I've been fortunate . I've been
covered by health insurance since the day I was born. To me it seems
natural and more necessary than almost any other type of insurance.
Why anyone would want to deny this to their fellows is beyond my
comprehension. Health care is a right, not a privilege. And don't
say that we, the richest nation on the planet, can't afford it. With
some adjustments to the military budget and the tax laws, we could
have universal health care as does every other advanced industrial
nation.
The Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act was a step in the right direction. At the time it was
signed into law, nearly 50 million Americans were uninsured - many or
most because they could not afford it. Single payer or some
public-private mix to get truly universal coverage would have clearly
been better. But the ACA is perhaps the most we could have hoped for
in light of the rabid opposition to the expansion of access to
medical insurance.
It's been a hard road so far.
Opponents have successfully hampered its implementation (25
Republican-controlled states decided not to expand Medicaid). The
startup of the government website was beset with problems. The
confusion over health insurance plans that did not meet the new
standards was stunning and people were ill informed to deal with the
"we're cancelling your insurance" notices sent out by
insurance companies.
And it is not going to get any easier.
Massive amounts of money are being spent to defeat vulnerable
Democrats who supported the ACA in the upcoming 2014 elections.
Since September, just one group, the conservative Americans for
Prosperity, has spent $20 million on anti-ACA-supporter TV ads. [NY Times, Jan. 15] There are ongoing ad campaigns aimed at convincing younger,
healthier Americans not to sign up. Should they be convinced by this
onslaught of negativity, premiums will necessarily go up and the
rabid opponents of the ACA, who poured millions into these campaigns
will say "I told you so."
Here then are some thoughts on the
Affordable Care Act at the start of its first fully
operational year.
The healthcare.gov rollout was
inexcusably botched... The single most important piece of
legislation enacted during Obama's first five years relied on a
website whose development appears to have been rushed and that lacked
adequate pre-startup testing. This one is on Obama and his staff.
All IT projects run into problems and, as red state after red state
declared their intentions not to set up state health care exchanges,
the writing was on the wall. This website would be overwhelmed.
Progressives should be angry with Obama for this lack of oversight.
The Affordable Care Act is an acid test of the most distinguishing
feature between the political philosophies of the two main political
parties: Does government have a role in improving the lives of its
ordinary citizens? As the title of the History Channel presentation
on the NASA space program says "Failure is not an option."
The botched rollout was more than what any red blooded Tea Partier or
supporter of the corporate oligarchy and the 1% could have hoped for.
...but things are looking up for the
healthcare.gov website. After 400 fixes, the downtime was less
than 5% by the end of November and it is even better now. "Ping
time" (the round-trip delay time for a computer signal) is down
to 15- 50 milliseconds. The site can now handle an estimated
800,000 visits per day.
After the fixes, enrollments surged.
The LA Times reported on January 13: "More than 2.1
million Americans signed up for health insurance in the last three
months of 2013 through new online marketplaces created by President
Obama’s health law, as a December surge in enrollment helped the
initiative recover from its disastrous launch." Don't forget
that one of those last three months was October which saw very few
enrollments. So it appears that ACA is enrolling new customers at a
rate of about 1 million per month. And there are 3 million more who
"have not yet selected a plan but have filled out applications
for coverage on the new insurance marketplaces since Oct. 1 and have
been deemed eligible for a plan." Finally, in October and
November alone approximately 3.9 million people signed up for
Medicaid. If one of the prime purposes of expanding health insurance
coverage is to cover those who could not afford it, this surely has to
count as a success.
