Monday, January 6, 2014
New study from Harvard University showing that Medicare patients used the Emergency Room 40% more than people with no insurance, which is about the exact opposite negative number projected by the Democrats when they were selling ObamaCare as cutting long term healthcare costs. And the study showed the vast majority of those ER visits were non-emergency issues better suited for a primary care physician. Opponents (including me) had predicted that with fewer 'in network' options, non-emergency use of ER services would increase, not decrease. If this trend plays out across the country, ObamaCare will increase US healthcare expense and place additional stress on ER service providers. Expect to see more privately owned, non-critical ER centers open up that do not accept Medicare patients, as people with good insurance will look to avoid the chaos of hospital ERs and seek out a higher level of service.
When asked about the cost reduction claims made in selling Obamacare to the public Vs the finding of the published Harvard study, Jonathan Gruber, health economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and considered co-author of the Affordable Care Act along with Dr. Zeke Emanuel said, "That was sometimes a misleading motivator for the Affordable Care Act. The law isn't designed to save money. It's designed to improve health, and that's going to cost money."
And here is the other shoe waiting to drop. The government's own estimate, from June 17, 2010, on how many people on group health care plans will lose their plan when that mandate kicks in. This screen shot of the Federal Register shows the odds of you losing your group plan, as well as confirms that whole, "If you like your plan..." was known at the time to be a complete lie, and EVERYONE in the government knew it.
If I were a cynical person, I'd suspect that is why President Obama pushed the deadline for the employer mandate until after the 2014 midterm elections.