Health care reform

Promises That ObamaCare Has Already Broken and Will Break

|

The front page of the Investor's Business Daily this morning very helpfully provides a list of ObamaCare's broken promises to date:

  • President Obama insisted that ObamaCare would "bring down the cost of health care for families, for businesses, and for the federal government." Instead, the Kaiser Family Foundation reported last week that insurance premiums climbed 9.5 percent this year—the biggest increase since 2004. Indeed, since 2008, Kaiser has found that average family premiums have climbed $2,393.

 In addition, writes IBD:

ObamaCare promised immediate help via subsidized "high-risk pools" for the millions that the administration said were denied coverage. The White House expected 375,000 would rush to sign up by the end of last year. As of July 2011, only about 30,000 had, according to the Health and Human Services Department. [And this was after the HHS launched an aggressive marketing campaign to boost enrollment that Peter Suderman reported on back in January.]

Backers of the reforms failed to predict the impact of raising annual payment caps on low-cost health plans that many smaller companies offer. As a result, the administration had to approve more than 1,500 waivers, or risk seeing the ranks of the uninsured swell by 3.4 million.

ObamaCare's promised price tag has already been exceeded. It was supposed to cost $938 billion over the first 10 years, until the Congressional Budget Office realized that it had underestimated administrative costs. That correction boosted the total cost by 12%.

But this is of course only the beginning. Here are some predictions for the future if ObamaCare goes forward:

  • As ObamaCare cuts Medicare's reimbursement in order to cover 30 million additional Americans who lack coverage, providers will refuse to treat Medicare patients or retire or both. Either way, seniors (and others) will have a harder time getting appointments and care, something that will make them hopping mad in addition to being sick.
  • The various mandates and regulations on insurance companies such as guaranteed issue (that bars them from refusing coverage to patients with pre-existing condition); community rating (that limits their premiums to a narrow range, regardless of the risk an individual patient poses) and medical loss ratios (that limits how much they can spend on administrative and other activities unrelated to patient care) will drive many of them out of business and drive consolidation in the industry. With competition diminished, premiums will rise as will the ranks of the uninsured.
  • This will mean that Uncle Sam will have to pick up the insurance tab for even more Americans, hastening America's date with bankruptcy.
  • Politicians will look for scapegoats to save their own skin, and the remaining private insurance companies will serve as a convenient target. There will be bipartisan outrage against rapacious, cruel and greedy insurers who care only about their bottom-line and not your poor dying grandma.
  • The logical solution under the circumstances will be a single-payer system complete with wage and price controls on providers, and rationing by some other name (such as evidence based medicine) on patients.

ObamaCare's repeal is the only sure way to avoid this dystopia. But David Frum advises Republicans to forget their foolhardy mantra of "repeal and replace." Better to accept the law and tinker with it, he avers.

Oh David—et tu?

Advertisement

NEXT: Who Are the 14 Percent of Americans That Think Congress Is A-Ok?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Repeal.

      1. Healthcare Reformed!

    1. Listen and Learn:
      How about all the positives from the law this year and savings for seniors so far in case you missed them:
      1) 2.3 million young adults now covered
      2) 20.2 million seniors got free preventive care worth over $2 billion
      3) 1.2 million seniors have saved 1.2 Billion from closing the donut hole
      4) Medicare inflation is the lowest ever
      5) Medicare Advantage premiums are FALLING 4% for 2012
      5) No insured American will ever face annual or lifetime maximums on their policy preventing potential economic harm to us all
      6) preventive care is covered with no copays in all company plans now saving any insured person and family who takes care of themselves money.

      Maybe when it goes into full effect in 2014 we will all be winners with more than one world vocabularies/

      1. There is absolutely nothing positive about ObamaScare. Nothing… its a death sentence to seniors, and it will cost our country out the wazoo..
        Its all a lie… toally…
        down with ObamaCare.

        1. The only lies here are your rants.

          Seniors are the greatest beneficiaries of the law so far saving over $3 billion in 2011 alone

          1. I am a senior on Medicare and have to ask you, What savings are you talking about? I haven’t saved one penny yet. Who is getting this phantom savings?

          2. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:42PM|#
            …”Seniors are the greatest beneficiaries of the law so far saving over $3 billion in 2011 alone.”

            Prove it. Or shut up.

      2. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:47PM|#
        “Listen and Learn:
        How about all the positives from the law this year and savings for seniors so far in case you missed them:…”

        How about not posting lies?

