Discussion in 'Politics' started by oreo, Dec 1, 2012.
Five Devastating Effects Obamacare Will Have on Young Adults
Give it a rest. Obamacare is the law of the land. The GOP had their chance to convince us to ditch it and we declined.
It's not going anywhere, so get over it and step up to the table and help make it better.
Young adults can buy catastrophic plans not available to older adults if they so choose. Those aren't subject to the 3:1 age rating ratio because they don't serve populations over 30.
"None" will not be the alternative when annual limits are finally phased out in 2014.
The government "nationalized" the federal student loan program? You people are ridiculous.
Direct Loans were created 20 years ago.
Since I assume it's well-known that Obamacare does reduce the deficit (and we're just choosing to ignore that), I'm going to focus on the claim that it won't reduce spending. By repeating what I already said earlier today:
Obamacare doesn't take just one approach to cost containment. It accepts that incentives are broken at pretty much every level of the health care system and proceeds from there.
If your pet issue is overutilization/poor shopping for health services by consumers and patients, you'll be pleased to know the law is a boon for consumer directed high deductible plan-HSA pairs. It reduces the tax incentive for employees and employers to have overly generous benefit designs. It adds new transparency requirements for hospitals to make public a list of their charges for items and services they provide.
If you think costs increases can be traced to the insurance side, the ACA places limitations on the portion of premium revenue that can be spent on non-medical things (like the executive compensation liberals complain about). It brings new insurers into markets that have been devoid of competition, in part by seeding the creation of new homegrown (and consumer-operated) plans and in part by allowing existing insurers to sell across state lines in new markets.
It fixes deficiencies in existing insurance markets to ensure that consumers have the information and the structure needed to make meaningful choices and send clear price signals--shopping in the new marketplaces is going to make it very easy to see what you're getting with a new plan, what the prices are (and even your own likely expenses under a given plan), how the choices stack up in terms of quality, etc. The ACA also helps states to develop new insurance premium oversight mechanisms that, when used aggressively, have shown potential in being able to help hold down rising costs.
If you think costs are being driven on the provider side, the ACA is making a huge push to address the problems in organization and care coordination, etc that drive costs on the provider side. It would take way too long to go through all of what it's doing on that front but a major strategy in the ACA is to use Medicare reform to drive change by (1) shifting the way Medicare pays for services away from encouraging high-volume, low (or mediocre) value service provision, and (2) promoting and assisting health care providers in delivering better care more efficiently and less expensively, while holding them accountable for quality outcomes. You can see some of what's coming down the pike in results (i.e. slower cost growth, higher quality scores) from this private sector pilot in Massachusetts that incorporates some of these principles: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...-reform-model-lowers-costs-improves-care.html.
More importantly, there are some early indicators that providers have already begun to reorganize care delivery in response to the ongoing and coming reforms, accounting for some of Medicare's current record-low cost growth--and offering some promise that we might be entering a new era of cost containment.Obamacare tackles the biggest cost drivers, not just in Medicare but in the entire health system: the inflationary payment mechanisms and flawed delivery systems that have plagued the health system for decades.
If tort reform is your issue, the ACA offered federal money and assistance to help states find innovative ways to reform their own tort laws (the GOP Congress has refused to fund that provision of the law). Those who push for blunt force approaches to tort reform, like national caps on damages, miss the fact that many, many states have already tried caps on damages and the like. If there's money to be saved through tort reform, we're going to have to get smarter about how we do it by trying new approaches (e.g. health courts). That's why we need states to start experimenting with new strategies.
Those who say the law does nothing to rein in costs are just being silly: it goes after cost drivers at every level of the system. There's more to be done in the future but it's a hell of a start.
Just imagine, the Heritage Foundation doesn't like ObamaCare.
Separate names with a comma.