would think you are in a perfect position to opine on how well they work.

slickwillie2001 on May 8, 2014 at 11:24 AM

canopfor on May 8, 2014 at 11:07 AM

Burr’s a sleeper version of McCain and Graham

Hope like the dickens we can remove him from office in 2016.

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 11:32 AM

This again is predictable and no surprise – why the numbnuts on Capital Hill (DEMS) couldn’t see this coming is beyond me!

apeks on May 8, 2014 at 11:32 AM

I remember reading somewhere that most companies in France have 49 employees because 50 is their threshold for all their socialist policies. I guess we’ll soon see the same thing here.

Occams Stubble on May 8, 2014 at 10:34 AM

Or we could see larger companies dividing themselves into small companies with less than 50 employees each who buy and sell to each other.

Steve Z on May 8, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

No one has ever been forced to having an employer sponsored policy–it’s a benefit in which you could still acquire your own indiv policy, as well, but thanks for nothing…

hillsoftx on May 8, 2014 at 11:39 AM

I’m not sure why people would think that the dems didn’t see this coming. They may have not advertised it but it is probably what they want. People less dependent on employer provided health insurance and more dependent on government.
As for the cost, when have they ever cared?

Remember, single payer is the goal, because monopolies are bad… or something.

tkc882 on May 8, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

everdiso on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

No one has ever been forced to having an employer sponsored policy–it’s a benefit in which you could still acquire your own indiv policy, as well, but thanks for nothing…

hillsoftx on May 8, 2014 at 11:39 AM

Of course; millions of Americans decline their employers’ plans and elect to join the spouse’s plan, depending on which might be more appropriate to their situation and what portion of the premiums the employers pay.

slickwillie2001 on May 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM

“Such an employer-dumping strategy can promote the interests of both employers and employees by shifting health care expenses on to the public at large,” wrote two University of Minnesota law professors in a 2011 paper that basically predicted the present interest.

I fail to see how this promotes the interest of employees.

tommyboy on May 8, 2014 at 9:38 AM

I completely agree.

Kevin K. on May 8, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Or we could see larger companies dividing themselves into small companies with less than 50 employees each who buy and sell to each other.

Steve Z on May 8, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Bingo. Before the Great Recession, my business had over 50 employees. Now, if we grow back to that size, I’m going to divide the company into several companies. Initially, I’ll break it between B2B and B2C and possibly have a third that just does manufacturing. The manufacturing company will sell to both “sales” companies, which in turn will target different market segments. This may also be how I get around nationwide internet sales tax collection, since most of the laws in the works require sales tax collection on companies over a certain size / revenue.

Small business owners aren’t stupid. They’ll figure out work arounds. It’s harder to do than with their big business competitors, since they just can’t bribe Congress, but many will find the loopholes.

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

All by design, rubes.

Schadenfreude on May 8, 2014 at 12:28 PM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

eradipshit on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

…HI!…I am your mind…^…on drugs!

KOOLAID2 on May 8, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Figures, we are in the sign up period this cycle for healthcare. Our rates are doubling for Anthem Blue cross. Our options also include Kaiser if we wish to choose. My costs double to $279 per month plus a premium extra 50 dollars. But Kaiser is $1450. This prices them out. Nobody is going to sign up for it unless they have like 10 kids. This is the coercion into socialized medicine, make your current health plan cost prohibitive.

jake49 on May 8, 2014 at 12:37 PM

You own it now democrats.

jake49 on May 8, 2014 at 12:38 PM

This is certainly going to be painful, and I’m perfectly happy to let the Democrats absorb the anger from this, but isn’t it kind of a given that employer-based health insurance probably does need to be phased out?

LukeinNE on May 8, 2014 at 12:45 PM

I’m a doctor that owns a multi-doctor corp. If you’re interested, this is what is going to happen.
When the employer mandate goes into effect everybody will have deductibles of $3000 to $10,000. This means that if you get an elective surgery, a colonoscopy,or any other hospital procedure you are going to have to cut a check on the spot, up front for the whole amount! Who can afford that? Most people just won’t get these things done. Because of this hospitals, large medical corporations and the doctors they employ will be gone in the first year. No matter what insurance you have, you will lose your doctor. That is when Obama will ride in on the single payer horse and save us all. Patients will jump on it because it’s free and doctors will jump on it just to work. The only thing standing in the way is private practice doctors that will keep the machine going. Look for your local private practice docs to be put out of business in the next year because of, IRS, Medicare or Medicaid “violations”. You will be reading of them in the paper soon.

