Sullivan: “Maybe there was some flim-flam about there being no trade-offs in Obamacare, especially for the young and healthy” Print This Post Email This Post


Andrew Sullivan concludes that flim-flam about “trade-offs” for the young and healthy may have occurred regarding the passage of ObamaCare, but that it’s OK, because the more expensive plans, with more coverage, are better. Thus, you have the essential consensus of the liberal to moderate media on this point.

It also is largely irrelevant to the predicting the actual behavior of the healthy under ObamaCare’s price increases.

For example, the LA Times online poll this morning, associated with their story, “The Affordable Care Act’s Challenge: Getting Young Adults to Enroll,” has the results at 50% saying yes, the young should buy health insurance, and 50% saying no, the young adults should not buy health insurance. This result, if half of the young and healthy signed up, will kill ObamaCare, dead. The cost of the subsidies for the premiums of the sick that would be in the pool will crush ObamaCare financially.

Given the poll reported by CNBC, that found that two-thirds of the uninsured are not sure if they will insure under ObamaCare — points to the main flaw in the great liberal consensus that all the uninsured will apply for the subsidies and get insurance since it will be offered to them, is just, well, fiction.

As in, not true.

You know, fantasyland.

And it is not just this CNBC poll that has found these results. The vast majority of states that tried guaranteed issue combined with community rating found themselves with only one or two insurers within five to seven years, and then they repealed those provisions of their own health care reform law.

Then, in addition to the failed past attempts to do what ObamaCare is now doing and the recent and clear polling data, there is the conclusion of the Congressional Budget Office that over the next ten years, 30 million Americans will remain uninsured.

That is, the uninsured will not comply with the mandate in ObamaCare.

So, Jonathan Cohn and Ezra Klein can rage against Avik Roy all they want, but it is merely a smoke screen to obscure one of the many fatal flaws that is part of the ObamaCare DNA, one which will destroy ObamaCare.

Once the public finds out they lost their plan they liked and are paying a huge premium price not to insure 30 million Americans, the Democrat strategy to “own” ObamaCare will produce predictable political results.

By the way, the recent polls and the CBO prediction about 30 million Americans remaining uninsured for the next decade confirm that Greg Scandlen was right, ObamaCare will not reduce the number of the uninsured, or as he put it, “ObamaCare is unlikely to increase the number of people with insurance.”

But hey, the Andrew Sullivans, Ezra Kliens and Jonathan Cohns of the world can be smug and happy that the insured are forced to buy “better” plans — not withstanding the fact that these “better” plans will force 30 million Americans to be uninsured.

Essentially, if the Cohns, Kliens and Sullivans really believe that more expensive plans that do not keep the moral promise made when passing ObamaCare, that it will insure the uninsured, then, as Domenech wrote recently: “All Obamacare has to do to survive any and all policy assaults, is work the way it was promised. If it does, the American people will respond, and the poll numbers will shift. In the meantime, it does the left no good to write off serious people like Roy or to pretend that these premium increases broadly are not a problem, or that the American people simply misunderstood what they were promised in the process of passing the legislation.”