ObamaCare 2.0: Judgment awaits
Health care premiums would shoot way up for everyone, because all the sick people get coverage and the healthy people don’t sign up. Subsidies could become a huge drain on the federal treasury, creating another entitlement that’s politically impossible to roll back. Businesses might drop health coverage and send their workers to the health exchanges — overloading the exchanges and driving up costs even more.
Making things worse, more low-wage workers could see their hours get cut back so the employers don’t have to cover them. States that expand Medicaid would then get stuck with the bill as the feds break their promise to pick up just about all of the new costs.
There’s also a new danger for Obama now that so many governors have refused to set up their own state health exchanges. The federal government will have to run exchanges for them, and the worst-case scenario would be that the Obama administration isn’t up to the task…
What really worries advocates of the law in the short term, though, is the prospect that Obama might agree to pare the law’s consumer subsidies before they begin — one concession he could give Republicans as part of a deal to head off automatic spending cuts or a government shutdown.
“That’s definitely a worst-case thing for anyone who worked on the law,” said Dash — because the law will only work if the subsidies make the coverage affordable to the people who have to buy it.









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
Just check yes to everyone.
rob verdi on January 20, 2013 at 3:13 PM
Worst-case? Survey says….likely-case.
JeffWeimer on January 20, 2013 at 3:14 PM
We can always hope the law collapses.
Illinidiva on January 20, 2013 at 3:17 PM
And the feds can’t require the states to expand Medicaid in order to get basic Medicaid funding…the only win from SCOTUS. The states can stick to basic Medicaid if they want.
Wethal on January 20, 2013 at 3:19 PM
Take note of this, much fewer doctors.
Schadenfreude on January 20, 2013 at 3:19 PM
Time bomb
Schadenfreude on January 20, 2013 at 3:21 PM
It may be politically impossible to roll back entitlements, but at some point (and we’re rapidly approaching it), an unassailable force — one that is immune to the over-hyped charms and petty demagoguery of Barry H. Obama — will roll them all back for us, and the name of that force is: fiscal reality.
AZCoyote on January 20, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Gee, there are problems with Obamacare? Who knew? Nobody said anything about this before it became law of the land?
MechanicalBill on January 20, 2013 at 3:49 PM
Now they tell us.
Purple Fury on January 20, 2013 at 3:54 PM
Oh, and I guess Politico didn’t get the memo. It’s health insurance “marketplaces” now.
Purple Fury on January 20, 2013 at 3:56 PM
Methinks Obamacare is going to a total damn mess.
SC.Charlie on January 20, 2013 at 3:56 PM
Well, silly, you had to pass the law to find out what was inside it.
Odysseus on January 20, 2013 at 3:57 PM
Because nobody does robust consumer assistance like the government.
Purple Fury on January 20, 2013 at 3:57 PM
Wait, the USPO and the DMV are not shining examples of customer service at its best?
Odysseus on January 20, 2013 at 3:59 PM
Someone wake me when a Legacy Media headline reads:
“Conservative and Libertarian Critics Were Right About ObamaCare”
visions on January 20, 2013 at 4:06 PM
BigGator5 on January 20, 2013 at 4:08 PM
We might end up a failed state, like Canada or Australia. The end is nigh!
lester on January 20, 2013 at 4:09 PM
Yeah.
Hasn’t that been his intention all along. Destroy the system…er..I mean, “fundamentally transform” the system?
Mimzey on January 20, 2013 at 4:13 PM
But, but, but, but they said Obamacare wouldn’t add to the deficit!
I know, Nancy Pelosi said so!!!
Purple Fury on January 20, 2013 at 4:17 PM
You would like that, wouldn’t you!
OldEnglish on January 20, 2013 at 4:19 PM
Worst-case scenario? I’d say metaphysical certitude. The clowns who can’t run any kind of a non-subsidized enterprise?
Let’s not forget that one of Obama’s two brushes with the private sector was working at Baskin Robbins in high school, where he spent much of his time giving free ice cream to his friends (read “casual acquaintances”).
I case you’re wondering, Obama’s other brush was that nine months he spent “behind enemy lines” at an entry level job for some business publishing company. I don’t count his time as a half-a** lawyer in Chicago because he was subsidized (hence overpaid) by UofC for his Mickey Mouse law lecturer position. And, as I understand it, his actual “law practice” was doing some meaningless legal work.
BuckeyeSam on January 20, 2013 at 4:32 PM
It works perfectly, but the conservatives are preventing it from working. Or something,
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 20, 2013 at 4:36 PM
A pox on your house John Roberts.
TxAnn56 on January 20, 2013 at 4:45 PM
The private sector is generally more incompetent than the public sector.
crr6 on June 12, 2010 at 12:08 PM
Del Dolemonte on January 20, 2013 at 5:22 PM