What Happened to the Federal Risk Pools?
This is Sarah Kliff (at Ezra Klein’s blog):
The crowds never showed and the program’s enrollment has lagged far behind projections. The chief actuary for Medicare initially estimated that 375,000 people would sign up by the end of 2010. As of Oct. 1, only 41,427 have enrolled.
A new report from the Government Accountability Office explores why that happened, suggesting that the speed and intensity with which the program was rolled out may explain the dismal enrollment numbers.
I have a different explanation: We have made it so easy for people to get insurance after they get sick that the need for a risk pool isn’t all that great.
John, I agree with you.
The administration should be happy. This is proof that the need was not nearly as great as everyone thought it was.
Somthing tells me, though, that they are not happy.
When the initial reports of the federal high-risk pools’ dismal enrollment were just coming out, I read an anecdote about an activist who had campaigned for the federal, high-risk pools. The man supported the idea of affordable coverage for people with health problems because he was HIV positive. Once a high-risk pool became available, he discovered that the monthly premium was going to be between $300 and $400. He balked at the cost, complaining that the rpemiums were similar to the payment on a used car. The activist continued to use hospital emergency rooms.
The writer reporting the story was perplexed; why would someone with a serious medical condition like HIV not be willing to pay the monthly equivalent of a used car for health coverage? This is an example of the paradox that Americans have towards health insurance and health care. We want expensive, top-quality medical care paid for with OPM (other people’s money).
I believe the numbers are far below predictions because Obamacare (and socialized healthcare systems in general) assume all individuals share the same desire and motivation for healthcare. Its an “if we build it, they will come” mentality when, in fact, individuals pursuit of medical care is dependent upon a multitude of factors not easily observable or measurable.
Medical providers know this–(Medicare/Medicaid knows this too) The blissfully unaware, obstinate, deniers and noncompliant of all ages, races, regions, income levels, etc. will always be with us and are a large portion of the chronically uninsured. But, that won’t stop the do- gooders from continuing on the road to hell paved with good intentions.
What risk pool. How can enrollment be expected when few people know about such a program?
This is a prime example of the failure of leftist policy because the left does not understand the dispersement of knowledge in society and how individual actors recieve and use knowledge. They presume a collectivist mentality.
“We have made it so easy for people to get insurance after they get sick that the need for a risk pool isn’t all that great.”
Could you substantiate this? I know who people who were unable to get health insurance in the individual market.
Steve
Steve: That statement cannot be substantiated and I agree with you. The biggest objection I found was having to go six months without coverage. No one with a chronic condition, who has coverage now, but wants something cheaper, can go that long without insurance.
Hey, folks, more than 90 percent of private health insurance is group insurance obtained through an employer. Employers are not allowed to discriminate against employees because of a health condition.
Geez, where did that 90% figure come from – sources please.
I don’t know that much about the details of this plan, and how it is pooled with the rest of the ACA regarding risk pooling, but a risk pool on its own doesn’t seem that sustainable – Putting all the bad risks in one basket may enable that pool will fail on it’s own. Though, again, it may be sustained through another part of the aca.
Also, not sure about Carolyn’s ‘leftist policy’ remark since similar implementation snafu’s existed for Medicare Part D – another government, Republican, program. The private sector is also not immune to such gaps and gaffes either.
My point was, and a point can be made on the anti-ACA side, that there are many items contained in the ACA that have not been very well marketed – the 5 W’s would be great. I know that I am not always on top of what every bill contains but the onus is eventually on each individual to know how any law impacts them and society as a whole- United right?