The promised savings of $2500 per family in the ACA aren't supposed to happen til 2019.

[dkf]

Rising Health Costs Undermine Obama's Pledge

Last year, I asked White House deputy chief of staff Nancy-Ann DeParle about that $2,500 in savings the president pledged. She insisted families will see that savings seven years after the president said it would be achieved - by 2019.

"Many of the changes in the Affordable Care Act are starting this year, and in succeeding years," DeParle told ABC News, "and by 2019 we estimate that the average family will save around $2,000."

DeParle said that the "big increases that occurred (in 2010) were probably driven by insurance plans overestimating what the impact would be and maybe trying to take some profits upfront before some of the changes in the Affordable Care Act occur."

Administration officials say they never claimed health care costs would go down, only that they would grow at a slower rate than they would have without the Affordable Care Act.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/blogEntry?id=17321046

[Purveyor]

1. I'm starting to have a 'bad feeling' about this whole thing, indeed. eom

[1StrongBlackMan]

2. I'm not ...

I got a rebate check from my employer because our insurer didn't meet the med-loss ratio ... I, personally, know several people that have benefitted from the features in effect today, from being able to insure a previously uninsurable spouse (due to a pre-existing condition) to a friend that can continue medical treatments after having been told by her insurer that she was uncovered because she had hit her "life-time limit."

So ... where some focus on what might not be; I choose to see, and be thankful for, what is.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

3. Ditto here

My son is on our insurance solely because of this. Without it he'd not have health insurance.

[liberal_at_heart]

4. My husband and son are now insurable where they weren't before but for a family of four

we now pay $925/month in insurance premiums.

[ProSense]

5. So

you decided to dig up a 2012 blog post by Jake Tapper to try to continue the fear mongering around the health care law?

DeParle said that the "big increases that occurred (in 2010) were probably driven by insurance plans overestimating what the impact would be and maybe trying to take some profits upfront before some of the changes in the Affordable Care Act occur."

Administration officials say they never claimed health care costs would go down, only that they would grow at a slower rate than they would have without the Affordable Care Act.

That is exactly correct. The only people making bullshit claims are the insurance companies.

Sec. Kathleen Sebelius

Holding Insurance Companies Accountable for High Premium Increases

The Affordable Care Act prohibits some of the worst insurance industry practices that have kept affordable health coverage out of reach for millions of Americans. It provides families and individuals with new protections against discriminatory rates due to pre-existing conditions, holds insurance companies accountable for how they spend your premium dollars, and prevents insurance companies from raising your insurance premium rates without accountability or transparency.

For more than a decade before the Affordable Care Act health insurance premiums had risen rapidly, straining the pocketbooks of American families and businesses. Oftentimes, insurance companies were able to raise rates without explanation to consumers or public justification of their actions.



The Affordable Care Act brought an unprecedented level of scrutiny and transparency to health insurance rate increases by requiring insurance companies in every state to publicly justify their actions if they want to raise rates by 10% or more. Insurance companies are required to provide easy to understand information to their customers about their reasons for significant rate increases, and any unreasonable rate increases are posted online.

And it's working.

A new report released today shows that the health care law is helping to moderate premium hikes. Since this rule was implemented, the number of requests for insurance premium increases of 10% or more has dropped dramatically, from 75% to 14%. The average premium increase for all rates in 2012 was 30% below what it was in 2010. And available data suggest that this slowdown in rate increases has continued into 2013.

- more -

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sec-kathleen-sebelius/holding-insurance-compani_b_2742501.html

Rules finalized for the good stuff in Obamacare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022415967

Obama Posts: Health Care Anniversary Is A BFD
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2556079

From the post you linked to:

UPDATE: An earlier version of this story failed to credit John Merline of Investor's Business Daily with the computations cited above. ABC News apologizes and regrets the error.

Imagine Jake Tapper using a wingnut site as a source.

Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims
http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx

[dkf]

6. I was researching Canadian health care and for some reason this popped up.

Sorry but if I find something illuminating I will post it.

And I could care less about the rest of the article, what interested me is the administration's comments on their own plan and what their expectations were and how they mesh with public expectations.

Everyone complains about businesses disclosing relevant information. What about Government officials and politicians disclosures of downsides when they are selling their plans?

