Healthcare insurance expert Bob Laszewski summarizes what appears to be the status of the PPACA:
As I reported on this blog yesterday, starting with the administration’s more recent enrollment total of 4 million, less than 15% of the 17.2 million people the Kaiser Family Foundation has estimated are eligible for subsidies have signed-up and paid for coverage––and many of these people who were eligible for subsidies were also previously insured.
The uninsured just aren’t buying Obamacare.
I believe they are not buying it because the premium––even net of the subsidies––is too much for plans that have deductibles that are too high. Consulting firm Avalere has put the average Silver Plan deductible at $2,567 and the average Bronze Plan deductible at $4,545. People are often being asked to pay hundreds of dollars per month in premium, net of subsidies, and they don’t see the value.
Hat tip: Megan McArdle. I think they’re not buying it because one of the assumptions underlying the PPACA was incorrect. The PPACA assumes that lots of people want healthcare insurance but aren’t able to afford it. I think that lots of people want healthcare but aren’t able to afford it. Not insurance, care.
He ends his post with what I think is a bit of wishful thinking:
Starting in April, when the final numbers are in, I hope we can have a meaningful conversation over how to fix the new health insurance reform law that is clearly not working.
That’s wishful thinking for any number of reasons. For example, what makes him think that we’ll have the “final numbers” in April? The open enrollment period could be extended, then extended again, indefinitely. Even if the open enrollment period isn’t extended the final numbers might never become available. And, most importantly, rather than starting a “meaningful conversation” I think that a lot of the PPACA’s supporters are more likely to double down on a plan “that is clearly not working” than to acknowledge that their assumptions were wrong to begin with and that they’ve been exerting all that energy defending a law that solved the wrong problem.