• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Point-By-Point: The Case Against Obamacare

    Two years ago, Congress and President Obama rushed to pass the enormous 2,700-page health care law that most didn’t even have time to read. As time has passed, Heritage experts have analyzed the law and written extensively on the need for its repeal. The major components of Heritage’s Case Against Obamacare are summarized below.

    Individual Mandate: Obamacare includes a requirement that everyone buy government-approved health insurance or face a penalty. This mandate is unconstitutional and violates personal liberty.

    Employer Mandate: Obamacare includes a requirement that employers with 50 or more employees provide government-approved health insurance or face a fine. This mandate will hit workers through lower wages and fewer jobs, shareholders through lower profits, and consumers through higher prices.

    Health Care Subsidies: Obamacare spends more than $400 billion in the first 10 years to subsidize health insurance offered through government-designed exchanges. The design of these subsidies reinforces the current inequities in the tax code and creates new ones that will discourage work and encourage employers to discontinue offering health insurance.

    Medicaid Expansion: Obamacare requires states to expand an already broken Medicaid program that is squeezing state budgets and providing poor-quality care. More than half of the reduction in uninsured under Obamacare comes from expanding this failing welfare program.

    Medicare Cuts: Obamacare cuts more than $500 billion from Medicare—not to shore up Medicare’s long-term solvency, but to pay for new spending in Medicaid and new health care subsidies. These payment cuts are unsustainable and will jeopardize seniors’ access to care and services.

    Independent Payment Advisory Board: Obamacare puts in place an unelected board to reduce payments to Medicare providers. These major payment decisions will ultimately impact seniors’ ability to access care and services.

    CLASS Act: Obamacare creates a new long-term care entitlement program for all Americans. The program is actuarially unsound and fiscally irresponsible. Its flawed design has led the Administration to put its implementation on hold.

    New Taxes: Obamacare includes more than $500 billion in new taxes. Many of these new taxes will be passed on to consumers in higher prices, while others will lead to higher tax rates on work and investment and discourage economic growth.

    Government Regulation and Benefit Mandates: Obamacare adds layers of regulation and benefit mandates on insurers and the insurance market and on employer health plans. Together, these provisions will increase costs, destabilize the market, and reduce consumer choice.

    Posted in Featured, Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    18 Responses to Point-By-Point: The Case Against Obamacare

    1. Michael Elliot says:

      not a single fact to back up any of these claims. What a joke.

      • Laura Henning says:

        Mr. Elliot, if you would bother to read the voluminous amount of fact-filled material Heritage has published on line about Obamacare through the years, you would understand that what you say is a joke. Get your facts straight before you make such a claim.

      • Bobbie says:

        these are the facts when obama's government run health care with government insurance fraud goes through. just because your narrow thinking is narrowly focused on your understanding the collective calls "benefit" today, is much less quality and less service = less beneficial than when people covered it for themselves, leaves you ignorant to the massive consequences from unlimited costs to questionable care nationalized health care puts on many others. It's already tripled our costs so you might leach yours through government for free. Compliments from government control, not compliments from me. Time to wake up, man!

        Ooh, I just heard a lady with Herman Cain on Neil Boortz say, "you can't be compassionate with other peoples money, you can only be a thief."!!!!! How so true!!!!!! Thieves of America! Lets use "the trickle down effect" starting with government authority!

    2. Jared says:

      What about the nationalization of student loans? Can that be one of the points?

    3. joelsk44039 says:

      I think this piece says it all. No further comment is necessary.

    4. Herbster says:

      Can you spell "Rationing?" This is the only way to sustain this leftist scam. Seniors will be hardest hit through denial of services. Cheaper to bury than to cure. Can Solyent Green be far behind? If you are not a Senior, beware! The age to qualify you as a "Senior" will drop, and continue to drop incrementally as costs rise.

      Look at the UK system….inefficient and broke. Canada is gradually returning to a market driven system. We are heading down a leftist rathole. I predict that the Supreme Court will either uphold obama-no-care in its entirety, or strike down a portion, or portions in such a way that it is easily resurrected. Republicans, under the present congressional leadership, have been bought and paid for. Term limits, anyone?

    5. Lloyd Scallan says:

      It really doesn't matter that we know what ObamaCare will do to destroy this nation. No one, not the Republicans in Congress, their hand picked candidate, or certainly not the Democrats, will do anything to repeal it. They won't even challange the latest Supreme Court Justice who clearly was involved in drafting the final bill.

      • Herbster says:

        Obviously, the fix is in. Our government is out of control. We have raised the Supreme Court to be the be all and emd all when the founders wanted the judiciary to be the weakest branch. Congress is useless. Obama governs by fiat and the republicans cower in fear of being forced to actually do something. Term limits, anyone?