Cancellation of existing policies
provided another black eye for the rollout... I don't think the
Administration had a clue as to the extent that insurance companies
would choose to cancel policies that did not meet Affordable Care Act
standards. Rather than enact the necessary provisions (e.g.,
coverage for prescriptions, hospitalizations and emergency room care), many insurers chose to cancel the policies. What could have been done to prevent
this from bollixing up the works at the eleventh hour as people went
to a malfunctioning website after being told they would no longer
have health insurance after the end of the year? Several things come
to mind: grandfather policies from say January 1, 2013; a
notification period of no less than 6 months that your policy was
being cancelled; a clear explanation by the President as to what "if
you are happy with your existing policy" actually meant
(policies in effect as of March 2010 were "grandfathered")
; and, of course, a fully functioning website.
...but Obamacare success stories are getting some press.
The
Daily Beast, Oct.23 - "The Obamacare Success Stories: From a retired business
owner in Arkansas to a young freelance filmmaker in Hollywood,
Eleanor Clift highlights a few of the people the media has found who
are happy to have Obamacare."
The
Daily Kos, Nov. 4 -"Obamacare 'rate shock' victim changes her mind, calls the law a
'blessing in disguise'
TPM,Nov.25 - looks at how "Kentucky Uninsured React To SecuringHealth Care Coverage Under Obamacare"
The most obvious, but surely not the
last attempt to defund, repeal or sabotage the Affordable Care Act
was the phony debt-ceiling crisis manufactured last year by
Republicans. The government
was shutdown by the extremists who control the Republican Party. Though it failed miserably, people have a short memory and
Republicans' approval ratings are increasing. There's a well-funded campaign in the run-up to the 2014 elections aimed at defeating Democratic legislators who supported the ACA.
There are the advertisements
urging young people to opt out. A Yahoo News November 11
headline of an article reporting the shenanigans at the University of
Miami read "Anti-Obamacare group entices students with models
and a boozy party." What's the reasoning here? As the Yahoo
post explains "You see, in order for the health care law to
function, lots of healthy, young people must sign up for the
exchanges to subsidize older, sicker insurance seekers. So
conservative groups are spending a lot of money to convince them not
to sign up." Now this logic should outrage any fair-minded
person. The absence of a healthier cohort in a health insurance plan
raises the rates for everyone. Expect an all-out blitz on this front
in the coming months.
Legal
challenges may cripple the legislation yet. It's not over yet in the courts as several legal challenges wend their way towards the Supreme Court. As reported in the LA Times "The new
suits take aim at the parts of the law that offer subsidies to those
who are above the poverty level but still may struggle to pay for
insurance."
The most threatening of these lawsuits
borders on nit-picking insanity - whether insurance obtained on the Federal health care exchange (as opposed to State exchanges) is eligible for subsidies. Wording issues such as this one would usually be ironed out
between the Administration and Congress. But in today's hyper-partisan
environment, no cooperation can be expected. If this law suit
succeeds, then no state without its own exchange would be able to
participate in the Federal subsidies. There are 36 states without
their own exchanges. Such a ruling would effectively dismantle the
Affordable Care Act in these states.
Now for the good news. On
January 15, a Federal District Court judge ruled in favor
of the Affordable Care Act. Reuters reports that the judge "upheld subsidies at the heart of President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, rejecting one of the main legal challenges to the policy by
conservatives opposed to an expansion of the federal government. A
ruling in favor of a lawsuit brought by individuals and businesses in
Texas, Kansas, Missouri, Tennessee, West Virginia and Virginia would
have crippled the implementation of the law by making health
insurance unaffordable for many people. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Paul
Friedman in Washington D.C. wrote that Congress clearly intended to
make the subsidies available nationwide under the 2010 Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act. 'There is evidence throughout
the statute of Congress's desire to ensure broad access to affordable
health coverage,' the judge wrote."
The respite might be temporary if the
plaintiffs take the case to the Supreme Court. But for now, the
greatest legal challenge has been overcome. Stay tuned. As a great philosopher once said, "It ain't over 'til it's over."
Other Links
Medicaid expansion is going forward in just half of the states. If every state agreed, more than 20 million Americans could be insured in the next decade. Here's a link to the Medicaid expansion webpage on the ObamaCare Facts website.
No comments:
Post a Comment