As far as "government is exerting more control", if you don't think a huge system of mandates, regulations, and condtional subsidies is more control, then I find it hard to take you seriously.
As for higher cost there have been plenty of links posted here. But I can always add a few more
-----
"From the perspective of insurance companies, implementation of Obamacare will mean an average increase of 32 percent in the cost of medical claims per person by 2017, according to a study released Tuesday by the Society of Actuaries (SOA). But that figure will vary dramatically state by state, depending on how states handle their high-risk pools, which are then folded into the individual market under the reform. The cost of claims drives the price of health-care premiums.
“The projections in this study suggest that when the dust settles by 2017, we can expect mixed results on the reform bill’s goals of expanding coverage and reducing costs,” says Kristi Bohn, consulting health staff fellow at SOA, in the report.
In the SOA model, what are currently considered “low-cost states,” such as Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, will see a large increase in the cost of medical claims – 80.9 percent for Ohio, 80 percent for Wisconsin, and 67.6 percent for Indiana. But the current “high-cost states” will see the average cost of medical claims go down. The biggest decrease, 13.9 percent, is projected for New York, followed by Massachusetts, with a 12.8 percent decrease."
csmonitor.com
"More than half of the counties in 34 states using the federal health insurance exchange lack even a bronze plan that's affordable — by the government's own definition — for 40-year-old couples who make just a little too much for financial assistance, a USA TODAY analysis shows.
Many of these counties are in rural, less populous areas that already had limited choice and pricey plans, but many others are heavily populated, such as Bergen County, N.J., and Philadelphia and Milwaukee counties.
More than a third don't offer an affordable plan in the four tiers of coverage known as bronze, silver, gold or platinum for people buying individual plans who are 50 or older and ineligible for subsidies.
Those making more than 400% of the federal poverty limit — $47,780 for an individual or $61,496 for a couple — are ineligible for subsidies to buy insurance.
The USA TODAY analysis looked at whether premiums for the least expensive plan in any of the metal levels was more than 8% of household income. That's similar to the affordability test used by the federal government to determine whether premiums are so expensive consumers aren't required to buy plans under the Affordable Care Act.
The number of people who earn close to the subsidy cutoff and are priced out of affordable coverage may be a small slice of the estimated 4.4 million people buying their own insurance and ineligible for subsidies. But the analysis clearly shows how the sticker shock hitting many in the middle class, including the self-employed and early retirees, isn't just a perception problem. The lack of counties with affordable plans means many middle-class people will either opt out of insurance or pay too much to buy it.
The prices of exchange plans have shocked many shoppers, especially those who had plans canceled because they did not meet the ACA coverage requirements. But experts are not surprised.
"The ACA was not designed to reduce costs or, the law's name notwithstanding, to make health insurance coverage affordable for the vast majority of Americans," says health care consultant Kip Piper, a former government and insurance industry official. "The law uses taxpayer dollars to lower costs for the low-income uninsured but it also increases costs overall and shifts costs within the marketplace." "
usatoday.com
In 35 percent of the nation’s counties, exchange enrollees will have a choice of plans from only two insurers—a duopoly. In 17 percent of counties, consumers will have no choice—a monopoly—as only one carrier is offering coverage in the exchange. Consequently, for many Americans, real choice will be very limited in the Obamacare exchanges.
Obamacare’s mandated benefits further limit choice and lead to the standardization of insurance plans. The law’s mandates create not only a benefit “floor” but also a benefit “ceiling.” That is because insurers are unlikely to add additional benefits that would further increase costs and put them at a disadvantage compared to their competitors. The standardization of benefits combined with a lack of insurer competition means consumers in Obamacare’s exchanges will have very little choice.
The lack of competition among insurers in the exchanges also decreases pressure to keep costs down. This is in addition to significant premium increases for a majority of consumers in a majority of states from Obamacare’s added benefit requirements, new insurance rating rules, and new taxes and fees.[5]
A recent Heritage study found that 42 of the 47 states for which comparable premium data is available will see significant average premium increases—in many cases, over 100 percent—for individuals purchasing from the exchanges.[6] Competition has the ability to lower costs and improve quality,[7] but Obamacare exchanges do not achieve this goal.
heritage.org
But middle-income consumers face an estimated 30% rate increase, on average, in California due to several factors tied to the healthcare law.
Some may elect to go without coverage if they feel prices are too high. Penalties for opting out are very small initially. Defections could cause rates to skyrocket if a diverse mix of people don't sign up for health insurance.
Pam Kehaly, president of Anthem Blue Cross in California, said she received a recent letter from a young woman complaining about a 50% rate hike related to the healthcare law.
"She said, 'I was all for Obamacare until I found out I was paying for it,'" Kehaly said.
articles.latimes.com
The combined result, Mast said, has been that companies have increased rates. According to the latest data measuring individual plans sold through eHealth, the average monthly cost of a premium without a government subsidy was $275, up 39 percent from a year ago.
The average cost of a family plan jumped from $426 to $663 between this time last year and now.
Mast said the entire increase probably cannot be attributed to the new law, since health costs were rising before it took effect. “It’s hard for us to parse that out with actual numbers,” he said.
But since health insurance costs were increasing an average rate of 8 percent to 9 percent a year, Mast said, most of the increase likely is due to the law.
Mast said it is interesting to watch the average cost on the eHealth Index change over time because the actual prices do not change from month to month. Instead, he said, the difference results from the plans that people actually purchase.
“It’s not about how the companies are pricing the plans. Out data is about what people are choosing,” he said. “It’s really an indication of what people can afford with these rates. … I think that’s the most interesting thing about it.”
blog.al.com
In the last 12 months average premiums for individual plans increased 37% and average family premiums were upped 56%. So they have risen faster under ObamaCare than in the previous eight years combined.
aun-tv.com
One of the most serious flaws with ObamaCare is that its hurricane of regulations and mandates drives up the cost of insurance for people who buy it on their own. This problem will be especially acute when the law's main provisions kick in on January 1, 2014, leading many to worry about health insurance "rate shock."
The ObamaCare-compatible insurance exchange released the rates that Californians will have to pay to enroll in the exchange.
"The rates submitted to Covered California for the 2014 individual market," the state said in a press release, "ranged from 2 percent above to 29 percent below the 2013 average premium for small employer plans in California's most populous regions."
That's the sentence that led to all of the triumphant commentary from the left.
"This is a home run for consumers in every region of California," said Lee.
Except that Lee was making a misleading comparison. He was comparing apples (the plans that Californians buy today for themselves in a robust individual market) and oranges (the highly regulated plans that small employers purchase for their workers as a group). The difference is critical.
If you're a 25-year-old male non-smoker, buying insurance for yourself, the cheapest plan on ObamaCare's exchanges is the catastrophic plan, which costs an average of $184 a month.
The next cheapest plan, the "bronze" comprehensive plan, costs $205 a month.
But in 2013, on eHealthInsurance.com, the median cost of the five cheapest plans was only $92.
In other words, for the typical 25-year-old male non-smoking Californian, ObamaCare will drive premiums up by between 100 percent and 123 percent.
Supporters of ObamaCare justified passage of the law because one insurer in California raised rates on some people by as much as 39 percent. But ObamaCare itself more than doubles the cost of insurance on the individual market.
ncpa.org
Yes, Obamacare Will Make Premiums Go Up
rpc.senate.gov |