Redglen on May 8, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Burwell is touted as an executive. An individual who’s world revolves around attention to detail and keen awareness, both of work and environment.

Take a close look at any photo of Burwell you choose, but the one attached to this article will suffice, since it shares key elements with them all.

Burwell, who lives in a world where branding and marketing is essential to success, is unaware of the esthetics of female grooming. Her makeup, such as it is, serves no purpose, her hairstyle is best suited to a middle school student. But more importantly, the suit Burwell is wearing doesn’t fit her and neither has it been tailored to fit her, it is simply something she chose off the rack and wears ‘as is’. The colors she has chosen don’t suit her, either, and can’t be even remotely construed, on her, as suggestive of competence. That’s saying something for a grey suit.

Interesting that an executive, one who has ostensibly been wearing a suit every working day for years,or at least has enjoyed the opportunity to do so, would look so uncomfortable and out of place wearing the working uniform of the executive class. This is a woman who should pay meticulous attention to detail as part of her nature as well as her position, and that attention should have been directed to her own ‘branding’ years ago in college. It should have been habit and integral to her daily routine by now. She should, by now, feel most at home in a suit. Yet, clearly, this is a woman who doesn’t understand the power of image, the mechanics of wielding executive power, and feels out of place in executive wear.

I have to wonder how well placed Burwell would be in an executive position where millions of Americans are forced to depend on her for far more than simply being astute enough to dress and groom herself in a way consistent with the position.

thatsafactjack on May 8, 2014 at 12:51 PM

Alternate Headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Freedom of Variety of Individual Insurance Choices: No Longer Bound to Whims of Middlemen Employers

Red Green on May 8, 2014 at 10:24 AM

Tell us again how Faux News never reported that 80% figure, and only reported the 67% figure, and maybe we’ll stop laughing at you.

F-

Del Dolemonte on May 8, 2014 at 12:58 PM

More accurate alternate headline: Millions of Americans to Gain Higher Premiums, Higher Deductibles, Smaller Networks, Higher Tax Burdens, Dependency upon Government Largesse.

stvnscott on May 8, 2014 at 11:09 AM

You forgot “without the employer paying for half or 80% or whatever of the premium as a job benefit”.

But hey, choice! Sometimes among a single carrier, but choice!

The Schaef on May 8, 2014 at 1:01 PM

Hope!! Change!!

The democrats OWN his mess. Hold their feet to the fire and make them pay. The midterms will be a bigger shellacking than 2010.

notalibturd on May 8, 2014 at 1:16 PM

redglen, yes, I agree, doctors will ask for money up front once they see what deductibles are out there. The only good news is, patients will then hit the ceiling and vote against the Dems, not to mention develop a real hatred for them.

PattyJ on May 8, 2014 at 2:02 PM

This is certainly going to be painful, and I’m perfectly happy to let the Democrats absorb the anger from this, but isn’t it kind of a given that employer-based health insurance probably does need to be phased out?

LukeinNE on May 8, 2014 at 12:45 PM

NO

In fact we need to expand the nature of organizations allowed to negotiate group health insurance. Let churches and temples offer it to their members, let Walmart and Target open their employee plan to customers, let Credit Unions offer group insurance to their customers.

slickwillie2001 on May 8, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Bingo. Before the Great Recession, my business had over 50 employees. Now, if we grow back to that size, I’m going to divide the company into several companies. Initially, I’ll break it between B2B and B2C and possibly have a third that just does manufacturing. The manufacturing company will sell to both “sales” companies, which in turn will target different market segments. This may also be how I get around nationwide internet sales tax collection, since most of the laws in the works require sales tax collection on companies over a certain size / revenue.

Small business owners aren’t stupid. They’ll figure out work arounds. It’s harder to do than with their big business competitors, since they just can’t bribe Congress, but many will find the loopholes.

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM

It won’t work:

Under regulations recently proposed by the IRS, employers with less than 50 full-time-equivalent employees (FTEs) that are part of a “controlled group” may also be subject to the “pay or play” penalties under the Affordable Care Act, since the entire “controlled group” is considered a single employer for purposes of determining whether the 50-employee threshold is met. The “shared responsibility” requirements would then apply to each individual employer in the controlled group, regardless of whether or not a particular employer within the controlled group has 50 FTEs. Note that for 2015 only, the FTE threshold is temporarily raised to 100.

