• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Side Effects: Another Obamacare Initiative Bites the Dust

    On Monday, the Obama Administration signaled that another part of its signature health care law may not be working out as planned. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) put an end to a program that offered a $100 incentive to insurance brokers and agents for recommending eligible people to Obamacare’s Pre-Existing Conditions Insurance Plan (PCIP).

    Obamacare created the PCIP, commonly called a high-risk pool, as a temporary way to cover those with pre-existing or chronic conditions before 2014, when insurance companies will be prohibited from excluding people based on health conditions.

    In an explanation of the Administration’s decision, Ryan Young, senior director of federal government affairs for the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, stated, “They just said enrollment’s up to where we want it to be, basically, and we don’t need your services anymore.”

    This is interesting given that thus far, the PCIP has largely been a failure. The Administration claims that as many as one in two Americans, or 129 million people, could suffer from pre-existing conditions. Of these, the Medicare actuary predicted that 375,000 would enroll in the new program offering them coverage. Instead, enrollment stands at 15 percent of the actuary’s estimate, with only 56,257 enrollees. And that’s after eligibility requirements and premiums were lowered the previous year to encourage more to participate.

    But despite the gross overestimation of enrollment, the program is still very pricey, because as it turns out, the per-person cost of coverage was underestimated. According to a report by the Administration, the cost per person in the high-risk pool is 2.5 times greater than originally estimated. This serious miscalculation of the high-risk pool’s costs raises concerns that covering the uninsured once the rest of the law goes online in 2014 will also be much more expensive than originally predicted.

    The fact that the Administration is pulling back incentives to enroll in its high-risk pool may signify its acceptance that the pre-existing condition problem is nowhere near as big as it was portrayed during the health care debate. This is yet another reminder that Obamacare isn’t just terrible health policy with disastrous consequences; it’s overreaching, taxpayer-funded programs that our country didn’t need.

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    26 Responses to Side Effects: Another Obamacare Initiative Bites the Dust

    1. O2BMe says:

      What else can you expect from a program put together behind closed doors in the dark and consists of 2000+ pages no one has even read. Do you think it would have helped if Obama had kept his promise to go over it line by line?

      • Related factor or Not.? Obama Appointed FDA Margaret Hamburg, in 2009 refused to


        or recall compensate for the many misdiagnosed given wronge kind of treatment & Drugs to make matter worse that

        have use of mercury used in dental work known as Amalgam Note: those “silver fillings” aren’t silver. Its mainly

        mercury ! Time released poison…. how many are on welfare programs

        The health problems reads like the nightmare of Gulf war syndrome ,pain, Ringing ear's, thyroid that is big factor

        of Overweight

        And Diabetes & More like Birth defects, memory problems, Mental Illness problems etc

    2. Bobbie says:

      Exactly right O2BMe!!!! this whole plan is based on NOTHING but speculation to sublimate Obama's agenda. Throw numbers to the wind and everyone believes. Preventive care is dangerous outside ones control and obviously isn't worth monetary means as government involvement creates crisis that can derive illness more than prevent them.

      • Captain Communism says:

        You should reply to a comment under that comment. What are you trying to share your comment with the world? That is communism

    3. smitty says:

      Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35
      January 10, 1963
      Current Communist Goals
      15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
      16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
      19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
      20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
      21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
      24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
      25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
      26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
      27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
      28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
      29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
      30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
      31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
      32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
      36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
      38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
      39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
      40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
      41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
      42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.
      Can you see where this is going? Can you see the current push in these directions? Open your eyes!

      • Stirling says:

        Thanks for posting that.. Their goals were never stoped, they just went underground until they could change our Anti-Communist culture.

    4. vesuvius13 says:

      It is clear now that the programs have started to be put in place that the administration over stated the problem while under stating the cost. They took a problem with insurance as a reason to rework the whole system when we would be far better off with small changes directed to each problem. I am one of the Americans with a chronic pre-existing condition but I am covered under my wife's insurance as many with my health problem have insurance already. The Obama administration wants single payer insurance to be run by gov't and they have tried to sneak it in the back door; hopefully the Supreme Court will knock it down and Congress can have a real and open debate on how to make our health care system work better.

    5. Obamacare was not designed for healthcare. Read it. It was designed to turn Obama into a dictator and Im going willingly to be his loyal subject while he spends us into bankruptcy. His new slogan should be "Let them eat cake"! Thats the Obamas attitude in my opinion.

    6. Keith Myatt says:

      The purpose of this legislation had nothing to do with healthcare. It was simply a way to take over 1/6 of the economy, driving insurance companiesa out of business.

