OBAMACARE Premiums Going Sky High in 2016

Published by Jack

CNN: “Many are proposing double-digit premium increases for individual policies, with some companies looking to boost rates more than 60%, according to a list posted Monday by the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

In Florida, for instance, United Healthcare (UNH) wants to raise the rates of plans sold on the Obamacare exchange by an average of 18%. Individual policies available outside the exchange through United Healthcare or through a broker would go up by 31%, on average, with hikes as high as 60% for certain plans in certain locations.

In Texas, insurer Scott & White is looking for a 32% increase for exchange-based plans, while Humana (HUM) is asking for an average 30% boost for its exclusive provider organization policies, which generally cover only in-network services.”health175

GOP lawmakers warned that Obamacare aka Affordable Care Act would actually raise premiums, not lower them, it could be no other way. You simply can’t offer people with extremely costly health problems a low cost insurance plan and then hope that somehow enough healthy people will pay into the system to off set the high cost patients. And just as the GOP warned, health insurance premiums in 2016 are set for big spikes.

Democrats have tried to spin this by saying, well just remember your health insurance premiums have had the smallest increases in a decade under Obamacare and it’s wonderful cost cutting. Not really, actually this would be more to government subsidies than overhead cost savings derived by the co-ops in Obamacare. And where does that federal subsidy money come from, need I say it? It comes right out of our pockets in the form of high taxes.

However stupid the average voter may be, they know a big fat bill when they get one! ACA premiums caused the average family to pay more for their health insurance while getting less for the money. Even the dumbest voter can figure this one out…eventually and they know who to blame. I quote, “I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.” Barrack Hussein Obama, President

All the spin in the world won’t save Obama and the democrats from being forced to take responsibility for an expensive boondoggle. They’ve hurt the middle income families with the ACA…period.

This is from 2014: “Average insurance premiums in the sought-after 23-year-old demographic rose most dramatically, with men in that age group seeing an average 78.2 percent price increase before factoring in government subsidies, and women having their premiums rise 44.9 percent, according to a report by HealthPocket scheduled for release Wednesday.

Cut the cost of a typical family’s health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year.

The study, which was shared Tuesday with The Washington Times, examined average health insurance premiums before the implementation of Obamacare in 2013 and then afterward in 2014. The research focused on people of three ages — 23, 30 and 63 — using data for nonsmoking men and women with no spouses or children.

The premium increases for 30-year-olds were almost as high as for 23-year-olds — 73.4 percent for men and 35.1 percent for women — said the study, titled “Without Subsidies Women & Men, Old & Young Average Higher Monthly Premiums with Obamacare.” Washington Times

From the New York Times: “WASHINGTON — Health insurance companies around the country are seeking rate increases of 20 percent to 40 percent or more, saying their new customers under the Affordable Care Act turned out to be sicker than expected. Federal officials say they are determined to see that the requests are scaled back.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans — market leaders in many states — are seeking rate increases that average 23 percent in Illinois, 25 percent in North Carolina, 31 percent in Oklahoma, 36 percent in Tennessee and 54 percent in Minnesota, according to documents posted online by the federal government and state insurance commissioners and interviews with insurance executives.

The Oregon insurance commissioner, Laura N. Cali, has just approved 2016 rate increases for companies that cover more than 220,000 people. Moda Health Plan, which has the largest enrollment in the state, received a 25 percent increase, and the second-largest plan, LifeWise, received a 33 percent increase.

This entry was posted in Health and Medicine. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to OBAMACARE Premiums Going Sky High in 2016

  1. Chris says:

    Jack: “You simply can’t offer people with extremely costly health problems a low cost insurance plan and then hope that somehow enough healthy people will pay into the system to off set the high cost patients.”

    Then I’m sure Republicans will do everything they can to encourage more healthy people to sign up for insurance.

    I mean, imagine if they instead tried to sabotage the law by telling people not to insure themselves. That would be crazy!

    • Jack says:

      Chris, do you want to force people to buy Obamacare? Because right now democrats are trying to coerce us with a big fine and that isn’t working. Maybe the next step is prison time in an Obama-Care gulag….think that would help sell this bum insurance?

      • Post Scripts says:

        Chris, people want affordable healthcare, but Obama’s plan isn’t it. My daughter makes $15 an hour, too much for Medical, too little to afford $350 a month for Obama’s plan plus a $3000 deductible. She never spends anywhere near that much in year and you’re asking her to pay for something that has no benefit to her, just so she can subsidize somebody who isn’t working and gets free healthcare? Doesn’t make a lot of sense.

  2. J. Soden says:

    If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor . .
    If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan . .
    ACA will save money . .
    Heath care costs will go down . .
    Your premiums will go down . .
    The moon is made of green cheese . .

  3. Jim says:

    “Many are proposing double-digit premium increases for individual policies, with some companies looking to boost rates more than 60%…”

    That is what would have happened if the Supreme Court ruled against Obamacare for the ‘Red’ states which didn’t have an exchange.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Jim, that is speculation, but what isn’t speculation is the failure of Obamacare to lower premiums and high deductibles. Look at the rate increases we’re facing and the worst is yet to come. The ACA still leaves a lot of Americans without affordable insurance, including my daughter who was caught in the middle before and is still caught in the middle…only now she will have to pay a fine, so she has lost money on this deal.

      • Jack says:

        What we need is a competitive market place for insurers, a cap on medical malpractice insurance premiums (also cap awards) and more incentives to get people off welfare and into the work place.

  4. Chris says:

    Jack, “buying Obamacare” isn’t a thing; do you mean do I want to force people to buy insurance from the exchanges?

    If they do not already have insurance, then yes, I agree with the Heritage Foundation circa the early 1990s and Mitt Romney circa 2008 that an individual mandate is a responsible policy, at least until we get totally universal healthcare, which will happen within the next twenty years.

    I sympathize with your daughter; my dad and stepmom are in the same boat, though they support fixes to the law rather than repeal so that more people can get access to the subsidies. And it strikes me as quite silly to say that buying insurance “has no benefit to her;” the entire point of insurance is to get it before you get sick. The reason the individual mandate exists is because people weren’t doing that. This made healthcare costs rise for everyone. The costs were already socialized.

    Premium growth has slowed since the implementation, and millions more are insured than before. People are also rating their healthcare plans very highly. The ACA has been a success so far.

  5. Jim says:

    “My daughter makes $15 an hour, too much for Medical, too little to afford $350 a month for Obama’s plan plus a $3000 deductible.”

    Something doesn’t sound right here. At that salary she should only pay about $125 a month.
    Use this calculator for options:
    https://www.coveredca.com/ShopAndCompare/2015/
    Of course she could also find a job that includes medical insurance.

    Of course most young people don’t have too many medical expenses, that is until something unfortunate happens. Accidents happen, and so do unexpected medical problems, one trip to the Emergency Room often run in the thousands.

    Jack, as you have pointed out, we still don’t have complete coverage and truly affordable insurance. The simple solution is to extend Medicare for everyone. Of course this would require a tax increase, however we would still come out ahead since we would no longer pay such high health insurance premiums.

  6. Tina says:

    Jack @ #5 The next step is single payer for Democrats. And as always their solution is far worse than their original “remedy” to the problem.

    Single payer would force everyone into a government run system, the end Chris seeks through his covert demand that Republicans “encourage” enrollment into Obamacare. He doesn’t want to come right out and say it but that’s the “solution” to this badly written end executed law that he seeks.

    @#6 Jack, your daughters problems aren’t of concern to those who prefer socialist solutions. Just like the fact that better, alternate solutions that provide more options, provide competition to keep prices down, provide coverage for all who want it, provide at least an equal improvement in the numbers uninsured, ensure less bureaucracy and less national debt don’t matter.

    Socialists want what they want, the unintended, frankly unconsidered, consequences be dam*ed!

    While Chris is busy putting the blame for Obamacare’s failures on Republicans let us not forget that it was Democrats alone that chose to foist this bad law on the entire nation. And let us not forget Jonathon Gruber:

    Meet Jonathan Gruber, a professor at MIT and an architect of Obamacare. During a panel event last year about how the legislation passed, turning over a sixth of the U.S. economy to the government, Gruber admitted that the Obama administration went through “tortuous” measures to keep the facts about the legislation from the American people, including covering up the redistribution of wealth from the healthy to the sick in the legislation that Obamacare is in fact a tax. The video of his comments just recently surfaced ahead of the second open enrollment period for Obamacare at Healthcare.gov.

    “You can’t do it political, you just literally cannot do it. Transparent financing and also transparent spending. I mean, this bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes the bill dies. Okay? So it’s written to do that,” Gruber said. “In terms of risk rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in, you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed. Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical to get for the thing to pass. Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.”

    Read the entire article and watch the video provided. Clearly socialist Democrats wanted what they wanted and to he77 with the American people.

    The solutions to our health care and insurance problems do not have to be solved through Obamacare…we have other options…options that would actually work!

  7. Tina says:

    Chris: “And it strikes me as quite silly to say that buying insurance “has no benefit to her;” the entire point of insurance is to get it before you get sick.”

    How “silly” of you to say so. You KNOW the ACA makes sure insurance companies can’t consider pre-existing conditions.

    “The costs were already socialized.”

