individual mandate

Pew poll: 53% of Americans disapprove of ObamaCare

Yet another poll has been released showing opposition to ObamaCare at an all-time high, just two weeks before the law’s state health insurance exchanges are set to open.

Just last week, CNN released a poll showing that support for ObamaCare had fallen to a record low, with only 39% of Americans holding a favorable view of the law. The decline of support comes despite ramped up efforts by the Obama Administration to promote its various provisions.

But a new USA Today/Pew Research poll finds that 53% of Americans disapprove of ObamaCare, the highest number since they began tracking public sentiment of the law, while 42% approve of it. The poll also reflects a substantial intensity gap, showing that 41% strongly disapprove of ObamaCare, while only 26% strongly approve.

Public opposition to ObamaCare has remained high for some time, with most polls showing that Americans favor repeal. But the USA Today/Pew Research poll shows another interesting dynamic, with Americans trusting Republicans over Democrats on the healthcare issue, at 40/39, though the numbers are within the margin of error.

CBO: Individual mandate delay would reduce budget deficit


If a one-year delay of ObamaCare’s individual mandate were enacted by Congress and signed into law, it would reduce the federal budget deficit by $36 billion between 2014 and 2018, according to a report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

In early July, the Obama Administration unilaterally delayed the employer mandate for one year, citing concerns from businesses that were not ready for the provision to take effect at the beginning of 2014. House Republicans struck a populist tone about the need to delay the individual mandate, with Speaker John Boehner telling reporters that it was a matter of fairness to American families.

“is it fair for the President to give American businesses an exemption from the health law’s mandates, without giving the same break to individuals and families across the country? Hell no it isn’t,” said Boehner during a July press conference, during which he announced that the House would vote on a measure to delay the individual mandate.

In mid-July, the House passed a delay of the individual mandate, the provision of ObamaCare that requires Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a punitive tax, and codified the delay of the employer mandate, over the objections of the White House.

But fairness isn’t the only argument for a delay of ObamaCare’s individual mandate. A report released last week by the CBO shows that there is a budgetary case for delaying the provision.

Voters overwhelmingly reject ObamaCare’s individual mandate

The Obama Administration has issued the final regulations for ObamaCare’s individual mandate. This controversial provision of the law, which goes into effect at the beginning of next year, requires most Americans to purchase health insurance coverage or face a punitive tax of $95 or 1% of their gross income.

Even as these regulations for the individual mandate are being implemented, Americans are weary of the provision and want it repealed or delayed, according to a recent tracking poll from The Morning Consult.

The poll, which was conducted at the end of July, found that 60% of registered voters oppose the individual mandate. It also shows that 49% want the individual mandate repealed while 28% believe it should be delayed. Only 39% support the provision and just 24% believe the provision should be implemented on schedule.

The Morning Consult also found that 57% of registered voters believe that ObamaCare will make healthcare more expensive for them through higher co-payments, premiums, and deductibles. Forty-one percent (41%) say that the law will make healthcare less expensive.

Republicans want to get rid of ObamaCare, division on strategy

With Congress set to return to Washington in just under two weeks, Republicans are incredibly divided on how to deal with ObamaCare in the upcoming Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded for another year.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) have been urging members of both chambers to sign onto their push to defund ObamaCare. Basically, this means that Congress would withhold statutory funding for the 2010 healthcare law while funding the rest of the government. But the idea has faced a substantial amount of opposition from Republican politicians and pundits who feel that this maneuver would led to a government shutdown, a prospect that they believe will be blamed the GOP.

Some 80 Republicans have signed on to a letter urging House leadership to back the effort, though only 14 Republican senators have signed the letter in the upper chamber. Cruz acknowledged over the weekend that the effort to defund ObamaCare doesn’t have enough votes to succeed and noted that it would take a “grassroots tsunami” to push it through Congress.

The merits of defunding ObamaCare are well understood. This is a destructive law that is greatly influencing the rise in health insurance premiums and hurting job growth as employers resort to hiring mostly part-time workers to skirt the laws’ costly mandates.

Only 27% of young Americans are aware of ObamaCare exchanges


The Obama Administration and groups supporting the 2010 healthcare law have a huge task in front of them if they want young people to sign up for health insurance coverage when the state exchanges launch on October 1st.

The Commonwealth Fund, a DC-based firm that backs ObamaCare, found in a recent survey that only 27% of 18 to 29 year-olds are aware of the state insurance changes.

“From October 2013 through March 2014, young adults without affordable health insurance through an employer will be able to select a plan from their state’s insurance marketplace, with coverage beginning January 2014,” the Commonwealth Fund noted in its brief on ObamaCare and young Americans. “Those with incomes under 400 percent of poverty will be eligible for subsidized coverage or Medicaid.”