  2. Strike down.

  3. Eliminate from the history books.

    1. Restore to the welfare rolls!

    1. Yes, but the really important question on the mind of voters regarding a PL regime is…what is his stance on antidisestablishmentarianism?

      Because I like the Church of England just the way it is, thank you very much.

      1. I’m proantidisestablishmentarian.

        1. Well in that case, set up a paypal account, because we’re ready to donate!

  4. With competition diminished, premiums will rise as will the ranks of the insured.

    Did you mean uninsured?

    1. Given the new progressive mantra about “access” when describing healthcare, it’s possible the meaning of “insured” stands.

      As we give more people “access”, fewer and fewer will get healthcare, and costs will go up.

    2. No competition is going to be greatly increased by the state exchanges and the private exchanges that Wellpoint and the Blues are rolling out to compete in all 50 states as well.

      There will be a minimum of 3 markets in all states vs one today with more carriers than ever and that is good news.

      Medicare Advantage has done the same thing in that market and prices are going down 4% for 2012.

      Aon Hewitt is also rolling out a private exchange for large employers nationally.

      1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:50PM|#
        “…[some bullshit prediction]…”

        Prove it. Or shut up.

  5. Of course the cost of healthcare is still climbing, Obamacare hasn’t fully gone into affect. And I’m not being facetious (it means to joke around inappropriately for all of you genius “right-wingers”). Personally, I’m not a winger of either persuasion, so don’t go there…

    1. Of course, I don’t think it will be upheld by SCOTUS (Sup. Ct.) though, so it’s probably moot to argue Obamacare’s realized or potential effects, or lack thereof.

    2. I think you’re a bit lost.

      1. Why’s that?

        1. “I’m not a winger of either persuasion”

          You just assume that everyone else just has to fit in one of the two teams, but you’re special? Most of the folks here are libertarians, who don’t really fall squarely on either side, although whichever team is currently out of power seems to spend some time sucking up to us. And if you’re not being facetious, you’re either an idiot or a democrat if you think Obamacare will bring the cost of healthcare down once it’s fully in effect. Oh yeah, it’s “effect,” not “affect,” you illiterate cunt. Condescension and stupidity don’t mix very well. Good thing your spellcheck picked up “Facetious,” though, or you’d REALLY look like an asshole.

          1. “And if you’re not being facetious, you’re either an idiot or a democrat if you think Obamacare will bring the cost of healthcare down once it’s fully in effect.”

            Where did I say it would go down? I said, of course the rise in the cost of healthcare is nearly the same as it was recently, before Obamacare.

            1. oops, I did say “still climbing” sorry.

              1. Just go.

            2. How about all the positives and savings to seniors from the law this year so far in case you missed them:
              1) 2.3 million young adults now covered
              2) 20.2 million seniors got free preventive care worth over $2 billion
              3) 1.2 million seniors have saved 1.2 Billion from closing the donut hole
              4) Medicare inflation is the lowest ever
              5) Medicare Advantage premiums are FALLING 4% for 2012
              5) No insured American will ever face annual or lifetime maximums on their policy preventing potential economic harm to us all
              6) preventive care is covered with no copays in all company plans now saving any insured person and family who takes care of themselves money

              Maybe it will work for us all once fully implemented…

              1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:45PM|#
                “Maybe it will work for us all once fully implemented…”

                Yeah, and maybe my unicorn will start pooping gold nuggets.

          2. Have either of the major parties ever ‘sucked up to libertarians’ while out of power or in power?
            Libertarians aren’t even pandered to with meaningless gestures.

    3. “Of course the cost of healthcare is still climbing, Obamacare hasn’t fully gone into affect.”

      So we can assume the costs will *really* climb once it’s gone into effect?

      1. you are probably right. My whole point was how bad one of the first points in the article was. Does the author really think healthcare costs were supposed to nosedive overnight? Just saying it’s a useless point, that’s all. But my rambling has definitely surpassed any time wasted reading that point of the article….

        1. “Does the author really think healthcare costs were supposed to nosedive overnight?”

          Probably not; that was *Obama’s* claim.

            1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:44PM|#
              “NO it never was..”

              So, Sir Pedant, are you saying Obama didn’t claim to lower costs ‘overnight’?
              OK, he never specifically said that.
              Are you saying Obama didn’t claim to lower costs sometime? How long, oh, Sir Pedant?
              And don’t you get dizzy from all that spinning?