    7. Gammi says:

      Last month I received my new Medicare policy information which had a substantial monthly premium increase. My network coverage went from full to partial. When I went to the pharmacy to get my prescription refills, my co-pay increased and some meds are no longer covered. I had to wait over a week to get authorization (not required before) for my diabetes medication. Three of the physicians I see are specialists. My co-pay increased from $35.00 to $45.00 each visit. The number of healthcare providers and facilities that accept Medicare are also very limited in my area, with some being a 4 hour drive from home or even in a different state. Did my cost increase so Obamacare could afford to the new enrollees under PCIP? I'm classified as a NPC (non productive citizen) under Obamacare, or one that will be eligible for comfort care only/genocide in the future. It doesn't matter that I started working when I was 12 y/o, entering nursing school while still in high school, and working for over 40 years in health care. I'm no longer a daughter, sister, wife, mother and grandmother. I'm a NPC.

      • Bobbie says:

        be careful, Gammi! I can't afford medications once a month so I have to extend them. When I recently went to pick up two prescriptions, they tried charging me twice as much at the pharmacy telling me my dosage was extended to 40 days?!! Nobody told me! It's none of their business how I handle my monthly supply! They were at liberty to change it back right away so I'm not sure yet, all who was behind this!!??

    8. Sgt. Flapjaw says:

      I think Obama needs to appoint a bunch of academics to write these type plans. They are real smart and getting smarter every day. Why just yesterday someone showed them which wat was up.

    9. Kevin Knauss says:

      Insuring over 56,000 people is not a failure. Not offering the $100 incentive to me as an agent is not a failure. The failure was the health insurance companies not covering these people on the first place.

      • Rationalist says:

        Maybe the other subscribers in those health plans didn't want to foot the bill for those people! Only a socialist would reason that others should be forced to pay higher premiums to please you and your agenda.

      • Helen Spingola says:

        The failure was electing this Liar=in=Chief in the first place! America weeps!!

      • Teresa Ruse says:

        So true! I do medical billing for a living…I've seen patients die with cancer, while prisoners get treatment.

        Why isn't there more advertisment for this plan? I know many people that could afford it but are not aware of it…

        I own my own business as well but I am uninsurable, thus I can NOT develop the business to where I want it to go and hire people…there goes the American Dream right out the door !

      • Lizzie1955 says:

        Sorry Kevin, any high risk person can purchase health insurance NOW. According to the insurance companies I spoke with they will sell anyone insurance. The problem is no one can afford the premiums. When I looked to purchase high risk insurance, the premium for my age was over $550.00 per month.
        This included a $5000.00 out of pocket before the 80/20% co-pay took affect. Prescription payments per year are capped. I calculated my cost per year to be over $12000.00 dollars. When you earn $23000.00 a year gross, it doesn't leave much room to pay medical cost. I'm still scratching my head. Premiums for a younger high risk person, lets say 23, pays over $200.00 less tan someone who is my age 57. Considering this person will be using funds for a longer number of years than I will, why are my premiums so high? Also some states such as Ohio chose to run the program and I'm not eligle for the same, may I add, better coverage than federal run programs offer. According to what I have read, each state is receiving the same amount of federal monies to run these programs, so why can't I have the same benefits as those living in other states? I have recently had a physician prescribe a medication that would cost me $578.00. per month. Am I taking it, no, It's a choice of dying from disease or starving to death.

    10. Tom Frazee says:

      The object of the program was to enable sick people who can't afford healthcare, to get the treatment they need? If they can't afford the cost of this plan, what would be a solution to this problem. If I'm understanding this, there are sick people in America who aren't eligible for care, because they are poor. Nothing against insurance companies, but, isn't it true that the busness of insurance more than doubles the cost of healthcare? Poverty is a wretched state of existence, but, it's not a sin. There seems to be a prejudice against the poor that weighs heavy in finding fault with their predicament, creating an environment of hatred. Now, that's sick!

      • Libby Eddins says:

        Could it be that there was an over-estimation of the need for such insurance (56K is very small percentage of population), or those affected don't recognize the need to be insured or simply feel that they are entitled and expect others to pay for their care. Personally, I always accept responsibility for my health needs–no matter your health status, that should be the case. "Programs" encourage people to think about how to get others to take care of them. There are many avenues to get care in the present system if you know how. We need more education in accessing the current system and realization that there are no free lunches.

