Facebook Twitter Google+ Shout YouTube SoundCloud RSS

White House Fail: Obamacare in a ‘Death Spiral’

1-Patrick-henningsen-BWPatrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire

It’s been riddled with problems from the beginning. It was sold to the people as ‘Universal Healthcare’, only, it’s not even close. As predicted, it looks as if Obamacare may end up being D.O.A after all.

Obamacare’s overpaid, elitist architect, Jonathan Gruber, is under fire this week for inferring that the American people were too ‘stupid’ to understand his genius – but that’s only the beginning…

In case you missed it, the US Supreme Court made a decision last week to hear an upcoming legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) aka ‘Obamacare’.

For those who are still claiming that Obamacare is “the most significant piece of social legislation in a generation”, this significant legal challenge is being brushed off as insignificant, only it’s not. The mere fact that this Supreme Court case leaves Obamacare in the balance until next summer means that the government may not reach its projected targets for 2015 enrollment – due to the fact that many will not bother registering if its legality is being challenged in 2015. White House spin doctors have already revised enrollment projections down to soften the PR blow and claim 2015 as, “a major success” and “another giant step forward” (White House propaganda speak).

The truth is that Obamacare is now hanging by a very thin thread. As Forbes explains, “If the Court rules for the challengers – nullifying the guts of the statute’s benefits in 34 states and sending participating insurers into an actuarial death-spiral – it will have rendered its most divisive ruling since Bush v. Gore.”

Here is how it was ‘marketed’ by the Democratic Party Central Planning from 2010:


The fundamental problem with any government attempt to control a marketplace, is that a select number of corporate beneficiaries will be able to ‘game the system’ set by the government. The result is increased profits for the insurance providers – in the form of a government mandated ‘grey bailout’. This is exactly what Obamacare has done. Forbes adds here:

“… A problem deep within the bowels of the subprovisions defining how to compute the tax credits that health plan enrollees are entitled to under the law. (These tax credits are “advanced” to the taxpayer and then paid directly by the government to the health insurer, so the enrollee experiences them only in the form of lower premiums.)”

In addition, the ACA Law of 2010, “requires insurance companies to cover all applicants within new minimum standards and offer the same rates“, but fails to recognize how the ACA has raised the cost bar for everyone, albiet equally.

Back in 2010, Obama said, “We’re not taxing folks, we’re taxing the insurance companies”. Yes Mr. President, and those same insurance moguls have passed that tax on to their tens of millions of consumers.

Notice how the only faction not complaining about Obamacare is the insurance companies. Why is that? Essentially, the ACA act enables insurance companies to double-dip their profit margins – a ‘grey bailout’ cash injection up front – courtesy of Uncle Sam, and another profit boost on the back end by sticking the consumer with higher premiums and deductibles.

Ultimately, when it comes to the ACA, the bottom line will be how much it costs individuals and families. If it increases peoples monthly premiums or their annual deductibles – then it will be deemed a failure – by everyone. Maybe that was the plan all along – make a federal law so bad and so fraught with land mines that it was designed to fail, only to be replaced by a newer system after the 2016 elections. Hmmm…

Regardless of what its sponsors have promised in terms of “the greater good”, any law which mandates that Americans must pay more for their healthcare than they did before the law was passed – will be automatically rejected. Here’s some of the public reaction from WP’s Peanut Gallery:

“I don’t know where the posters live but this is my personal experience with O-care. My daughter who is self-employed has a plan that costs she and her husband $567/month with $8,000 in yearly deductibles. I was with Hubby last week to a cardiac appointment. There, a sign was displayed saying that the doctor was no longer accepting Humana Blue Cross. People were so upset because in this area, the closest cardiologist was 60 miles away. A friend on facebook, also self-employed with teenagers, just had been notified that her monthly bill was $900 with $11,000 deductible. If this monstrosity stays you can kiss the middle class and the working poor good bye. Because no family can sustain this kind of monthly hit.”

No amount of spin, lies, or statistical distortions, or veiled Democratic threats to 2016 voters can change the individual ‘cost reality’ of Obamacare.

