Tags: Barack Obama | Democrats 2016 | Healthcare Reform | aca | costs

Obamacare Is on Life Support

By
Friday, 19 August 2016 03:20 PM Current | Bio | Archive

The Democrats like to blame Republicans for the failings of Obamacare, but it isn’t that simple. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was conceived with little thought given to transparency, for as then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “We have to pass it before we can let you see what is in it.” 

The flaws of Obamacare become more apparent daily. The announcement by Aetna (the largest insurer) that it was exiting the program after more than 300 million dollars in losses joins it with United Healthcare — leaving less than optimal health insurance companies to cover the rest.

Structurally, the ACA counted on an influx of young insureds to offset the high-risk pools and elderly which demographically made no sense, as more baby boomers are hitting retirement and not as many babies are being born.

The young who purchase insurance are picking the cheapest policies. The attempt to make folks purchase coverage which they don’t presently need for pregnancy, children, etc., leaves a tremendous financial hole in resources.

Another hidden and not discussed penalty is that which is imposed on student aid’s associated loans and when they are paid back; as those students hit the job market, there were factored in other costs.

As more loans go unpaid and less students are available for college enrollment, it bites the ACA in the butt.

At the time of Obamacare's inception in 2010, approximately 46 million Americans were uninsured. By 2015, Obamacare had dropped that number to approximately 28 million.

But at what cost?

The promises made about affordability vanished when people realized that you could be poor and yet make too much to qualify.  And for those whose taxes covered the cost, the burdens of their own health cost overshadowed their appreciation of what others may not have.

The charade of being able to keep one’s own doctor was quickly lost. And accessibility hasn’t always correlated with having insurance.

The ACA was a boondoggle for insurance companies who have been allowed to set fees and rates without challenge. States did not buy into exchanges because the federal government would only pick up the cost for two years and after that the state taxpayers had to pay for the care.

The elephant in the room is who will assume the costs burdens when more and more aren’t employed? Though the perception is that the “rich” don’t pay their fair share of taxes, the reality is that those earners in the top one percent pay 43 percent of all federal taxes, those in the middle pay about 39 percent, and the poor pay less than 13 percent.

The infusion of cash required to cover all people’s healthcare is more than the cost of entitlements, which the nation can’t afford without relegating people to second tier providers and driving doctors out of business.

Is it time to pull the plug or just let folks buy what they can and have a tax deduction on this?

As a former member of the National Health Service Corps which tried to address the needs of rural America and impoverished cities, I saw the program morph into things such as providing transportation, free devices, and other challenges people might have to accept — making them responsible for their addictive behaviors, decadent lifestyles (which increased sexually transmitted diseases) and other morbidity factors impacting negatively on personal health.

It is likely that ACA has reached a plateau with populations whose baselines are difficult to cure or treat affordably. Those who advocate universal coverage see healthcare as a right instead of the privilege and responsibility that it must be, lest it be expected to pick up the slack for behaviors for which there are no cures. The impact of genetics and accidents are added cost factors few rationally discuss.

A presidential debate question should center on how we are to provide care not just for the poor but to those without access, while at the same time not killing off physicians whose decreasing reimbursements threaten their existence. Is socialized medicine but another step toward the progressive’s vision of socialism where government controls the essential goods and services of society?

Kiss privacy even more goodbye.

Dr. Ada M. Fisher was the first black woman to serve as the Republican National Committeewoman. She was a candidate for the U.S. Senate from North Carolina, a candidate for U.S. Congress, and a candidate for the North Carolina House of Representatives. She is the author of "Common Sense Conservative Prescriptions Solutions for What Ails Us, Book I." For more of her reports, Go Here Now.

 


 

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
AdaFisher
Is socialized medicine but another step toward the progressive’s vision of socialism where government controls the essential goods and services of society The flaws of Obamacare become more apparent daily.
aca, costs
758
2016-20-19
Friday, 19 August 2016 03:20 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved