Goldberg: It's 'I told you so' on Obamacare

"What we've learned through the course of this program is that this is really not a sensible way for the healthcare system to be run."

That was Gary Cohen, director of the Department of Health and Human Services' Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, talking. He was specifically responding to the apparently surprising need to halt enrollments in a program designed as a temporary bridge for people with preexisting conditions who couldn't wait until the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare) fully kicks in next year. The program was allocated $5 billion, but some estimate it will take $40 billion to fund the effort.

Such surprises are becoming routine. The New York Times has reported that many small and mid-size firms may be opting out of Obamacare entirely. "The new healthcare law created powerful incentives for smaller employers to self-insure," Deborah J. Chollet of the Mathematica Policy Research told the paper. "This trend could destabilize small-group insurance markets and erode protections provided by the Affordable Care Act."

It turns out that Obamacare actually makes self-insurance less of a gamble because you can always throw workers on public exchanges without penalty. Naturally, the administration's response is to look for ways to tighten the ratchet and make self-insurance harder. It's a typical response. The shortcomings of a wildly ambitious law only justify more regulatory strong-arming.

As Yuval Levin of the Ethics and Public Policy Center notes, the NYT never paused to ask why it's OK that "a design flaw in the law somehow empowers" regulators to punish private employers. But this is typical of so much coverage of Obamacare. It is just taken for granted that thing must be made to work.

Although it's true that we collectively spent a lot of time shouting about Obamacare, we spent precious little time actually debating it. Most of the media covered the discussion as if it were a spectator sport, with the Democrats the hometown favorite. And much of the remainder seemed to assume that healthcare reporting amounted to explaining why Obamacare was a good idea. The facade of objectivity was often maintained by citing carefully crafted CBO projections that reflected political assumptions. Garbage in, garbage out.

Reality is teaching the propeller-heads a lesson. Despite President Obama promising that his plan would not add "one dime" to the deficit, the Government Accountability Office announced last week that it would more likely add 620,000,000,000,000 dimes (or $6.2 trillion) over 75 years.

Obama also promised that "if you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan." Estimates for how many Americans will lose their existing plans vary. The CBO says 5 million to 20 million. The consulting firm McKinsey & Co. says about 30% of employers will push workers onto the public system.

Even the AFL-CIO and the Teamsters have started to freak out over the gold-plated benefits many of their members will lose, thanks to the guy they helped reelect. Another irony: While the president rode to reelection hyping a mythical GOP "war on women," incentives to drop spouses from employee coverage under his plan will only increase, a particular concern for mothers with small kids. The good news is that if they keep their coverage, it will cover birth control pills.

Meanwhile, not just Taco Bell and Wendy's are demoting many full-time workers to part-time work. Some of Obama's core constituencies — universities and state governments — are cutting hours. For instance, Stark State College in Ohio sent a letter to faculty saying that "to avoid penalties under the Affordable Care Act ... employees with part-time or adjunct status will not be assigned more than an average of 29 hours per week."

Virtually all of these problems and many others were predicted by conservatives, but the media rolled their collective eyes in response. The Iraq war justifiably led to a lot of media soul-searching about how journalists were too credulous of the Bush administration's arguments. A similar discussion about how we got stuck in the Obamacare quagmire seems long overdue.

jgoldberg@latimescolumnists.com

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • House GOP lawsuit wages surprising fight over federal purse strings
    House GOP lawsuit wages surprising fight over federal purse strings

    When the House GOP authorized a lawsuit accusing President Obama of overstepping his authority, the rationale it offered was a head-scratcher: the administration's move to delay the employer mandate, a requirement that House Republicans unanimously opposed.

  • Who should and shouldn't get heart transplants -- and why?
    Who should and shouldn't get heart transplants -- and why?

    When a Georgia teenager named Anthony Stokes got himself killed not long ago, smashing up a stolen car in a police chase after supposedly taking a shot at an old lady in her house, the regret that poured out online was not for the death of the 17-year-old, but for the “waste” of the transplanted...

  • Children's Health Insurance Program deserves funding
    Children's Health Insurance Program deserves funding

    In what may be a hopelessly quixotic effort, supporters of the federal Children's Health Insurance Program are trying to persuade Congress to renew its funding almost a year in advance — and in a lame-duck session. Nevertheless, lawmakers ought to heed that call. The program plugs a troubling gap...

  • The GOP's shameful lawsuit against Obamacare
    The GOP's shameful lawsuit against Obamacare

    The lawsuit the House GOP filed against President Obama on Friday opened a new front in the attack on the 2010 healthcare law, this time targeting the subsidies that reduce deductibles, co-pays and other out-of-pocket expenses faced by lower-income Americans. According to the complaint, the subsidies...

  • A sensible cap on costly prescription drugs
    A sensible cap on costly prescription drugs

    To help prevent Americans from being bankrupted by medical bills, the 2010 federal healthcare law placed an annual cap on deductibles, co-pays and other out-of-pocket costs imposed by health insurers. That's turned out to be a mixed blessing for Americans who suffer from certain chronic diseases,...

  • Jonathan Gruber should've been Time's Person of the Year
    Jonathan Gruber should've been Time's Person of the Year

    Jonathan Gruber should have been Time's Person of the Year. The magazine gave it to the "Ebola Fighters" instead. Good for them; they're doing God's work. Still, Gruber would have been better.

Comments
Loading