    Yes, at the onset of coerced socialist government programs like Medicare, a program where the inevitable unsustainable consequences and monopolistic aura were dismissed:

    The health care debate in this country is an old story. It began in 1934 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to include government-funded health care in his “New Deal” as part of his comprehensive Social Security legislation. President Roosevelt was very concerned that the Supreme Court might rule parts of his “New Deal” unconstitutional. He tried to induce Congress to approve increasing the total number of justices on the Supreme Court to fifteen, attempting thereby to circumvent the judiciary and the Constitution by stacking the Court in his favor. … (Bribes and deceit worked better)

    …Medicare and Medicaid employ price-fixing, which is illegal for any private organization. The government decides on the worth of medical services and the providers of those services must comply. The government therefore utilizes unfair practices to establish a monopoly, transferring costs to the private sector, artificially magnifying the cost of private insurance and hiding the true cost of government coverage.

    When Medicare was passed senior citizens were promised that Medicare would not prevent them from utilizing private primary insurance if they wanted to. This assurance was false. Private primary health insurance has become all but impossible for persons over 65 to obtain.

    Medicaid recipients, as well as and those on military health plans, are significantly restricted in their choices. This lack of choice has stifled competition. Contrary to the claims of the current administration, every time government has gotten involved in health care, competition has been suppressed by practices that would be prosecutable if carried out by private companies. Far from promoting competition, a government plan will eventually eliminate private health care, thereby eliminating all competition.

    Tom Miller, Director of Health Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, explained:

    “As fiscal pressures mount, the federal government does not ‘negotiate’ with medical providers for lower prices for covered services. It dictates below-market reimbursements with its near-monopoly power as a purchaser of health care for seniors. The full costs of such price discounts eventually reduce access to quality care and hold health care markets hostage to political exploitation.”

    2. A government option will decrease costs.

    It is naïve to believe that increased government intervention will lower the cost of medicine. All past evidence indicates that the reverse is true. In 1965, the government promised that Medicare part A would cost $9 billion by 1990. The actual cost was more than $66 billion — over seven times projected costs. There has never been a single large federal social program that has come in at budget or has performed as predicted.

    Democrats have tried to pin the rising cost of medical care on the private sector. It is, however, government interference and government regulations that have caused the high cost of medical care in the past and that will continue to increase the costs of medical care in the future. Medicare increases the cost of medical care by shifting federal administrative overhead to the private sector and through oppressive regulation.[i] These practices will undoubtedly accelerate under “Obamacare” as the following chart, using data from the Congressional Budget Office, indicates: The estimated $1.6 trillion for Obama’s proposed legislation will cover only about one third of his claimed 45 million uninsured. If historical precedents and evidence are any indication, the actual costs of the plan could be seven times higher than this estimate. Adding to the fiscal nightmare, Mr. Obama is planning on cutting benefits for Medicare and Medicaid in order to transfer funding to his new health plan. This is another example that government does not contain costs, but shift costs from one program to another.

    This was written before the passage of Obamacare. It’s worth reading in it’s entirety. These predictions have proven to be true, sometimes with an added twist, like doctors leaving the profession or doctors forced out of private practice and into hospital agreements and oversight.

    Socialism does not work, every time its tried. Obamacare is no exception.

  8. Tina says:

    Chris: “Premium growth has slowed since the implementation”

    There’s no way to prove premium growth would not have “slowed” anyway. This is another sloppy argument just like those used to sell this peace of crap law.

  9. Tina says:

    Jim: “The simple solution is to extend Medicare for everyone.”

    Oh brother! An expensive monopoly!

  10. bob says:

    #10 Something doesn’t sound right here. At that salary she should only pay about $125 a month.

    You think someone only making $15 an hour can afford $125 a month for what amounts to a catastrophic care policy? When he/she needs medical care they will need to pay $3000 before the policy kicks in. Think they can afford that on $15 an hour?

  11. bob says:

    Jack, you ought to post this article. I wonder how the libtards who infest this blog will defend this. Oh, that’s right, blame Bush…


    In case anyone forgot, Hillary Clinton — whose demands for a keynote speech appearance include a quarter of a million dollars, a private jet (“a Gulfstream 450 or larger), and $1,000 for a stenographer — is running for “everyday Americans.”

    Presumably, these are the “folks” who make up the 83% of American workers classified by the BLS as “non supervisory” and probably include those whose job it is to report the news, which is why we were surprised (not really) to see that when it comes to “everyday” reporters, covering a Clinton rally means being herded along like cattle inside a moving rope pen which looks to have been designed to separate the former First Lady from ‘the rest of us’

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-05/hillary-ropes-everyday-reporters-creates-media-spectacle

  12. bob says:

    a private jet (“a Gulfstream 450 or larger)

    Another AGW hypocrite, just like Algore.