        2. Oh, and it passed nearly two years ago. You’d think two years would be enough time to, if not lower costs, at least stabilize them.

          1. ,cause, after all youknow, Obamacare is going to solve all the nation’s problems, and that should make it all more affordable for everyone!

            1. And it’ll “create” JOBS too!

          2. You’d think two years would be enough time to, if not lower costs, at least stabilize them.
            —————-
            you’d think that IF the goal were actually to lower costs. But if the goal were to drive private insurers out of business and establish single payer via the backdoor, then higher premiums are exactly the intended destination.

            That is the thing with the Obama administration. It runs counter to normal expectations. Whereas one might think a president would want unemployment to go down, one who promised transformational change may not want that, because such change requires chaos in order to enact.

            1. wareagle|10.6.11 @ 9:01PM|#
              “you’d think that IF the goal were actually to lower costs. But if the goal were to drive private insurers out of business and establish single payer via the backdoor, then higher premiums are exactly the intended destination.”

              I have a problem with this; it presumes a logical goal on the part of Obama, that hag Pelosi and others.
              Further, it presumes a goal-horizon of something beyond the next election cycle.
              My vote goes to stupidity rather than cleverness.

              1. Definitely stupidity. Conservatives like to see the whole thing as some orchestrated plot to bring down the health care system and drive us into socialist medicine, but I just don’t think the academic ‘geniuses’ in the administration are that bright, regardless of how they are packaged.

                They hold ridiculous beliefs that have apparently never been seriously challenged in their careers as tenured professors. In either case though, they will desperately blame those obstructionist republicans.

          3. It does not take effect in total until 2014 and no one ever promised sabvings in the short run. The full law needs to be in place with the exchanges in order to actually work.

            How about all the positives and savings for seniors from the law this year so far in case you missed them:
            1) 2.3 million young adults now covered
            2) 20.2 million seniors got free preventive care worth over $2 billion
            3) 1.2 million seniors have saved 1.2 Billion from closing the donut hole
            4) Medicare inflation is the lowest ever
            5) Medicare Advantage premiums are FALLING 4% for 2012
            5) No insured American will ever face annual or lifetime maximums on their policy preventing potential economic harm to us all
            6) preventive care is covered with no copays in all company plans now saving any insured person and family who takes care of themselves money

            1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:43PM|#
              …”no one ever promised sabvings in the short run.”…

              Bullshit.

    4. doofus: obamacare DOES NOTHING ABOUT THE COST OF CARE YOU (you know the word)ING nitwit.

      IT IMPOSES PRICE CONTROLS AND RATIONING thereby limiting what the govt PAYS for care and has nothing to do with COSTS.

      1. Truly a shame you have no clue about what is really in the bill to control costs and that no it does not impose price controls and NO there is no rationing in it either.

        1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:40PM|#
          “Truly a shame you have no clue about what is really in the bill to control costs and that no it does not impose price controls and NO there is no rationing in it either.”

          You’re a liar.

  6. If we had to pass the bill to find out what is in it, haven’t we now learned that it was full of shit? By Pelosi’s own standard, repeal.

    1. The reason they had to pass the bill to find out what was in it; is because so many of the specifications were left undetermined. The word determined appears in this bill, by my count, 474 times. Even at this late date most of these specifics are yet to be determined, making it impossible to know what this bill will cost to either the government or the consumer.

      1. Void for vagueness!

        1. Hmmm. You know, that might be just the left-field thing that gets SCOTUS (by which I mean Justice Kennedy) to trash this thing and avoid the massive Federal pruning that the 10th Amendment argument would cause.

          (Not that I’d mind the massive pruning.)

    2. Try reading the bill yourself you actually will be surprised at what is in it and it is not what all of you here are ranting about

      1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:41PM|#
        “Try reading the bill yourself you actually will be surprised at what is in it and it is not what all of you here are ranting about.”

        Strangely, those who *have read it still don’t know what it means.
        You’re a liar.

  7. The very first promise broken was the one about keeping your current insurance policy if you like it.

    Because the very first thing this law did was amend all those policies to expand benefits (and thus increase premiums). The policy you have now (if you have one) is not the policy Obama promised you could keep.

  8. And, need I add, those expanded benefits keep on a-coming. In the name of covering “preventive health care”, Sebelius is releasing rules requiring that all family planning and birth control be covered from dollar one.

