• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

New CBO estimate on Obamacare repeal: 17 million uninsured by 2018, 32 mill. by 2026

A

Autodidact

Banned
Read it and weep, y'all.

Some numbers:

For reference it was 23 million more in 2026 relative to ACA under House bill and 22 million more in 2026 relative to ACA under previous version of Senate bill.

Uninsured in...
2018: 17 million more would be uninsured than under Obamacare
2020: 27 million more
2026: 32 million more
Click to expand...

One of the most damning passages, quoted by someone down thread:

- The number of people who are uninsured would increase by 17 million in 2018, compared with the number under current law. That number would increase to 27 million in 2020, after the elimination of the ACA's expansion of eligibility for Medicaid and the elimination of subsidies for insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by the ACA, and then to 32 million in 2026.

- Average premiums in the nongroup market (for individual policies purchased through the marketplaces or directly from insurers) would increase by roughly 25 percent—relative to projections under current law—in 2018. The increase would reach about 50 percent in 2020, and premiums would about double by 2026.
Click to expand...
 
L

Loxley

Member
This is about as damning as it gets:

- The number of people who are uninsured would increase by 17 million in 2018, compared with the number under current law. That number would increase to 27 million in 2020, after the elimination of the ACA's expansion of eligibility for Medicaid and the elimination of subsidies for insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by the ACA, and then to 32 million in 2026.

- Average premiums in the nongroup market (for individual policies purchased through the marketplaces or directly from insurers) would increase by roughly 25 percent—relative to projections under current law—in 2018. The increase would reach about 50 percent in 2020, and premiums would about double by 2026.
Click to expand...
 
B

Balphon

Member
To say nothing of skyrocketing premiums in the nongroup market.

Honestly, one of the most impressive things about the GOP health care bills is that they are in some ways worse than a full repeal. That's some talent on display.
 
J

JonnyDBrit

Member
So by 2026, you would gain as many people uninsured as there are people in Peru today.

Or to keep it domestic, the equivalent of the entirety of Florida and Ohio being without insurance. And that's on top of whatever the extant numbers are.
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
For reference it was 23 million more in 2026 relative to ACA under House bill and 22 million more in 2026 relative to ACA under previous version of Senate bill.

Uninsured in...
  • 2018: 17 million more would be uninsured than under Obamacare
  • 2020: 27 million more
  • 2026: 32 million more

If Autodidact wants to add to OP.
 
S

Shaanyboi

Banned
For the people....

tumblr_mgc2qxTGDX1r5tzcco1_500.gif
 
L

LegendofJoe

Member
Healthcare is continuing to bankrupt this country - sucking up every extra dollar and crowding out all other sectors of commerce. It is THE reason why the majority of people haven't seen their incomes rise in 30 years. The healthcare sector is slowly, but surely bleeding the economy to death.
 
O

obijkenobi

Member
Impressively shitty work here. Like, literally someone was dared to come up with this as a joke and then the GOP did it anyway
 
A

Autodidact

Banned
Tovarisc said:
For reference it was 23 million more in 2026 relative to ACA under House bill and 22 million more in 2026 relative to ACA under previous version of Senate bill.

Uninsured in...
  • 2018: 17 million more would be uninsured than under Obamacare
  • 2020: 27 million more
  • 2026: 32 million more

If Autodidact wants to add to OP.
Click to expand...

Thank you much. I put the numbers in the title but should've also included them in the post.
 
B

BitStyle

Unconfirmed Member
What in the fuck? Aren't these higher uninsured numbers than the other?

How the fuck do they expect to pass that?
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
BitStyle said:
What in the fuck? Aren't these higher uninsured numbers than the other?

How the fuck do they expect to pass that?
Click to expand...

Yep. This "kinder" version of Senate bill causes more uninsured people at all benchmarks years than their original draft.

They one upped their own evil.

Also as things stands they don't have votes to push this anywhere.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
It's weird that the revised CBO score stuff for the tweaked bills is something people care about at all.

