The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

New York Times Now Admits Conservatives Right About ObamaCare – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on April 23, 2010

…but only after they called us names, called us liars in the face of clear evidence that showed were were/are correct….and of course, after the bill was passed.


We said that the O-Care bill would raise premiums, health care costs and insurance premiums. We were not alone. Caterpillar, John Deere, AT&T, and all sorts of small businesses issued new reports (which in some cases are required by law after new tax legislation estimating the new costs of the law.

Its Starting Already – John Deere: We will take $150 million hit from healthcare reform; Caterpillar: We will take $100 million hit just this year. UPDATE AT&T says ObamaCare bill will cost $1 billion per year! – UPDATED!

Davanni’s Pizza: New ObamaCare taxes and mandates will cost us $200,000 a year. May have to close three locations to get around costly regs.

Joe Lieberman said it would raise taxes and some even listed all the new taxes for all of you to see. The CBO said that O-care would increase premium cost by an estimate of $2,100 a year.  The Oliver-Wyman study concluded that the bill would make premiums go up for some by as much as 54%.

If you believed the New York Times narrative we are all liars who were only interested in health providers insane profits. I am still waiting for my check. Of course the NYT wasn’t the first among Obama supports to realize that we were right.

Of course the NYT did not just come out and say we were right, instead they are now reporting all of these problems that we said are going to happen as if they had just discovered them; SHAZAM!

Read this carefully –

New York Times April 18, 2010:

New York’s insurance system has been a working laboratory for the core provision of the new federal health care law — insurance even for those who are already sick and facing huge medical bills — and an expensive lesson in unplanned consequences. Premiums for individual and small group policies have risen so high that state officials and patients’ advocates say that New York’s extensive insurance safety net for people like Ms. Welles is falling apart.

The problem stems in part from the state’s high medical costs and in part from its stringent requirements for insurance companies in the individual and small group market. In 1993, motivated by stories of suffering AIDS patients, the state became one of the first to require insurers to extend individual or small group coverage to anyone with pre-existing illnesses.

New York also became one of the few states that require insurers within each region of the state to charge the same rates for the same benefits, regardless of whether people are old or young, male or female, smokers or nonsmokers, high risk or low risk.

Healthy people, in effect, began to subsidize people who needed more health care. The healthier customers soon discovered that the high premiums were not worth it and dropped out of the plans. The pool of insured people shrank to the point where many of them had high health care needs. Without healthier people to spread the risk, their premiums skyrocketed, a phenomenon known in the trade as the “adverse selection death spiral.”

“You have a mandate that’s accessible in theory, but not in practice, because it’s too expensive,” said Mark P. Scherzer, a consumer lawyer and counsel to New Yorkers for Accessible Health Coverage, an advocacy group. “What you get left clinging to the life raft is the population that tends to have pretty high health needs.”

Since 2001, the number of people who bought comprehensive individual policies through HMOs in New York has plummeted to about 31,000 from about 128,000, according to the State Insurance Department.

At the same time, New York has the highest average annual premiums for individual policies: $6,630 for single people and $13,296 for families in mid-2009, more than double the nationwide average, according to America’s Health Insurance Plans, an industry group.

Read carefully:

The new federal health care law tries to avoid the death spiral by requiring everyone to have insurance and penalizing those who do not, as well as offering subsidies to low-income customers. But analysts say that provision could prove meaningless if the government does not vigorously enforce the penalties, as insurance companies fear, or if too many people decide it is cheaper to pay the penalty and opt out.

Under the federal law, those who refuse coverage will have to pay an annual penalty of $695 per person, up to $2,085 per family, or 2.5 percent of their household income, whichever is greater. The penalty will be phased in from 2014 to 2016.

Now here are the main problems that we and many others who understand economics have reported for a year:

1. Since the sick and those with pre-existing conditions cannnot be denied coverage, they can drop the coverqage and pay the much smaller fine till thyey need treatment, buy coverage, have the coverage pay the bills and then drop the coverage.

2. While on paper this makes it so that more people with pre-existing conditions have access to coverage, in reality they have less access because much fewer people can afford the skyrocketing premiums this law forces on the system. Just as has happened in New York, the amount of people with coverage dropped dramatically.

3. Mandating that people buy a commercial product (health insurance) as a condition of citizenship is unconstitutional and about half the states are challenging the new law in court.