Unquestionably, for the White House and the Democratic election machine, Obamacare provides a convenient ‘Divide and rule’ device for 2016. This comment embodies how Obamacare will be used in the run-up to the 2016 election, as Democrats scare college students with being kicked off of their current family plans, and  effectively threaten the few million who are newly recipients of subsidized Obamacare.

Here is a comment left in the WP article, one which could have been planted by the White House’s social media team. Notice the voter coercion being applied here – through fear:

“The people who now have insurance under ObamaCare will be very angry at the Republicans if their coverage goes away. That would NOT be good for the Republican Party come the Presidential election in 2016. Nor would all those millions of college students who now can remain longer on their parents’ coverage. Voters might think, “Hey, if this Supreme Court takes away my medical insurance, I want to vote for a person WHO WILL appoint people who will keep ObamaCare. In other words, “Go ahead, make my day, as Reagan used to say!

Partisan scare tactics? That’s the last card left to play in a very, very bad hand.


Here’s The Post’s take on Obamacare’s new D.O.A status…

Dana Millbank
Washington Post

So it turns out there is an Obamacare death panel after all…

It has nine members and it operates out of a marble building directly across the street from the Capitol.

When the Supreme Court on Friday announced that it would take up another challenge to the Affordable Care Act in March, it delivered the threat of two mortal blows to the signature achievement of the Obama presidency.

First, it raised the possibility that the justices, who narrowly spared the law in 2012, will in June come out with a new ruling that would dismantle the law on different grounds. But even if the justices make no such ruling, the very act of taking up the challenge to the law will itself undermine the law. The justices announced their decision just a week before the open-enrollment period for 2015 begins — and the looming possibility that the high court will strike down the law will probably deter those who are considering signing up for its coverage.

Thus did Sylvia Mathews Burwell, the new secretary of health and human services, find herself in a defensive posture Monday afternoon, even though she was in the friendly environs of the liberal Center for American Progress. An event had been scheduled to generate enthusiasm for the new open-enrollment season, but the host, former Ohio governor Ted Strickland, had little choice but to acknowledge the elephant that John Roberts had led into the room.

“What do you want consumers to know and should they be concerned, as we head into this open-enrollment period, about this Supreme Court decision?” he asked gingerly.

Burwell’s practiced reply: ‘Nothing to see here’.

“The most important thing for consumers to know is that nothing has changed,” she said, assuring all that the law’s tax credits would continue. “And so as we go into open enrollment, nothing has changed,” she repeated. She kept her face determinedly in a smile, though nothing about the gesture indicated pleasure.

Strickland coached her further, asking whether she expects that “the court will ultimately make the correct decision and this will no longer be a problem?”

“That’s correct,” the secretary replied. “And I think what’s most important is that nothing has changed. And as we go into this open enrollment, which we’ll be starting this Saturday . . . nothing has changed.”

For those keeping score, Burwell managed to say “nothing has changed” four times in 90 seconds.

And she’s right, technically. Nothing has changed, and nothing will, at least until next spring, when the Supreme Court rules. The trouble is the doubt among potential enrollees the Supreme Court has created by raising the possibility that the law will be eliminated — just like the doubt created when HealthCare.gov flopped a year ago, and the doubt Republicans have tried to create with incessant talk of repealing the law.

Further complicating Burwell’s don’t-worry message to the liberal think tank: The administration had just cut its forecasts for Obamacare enrollment in 2015 — an effort to lower expectations. Previously, the Congressional Budget Office had forecast enrollment of 13 million by the end of the year…

Continue this article at Washington Post

READ MORE OBAMACARE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Obamacare Files

21wire

21wire

We are a North American and European-based, grass-roots, independent blog offering geopolitical news and media analysis, working with an array of volunteer contributors who write and help to analyse news and opinion from around the world.
21wire

@21WIRE

Independent journalist trying to keep it real in an epoch of great mainstream deception... #SundayWire
RT @l_bourhill: Live At Five (GMT) > SUNDAY WIRE - Episode #213 – ‘Trouble in the Holy City’ with guests Marwa Osman (@Osman_Marwa1) and Ge… - 19 mins ago
21wire