        Am I the only one that senses the 1930's here? The most frightening words I hear uttered now are, "It cna't happen here."

        Remember, without the Second Amendment there will be no First Amendment. Besides, who pays attention to the Constitution anymore? We even have a Supreme Court justice denigrating it.

    6. Bob Bartlett says:

      Worst of all HHS can change anything, anytime, by issuing new rules. Congress has no control, or say in this matter at all !!!

    7. wayne armstrong says:


    8. David Biondo says:

      The need to even drag ourselves into the weeds of a debate is foolhardy. We have all of the information we need from Europe and Canada for the costs around any new system, except they pay less than we do on hard costs (pharma and medical technology). If we extrapolate their cost structures to cover 350 million people (US population 2020) and add to the enormous costs of changing the system we currently have why would we doubt it's going to cost taxpayers (50% of the US population) TRILLIONS. It's also going to cost us trillions in revenue. Every European country has much, much higher unemployment than we have and that is obviously a structural issue. See Greece, Spain, France, Italy and Germany for what happens when you try to make structural changes.

    9. Chris Rowan says:

      Some people just want to watch it all burn.

    10. Ally Goforth says:

      There are many reasons why Obama’s health care plan is not suitable for the United States of America at this time.
      First of all, this plan is not economically feasible for us right now. America simply cannot afford to give more handouts. Following through with this plan as it stands will increase the national debt by a significant amount – an amount that we aren’t prepared to handle. According to a report done by the Congressional Budget Office, Obamacare as it stands would add a total of $341 billion to the federal deficit by the year 2019. By itself, the legislation would add $226 billion to our national debt. However, the cost of implementing the legislation would increase that figure by about $115 billion; this brings the grand total to $341 billion. In my opinion, any legislation that adds $341 trillion to the deficit and is not completely necessary for the relative success of the country has no business being passed and/or implemented.
      Secondly, Obamacare would cost Americans money, and lots of it. Obviously, American taxpayers are directly affected by the national debt. Because Obamacare would contribute to the growth of the national debt, it would directly contribute to the growth of the amount U. S. citizens are asked to offer up in taxes. Also according to the Congressional Budget office, Obamacare would cost Americans as a whole approximately $500 billion in new taxes. Many citizens are having trouble affording life’s necessities as it is without having to pay extra in taxes.
      Employers in general are also found in this legislation’s line of fire. Robert Pear, in the article “Study Points to Health Law’s Penalties,” published in the New York Times, states the following: “About one third of employers subject to major requirements of the new health care law may face tax penalties because they offer health insurance that could be considered unaffordable to some employees.” Penalties to businesses increase under this legislation. America’s small businesses cannot afford this spike in costs; our small businesses find themselves under a ridiculous amount of regulation as it is. When our employers are hurting, it hurts our employers, their employees, and their customers. We all economically fall in one of those categories or are directly affected by people who do fall in one of those categories. Obamacare would also increase premiums for employees who do not carry employer-based insurance. Also, the Congressional Budget Office has stated that this legislation would cause about nine million Americans to lose any insurance that they may already have.
      Hospitals would also realize and suffer from increased costs under Obamacare. Our hospitals are already facing enough costs as it is. Our emergency rooms are already too crowded. Our hospital rooms, beds, and hallways are already too crowded. Last year, during a visit to my local hospital’s emergency room for kidney stones, I spoke to an ER doctor. He proceeded to tell me how frustrating it was for the hospital to have to treat every person who decided they needed to come into the ER on any given day. He even cited examples of people who would come in daily simply out of boredom or loneliness. One man in particular had made 374 visits to the emergency room last year alone. That’s right – that means he came in even more than once a day. His reason? He “needed Vicodin,” for a different pain each time. What he really needed, or should I say wanted, was a supplier so he could get high for free. Being homeless, he wasn’t really held responsible for any costs he inflicted on the hospital, which totaled to over one million dollars in 2011 alone. This was one small hospital in rural northern California; if this is happening there, we can bet that it’s happening elsewhere on even larger scales. Our hospitals simply cannot afford to be put under the burden of extra costs.
      Lastly, Obamacare indirectly impairs and deteriorates the quality of health care that is available. Putting more people into the health care system is going to increase the number of people trying to receive health care – this is an obvious side effect. Because of this, wait times will increase. Because of increased wait times, it is likely that medical professionals will be in an ever-increasing rush to treat as many patients as possible. As quick as office visits sometimes have to be and as long as wait times are now under the current health care system, these times will approach the extremes under Obamacare. As stated above, emergency rooms are not always necessary, and apparently not all people realize that. Some people visit ERs for simple cold symptoms. These people increase wait times and overcrowding for those who truly need immediate assistance, again decreasing the standard of health care that the rest of us would be receiving. These are all unfavorable side effects of the unnecessary Obamacare legislation.
      If that wasn’t enough to prove that this just isn’t right for us, let me make one more point. Obamacare puts more of our lives into the hands of centralized government. It takes more control from us and gives it to the governmental and asks us to pay more government-imposed taxes, but only returns substandard health care and increased national debt. Seem like a good idea to you? Sure doesn’t to me.