      • Stirling says:

        Poverty in America can include having a car, stero, tv, and all sorts of goodies that does not scream "wretched existance." The ammount of money (in the Trillions of Dollars) put towards stamping out poverty in this country started in the 1950's.. and what do we have today? yep, poverty is still arround.. Thus one should assume that Government Intervention will not achive the desired goal..

        Americans are far from prejudiced against the poor, we give more in charity then any other nation (from the private sector), which is where true giving and help occurs that gets real results.. Get government out, and let the people do the work.

    11. Bobbie says:

      The prejudice stems from imagination that everyone poor is sick! Misleading and confusing everyone. Mr. Knauss and Mr. Frazee are confused and wrong. Mr. Knauss, if you need the country to pay you an incentive says you aren't a man of integrity. Insurance was always available. More enduring for the sickly but most sickly paying their own, don't take advantage of insurance. The government and their neglect to oversee, continues to allow insurance to take advantage of us! I'd rather the incompetence of government wasn't added to my health care.

      Mr. Frazee, it is very difficult not to have enough money for medications costs that the government causes to increase when the government overreaches unconstitutionally, to involve itself. It's very difficult to have insurance that changes to reflect the mandates and regulations the government has no reason to impose, causing outrageous out of pocket expenses with more work on the patient to keep those government make work jobs going. Those of us who know our illness isn't likely to carry us to retirement or social security are the ones forced to contend with specious, unconstitutional government control INVASION! The government and the costs of their intrusions are keeping us in poverty, because government control ABUSING GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY, can! Trust is when the doctor is better than taking government incentives by unconstitutional authority and when the doctor protects the patient by fighting off government involvement who's only reason is to make a buck and gain full control. Forcing insurance on anyone is not trustworthy when people aren't responsible or choose not to have it. There are ways for people to cover their own costs that doesn't include government unconstitutional authority. People accountable to their own expense should be the main goal again, without the costs and inefficiencies of government unconstitutional involvement.

    12. JustDamnMad says:

      In days gone by, family members, who had a strong moral compass , took care of those in their own family who were sick, elderly, mentally challenged. THEN the government, in its infiniate wisdom, stepped in to "take over" which relieved families of the responsibility for that same care. The government FAILED miserably in filling the gap, and so those same people have NO ONE!!!! Today, extended family members have filled that gap in the family with "stuff" and feel no moral obligation to once again assume responsibility, and they have relegated visiting/phoning when the mood strikes them!

      What will be next? Will we eventually approve a program to "relieve them of their suffering" and just put them out of their misery . . . . not their misery but out of OUR sight? Go back and read your history . . . that is EXACTLY what happened in Germany, and it led to one of the most horrific events in history!

      • Lizzie1955 says:

        Yes family members did care for their own in the past. Working in the healthcare field, so many, especially the elderly do not have family members to share in the expense. Family are much smaller. My family is an example. My grandparents had eleven children, my parents had two children and I have two children. Each of my children have one child. I would have loved to had more children but decided on raising the two I could afford. It seems that people have forgotten that many Americans work 1 or 2 minimum wage jobs to just make a living to pay for what they need. When I was younger I worked 3 jobs and my son worked 2 jobs to get him through college. Now that I'm older I'm no longer physically able to do that.

    13. BIggbear says:

      If this law is NOT found UNCONSTITUTIONAL and goes into full effect come Jan 1 2014 we will be residind the new COMMUNIST Nation the planet has to offer. The IRS already has the power to come into your home, unannounced and do pretty much as they please, as does the NSA, hence the american version of the SS. No joke people all you have to do is read what is inside that communist decloration and you'll see wjhat life is going to be like in a world socialist State.

    14. Lizzie1955 says:

      The History Channel is showing a documentary called "Third Reich: Rise and Fall. If you have any doubts about were this country is headed, watch and weep.

    15. DRG says:

      Before we met, my wife lost her job when she became too sick to work, and from this lost her health insurance. Being too sick to work and with no health insurance company accepting her, she was lost. No doctor or hospital would see her. She stayed in bed getting sicker until eventually she took an ambulance ride to the hospital, was told she was in kidney failure and had 20% chance to survive. She did recover and we met and married. I had some savings and was able to pay down her outstanding bills such that she could have her kidney removed. Had we had Obamacare my wife's life wouldn't have been in danger, and we would be $300,000 richer. Before you put your political opinions ahead of the reality, please stop and think what this bill actually means to the people it helps. Americans are dying on a daily basis because they are uninsured. People are going bankrupt on a daily basis because they are blowing their life savings on their healthcare. Pause a moment before disliking my post and flaming me, and just ask yourself if this is the fate you want for the citizens of the best country on earth?

    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.