Quote:
Originally Posted by txdot-guy
Do at a little research please.
The issue at hand is the enhanced ACA subsidies... Costs are likely to double for everyone.
|
Here's a little research for you, txdot:
ObamaCare Premiums Are Doubling? Don’t Believe It
The Democrats’ latest scare is based on a misleading study.
By Chris Jacobs
Oct. 20, 2025 5:26 pm ET
As the government shutdown drags on, Democrats claim that “premiums will double” if enhanced ObamaCare subsidies expire as scheduled on Dec. 31. That would be shocking if it were true, but it isn’t. The misleading claim is based on research by KFF, formerly the Kaiser Family Foundation. It ignores the sizable subsidy that the federal government will still provide to most exchange enrollees if the enhanced subsidies expire and overstates the expiration’s effect on most households.
On Aug. 6, KFF published an analysis showing “a median proposed premium increase of 18%” for insurers’ exchange plans. But
on Sept. 30, several of the same researchers issued a second report with a headline asserting that “premium payments would more than double” if enhanced subsidies expire. What happened?
Did premium estimates for 2026 rise sixfold in one month?
No. KFF’s second study was misleading. It used cleverly parsed terms—“premium payments” rather than “premiums”—to conflate total premiums with enrollees’ out-of-pocket payments. The two aren’t the same. Focusing on the latter to the exclusion of the former, as the September study did, omits important context.
And the researchers know it. I asked
Cynthia Cox, a KFF vice president, about a graphic on the foundation’s home page warning “premiums will more than double.” Ms. Cox
acknowledged the claim was inaccurate and said “we do plan to update the graphic to be more precise.” KFF didn’t advertise the correction and edited the graphic without publicly disclosing its error.
KFF’s own work demonstrates that the federal government will still pay the vast majority of most enrollees’ premiums if the enhanced subsidies, first enacted under the Biden administration in 2021, end. Its analysis last July found that in 2024 the enhanced subsidies paid an average of 88% of enrollees’ overall premiums. Without them, the federal government would have paid an average of 78% of enrollees’ premiums last year. KFF hasn’t published a more recent analysis, but other groups have confirmed that federal dollars will continue to pay the lion’s share of most enrollees’ premiums if the enhanced subsidies expire.
Focusing solely on percentages also obscures the difference between absolute and relative increases in out-of-pocket enrollee spending. In many ways, the large projected cost increases in percentage terms reinforce the richness of the enhanced subsidy regime, under which nearly half of enrollees qualify for zero-dollar (free) benchmark coverage.
Most exchange enrollees will face moderate increases in out-of-pocket costs in dollar terms. KFF estimated that the average enrollee will pay $1,016 more per year, or $84.67 more per month. A separate study from the Urban Institute concluded that households with incomes below 250% of the poverty level—who receive the richest subsidies, and comprise roughly three-quarters of all exchange enrollees—will pay an average of $750 more a year, or $62.50 monthly.
In response to my request, the KFF researchers claimed they couldn’t quantify the financial effect on the median enrollee. But given the results from KFF and the Urban Institute, most households will likely face increases of $50 to $100 a month.
Some will face more-substantial costs if the enhanced subsidies expire. Whereas ObamaCare limited subsidy eligibility to households with incomes below four times the poverty level, the enhanced subsidies eliminated that cap. If the enhanced subsidies expire, the cap would return, and households with incomes just above it could face thousands of dollars in heightened costs. But even here, KFF data show that such households represent a mere 7% of enrollees. The Urban Institute estimated that the uninsured rate among this cohort would rise only modestly, because they “are more likely to pick up coverage from an employer” and “are more willing to pay the full premium.”
Reasonable people can disagree about the wisdom of a $50 to $100 monthly cost increase for households of modest means. But given the
Congressional Budget Office’s estimate that 2.3 million exchange enrollees “improperly claimed” subsidies “via intentional overstatement of income” this year, allowing the “free” benchmark coverage provision to lapse—requiring households to pay something toward their health insurance—seems necessary to combat fraud.
The left’s apocalyptic rhetoric about the expiration of the enhanced subsidies belies that federal taxpayers will still subsidize three-quarters of enrollees’ premium costs.
KFF’s misleading claim about premiums’ doubling echoes the maxim of not letting a good crisis go to waste, even if one has to use deceptive rhetoric to overstate the supposed “crisis.” Taxpayers footing the bill for ObamaCare subsidies shouldn’t be fooled by the scaremongering of the welfare-industrial complex.
Mr. Jacobs is founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group, a consulting firm
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/obamacar...ve-it-6a7316d7
