SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (743677)10/3/2013 12:39:45 PM
From: bentway  Read Replies (8) | Respond to of 1575421
 
America: a land of liberals, governed by conservatives?

Politicians across the spectrum believe voters are vastly more rightwing than they are, even after elections prove otherwise
theguardian.com

The current US government shutdown isn't the first time a small group of hard-right politicians has held the rest of the country to ransom, and it presumably won't be the last. (I'm not sure it's widely appreciated exactly how small that small group is, in the present case: we're talking 30 people here. That's like letting The Polyphonic Spree determine America's future!)

And if it always seems to happen this way – with the whole political system gravitationally sliding off to the right, not the left. A recent paper suggests why: American politicians, whether they're liberal or conservative themselves, chronically misperceive the voters who elect them as more conservative than they are.

Before last November's nationwide elections, David Broockman and Christopher Skovron, political scientists at the Universities of California and Michigan, asked almost 2,000 state-level political candidates about their voters' views. How did people in their district feel about same-sex marriage being legal, or whether the country needs universal healthcare? What were their views on abolishing federal welfare programs?

"Pick an American state legislator at random," Broockman and Skovron report in a new summary at the Scholars Strategy Network, "and chances are that he or she will have massive misperceptions about district views on big-ticket items, typically missing the mark by 15 percentage points."

The mismatch is most extreme among conservative politicians, who typically overestimate their voters' conservatism so much – by 20 points, on average – that they're essentially claiming their district is more conservative than the most conservative district in America. Most of those conservatives are sure their voters agree with them on same-sex marriage and healthcare – but in three-fifths of cases, they're wrong.

Oh, and these out-of-touch politicians don't learn from experience, either: when Broockman and Skovron posed the same questions after the 2012 elections, once it was obvious what voters actually thought, they found the basic discrepancy unchanged.

Which makes it a bit easier to understand how even the upper echelons of Mitt Romney's campaign could have been caught so unawares by his defeat. (It also suggests a "simple lobbying strategy" for progressive groups, the authors write: "Just let legislators know the truth about what their constituents think and want!")

The explanation for all this isn't necessarily cryptic, and Broockman and Skovron hint at what's probably at the root of it: conservatism talks louder, because conservatism talks with more money, because people with plenty of money tend to prefer conservative policies.

What's striking, though, is the suggestion that politicians aren't following the money in a purely cynical fashion, ignoring voters in favour of a few big donors: if these findings are to be believed, they really, truly imagine their voters share their views. Perhaps that's the most alarming thing about the Tea Party faction directing events in DC at the moment – not just that they're out of step with voters, but that they sincerely believe they aren't.



To: tejek who wrote (743677)10/3/2013 2:54:10 PM
From: jlallen1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Tenchusatsu

  Respond to of 1575421
 
Study: Premiums for Young People to Rise in all 50 States

Health insurance premiums for young people will rise in all 50 states under Obamacare, with an average increase of 260 percent, according to a study released Thursday.

The young and healthy segment of the uninsured are considered crucial for the Affordable Care Act to succeed. Former President Bill Clinton suggested last week that Obamacare only works “if young people show up.”

However, an analysis of premiums both before and after the implementation of Obamacare shows that 18- to 35-year-olds are likely to opt out of high rates in the exchanges in favor of cheaper penalties for not having insurance.

According to a study released by the American Action Forum, post-Obamacare premiums will average $187.08 per month, up from $62 per month in 2013, a 202 percent increase. Overall, states averaged an increase of 260 percent.

Forty-four out of 50 states saw a three-digit percent increase, and in Vermont the cheapest available premium for a 30 year-old male nonsmoker will increase by $332.69, or 600 percent.

The American Action Forum, a center-right policy institute led by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the former director of the Congressional Budget Office, compared premiums across the nation in 2013 to rates under the federally and state run exchanges in the heath insurance marketplace, which launched on Tuesday.

The group analyzed plans for a 30 year-old male non-smoker as the model for the so-called “young invincible.” They presumed that if a healthy young person purchases health insurance, he would most likely choose the “bronze plan,” the least expensive plan offered in the marketplace.

After analyzing each bronze-tier plan for a 30-year-old single male, every state saw an increase. Most saw an increase between 200 and 300 percent, with the top five occurring in Vermont, Georgia, Nebraska, Arkansas, and Wisconsin.

Massachusetts had the lowest increase at 9 percent, though the state is considered an “outlier” since it already had similar health care reforms put in place under former Republican Gov. Mitt Romney.

“[T]hat state’s insurance market has been subject to ACA-like reforms since 2006, bloating the premium for the lowest-cost pre-ACA policy to nearly $214, making it the highest of the 2013 premiums analyzed in this study,” the report said.

Given the high costs of the premiums, the study predicts that even with subsidies, most of the young uninsured will opt to pay the penalty rather than sign up for health care.

Individuals between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty line are eligible for subsidies under the law.

Only those who earn up to 133 percent of the poverty line will have a financial incentive to join the health exchange. An individual with an income of $15,281.70 would receive a subsidy to cover 100 percent of their health care premiums.

Moving up the income bracket creates disincentives for the young to enroll. Those making $20,107.50, or 175 percent of the poverty line, will still face a $449 premium, which is three times higher than the penalty they would incur in 2014 ($103.57) if they did not purchase insurance.

An individual earning $37,342.50 will receive no subsidy at all and will face a minimum premium of $2,839, as opposed to a $275.92 penalty in 2014.

“Premium subsidies will do little to defray increased rates for young people, while penalties for noncompliance appear paltry when compared to the costs associated with coverage,” the study said.

The report, written by Sam Cappellanti, a health care policy analyst at the AAF, points to numerous policies within Obamacare as the reason for higher premiums, most importantly “guaranteed issue” and “community rating.”

Guaranteed issue is the portion of the law that restricts health insurers from denying coverage on the basis of preexisting conditions. The study notes that the policy forces insurers to pay more for high-risk individuals and enables others to apply for coverage after they get sick, making premiums go up for everyone else.

“Bringing higher cost individuals into the risk pool gives rise to premium increases for the young as the system has to accommodate enrollees requiring above-average expenditures,” the study said.

Community rating under Obamacare mandates that insurance companies charge the same premium to individuals regardless of health history and current health status.

“In a guaranteed issue and community rating system, healthy individuals are perversely incentivized to wait to enroll in coverage until there is a true need,” the study said.

Other factors driving up premiums are the Health Insurance Tax (HIT) and fees insurance companies must pay in the exchange, which are likely to be passed onto the consumer.

The policies work together to create what Cappellanti calls a “death spiral,” making premiums jump “exponentially” in 2014.

“In response to rising costs, young healthy enrollees opt out of coverage, seeing the investment as financially disadvantageous given their low medical costs,” the study said.

“The insurance risk pool becomes disproportionately older and sicker, further increasing prices and driving insurers out until the system becomes unsustainable.”