Pages

Monday, May 14, 2012

Did You Know; Members of Congress/Federal Employees have to Give Up their Health Care Plans for Insurance Exchanges in “Obamacare.”

I didn’t know anything about this surprising feature. I like it. And ironically, Republicans were the ones who added this interesting wrinkle to the Affordable Care Act. They were basically saying to the Democrats; if you like it so much, you’ll have to buy into it. Oops, but so will they, and the taxpayer supported Republican freeloaders in congress want out.

Add to that the possibility that the Supreme Court Justices will also have to shop for insurance. Guess what side the conservative activist, legislating from the bench justices will come down on the law?
It doesn’t stand a chance of passing:
Philly: The Supreme Court, which is expected to issue its decision in June, gets its health insurance through the same plan available to members of Congress and other federal employees … In one little-known feature of the law, however, members of Congress would have to leave the generous federal plan and obtain their coverage through online insurance exchanges, or markets, if the law is upheld. The law mandates the establishment of exchanges in each of the states as a means for consumers to shop for health coverage, comparing costs and features of competing plans. “It is more of a gesture to show that members of Congress are willing to experience what ordinary Americans are willing to accept,” said Mark Pauly, professor of health care management at Wharton, referring to the requirement that Congress exit the federal employee health plan.

The federal government spends some $50 billion a year to provide health care coverage to eight million federal workers, retirees and their independents under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan.

“They are pretty decent plans,” said Pauly, of the federal health insurance plan. Pauly asserts one reason federal health plans offer relatively generous benefits, and stack up well against those in the private sector is that federal workers on average are paid less than private sector employees; the difference is made up in benefits. The only change would be the requirement that members of Congress exit the plan and obtain coverage from the exchanges. The exact details of how members will purchase insurance, and from which exchanges, have yet to be worked out.

But Joseph Antos, a health care policy analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank based in Washington, said that language was inserted by Republicans to make a point. “The reason that provision was adopted was purely political,” Antos said. “It was purely for Republicans to say to Democrats that if you like this so much, you should live with it too.”

3 comments:

  1. Seems to me that this feature of the Afforable Care Act alone ought to have been enough for an ethical (yeah, I know) Supreme Court to have declined the case, since the justices are personally affected financially by the outcome. Recuse! But we shouldn't hold our breaths.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Keep in mind that many insurance companies love O Care. It provides a steady stream of revenue. It would be in their best financial interests to approve it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. They shouldn't love it. Doctor and hospitals are combining into independent insurance groups themselves, where they don't need the old middle man in place.

    Any change is promoting change as well, so the Affordable Care Act has actually done more in that aspect than doing nothing.

    But then, the court is going to bring it down. It's just part of their ideology, nothing more.

    ReplyDelete