Urban Institute Study Only Counts Part of ObamaCare Premiums When Comparing Them to Employer Plans
In a new report, scholars from the Urban Institute claim ObamaCare premiums “are 10 percent below average employer premiums nationally.” There is variation among states. The authors report ObamaCare premiums are actually higher in 12 states, by as much as 68 percent.
At Forbes.com, I explain the Urban scholars aren’t making the “apples to apples” comparison they claim to be:
The Urban Institute study instead engages in what my Cato Institute colleague Arnold Kling calls a game of “hide the premium.” As ACA architect Jonathan Gruber explained, “This bill was written in a tortured way” to create a “lack of transparency” because “if…you made explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.” When it did pass, it was due to what Gruber called the “huge political advantage” that comes from hiding how much voters are paying, as well as ”the stupidity of the American voter.”
That lack of transparency has allowed supporters to claim the ACA is providing coverage to millions who are so sick that insurance companies previously wouldn’t cover them, while simultaneously claiming Exchange coverage is no more expensive than individual‐market coverage prior to the ACA or than employer‐sponsored coverage. When we incorporate the full premium for Exchange plans, the smoke clears and we see Exchange coverage is indeed more expensive than employer‐sponsored coverage. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.
If you think this is fun, just imagine the shell games we could play with a public option.
