A couple of days ago Obama spoke near Cleveland, Ohio about healthcare….he claimed the disastrous Obamacare bill will reduce business healthcare premiums by 3000%!
Hello, Einstein, where you are when we need you?
Obama can reduce premiums by 3000% in the same way he has taken transparency to a whole new level. Both are impossible. Nothing can be reduced more than 100%…funny thing is–the leftists in the audience thought that Obama’s claim was great and showed their ignorance by cheering! (Perhaps someone should have said “How dare you” at that point)
Oh, and Obama can’t be transparent because he can’t state clearly and outright his anti-American, Constitution-trashing agenda…transparency might give him away a little more quickly than his god-awful policies already have (see results of those policies) . (Or transparency may expose the bribes and Chicago-style arm-twisting taking place for “yes” votes.)
And don’t forget that Obama wants a single-payer government takeover of healthcare and he believes it will take steps to get there. Has he ever been transparent enough to tell you that is exactly where this Obamacare leads? From Breibart.tv via HotAirPundit, Obama’s own words:
Obama: Transitioning a system is a very difficult and costly and lengthy enterprise. It’s not like you can turn on a switch and you go from one system to another…I don’t think we’ll be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately there’s gonna be potentially some transition process, I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or twenty years out
NEVER forget that Obamacare is not about healthcare, but about power and a complete government takeover of healthcare.
Of course, Obama’s spokesperson has said Obama “misspoke” about the premiums and should have said $3000. (Of course, if Bush had made the same mistake, we’d never hear the end of it) However, via the Drudge Report, the AP is reporting that business premiums be reduced very modestly under this plan, if at all:
A White House press spokesman later said the president misspoke; he had meant to say annual premiums would drop by $3,000.
It could be a long wait.
“There’s no question premiums are still going to keep going up,” said Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a research clearinghouse on the health care system. “There are pieces of reform that will hopefully keep them from going up as fast. But it would be miraculous if premiums actually went down relative to where they are today.”
The statistics Obama based his claims on come from two sources. In both cases, the caveats got left out.
A report for the Business Roundtable, an association of big company CEOs, was the source for the claim that employers could save $3,000 per worker on health care costs, the White House said.
Issued in November, the report looked generally at proposals that Democrats were considering to curb health care costs, concluding they had the potential to significantly reduce future increases.
But the analysis didn’t consider specific legislation, much less the final language being tweaked this week. It’s unclear to what degree the bill that the House is expected to vote on within days would reduce costs for employers.
An analysis by the Congressional Budget Office of earlier Senate legislation suggested savings could be fairly modest.
It found that large employers would see premium savings of at most 3 percent compared with what their costs would have been without the legislation. That would be more like a few hundred dollars instead of several thousand.
And individual premiums, Obama is misleading at best on those:
The claim that people buying coverage individually would save 14 percent to 20 percent comes from the same budget office report, prepared in November for Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind. But the presidential sound bite fails to convey the full picture.
The budget office concluded that premiums for people buying their own coverage would go up by an average of 10 percent to 13 percent, compared with the levels they’d reach without the legislation. That’s mainly because policies in the individual insurance market would provide more comprehensive benefits than they do today.
For most households, those added costs would be more than offset by the tax credits provided under the bill, and they would pay significantly less than they have to now.
The premium reduction of 14 percent to 20 percent that Obama cites would apply only to a portion of the people buying coverage on their own — those who decide they want to keep the skimpier kinds of policies available today.
Their costs would go down because more young people would be joining the risk pool and because insurance company overhead costs would be lower in the more efficient system Obama wants to create.
The president usually alludes to that distinction in his health care stump speech, saying the savings would accrue to those people who continue to buy “comparable” coverage to what they have today.
But many of his listeners may not pick up on it.
“People are likely to not buy the same low-value policies they are buying now,” said health economist Len Nichols of George Mason University. “If they did buy the same value plans … the premium would be lower than it is now. This makes the White House statement true. But is it possibly misleading for some people? Sure.”
ANYTHING to pass this monstrosity and change (for the worse) the fabric of our society and markets permanently. It makes me sad every time I think about it. How in the world did 52% of voters believe this man and his statist, anti-American leader cohorts in Congress would be good for our country? Gag.
Filed under: Abortion, Barack HUSSEIN Obama, Chicago corruption, Collectivism, Economy, Entitlements, Liberalism, Nutroots, Obama corruption, Politics, Progressives Ain't, Socialism, Socialized Healthcare, Taxes, Tea Party, Union Thugs, Welfare | Tagged: 3000%, Barack Obama, bribery, business premiums, government takeover of healthcare, health insurance, healthcare, healthcare bill, insurance premiums, Obamacare, transparency |