    1. You’d rather have more at the welfare trough?

      1. Assumption not proven; fail.

      2. here’s an idea – if you cannot afford children, don’t have them. Stop pretending that the only options are welfare or insurance pays everything, beneficiary pays nothing.

    2. The bill strives to equalize the cost by requiring everybody to have the exact same coverage. This equates to men subsidizing women’s health giving them a vested interest in how women take care of themselves. I predict that the full implementation of this bill will result in women having their healthcare more managed than they ever imagined.

      1. Damn, guess they shouldn’t have all voted for “Oh!Bumah!”.

      2. Good Lord, the idiocy: the bill does NOTHING ABOUT THE COST OF CARE. say that over and over to yourself.

        the bill IMPOSES PRICE CONTROLS AND RATIONING – i.e. controls what the govt PAYS FOR CARE.

        this is NOT CONTROLLING THE COST ONLY THE AMOUNT PAID.

      3. No it does nothing of the sort. Coverage options exist for any buyer be they the employer or an individual.

        Adding some new features is nothing new as the states do that today and have on average 42 mandates that we all pay for whether we like it or not

        1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:39PM|#
          “No it does nothing of the sort.”

          You’re a liar.

  9. There was this brief shining moment when the liberals held the White House and just enough votes in the Congress to push this jalf baked mess over the finish line by by bullshitting Bart Stupak about some executive order that Obama would issue later…

    And now we have to live with it the rest of our lives ? Repeal the fukcing thing.

    1. Repeal the fukcing thing.

      Probably can’t happen, even assuming that there were no moderate (Mainer) Republican squishes against repealing it, even getting to the necessarily 60 votes in the Senate plus the Presidency is quite difficult.

      And now we have to live with it the rest of our lives ?

      Yes, well, that’s the result you get when the Republicans do such a bad job that small government people feel that the Democrats should get a super majority to “teach the Republicans a lesson.”

      1. Yes, well, that’s the result you get when the Republicans do such a bad job that small government people feel that the Democrats should get a super majority to “teach the Republicans a lesson.”
        ———————–

        doubtful that you could make small govt people look more petty or more foolish.

      2. While full on repeal would be insanely difficult due to the reasons you mentioned, a Senate with over 50 Senators against the healthcare reform act could easily defund the entire thing through reconciliation, which would be a start.

    2. Oh you mean the abortion coverage that never existed on the bill and cannot due to Federal Law- ie the Hyde Amendment?

      1. No he means the last holdout vote on Christmas Eve at midnight, you simpering shit.

  10. It’s entirely unsurprising that David Frum would want tinkering and compromise. That’s what he supported when his hero, GWB, did Medicare Part D.

    1. Frum Frum Frummm FRUMMMMMMMM

    2. Frum is the worst of the worst concern trolls.

      He only has one move on the political dance floor, and he does it OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND…..

  11. HMOs fight to save Obamacare from conservatives. There are enough “pro-business” moderates and so forth in the GOP that I doubt that even with the (won’t happen) 60 votes in the Senate plus Presidency repeal would occur.

  12. “The logical solution under the circumstances will be a single-payer system complete with wage and price controls on providers, and rationing by some other name (such as evidence based medicine) on patients.”

    …which was the ultimate goal of the system in the first place.

  13. Shrug Atlas, Shrug!

    1. Working on it…

  14. Thank you for sharing this information, hope you can often see after the information, get more people to useful things.

  15. The logical solution under the circumstances will be a single-payer system complete with wage and price controls on providers, and rationing by some other name…

    But remember that doesn’t mean Death Panels. Because if you say “Death Panel!” you’re an *extremist* and everybody knows that’s bad.

    Besides — this is only secondarily relevant — when bureaucrats decide if and what health care you can and can’t have, it’s just not a Death Panel. In fact nobody knows what a Death Panel is, the term us utterly undefined in the Liberal’s First Self Righteous Dictionary.

    1. see Independent Payment Advisory Boards in the bill.

      they are APPOINTEES who will determine “effective treatments” and therefore “ineffective treatments”

      the standard used will be similar to Quality Adjusted Life Years which means if the benefit of the treatment – as measured in increased years of life or increased quality of life – is NOT cost effective, the treatment will NOT BE OFFERED.

      Soooo, we do NOT have to wait long for reduced access to poorer care which will be rationed by “govt bureaucrats”.

  16. I’m nowhere near as afraid of Religious Right Wing Nut Jobs as I am Religious Left Wing Nut Jobs. But what do I know, I’m just a smart ass.

  17. Oh David?et tu?

    I can’t relate. I’ve always considered him a smarmy Trotskyite crypto-communist so it never felt like being stabbed in the back when he goes supposedly contrarian. A typical Gnational Review weak sister. You would have to be blind not to see his true colors from a mile away.

  18. That piece of shit up there, I never liked him, I never trusted him. – Tony Montana

    Frum very well illustrates the RNC and its self-serving, socialism-lite, professional-politician, silver spoon mentality. These are narcissists believing that they are entitled to political power and privilege. They view ideologues and principled Americans as fools and peasants who keep “screwing things up” for Republican members of the political class of pseudo-nobility.

    Democrats are no better.

    This is why, in November 2008, I drove straight home from work – didn’t bother with the polls.

    Shortly before election time, when the TARP was up for a vote, I had called my GOP congressman and gotten a staffer on the line who responded to complaints of TARP’s unconstitutionality with demeaning, patronizing descriptions of how important TARP was despite my constitutional concerns.

    The arrogance is disgusting.

    The hell with Frum and his whole world view.

    Republicans can either repeal Obamacare, or go jump off a cliff.

    We don’t work for THEM. THEY work for US.

    1. Clarification:

      – The job of politicians is not supposed to be rabble-rousing and mob-rule. It is to govern within the bounds set by the constitution.

      – However, the American people need to remind themselves that the political and bureaucratic “class” is not a club for their betters – IT’S THE HELP.

  19. I’m a public school teacher, so my health insurance is already under the 2012 mandates from Obamacare. The result is that I now bring home $180 LESS than I did last year despite a pay step increase. This means that the cost of Obamacare’s mandates has forced the cost of insurance upwards at the same time that salaries are stagnant. The only reason you aren’t hearing more about this is that it hasn’t hit the mainstream employees in the wallet….yet. And union employees are being promised all kinds of waivers that will keep their costs low while pushing off the higher costs on the non-union sector of the population. This does not bode well for Obamacare or the economy in the long run. Repeal it now.

    1. ACA’s “mandates” are 3 so far and in total added 1.8% to costs overall while providing better coverage and benefits:
      1) Age 26
      2) No co pays for preventive care
      3) Eliminating annual/lifetime maximums

      For age 26 employers will charge those impacted. For preventive care you are saving money you spent last year out of pocket for checkups etc and the end of restrictive maximums means no matter what you will never go bankrupt paying your bills. How did you lose here?

      This is not the reason your paycheck is down your local situation is as people all over the nation face hire cost sharing than ever, no fault of ACA which isn’t fully in place for 2 more years.

    2. Did you vote for Obama? How about your fellow public school teachers? Just about every public school teacher I ever met was a knee-jerk liberal. If you voted for him, you got what you deserved.

      1. Actually I did and am no teacher but I also voted for Reagan thru W and at least when Obama passed ACA it was funded, unlike W’s drug bill that adds $7T to the deficit over time.
        The only “jerk” in this conversation is you.

        1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:37PM|#
          …”at least when Obama passed ACA it was funded,”

          You’re both a jerk and a liar.

  20. Live Free Or Die

  21. ALL anyone had to do was READ the bills (Pelosi, Bauchus, Reid)to know this was ALL BS.

    ANYONE who believed that offering an UNLIMITED ENTITLEMENT to 300 MILLION people who woulld have UNLIMITED ACCESS to the entitlement was going to lower the deficit or decrease the cost of care is SIMPLY TOO STUPID TO VOTE!

    1. It is not being offered to 300M people nor is it unlimited, but you’d have to read the bill or at least a summary of it to know that

      1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:35PM|#
        “It is not being offered to 300M people nor is it unlimited, but you’d have to read the bill or at least a summary of it to know that.”

        You’re a liar.

  22. –How I Got Screwed By Obamacare–

    Here is what Obama’s health-care reform law has done to me. Not FOR me; TO me.

    BEFORE Obamacare, that is up until December 31, 2010, the family deductible for my company-paid medical coverage was $300?and it had been $300 for years.

    AFTER Obamacare, that is on January 1, 2011, the family deductible for my company-paid medical coverage went up to $2,800. You can do the math. And because my company is self-insured, it was a take it or leave it situation.

    Obama LIED when he said that if I liked the plan I currently had, I’d be able to keep it. He was WRONG. Instead, my company canceled the plan I liked and in its place substituted the aforementioned high-deductible plan.