New York Times April 19, 2010:

William Mann of Pittsburgh earns just enough to get by. He is 46, doesn’t own a car, hasn’t taken a vacation in three years and hasn’t had health insurance for most of his adult life.

He is just the kind of person who should benefit from the health care overhaul, and he is, in fact, eligible for heavily subsidized insurance that will cost him an estimated $1,845 a year, while the government contributes about $2,756.

But Mr. Mann says he still can’t afford it. He lives too close to the edge, and won’t be buying insurance, even though he will face a fine under a provision called the individual mandate, which penalizes most Americans who don’t buy coverage starting in 2014. The requirement is one of the most controversial aspects of the overhaul.

“I just can’t put that kind of money out for a ‘maybe’ — maybe I’ll get sick and use it,” said Mr. Mann, who makes just over $25,000 a year as an administrative assistant at a small wine distribution company. “That’s a lot of money.”

“The people who make all these decisions don’t live like the way I do,” Mr. Mann added, echoing other uninsured people in his income group. “They don’t live like the rest of us.”

Legal questions about the individual mandate aside, the choices made by people like Mr. Mann are crucial. One reason the individual mandate was created was to attract as many healthy people as possible to the individual market to offset the demands of the many sick people who will be buying in, and who have medical needs that drive up costs.


Amazing isn’t it? Where have the been for the past year. This is classic journalistic malpractice.

On Wednesday HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testified to congress that the doesn’t know how much a kep provision of the ObamaCare plan will cost. Just 4 weeks ago they were absolutely certain and now they are already expecting massive shortfalls. See the testimony HERE at Breitbart News.

New York Times April 21, 2010:

Senate Bill Sets a Plan to Regulate Premiums

WASHINGTON — Fearing that health insurance premiums may shoot up in the next few years, Senate Democrats laid a foundation on Tuesday for federal regulation of rates, four weeks after President Obama signed a law intended to rein in soaring health costs.

After a hearing on the issue, the chairman of the Senate health committee, Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, said he intended to move this year on legislation that would “provide an important check on unjustified premiums.”

Mr. Harkin praised a bill introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, that would give the secretary of health and human services the power to review premiums and block “any rate increase found to be unreasonable.” Under the bill, the federal government could regulate rates in states where state officials did not have “sufficient authority and capability” to do so.

Now why do we need that after all Obama told us that premiums for a family would end up costing $2,500 less per year:

So insurance costs are going to go up big time, because of government imposed anti-market forces and new taxes across the spectrum of health care. Democrats promised that this wasn’t the case, but they knew that was a lie because now they are moving into slap price controls on health providers.

So what happens when you drive up the cost with new taxes and an inability to expand the risk pool? The cost of medical insurance and care goes up, so now the government will impose price controls. This will drive providers out of business leaving the government to say “see we told you that free markets and capitalism fails, now we will impose the public option”.  

First, we here at IUSB Vision said that the ObamaCare bill was designed to raise costs and blow up the system so that the people would “cry out for a public option“, then Real Clear Politics echoed the same and confirned we were right.  

Then Nancy Pelosi herself said that the bill would make them cry out for a public option. See the video at the bottom of the page HERE.

Today the AP has a story about an analysis from the Department of Health and Human Services Medicare Actuary. AP left out the most damning parts of the report but still reported a key component:

President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law is getting a mixed verdict in the first comprehensive look by neutral experts: More Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up.

Economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department concluded in a report issued Thursday that the health care remake will achieve Obama’s aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million to the coverage rolls.

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, since Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, the report warned.

It’s a worrisome assessment for Democrats.

In particular, concerns about Medicare could become a major political liability in the midterm elections. The report projected that Medicare cuts could drive about 15 percent of hospitals and other institutional providers into the red, “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors.

Hmmm, and when they start going out of business and/or when more and more health providers stop accepting any payment from of government health care and government pools because of the costs, mandates and restrictions, people will cry out… Just like we told you so many months ago. They will blame freedom as the culprit and a leviathan state as the cure.

Now I am waiting for the elite media to tell us how ObamaCare creames public university education because the unfunded mandates to state run Medicaide which are so expensive that education is getting a very painful squeeze. That goes double for California.

UPDATE –  NY Times April 26, 2010,

When major companies declared that a provision of the new health care law would hurt earnings, Democrats were skeptical. But after investigating, House Democrats have concluded that the companies were right to tell investors and the government about the expected adverse effects of the law on their financial results.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: