« | »

51% May Lose Current Health Coverage

From Investors Business Daily:

Keep Your Health Plan Under Overhaul? Probably Not, Gov’t Analysis Concludes

By DAVID HOGBERG AND SEAN HIGGINS, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 06/11/2010

Internal administration documents reveal that up to 51% of employers may have to relinquish their current health care coverage because of ObamaCare.

Small firms will be even likelier to lose existing plans.

The "midrange estimate is that 66% of small employer plans and 45% of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfathered status by the end of 2013," according to the document.

In the worst-case scenario, 69% of employers — 80% of smaller firms — would lose that status, exposing them to far more provisions under the new health law.

The 83-page document, a joint project of the departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and the IRS, examines the effects that ObamaCare’s regulations would have on existing, or "grandfathered," employer-based health care plans.

Draft copies of the document were reportedly leaked to House Republicans during the week and began circulating Friday morning. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., posted it on his Web site Friday afternoon…

In a statement, Posey said the document showed that the arguments in favor of ObamaCare were a "bait and switch."

"The president promised repeatedly that people who like their current plans can keep them, but now the details of their plan actually confirm what many suspected all along, most Americans will lose their current health care plan," Posey said.

A White House official told IBD: "This is a draft document, and we will be releasing the final regulation when it is complete. The president made a promise to the American people that if they liked their health care plan, they can keep it. The regulation, when finalized, will uphold that promise."

However, the source conceded: "It is difficult to predict how plans and employers will behave in the coming years, but if plans make changes that negatively impact consumers, then they will lose their grandfather status." …

Under the new health law, current employer-based health plans will be grandfathered — that is, they will not have to follow many Obama-Care provisions that take effect on Jan. 1, 2014. These include benefit mandates, caps on out-of-pocket expenses and limits on age-based premiums.

But they forfeit that grandfathered status if they make changes to the plans by 2014. If so, firms may have to adopt new plans or drop coverage and pay the penalty…

Under the regulations in the document, a plan is no longer considered to be grandfathered if:

• It eliminates benefits related to diagnosis or treatment of a particular condition.

• It increases the percentage of a cost-sharing requirement (such as co-insurance) above its level as of March 23, 2010.

• It increases the fixed amount of cost-sharing such as deductibles or out-of-pocket limits by a total percentage measured from March 23, 2010, that is more than the sum of medical inflation plus 15 percentage points.

• It increases co-payments from March 23, 2010, by an amount that is the greater of: medical inflation plus 15 percentage points or medical inflation plus $5.

• The employer’s share of the premium decreases more than 5 percentage points below what the share was on March 23, 2010.

Analyzing data on employer-provided plans from 2008 and 2009, the report stated: "Many employers who made changes between 2008 and 2009 that would have caused them to relinquish grandfather status did so based on exceeding one of the cost-sharing limits."

In total, 66% of small businesses and 47% of large businesses made a change in their health care plans last year that would have forfeited their grandfathered status.

"These rules will ensure that up to 69% of employees — and 80% of workers in small business — will lose their current plan within three years," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., a physician

What a nightmare.

But Ms. Pelosi was right. We are finding out about Obama-care, now that it is safely passed.

This article was posted by Steve on Saturday, June 12th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “51% May Lose Current Health Coverage”

  1. proreason says:

    Sometimes it’s impossible to determine if they are merely incompetant or deliberately trying to destroy our way of life.

    In this case, it is probably both.

  2. BigOil says:

    Look at the bright side – 49% of people will be able to keep their current plan – at a much higher cost.

  3. Rusty Shackleford says:

    If the sales pitch for O-care isn’t “The Greatest Lie Ever Told”, it’s certainly in the top five.

  4. tranquil.night says:

    “Internal documents” like this indicate to me a greater likelihood that this type of result is what’s actually expected in the inner circles of power. This information has always fit the mold of the HealthCare bills true intent, which is why even if you’re a Conservative who understands liberals but didn’t understand the bill, it was an easy call to make. Here’s the pattern from hated business or industry to bailed out government institution:

    – We have a sudden crisis that can be conveniently twisted to fit any number of liberal political messages (anti-bankers, anti-auto executives, anti-private insurers, ‘anti-immigrant racism’, now anti-BigOil). The means and money behind production came first, then a halmark industry of American tools that we produce, then the insurance on producers (which, tied to the means and the tools, fundamentally negatively changes the relationship between employee/employer/govt) and now finally the actual energy that fuels production.

    – Far from embracing the truth behind what has caused the crisis (typically them), rather the regime and its propogandists irresistably leap at the impulse to spread their false narrative of anti-capitalist accusations. When their arguments are thoroughly rebuked, in true Alinsky fashion they double down, personally attack and seek to divide their opponents. Then comes the legislation, the regulation, and every grab for power they can possibly conceive or broker.

    – After facing loud and united opposition & typically having to broker deals with their own members to go along with their obviously vitriolic and unconstitutional methods, they then shut down discussion and bank their political defense on the fact that they haven’t ruined the country.. yet. While Congress and the regime is free to pursue the next crisis, those who remain informed on yesterday’s issues get to bear lone witnesss to every prognostication they made months earlier coming true – quietly.

    Because even if the truth did eventually get out they knew they just had to take care to “not wake the bear.” It would take a grassroots movement the likes of which had little been seen before to stop what they were accomplishing; and reversing Liberal entitlements had seldom ever happened before. They made their gamble, which was that the American people were too mal-informed, too disengaged, or already too dependent on Government, to stop them. Now they have to sit on the results.

    • Right of the People says:

      I think the bear is awakening and he’s hungry as hell for some juicy, tasty liberal. I’ve heard to a bear they taste like chicken.

  5. lukematthews says:

    It hasn’t changed. The problems inherent within the bill, now law, are just as true during the battle against passage as they were then. We are now just facing the music and by next year, it will be very ugly. The mandates and taxes will force more and more of us out of the system while the collectivists clamor for a public option in order to control us.
    These are not rhetorical flourishes, as Fancy Pelosi would have us believe, these are the simple actions built within the deform movement. I just hope people continue to agitate against this and force a repeal next year. Otherwise, we are all in deep and sinking doo-doo.

  6. U NO HOO says:

    Just a reminder off topic and with no socially redeeming value:

    The original grandfather clauses were intended to keep blacks from voting in the post-bellum south.

  7. canary says:

    I heard companies that offer really good policies which cost more, are having to pay penalties for being expensive, so they are providing cheaper, less providing insurance.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »