On a decisive 6 to 3 vote, King v Burwell, the US Supreme Court ruled that
the legislation implementing Obamacare was constitutional and that the
legislative intent that federally administered insurance could be subsidized. What this means for consumers is that 6
million subscribers through the federal system will maintain their affordable
health insurance and that for everyone else, the rates would not soar. The subscribers most affected were those who
lived in the 35 states that did not set up their own health insurance exchanges
through which Obamacare could have been administered on a state basis.
Consumers everywhere in the US, regardless of which state, will continue to benefit.
Per healthcare.gov, On average, consumers enrolled in the Marketplace are receiving $3,260 per year in taxcredits, or $272 each month. About 8 in 10 consumers could find coverage for $100 orless with tax credits through the Marketplace.
Consumers everywhere in the US, regardless of which state, will continue to benefit.
Per healthcare.gov, On average, consumers enrolled in the Marketplace are receiving $3,260 per year in taxcredits, or $272 each month. About 8 in 10 consumers could find coverage for $100 orless with tax credits through the Marketplace.
Kaiser Health had
predicted that all insurance rates would have increased eventually more than
predicted otherwise if the Court did not uphold the Obamacare law. The
Congressional Budget Office also predicted a hit in the long term to the
deficit if the law was overturned because indeed there were cost savings built
into Obamacare to the health care system
that aided the flattening of the cost curve. Costs were held down by less
charity care, greater competition, and
built in preventative care. With fewer
consumers unable to pay their bills and with more consumers getting
preventative care and checkups without copays, the entire system would see
lower costs than if the Obamacare system were not viable.
Colorado would not have been immediately affected since
Colorado was one of the states that set up the state exchange. But in the
future, the lack of participation of so many in health insurance in general
would have set up conditions that might have made Obamacare financially
unsustainable since the whole system depended upon a large number of healthy as
well as sick making the pool of insurers large enough to attract even healthy
payers. Our own state health exchange
has also come under fire for administrative and financial problems and there is
talk of abandoning the state exchange and moving its customers to the federal
exchange if the Court ruled in favor of Obamacare. There is now a plan B, a fallback to the
federal exchange, if the state exchange is put on ice by our state legislature. I would hope the State exchange would survive
because its administration is closer to home than Washington, and the State
legislature has some control over it.
Politically both Democrats and the GOP can breathe a sigh of
relief. The Obama health care legacy is
secure. The GOP would not have to face 6 million hardship stories of those who
had to drop insurance and feel pressure
to find an alternative to replace Obamacare.
After years of trying, they have never come up with a comparable
replacement. One of their dumbest proposals, to remove the individual mandate
(already upheld by the Court) and mandates on employers, would have eventually
destroyed the system since only the sick would have subscribed, the pool would
have had less healthy paying for the sicker, and the cost would have spiraled
into its eventual death. Their State legislatures are also off the hook for
finding some state funds to keep the subsidies going. Most of the states not having state run
exchanges are red states, so the political uproar would have been more severe
in a presidential election year.
For those in the GOP decrying the SCOTUS decision, they offer some very misleading reasons:
That Obamacare caused soaring premiums (in fact premium increases have been less than before Obamacare) and the costs are going to be outrageous (in fact, Obamacare will lower the deficit over time per the CBO). For the sources and reasons, see the independent, non partisan factcheck.org
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/scotus-ruling-fallout/
A version of this blog appeared in the www.skyhidailynews.com July 3, 2015
How the ACA benefits all consumers who have health care insurance from any source:
A list from the White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/health_reform_checklist.pdf
http://www.coloradohealthinstitute.org/blog/detail/the-aca-lives-and-one-chi-report-dies
http://coloradostatesman.com/content/995830-us-supreme-court-ruling-deals-another-defeat-obamacare-foes
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/06/19/facing-the-fallout-from-a-king-v-burwell-ruling/
http://acasignups.net/15/06/19/cbo-aca-repeal-federal-deficit-increase-353b-or-137b-over-next-decade-net-loss-24m-insured
For those in the GOP decrying the SCOTUS decision, they offer some very misleading reasons:
That Obamacare caused soaring premiums (in fact premium increases have been less than before Obamacare) and the costs are going to be outrageous (in fact, Obamacare will lower the deficit over time per the CBO). For the sources and reasons, see the independent, non partisan factcheck.org
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/scotus-ruling-fallout/
A version of this blog appeared in the www.skyhidailynews.com July 3, 2015
How the ACA benefits all consumers who have health care insurance from any source:
A list from the White House: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/health_reform_checklist.pdf
http://www.coloradohealthinstitute.org/blog/detail/the-aca-lives-and-one-chi-report-dies
http://coloradostatesman.com/content/995830-us-supreme-court-ruling-deals-another-defeat-obamacare-foes
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/06/19/facing-the-fallout-from-a-king-v-burwell-ruling/
http://acasignups.net/15/06/19/cbo-aca-repeal-federal-deficit-increase-353b-or-137b-over-next-decade-net-loss-24m-insured
No comments:
Post a Comment