Under §414(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, a controlled group exists when any two or more entities are connected through ownership in a parent-subsidiary controlled group, a brother-sister controlled group, or a combination of the two. Any type of business entity can be a member of a controlled group for benefit plan purposes (i.e. a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship or limited liability company). In general, there are three types of controlled groups: parent-subsidiary, brother-sister, and combined controlled groups.

In these cases, an employer is treated as offering coverage to all full-time employees if it covers all but 5% of its employees, or five full-time employees, whichever is greater. Because of this five-employee minimum, a very small employer that is part of a larger controlled group may be required to provide coverage to all of its full-time employees, and penalties for non-compliance could be substantial depending on the size of the group. For this reason, it’s important that controlled groups and their subsidiaries understand their status as a group as well as assess their obligations with respect to ACA compliance, both from a tracking and reporting and “shared responsibility” standpoint.

http://www.tangohealth.com/posts/controlled-group-rules-aca-impact-smaller-employers/

jim56 on May 8, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Hey, notalibturd, sorry for the negativity about “midterms will be a bigger shellacking than 2010″. Please, tell me I’m wrong, but aren’t a bunch of rinos (McConnell, Boehner, Graham) up for re-election? Even pro-amnesty Rep. Renee Ellmers (R) won the primary in NC.

Reality check: & what’s the difference between the (2) parties? The (R)’s are giving up, no, they were never serious about curtailing Obamacare; after all, they want a piece of the money pie, too.

Belle on May 8, 2014 at 2:21 PM

I’m a doctor that owns a multi-doctor corp. If you’re interested, this is what is going to happen.
When the employer mandate goes into effect everybody will have deductibles of $3000 to $10,000. This means that if you get an elective surgery, a colonoscopy,or any other hospital procedure you are going to have to cut a check on the spot, up front for the whole amount! Who can afford that? Most people just won’t get these things done. Because of this hospitals, large medical corporations and the doctors they employ will be gone in the first year. No matter what insurance you have, you will lose your doctor. That is when Obama will ride in on the single payer horse and save us all. Patients will jump on it because it’s free and doctors will jump on it just to work. The only thing standing in the way is private practice doctors that will keep the machine going. Look for your local private practice docs to be put out of business in the next year because of, IRS, Medicare or Medicaid “violations”. You will be reading of them in the paper soon.

Redglen on May 8, 2014 at 12:47 PM

Most employer plans already have fairly high deductibles before they pay for most elective surgeries. And most people without insurance now probably can’t afford most elective surgeries and are putting them off. I don’t understand how the employer mandate makes the current situation any worse.

jim56 on May 8, 2014 at 2:22 PM

I don’t understand how the employer mandate makes the current situation any worse.

jim56 on May 8, 2014 at 2:22 PM

Then you are bigger fool than we already suspected you are.

cozmo on May 8, 2014 at 2:23 PM

lineholder on May 8, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Several years ago, my wife and I saw this coming – courtesy of the National Democratic Socialist WorkersParty. We drastically altered our life styles and the resulting health choirs have helped. (We’re both in our late 60′s.) We have minimal need of routine health services and are resigned to the fact that if we need major medical care, we’ll die. Whether we’re killed for holding politically incorrect views or end up as medical guinea pigs, the result will be the same. If anyone wants to see where this nation is headed, just review what the record of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

Some of us recall the about 30 years ago, the UK’s National Health Service had a policy for any patients over 55 who were dependent on the NHS and didn’t have the money to go ‘outside’ the system. If those over 55 went to a hospital with a serious condition, they were told to go home, put their affairs in order, and wait for death. They were never told the truth – that because of their age The State considered them expendable. The USA has now reached that point.

oldleprechaun on May 8, 2014 at 2:29 PM

AP Politics ‏@AP_Politics 57m

AP VIDEO: Sylvia Mathews Burwell, Obama’s pick to lead federal health care agency, testifies before Senate committee. http://apne.ws/1nsArCT

HHS Nominee Gets First Turn Before Senators

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1zWO_N2f-M

canopfor on May 8, 2014 at 2:34 PM

Once the dumping into Obamacare begins, any repeal of it becomes moot. It will be an inevitable disaster. Then, single payer will also be inevitable.

Techster64 on May 8, 2014 at 3:05 PM

It won’t work:

jim56 on May 8, 2014 at 2:06 PM

Super! Then I won’t go past 50. It’s great living in France.

ReaganWasRight on May 8, 2014 at 5:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2