    Obama LIED when he said his plan would “bend the cost curve downward.” What he really meant was: “Bend over and face downward.”

    Thanks, Obama!

    1. Jack Davis – I have now seen the same comment in many places over the past month. ACA has nothing to do with your company and its plan. Your company cancelled/changed your plan…nice trolling

      1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:25PM|#
        “Jack Davis – I have now seen the same comment in many places over the past month. ACA has nothing to do with your company and its plan.”

        You’re a liar.

  23. The abject ignorance of the posts on here is scary.

    How about all the positives from the law this year so far in case you missed them:
    1) 2.3 million young adults now covered
    2) 20.2 million seniors got free preventive care worth over $2 billion
    3) 1.2 million seniors have saved 1.2 Billion from closing the donut hole
    4) Medicare inflation is the lowest ever
    5) Medicare Advantage premiums are FALLING 4% for 2012
    5) No insured American will ever face annual or lifetime maximums on their policy preventing potential economic harm to us all
    6) preventive care is covered with no copays in all company plans now saving any insured person and family who takes care of themselves money

    So yeah this law really is terrible and has hurt the nation.

    How many of you have benefited and do not even know it?

    1. Covered…by whom? “Free” preventive care? If you believe medical care of any kind is “free”, or that this country isn’t broke and living on borrowed time when the Dems in Congress decided to ram this through, then please, come over to my house and let me sell you this really cool perpetual motion machine. It costs nothing to operate it!

      1. Gee, it is now covered under Medicare and premiums are going down in 2012. According to CMS preventive care is helping LOWER costs for seniors and keeping them on their meds and away from the hospital so yes FREE actually can lower costs

        1. “Covered under Medicare” is not free, genius. It means our taxes are going up.

        2. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:32PM|#
          “Gee, it is now covered under Medicare and premiums are going down in 2012.”

          You’re a liar and a fool.

      2. Also remember that Medicare part D, the unfunded drug progam that adds $7T to the deficit over time was a Republican creation and ACA is funded over time via the law

        1. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 7:34PM|#
          ….”ACA is funded over time via the law”

          You’re a liar and/or a fool.

    2. J Nail|10.7.11 @ 4:37PM|#
      “The abject ignorance of the posts on here is scary….”

      You’re a liar.

  24. “providers will refuse to treat Medicare patients or retire or both”

    What does the above mean?

    A typo?

    1. Looking at this again, I can only guess that it means that present health care providers will either shut up shop or refuse to to treat Medicare patients; or do both.

      Sad that the article’s writer doesn’t even check to see if his English makes sense.

      Anyway, I do personally know of several small-town doctors that are shutting up shop because nobody wants to pay them enough anymore.

      Sad but true!

    2. Looking at this again, I can only guess that it means that present health care providers will either shut up shop or refuse to to treat Medicare patients; or do both.

      Sad that the article’s writer doesn’t even check to see if his English makes sense.

      Anyway, I do personally know of several small-town doctors that are shutting up shop because nobody wants to pay them enough anymore.

      Sad but true!

  25. Yes, it must be repealed. That is precisely why I am adamantly opposed to Romney – he is soft on repeal.

    1. Are you kidding me? Romney says the first thing he will do is grant waivers to all 50 states. Then the law will collapse on it’s own weight. If The GOP controls all branches of government, they can repeal it whether it’s Romney, Cain or Perry. Wise up, the only thing you should be thinking is STOP OBAMA, not have a right wing purity test to the point of a suicide pact for the country. IF ROMNEY IS THE NOMINEE YOU BETTER VOTE FOR HIM, OR YOU GUARANTEE AN OBAMA VICTORY…. YOU PEOPLE AMAZE ME

      1. The waiver authority expires December 31, 2012. Romney knows this. The only way to kill this monstrosity is a long hard legislative battle that Romney doesn’t have the stomach for.

