Sometimes, the email we receive is so unintentionally funny, I just have to respond. In this case, the New America Foundation, in the person of its Director of the Health Policy Program Len Nichols, went off on a baseless and error-infested rant regarding AHIP's opportunistic ObamaCare about-face.
Having initially tied itself to the ObamaCare wagon, the self-proclaimed spokesgroup for health insurance companies has decided to untie itself, having finally figured out something we've been saying for quite some time: that Obamacare will lead to major premium increases, less competition and health care rationing. In the spirit of graciousness, we welcome the AHIP to reality.
What has Len's knickers in a wad is that AHIP finally decided that maybe it would be a good idea to have an independent organization vet the plan (such as it is), to see if it truly was the Holy Grail. To that end, they engaged the respected accounting firm Price Waterhouse Cooper to run the numbers. What PWC found is that "the typical family premium in 2019 could cost $4,000 more than projected." And as Bob has pointed out, it will also shift the cost of Medicare cuts to privately insured patients, and rate increases will disproportionally impact younger folks. What a great deal!
Len begins by constructing a straw man that would do L Frank Baum proud: "Most think tank work is funded by Foundations, which by law are nonpartisan."
That would be wrong: there is nothing that requires (or even suggests) that any "Foundation" be apolitical. And if he wants to cast stones, then he ought not to be quoting two of the most hyper-partisan such groups around, the Urban League and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Shooting the messenger is, of course, a time-honored tradition, but Mr Nichols isn't content with just shooting it, he means to obliterate it:
"Good policy research uses nationally and statistically representative data so that its conclusions reflect behavior of the actual population."
Since when?
Almost all polls are done with samples that are weighted for a specific bias. His take isn't even good statistics.
Gotta love this one:
"The report ignores the subsidies included in the Finance Committee bill." Hunh? From where does he think these "subsidies" come? Here's a clue, Len: they come from the taxpayer, including that hypothetical family of four.
And this, along the same lines:
"The report ignores the excise tax on high-cost plans." Who do you think pays those, Len? Certainly not those on funemployment, thanks in large part to the Spendulus.
This is simply amazing:
"The report assumes that all Medicare savings will be converted into private sector cost shifts."
Well, dunh! That's because Nancy, Harry and Barry have been claiming this to be one of the primary goals of the legislation. Are you calling them liars now?
And this is pure gold:
"The report ignores the fact that under the Senate Finance bill, "If you like your coverage, you can keep it."
That's because, as we've documented, you can't; this was never a goal of ObamaCare, and it's disingenuous to suggest it ever was.
It's unfortunate that Mr Nichols and his crew must resort to obfuscation to try to save this quickly sinking ship. But it's of a piece with those who believe that a nationalized health care scheme is a "good thing."
Not even close.
Having initially tied itself to the ObamaCare wagon, the self-proclaimed spokesgroup for health insurance companies has decided to untie itself, having finally figured out something we've been saying for quite some time: that Obamacare will lead to major premium increases, less competition and health care rationing. In the spirit of graciousness, we welcome the AHIP to reality.
What has Len's knickers in a wad is that AHIP finally decided that maybe it would be a good idea to have an independent organization vet the plan (such as it is), to see if it truly was the Holy Grail. To that end, they engaged the respected accounting firm Price Waterhouse Cooper to run the numbers. What PWC found is that "the typical family premium in 2019 could cost $4,000 more than projected." And as Bob has pointed out, it will also shift the cost of Medicare cuts to privately insured patients, and rate increases will disproportionally impact younger folks. What a great deal!
Len begins by constructing a straw man that would do L Frank Baum proud: "Most think tank work is funded by Foundations, which by law are nonpartisan."
That would be wrong: there is nothing that requires (or even suggests) that any "Foundation" be apolitical. And if he wants to cast stones, then he ought not to be quoting two of the most hyper-partisan such groups around, the Urban League and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Shooting the messenger is, of course, a time-honored tradition, but Mr Nichols isn't content with just shooting it, he means to obliterate it:
"Good policy research uses nationally and statistically representative data so that its conclusions reflect behavior of the actual population."
Since when?
Almost all polls are done with samples that are weighted for a specific bias. His take isn't even good statistics.
Gotta love this one:
"The report ignores the subsidies included in the Finance Committee bill." Hunh? From where does he think these "subsidies" come? Here's a clue, Len: they come from the taxpayer, including that hypothetical family of four.
And this, along the same lines:
"The report ignores the excise tax on high-cost plans." Who do you think pays those, Len? Certainly not those on funemployment, thanks in large part to the Spendulus.
This is simply amazing:
"The report assumes that all Medicare savings will be converted into private sector cost shifts."
Well, dunh! That's because Nancy, Harry and Barry have been claiming this to be one of the primary goals of the legislation. Are you calling them liars now?
And this is pure gold:
"The report ignores the fact that under the Senate Finance bill, "If you like your coverage, you can keep it."
That's because, as we've documented, you can't; this was never a goal of ObamaCare, and it's disingenuous to suggest it ever was.
It's unfortunate that Mr Nichols and his crew must resort to obfuscation to try to save this quickly sinking ship. But it's of a piece with those who believe that a nationalized health care scheme is a "good thing."
Not even close.
Posts
