I have never been the biggest fan of the Affordable Care
Act.
I believe that since the government is already paying over
70% of our nation’s health care bill and we’re paying another 12% out of
pocket, this colossal effort to preserve the small share financed by
privately-funded private insurance without bankrupting the nation may not have
been worth the effort. Medicare-for-all
would have been a much better approach.
But now that an
emerging group of at-risk Democratic senators have joined the Republican chorus
to delay the individual mandate, I want to offer an opposing view to theirs.
Obamacare has been
compromised enough.
Since it was enacted in 2010, Obamacare has undergone the
following significant changes:
- The minimum medical loss ratio requirements were delayed in several states.
- The long-term care insurance program has been repealed.
- The prevention fund has been raided.
- The reductions in payments to providers have been put off.
- The mandatory Medicaid expansion has been made optional.
- The employer mandate has been delayed.
These have all occurred before the program was fully implemented.
And this has had more to do with public pressure
than public policy.
Now there are at least three more changes gathering steam –
a delay in the individual mandate (favored by conservatives), a delay in the reinsurance
pool tax (favored by liberals), and a delay in the 2.3% excise tax on
medical equipment (favored by both).
The irony is that members of Congress think these changes will
make them more popular with their constituents.
But that isn’t going to happen. The
popularity
of Congress is at an all-time low. Obamacare
is at
least four to five times more popular than Congress.
So enough
already. How about trying leadership for
a change?
Democrats reversing course on the Affordable Care Act’s
individual mandate is only today’s news.
Even though they now count on short memories, the Republicans and their
conservative allies, who
for the most part laid the philosophical foundation of the Affordable Care Act,
including its individual mandate in the first place, also used to favor the
individual mandate. They reversed their position
on it around the time President Obama embraced it.
So here is the question.
Are any of these people capable of staking out a position on this law as
a matter of policy and then actually sticking by it – at least until the law is
implemented?
When John Kerry said in the 2004 Presidential campaign that he voted for an
appropriation for the Iraq War before he voted against it, it became a
national joke and added “flip-flopping” to the political lexicon.
A decade later, flip-flopping
on the Affordable Care Act seems to have replaced leadership as a requirement of
public office.
And here’s why a little leadership today could go a long way:
because most of what is being argued about doesn’t really affect anyone anyway.
All the news this month about both the non-working federal
exchange and the individual mandate affects about seven million people this
year. They are all either uninsured or
have really lousy employer-based insurance.
That’s a little over 2 percent of the population.
For the rest of us who are not yet eligible for Medicare,
the Obamacare consumer protections are what matter – no lifetime caps on
benefits, no denial of coverage based on pre-existing conditions, no cancelling
of coverage when people get sick, and mandated minimum medical loss ratios. And these have all been in place, for the
most part, for the last couple of years.
And for Medicare beneficiaries, the closing of the donut
hole and the new prevention benefits are pretty much all they need to be
concerned about, and they, too, have been in place for a couple of years.
No one objects to
these. And so far as I can tell no one
is begging the members of Congress to change them.
So why don’t we just wait and see how the other 2 percent make
out? They have until March 31st
to sign up for insurance through the exchange.
And if in February they cannot
because of technical problems, there will still be plenty of time to help them
out by delaying the March 31st “individual mandate” deadline.
In the meantime, let’s stop pretending that members of Congress
have our interests in mind when they advocate delaying the individual
mandate. Or that they’re showing any leadership
at all.
Because pandering and leadership are not the same thing.
Paul Gionfriddo via email: gionfriddopaul@gmail.com. Twitter: @pgionfriddo. Facebook: www.facebook.com/paul.gionfriddo. LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/paulgionfriddo/
All the latest hype is about Computer glitches etc., BUT none are discussing the real impact this flawed sffort will affect the actual; hands on medical heath care itself!
ReplyDeleteWhere can an individual get the direct facts? This Chicago style administrationis so blatently obtuse that the great tragic result is that the average manbn has lost any semblence of respect for the governent and its judicial and administrative players
Keep in mind that the individual mandate was a legislative trade-off to get the consumer protections that were needed without moving ts a single-payer system. Congress isn't off the hook here by any means - the reason we have what we have is because of who influences Congress, and how Congress is influenced.
DeleteI think there wasnt enough teeth in the new law, such as - wherever an insurance company offers any health insurance in a state, it must offer plans on that state's marketplace for those locations, in order to insure competition. BCBS is the only company offering marketplace plans in my county, although there are several others who offer insurance in this county. just my humble opinion.
ReplyDelete