People who warn that President Obama’s healthcare law is in dire straits often point to rising health insurance premiums as proof. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has called premium increases on Affordable Care Act exchanges “astronomically high.” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), said premiums have “skyrocketed.”
But are these growing premiums actually high?
A new analysis from the Urban Institute found that the average unsubsidized premiums in the Affordable Care Act exchanges, commonly known as Obamacare, are actually 10% lower than the full premiums in the average employer plan nationally in 2016.
Source: Rising Obamacare premiums are still lower than employer-sponsored health insurance | LA Times
Obviously it wasn’t just the LA Times; WaPo, and the Morning Consult got in on the act too. They all cited the same study from the aptly-named Urban Institute, a policy group founded by Lyndon Johnson to promote his own government programs. Unsurprisingly, it is one of the largest think tanks today, and while it claims to be independent, its own Wikipedia page shows its clear tilt towards liberal initiatives. Yet, it is still cited in major media as an “unbiased” source.
Forbes already did an excellent job of refuting this study; I suggest you give their bit a read. Notably, the study does not account for differences in health plans, health plan availability, differences in copays and deductibles, tax incentives in employer-sponsored plans, and man other variables. Forbes made a note that since Obamacare was rolled out, insurance claims in the cheaper policies with supposedly “high” deductibles skyrocketed.
I decided to look a little bit closer, not into the study, but into the Urban Institute itself. How could an organization that was heavily cited by MSM as a respectable source put together such a limited, heavily biased study, with little if any empirical evidence? I looked at the Urban Institute’s financial data for 2015, the most current year available, and examined the list of “funders” of the institute. And what do you know…
…SIX of the top donors were US government agencies! Some notables on the list:
- HHS, who has been peddling Obamacare to everyone it can
- Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, under investigation for improper involvement in Obamacare
- The Justice Department, who knew about Obamacare’s plan to cancel policies prior to its implementation
So, The Urban Institute is directly funded by the federal government, specifically agencies that are active in promoting Obamacare and spreading misinformation about the law. How can anyone cite any study from the Urban Institute as anything but biased? Of course, the MSM will try to refute that by saying, “Only a few of the top donors are government entities, there are many others on the full list!” And they would be right, they do accept funds from donors, notably foundations. But take a closer look at a chart depicting Urban Institute’s revenue sources:
You guessed it: the feds are far and away the largest donor. How is the federal government still funding this institute, and masquerading it as unbiased? And given that the top federal bureaus funding the Urban Institute are involved in promoting Obamacare, how could anyone be surprised at the result of this study?
About the only thing that is unsurprising regarding this whole affair is that a government-funded study is so faulty and incomplete that it is almost completely worthless, yet it is still cited by the MSM as credible.
If you’ve been reading my content, you know that I’ve had my own experience with the ACA, and of course its has been anything but enjoyable. After getting my own policy in 2012, I do pay lower premiums than I did with my employer’s plan, but mostly because I accepted inferior coverage with a much higher deductible. Notably, my plan is unavailable in the Obamacare exchanges and not offered by the provider anyway; similar plans are much more expensive. I was very lucky from a timing perspective in choosing a plan that is ACA compliant, yet sold before the Obamacare exchanges existed. Though I was recently informed I’ll be able to keep my plan for another year, I’m dreading the coming notification of my price increase. Those who are in the Obamacare exchanges have not been nearly as fortunate as I have.
So we should all ask Carolyn Johnson and Caitlin Owens, the authors of the above MSM articles, about their Obamacare experience. If Obamacare is so much cheaper, are they using it? And how much are they saving? While the law states that they must have health insurance, and a large enough employer must provide it, there is no law stating that individuals MUST purchase insurance from their employer. Have either of the two of them “shopped” for insurance on the exchanges?
If I were to list a contract on Betfair, I imagine the money would be over 95% on them having employer-sponsored insurance. Furthermore, the money would likely be squarely on the same coverage in the exchange being more expensive than their employer’s insurance. But don’t take my word for it: I linked to their respective Twitter accounts above. Go and ask them for yourself, or just re-tweet my queries to them.