  26. FK David Frum, repeal this monstrosity or there will be serious revolution

  27. Certainty of Uncertainty
    07 October 2011
    Folks,
    Greg Sargent of the Washington Post, on 07 Oct 2011 in a segment called “The Plum Line”, wrote an article entitled “The ever-rising ‘uncertainty bar'”, which seems, near as I can tell, to make the point that the conservatives supposedly are saying that the uncertainty caused by Obama’s policies is the ruination of the US economic recovery and the US economy, and that every time the Dems cooperate to try to provide certainty, the Republicans raise the bar on the level of uncertainty, so the Dems can never, ever provide adequate certainty.
    Well, not quite. The Dems could provide certainty to all Americans, both conservatives and middle-of-the-roaders, by undoing everything that the Obama administration has done, except leave in place the continuance of the Bush tax cuts and other Republican ideas. The Dems are correct that the bar of uncertainty, that the Dems have created over the past almost 3 years, is very high and is bringing ruination of the US economic recovery and the US economy.
    The challenge is to make the US economy grow, to make the pie bigger, NOT to redistribute the wealth, to divide a constant sized, or even shrinking, pie into ever smaller, but evenly-sized (fairer), pieces.
    The free-market economy will not grow with increased taxes. The free-market economy will not grow with increased, unnecessary, unproductive, business-restraining regulations (think EPA and Dodd-Frank). The free-market economy will not grow with the coming, hidden, incompletely known regulations, taxes, fines, and who knows what else, of Obamacare. Obamacare must be repealed for the US economy to recover.
    Mr. Sargent, like most of the Democratic elite ruling class, plays loose with the facts. Let me restate the first part of his first paragraph. “The US economy added 103,000 jobs in September – some 137,000 added jobs in the private sector were offset by more shrinkage in the public sector, which shed 34,000 local government jobs.” Correct, so far, but not the complete story. Of the 103,000 jobs supposedly added in September, the Lefties count the 45,000 union worker who were on strike and went back to their old jobs. Those 45,000 jobs are not new jobs, just folks who went back to work after a voluntary leave. So, 103,000 minus 45,000 results in only 58,000 new jobs created in September. The Dems are consistent in not telling the whole story.
    But don’t worry. In 13 months, there is a US General Election, and the Republicans will win the US Presidency, become majority in the US Senate, increase the Republican majority in the US House. Then the Republicans can address (read repeal) all the problems caused by the Dems.
    Respectfully,
    Tom Johnson
    opinionscribe.blogspot.com

  28. J Nail sure does love his talking points. You can’t polish a turd.

    1. You didn’t try hard enough. Where is your discipline?

  29. The trick is this: Repeal is the only option, because Obamacare is such a convoluted mess. However, many of the provisions that were publicized are valued by the public and recognized by those in the private industry as doable and appropriate for a private healthcare financing system.
    So, Obamacare should be repealed and replaced with a first step that:

    1. Continues the availability of coverage to dependents over age 25, but with realistic limits to prevent abuse.
    2. Promotes federally funded “high risk pools” (health plans specifically built to serve individuals with active or chronic health problems) to provide affordable coverage (at reasonable benefit standards) to those individuals with medical conditions considered uninsurable by private insurers.
    2. Provides a funded mandate to p
    publicize the availability of this coverage to all who can benefit.
    3. Repeals or preempts all federal and state laws that currently prohibit employers and insurers from “removing” uninsurable individuals from group coverage or “sending” them to high risk pools. In the many places they have been implemented, high risk pools have been regarded positively by the individuals they serve.

    The preceding changes would fully address the lack of coverage for “medically uninsurable individuals”. Insurance industry estimates for the cost of this program are in the range of $10 billion per year.

    It should be noted that the federal government has made no effort whatever to publicize the availability of similar programs in the current law. This has confused and obfuscated a viable solution to the problems of medical uninsurable individuals.

    This would be a good start toward the goal most Americans already desire.

    1. “This would be a good start toward the goal most Americans already desire.”

      That’s nice. Quite a few Americans desire stuff for free.
      Does it do anything about making sure those who ‘desire’ something pay for it themselves?

  30. Has any one else noticed in the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers that Health Care continues to grow jobs monthly in the tens of thousands.

    If we repeal ObamaCare, not only do we repeal health insurance for millions of Americans, but we also kill jobs for thousands of Americans

    1. J Nail would be out of a job for starters. Repeal!

    2. Linda Lane|10.8.11 @ 3:32AM|#
      “Has any one else noticed in the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers that Health Care continues to grow jobs monthly in the tens of thousands.”

      Has Linda Lane ever heard of ‘broken windows’?
      I don’t think so; I’d say Linda Lane is an econ ignoramus.

  31. Physicians are already starting to leave Medicare. It seems to me that the only way Obama can keep doctors from leaving is to mandate that participation in Medicare is a condition of obtaining and renewing your license to practice medicine.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.