It's obvious that no matter what tweaks you make, if you end the mandate, the medicaid expansion, and subsidies for the exchanges, the total number of uninsured will jump to the ballpark of the number of uninsured from before the PPACA. All of the Republican pitches have involved these three features, and surely any future pitch would also. Further, it's obvious that most of the money and most of the numbers are in the Medicaid expansion, not the mandate/subsidies. Twiddling a few billion here and a few billion there, offering little tweaks to the timing here and there, etc. don't materially change the stakes.

When they announce the next bill that does the exact same thing but adds a new clause that takes one cent from the National Endowment for the Arts and adds it to the Bomb Iran fund, we don't need to wait for CBO projections to find out that it will still cause 20-odd million uninsured and save a few hundred billion.
 
B

Bam Bam Baklava

Member
One of the things that frustrates me about all of this "my premiums went up 50%" talk is that no one bothers to ask where they would be without the bill.

Premiums are going to keep rising, but this analysis seems to suggest that they would be higher right now had ACA not been implemented.
 
1

120v

Member
i thought the wile of repeal/no replace would be nobody suffers immediately... but about 20 mil by next year? lol, k bruh put that on the floor
 
A

ascii42

Member
Stumpokapow said:
It's weird that the revised CBO score stuff for the tweaked bills is something people care about at all.

It's obvious that no matter what tweaks you make, if you end the mandate, the medicaid expansion, and subsidies for the exchanges, the total number of uninsured will jump to the ballpark of the number of uninsured from before the PPACA. All of the Republican pitches have involved these three features, and surely any future pitch would also. Further, it's obvious that most of the money and most of the numbers are in the Medicaid expansion, not the mandate/subsidies. Twiddling a few billion here and a few billion there, offering little tweaks to the timing here and there, etc. don't materially change the stakes.

When they announce the next bill that does the exact same thing but adds a new clause that takes one cent from the National Endowment for the Arts and adds it to the Bomb Iran fund, we don't need to wait for CBO projections to find out that it will still cause 20-odd million uninsured and save a few hundred billion.
Click to expand...
Yeah, exactly.
 
S

skullmuffins

Banned
BitStyle said:
What in the fuck? Aren't these higher uninsured numbers than the other?

How the fuck do they expect to pass that?
Click to expand...
They won't. There's a reason they didn't consider repeal-and-delay the first time around. It would be political suicide.

Republicans are such dirtbags. They may have won by running on repeal and replace, but that's because they kept going on about how Obamacare was falling apart, premiums were too high, etc with the implication that they'd make it better. People weren't voting on a message of "we're gonna repeal Obamacare and make things unambiguously worse!"
 
C

Carpe Carnim

Member
TheCochese said:
Watch the Republicans try to prop their replace bills because the numbers are better.
Click to expand...

We're going to be treated to another 'Gang of n' Potemkin goat rodeo. McCain and Rand are sure to worm their way onto it.

We'll probably end up with a more expensive and less comprehensive ACA, particularly for women. That will be the price of admission for 'bipartisan fixes' and reaching across the aisle. Maybe they'll wheel Scalise out to give him a signing pen.

This is also why we can't have nice things.
 
H

hydrophilic attack

Member
Stumpokapow said:
It's weird that the revised CBO score stuff for the tweaked bills is something people care about at all.

It's obvious that no matter what tweaks you make, if you end the mandate, the medicaid expansion, and subsidies for the exchanges, the total number of uninsured will jump to the ballpark of the number of uninsured from before the PPACA. All of the Republican pitches have involved these three features, and surely any future pitch would also. Further, it's obvious that most of the money and most of the numbers are in the Medicaid expansion, not the mandate/subsidies. Twiddling a few billion here and a few billion there, offering little tweaks to the timing here and there, etc. don't materially change the stakes.

When they announce the next bill that does the exact same thing but adds a new clause that takes one cent from the National Endowment for the Arts and adds it to the Bomb Iran fund, we don't need to wait for CBO projections to find out that it will still cause 20-odd million uninsured and save a few hundred billion.
Click to expand...