[ProSense]

7. Did you

"Sorry but if I find something illuminating I will post it. "

...notice that the source was a wingnut writer?

What exactly is "illuminating" about a six-month-old blog post pushing RW lies?

Is it more "illuminating" than this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022554154

Or this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022554154#post3

[dkf]

8. Jake Tapper is a wingnut?

Really? I swear I used to read him on a liberal site.

[ProSense]

9. Here

"Jake Tapper is a wingnut?"

...read the entire comment (I'm assuming you didn't. Either that or you're being disingenuous).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2556394

[dkf]

12. I just told you I posted the article for the comment by the Obama administration.

Are you disputing those comments?

You are trying to tear down the article to say that Jake Tapper misquoted the administration perhaps?

Sometimes you need to step back from the agenda and examine things at face value.

If even the administration didn't expect cost savings til the far out years don't we deserve to know it?

What I want to know is when we expect to have costs inline with the rest of the world.

[ProSense]

15. Did I

"I just told you I posted the article for the comment by the Obama administration.

Are you disputing those comments? "

...dispute the administration's point: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2556394

The entire piece is wrapped in RW bullshit. Tapper:

Investor's Business Daily's John Merline was first to note the difference in premiums climbing faster under Obama than the previous four years under Bush.

Here's the article Tapper links to:

Health Premiums Up $3,000; Obama Vowed $2,500 Cut

Not only is that utter bullshit, but how did the administration promise to cut costs before the law passed let alone before it is implemented in 2014?

You have the facts, the same ones pointed out to you yesterday:



http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2556394

[ProSense]

10. I also assume

that you're researching Canadian health care because it was pointed out that it's similar to Medicare for all, which you oppose.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2554489

[dkf]

11. I know it's not the same, but I'm sure you want documentation so I was trying to oblige.

Canada has a set budget for health care. That is what helps keep costs down. But I'm sure you won't believe me.

[ProSense]

16. You're

"Canada has a set budget for health care. That is what helps keep costs down. But I'm sure you won't believe me. "

...spreading disinformation about the Medicare system in this country.

You continue to fear monger Medicare, and oppose Medicare for all based on conservative deficit hawk BS. You posted this below:

"Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance or whatever vehicle we examine, health costs in the US are the driver of insolvency for individuals and the government. "

The same scare tactics are employed by conservatives in Canada.

<...>

Conservatives in Canada have been fairly successful in disseminating the concept that their Medicare program is unsustainable, and that only privatization can save it. Their campaign has been downright dishonest.

This report from Canadian Doctors for Medicare shows that Medicare has been very stable through the decades and that the increasing cost pressures have occurred in the private sector. The Canadian health care system clearly needs more government involvement, not less.

There are lessons here for the United States. Our much higher costs have been due to unconstrained pressures in the private sector. Our health care prices are by far the highest, and our private insurers have been ineffective in constraining these escalating costs. Since our Medicare program covers only selected populations (elderly, long-term disabilities, end-stage renal disease) it has not had the leverage to control spending as effectively as the Canadian Medicare system. Also, being only a part of a highly fragmented financing system, Medicare is forced to deliver within a system steeped with wasteful administrative excesses.

In the United States, we need a Medicare system that administers financing for our entire health care delivery system, while eliminating the privatizers who continue to drive up health care pricing to unsustainable levels. Canada has shown us that a single payer system works just fine, as long as you don’t give free rein to the privatizers.

http://pnhp.org/blog/2011/03/07/lesson-for-u-s-canadas-medicare-remains-fully-sustainable/

Medicare for all is a solution, not a potentional problem.

[dkf]

17. If you have medicare for all but don't control costs then we all spend too much.

Our medicare fulfills whatever is asked of it and pays a portion. We need to be smarter about it and set limits.

And yes that is the unpopular but unspoken difference.

[ProSense]

18. Why

"If you have medicare for all but don't control costs then we all spend too much."

...are you assuming Medicare for all wouldn't "control costs"?

[dkf]

19. It doesn't now.

It's cheap in terms of its administration, but its still a victim of the fee for service model.

[theKed]

13. Your concern

is noted.

[dkf]

14. Health care costs are outsized and will bankrupt this country.

Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance or whatever vehicle we examine, health costs in the US are the driver of insolvency for individuals and the government.

So yes this concerns me.