If the MSM is going to use a flawed study to promote Obamacare as cheaper than employer sponsored insurance, than don’t allow them to hide behind their own hypocrisy; demand that they use Obamacare themselves.
Note: While inspecting the Urban Institute’s donors, a curious name popped up: Everytown for Gun Safety, AKA the anti-gun organization funded entirely by Michael Bloomberg. I wonder where the Urban Institute stands on gun control?
I’ve gotten used to Ben Garrison’s drawing a penis head on Bill’s nose or gross depictions of the bitch of bengazi but a hairy dick coming out the side of a patient’s head?
right, and it was funny too.
gov. is adding mightily to the coming “Peak Distrust”*
(attribution: * dc.sunsets)
MSM will dive in feet first to promote anything Obama could dream up regardless of the damage from unintended consequences ! Face the economic facts our country is “CIRCLING THE DRAIN” and nothing can stop it now ! We have all experienced serious loss of every benefit we once took for granted as part of the package of working for a living , all who still enjoy a defined benefit package congratulations while the rest of us walk the edge of bankruptcy trying to keep some medical insurance and retirement that we find ourselves on shrinking paychecks and then you get sick not just drink fluids and rest but without about $300 thousand you are fucking dead at 55 oh and you don’t smoke use drugs or abuse alcholol thank god you have insurance well fuck it if my country can piss trillions away on bull shit then we can swing womb to tomb top notch medical care for all our citizens when you do the math we certainly pay enough for it but insurance and government get in the way not help
Thumbs down to full coverage for American citizens paid thru taxes rather than different coverages . Obviously you are very wealthy or never got real sick as I said your going to die sick without expensive treatment and then you are ok as long as you have life long expensive medications that place you on disability social security entitled , yes for 42 years my employer and I paid a 15% tax for my disability insurence that’s not entitled when you collect on a plan you paid for also I always worked and had 2 retirement plans bankrupted away and did fully fund IRA’s and continued to pay high premiums because of an individual plan always cost the higher premiums while I am taxed for others to pay a lower premium for the same coverage . I never said we should not pay for health care but get government and insurance companies out of the way and then we will have a fair market health economy not a proped up mess with co-pays etc
Most people who were paying for their own insurance with its premiums and deductibles know what they were paying before Obamacare and what they are paying now.
Most of them, the unsubsidized ones, are paying significantly more now with equally higher deductibles than they were than then.
We don’t need a study to tell us how much we are paying on premiums, but it would be nice to have a comprehensive one for the total impact on the health care system. By that I mean things like total spending, number and costs of both the most common and more serious procedures performed, number of people foregoing routine and non emergency care because they can no longer afford the deductibles on top of the premiums, number of emergency room patients putting a strain on hospitals with emergency rooms and the percentage of them that are non paying, and so on till everything involved in the total healthcare system is analyzed and can be intelligently discussed as a result of that analysis.
I doubt we’ll see such a comprehensive study anytime soon.
I suppose the next push we see will be for government run single payer so we can compare more favorably with places superior to ours like we are told the the UK system is (told it is, not necessarily is: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/10/hospitals-on-brink-of-collapse-say-health-chiefs).
There is a TV PSA out now, with a group of history’s TV doctors, telling us we should go get our annual checkup, cause, ya know, the doctors have to make a living too.
clear indication that obamacare has failed, and will be replaced with something much worse, like Medicaid.
the whole sick care industry shot it self in the foot when it thought that working with .gov would improve anything.
I’m inclined to agree that there’s a good chance some form of Medicaid could replace Obamacare. However, I don’t necessarily think that would be worse than Obamacare, because the ACA has been such a disaster. Citizens are already paying for the uninsured when they hit the emergency room, and Medicaid already exists. Though a free-market system absent of government and private insurance is best, that ain’t happening.
See my article, “Update On My ACA Experience” for more:
http://fmshooter.com/update-aca-experience/