Obvious if you care about and understand policy

Numbers from the CBO will be harder for someone's Fox News watching umcle to dismiss out of hand
 
RPGCrazied

RPGCrazied

Member
Makes Trump speech over this today that much more horrifying. He has no clue whats in the bill or has even read it. He doesn't care. He just wants to make Obama look bad and blame Democrats so he looks like hot shit for his base.
 
T

TS-08

Member
Stumpokapow said:
It's weird that the revised CBO score stuff for the tweaked bills is something people care about at all.

It's obvious that no matter what tweaks you make, if you end the mandate, the medicaid expansion, and subsidies for the exchanges, the total number of uninsured will jump to the ballpark of the number of uninsured from before the PPACA. All of the Republican pitches have involved these three features, and surely any future pitch would also. Further, it's obvious that most of the money and most of the numbers are in the Medicaid expansion, not the mandate/subsidies. Twiddling a few billion here and a few billion there, offering little tweaks to the timing here and there, etc. don't materially change the stakes.

When they announce the next bill that does the exact same thing but adds a new clause that takes one cent from the National Endowment for the Arts and adds it to the Bomb Iran fund, we don't need to wait for CBO projections to find out that it will still cause 20-odd million uninsured and save a few hundred billion.
Click to expand...

The CBO creates headlines and talking points by providing these estimated numbers to the outcome of passing the bills. These help shape public opinion (and awareness) of the bills. I just got a notification from my local news app about 32 million people losing insurance by 2026 under the proposed repeal. People who don't spend a lot of time on GAF and therefore aren't as up to date on Congress' legislative efforts as our brilliant minds might find such a notification to be pretty useful. It's not hard to understand.
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
Stumpokapow said:
It's weird that the revised CBO score stuff for the tweaked bills is something people care about at all.

It's obvious that no matter what tweaks you make, if you end the mandate, the medicaid expansion, and subsidies for the exchanges, the total number of uninsured will jump to the ballpark of the number of uninsured from before the PPACA. All of the Republican pitches have involved these three features, and surely any future pitch would also. Further, it's obvious that most of the money and most of the numbers are in the Medicaid expansion, not the mandate/subsidies. Twiddling a few billion here and a few billion there, offering little tweaks to the timing here and there, etc. don't materially change the stakes.

When they announce the next bill that does the exact same thing but adds a new clause that takes one cent from the National Endowment for the Arts and adds it to the Bomb Iran fund, we don't need to wait for CBO projections to find out that it will still cause 20-odd million uninsured and save a few hundred billion.
Click to expand...

Even Democrats hate the mandate though. People need to understand why the mandate is needed and I hope these CBO grades help underscore why.
 
T

the-pi-guy

Member
Bam Bam Baklava said:
One of the things that frustrates me about all of this "my premiums went up 50%" talk is that no one bothers to ask where they would be without the bill.

Premiums are going to keep rising, but this analysis seems to suggest that they would be higher right now had ACA not been implemented.
Click to expand...

If people weren't going to get hurt by no healthcare, I'd say let the whiners get their healthcare premiums...

Just goes to show how easily people forget these things. Obamacare was such an amazing scapegoat. The people that don't know any better will go along with whatever you tell them.

Premiums have been increasing at a lower rate after ACA, than before. There's plenty of data on it. Yet people cling to "look at my premiums after ACA! They've gone up!"

Prototype Viktor said:
Eh that's only 10% of the country - Republicans
Click to expand...

More like "YES! People are able to be free to live their lives and not have money forcibly taken from their wallets!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Gamers Have Become Less Interested in Strategic Thinking and Planning
Analysis 2
92
6K
deriks replied
WWE and Endeavor (UFC) announce 21 billion dollar deal.
40
3K
thefool replied
Interview with Shuji Utsumi (SEGA Co-COO) by Japanese media outlet Seizo-Trend
Business Game Dev
1
2K
Unknown? replied
Now I Know: The Man Who Gets People Out of the Hospital
5
2K
ClanOfNone replied
Epic Games seeking to sell stake for $750 million at $17 billion valuation
16
2K
FranXico replied
Top Bottom