    11. Grelbick Johnfjords says:

      The system we have now is broken. It benefits only the insurance companies, Big Pharma, shareholders, and whiney righties (especially the $30,000 per year dupes who think millionaires need tax breaks). Obama’s plan is not perfect, but then again anything that is attempted that helps the poor (especially women and people of color), the right will wail against. It’s too bad so many Americans have been trained to hate each other by right wing demagogues.

      • Make Your Own Way says:

        Well I for one am offended that you consider anyone who has a different view other than your own gets called names. I've counted three negative comments in your post. Talk about 'hating' each other. Furthermore, have you EVER been employed by a 'poor' person. I think not. Listen-when the wealthy get the tax cuts, they share the wealth with benefits and raises, just to name a couple. And why do you emphasize 'women' and 'people of color'? Because of this administration, there are more men who are unemployed than the depression! Let's face it, there has been a government health plan in place for decades-IT'S CALLED WELFARE. So my suggestion to you is to stop accusing others of hating when your comment is filled with venom. But then again, That is PAR-FOR-THE-COURSE! P.S. I honestly wonder if this 'law' doesn't bother you because you don't pay into taxes at the end of the year, therefore, it won't affect you at all. AT LEAST NOT YET!!!!!

    12. Nic says:

      Err…I don't understand what the fuss is about really.

      As someone from the UK, I'm quite glad everyone has access to coverage. Sure there is a cost, but isn't it better to support each other than to behave selfishly? So some of your tax dollars will be spent helping others, but it's definitely better than pumping money into defence spending.

      Anyway, some of the points made in this article are nonsensical:
      Individual Mandate violates personal liberty: The fact is, having insurance is a good thing, right? Not being covered is harmful to one's own wellbeing, right? If you agree to that, then the violation of personal liberty constituted by Obamacare is one that stops you from self-harm (in philosophical terms, this is undeniable). So yes, it is a violation, but it's not one you'd ever find me arguing against.

      Subsidies reinforce the current inequities in the tax code and creates new ones that will discourage work and encourage employers to discontinue offering health insurance.
      Well, I don't know what inequities this is talking about, so no comment, but the second point is daft. Why would employers discontinue provision of healthcare? They are mandated to to supply it. It's a nonsensical conclusion.

      The rest is all about tax and how it's bad for jobs and fiscally irresponsible. Oh, and how it will destabilise the market.
      Taxes: Most of the taxes are levied on high income earners and on extremely expensive, cover everything policies. The consumer won't feel the pinch, only the highest earners. It's redistributive, that's all. There's a fee on branded drugs, so only those will be more expensive, as well as those protected by IP (and they are already prohibitively expensive). Generic medicines will still be at the same price.

      The last thing is the reduction of Medicare and expansion of Medicaid… I don't really know about these, but why is there a big difference in how senior's get access to care?

      Lastly, there are all the good things that Obamacare does, like providing regulation and forcing private policies to provide better care.

      All in all, I think there are more pros than cons, and an awful lot of dishonest analysis on the part of the cons (though I must say, the coverage here is among the best I've read. Elsewhere is really bad).

    13. Concerned says:

      Lets just have more government in control of our lives that's the way! Stupid stupid

    14. mikec says:

      …oh, here we go…. Republicans are all "right wing demagogues"… (Grelbick Johnfjords)… Oh, Racist, and sexist as well…. Here lies the problem folks… Idiots like this, who will never break across lines of R or D, to work together for a solution… Bottom line, divided political parties, divide the country…. The "machine" (both war, and political) has created these oppositions to gather the sheep, like Grelbick Johnfjords, to keep complete control of who is in office… PERIOD! They learned their lesson from the Kennedy administration. A mistake the "Machine" will not make again…. So keep debating Romney, Obama… etc… blah blah, While both take orders from the private interest groups, NOT THE PEOPLE…. Hey, we are too busy arguing, and living with blind-folds, calling each other,,, uh, what was it Grelbick Johnfjords? ah, demagogues! I love this country, and wouldnt want to live anywhere else… However, if we keep allowing the things i've stated to continue, guess I'd better learn to speak Chinese.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.