    I wonder how the libtards who infest this blog will defend that…how, that’s right, blame Bush.

  13. bob says:

    #10 “Something doesn’t sound right here. At that salary she should only pay about $125 a month.”

    And good luck finding a doctor that takes a Covered California policy.

  14. bob says:

    Chris, you are an economic illiterate. The only way you lower healthcare costs is to increase the supply of healthcare or decrease the demand for healthcare or both.

    Obammiecare has done none of these. It has increased demand while doing nothing to increase supply.

  15. bob says:

    Obammie Care was designed to fail so we will eventually have single payer shoved down our throats.

  16. bob says:

    #9 “Premium growth has slowed since the implementation”

    Dingbat, did you even bother reading the article? Can’t you see what’s coming down the road at us?

  17. Chris says:

    Chris: “And it strikes me as quite silly to say that buying insurance “has no benefit to her;” the entire point of insurance is to get it before you get sick.”

    Tina: “How “silly” of you to say so. You KNOW the ACA makes sure insurance companies can’t consider pre-existing conditions.”

    What connection does this reply have to the portion of my comment you quoted? I said nothing about pre-existing conditions; I’m talking about the point of insurance. Your remark here is a non-sequiter.

    “There’s no way to prove premium growth would not have “slowed” anyway.”

    I never said it wouldn’t have. But there’s also no way to prove that the ACA hasn’t had an effect on premium growth, which is what Jack said:

    “Jim, that is speculation, but what isn’t speculation is the failure of Obamacare to lower premiums and high deductibles.”

    Try to pay attention to what people are saying.

    Bob, tell us more about how hard it is for people making $15 an hour to afford healthcare. It will be really interesting to return to those comments next time we discuss the minimum wage.

  18. Peggy says:

    Question I can’t find the answer to this in the article. Are these increase based on the previous year’s premium cost or from when ObamaCare went into affect in 2010?

    A 30-40% increase on premiums that have already increase each year for the past 5 years is a heck of a lot more than the cost would be if compared to the base cost in 2010.

    Would love to see the cost of a plan for each year from 2010 to 2015.

  19. More Common Sense says:

    #9 “Premium growth has slowed since the implementation”

    I don’t believe this is true at all but if you assume that it is, it is still a pitiful accomplishment. There were and are many possible ways to solve the healthcare cost issue; none of which have been implemented. More competition and decreased regulation would have a significant impact. If you ask any doctor or hospital administrator where the expenses are that increase costs and don’t improve healthcare they will tell you that it is in the record keeping regulations. I had a doctor tell me that complying with current regulation and keeping track of new regulations is kind of like being required to file your income taxes every day. The majority of his office staff spends its time creating documents that nobody reads. The current regulations also limit competition in the insurance market. Allowing insurance companies to cross state lines would increase competition and decrease premiums just as it has in auto insurance. What are the options in Chico; Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield, and United Healthcare? That’s about it and it is very difficult to find doctors that take United Healthcare.No competition means no incentive to streamline operations and cut costs.

    This administration is full of comments like this. When the best thing a president can say about his tenure as president is “it would have been a whole lot worse if it wasn’t for us” you know you are dealing with failure.

  20. Chris says:

    Chris: “Premium growth has slowed since the implementation”

    More Common Sense: “I don’t believe this is true at all”

    Well, then you’re uninformed. This is a well documented fact, and it’s not even a subject of disagreement between Republicans and Democrats. Premium growth has slowed.

  21. More Common Sense says:

    Chris, okay, based on the literal meaning of what you said you are correct. Premiums may have been growing at a higher rate prior that Obama Care. What I meant by what I said is that I don’t believe that what was in Obama Care could, in any way, have anything to do with reducing premiums growth. What is projected to happen with heath care insurance premiums supports my conclusion. Did you read the rest of my post. This is still another of the many “it would have been worse without me” items that have happened in Obamas term. Solving problems is not his legacy. Mediocrity and piss poor policies are his legacy. Jimmy Carter is smiling.

  22. Tina says:

    One of the many reasons premium growth is expected to clime dramatically is because the government has created a few huge monopolistic insurance companies and put smaller insurers out of business creating less competition. Their solution is single payer which would give us a single monopoly…the US government. We are not headed in the right direction with respect to healthcare insurance.

    Obamacare was a piece of stepping stone legislation that Democrats knew might be around for awhile before they could push for single payer. They milked as much power and control from it as was possible.

  23. Chris says:

    MCS: “What I meant by what I said is that I don’t believe that what was in Obama Care could, in any way, have anything to do with reducing premiums growth.”

    Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification, and sorry for the misunderstanding.

    Personally I’m skeptical about the premium hike speculation, as it sounds very much like what we were told would happen in 2015, and even in 2014. But we’ll see.

Comments are closed.