“Only 27 percent of 19-to-29-year-olds in the survey were aware of the marketplaces, with awareness lowest among those uninsured for some time during the year (19%) and those in low-income households eligible for subsidized coverage or Medicaid (18%),” the report added. “Awareness also varied by education levels: one-third of college graduates were aware of the marketplaces, compared with 20 percent of those with a high school degree or less.”

The Commonwealth Fund disputes assertions that young people don’t purchase health insurance coverage, noting instead that they cannot afford it. And while the organization says that subsidies will help with affordability, they don’t mention that many young people will likely pay the individual mandate tax rather than an expensive health insurance plan on a state exchange.

New study shows ObamaCare is a bad deal for young Americans

Despite ongoing efforts by the Obama Administration and its supporters to sell ObamaCare to a skeptical American public, a new study from the National Center for Public Policy Research finds that young people will see no financial benefit from the law’s insurance exchanges.

The centerpiece of the ObamaCare is the state insurance exchanges, through which uninsured Americans can purchase coverage from any one of four different plans, the cheapest of which is the Bronze plan.

But even with subsidies provided by the law, many Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 will be $500 richer if they don’t buy health insurance, according to the study, Why the ‘Young Invincibles’ Won’t Participate in the ObamaCare Exchanges and Why It Matters.

“Over 3.7 million individuals will pay at least $595 out-of-pocket for a Bronze plan, meaning that they will save at least $500 if they decline insurance and pay the fine,” noted Dr. David Hogberg, the author of the study. “About 3 million individuals will save at least $1,000 if they go the same route.”

“Also noteworthy is that a large portion of the total number of single people without children ages 18-34 have a substantial financial incentive not to participate next year,” he added. “Sixty-one percent will have at least $500 worth of incentive to avoid the exchange, and 49 percent will have at least $1,000 worth.”

But here’s how it is in real world terms.

“At $23,831 annual income, that 25-year-old will save $1,000 by just paying the one percent fine,” wrote Hogberg. “That’s a savings of about $83 a month that can purchase a month’s worth of groceries for a single person at a grocery store such as Aldi.”

ObamaCare’s consumer cost caps delayed until 2015

ObamaCare Trainwreck

The Obama Administration has delayed yet another key part of ObamaCare. The New York Times reports this morning that the limit on out-of-pocket healthcare costs for consumers has been pushed back for a year to allow insurers more time to get their computer systems ready to comply with the policy.

“The limit on out-of-pocket costs, including deductibles and co-payments, was not supposed to exceed $6,350 for an individual and $12,700 for a family,” notes The New York Times. “But under a little-noticed ruling, federal officials have granted a one-year grace period to some insurers, allowing them to set higher limits, or no limit at all on some costs, in 2014.”

The Times explains that the delay has been policy since February, but it was “obscured in a maze of legal and bureaucratic language that went largely unnoticed” on the Labor Department’s website.

“Under the policy, many group health plans will be able to maintain separate out-of-pocket limits for benefits in 2014. As a result, a consumer may be required to pay $6,350 for doctors’ services and hospital care, and an additional $6,350 for prescription drugs under a plan administered by a pharmacy benefit manager,” reports The Times. “Some consumers may have to pay even more, as some group health plans will not be required to impose any limit on a patient’s out-of-pocket costs for drugs next year. If a drug plan does not currently have a limit on out-of-pocket costs, it will not have to impose one for 2014, federal officials said Monday.”

Group family insurance coverage could be the next ObamaCare casualty

Congress may have received an ObamaCare exemption to keep their out of pocket health insurance costs from going up, but hardworking families with coverage through small businesses may not be so lucky.

The Associated Press reports that small business owners facing hefty premium increases because of ObamaCare may end paid group family health insurance coverage for employees, leaving workers with less take home pay:

Insurance companies have already warned small business customers that premiums could rise 20 percent or more in 2014 under the Affordable Care Act. That’s making some owners consider not paying for coverage for workers’ families, even though insurance is a benefit that helps companies attract and retain top talent. If more small business owners decide to stop paying for family coverage, it will accelerate a trend that started as the cost of health insurance soared in recent years.

Under the law, companies with 50 or more employees are required to provide affordable coverage for their workers. They also must offer health insurance to employees’ dependents, but don’t have to pay for it. And they aren’t required to offer insurance at all to employees’ spouses.

House passes Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act

 Rep. Eric Cantor -- @GOPLeader

The House of Representatives voted on Friday to remove the Internal Revenue Service’s authority to enforce ObamaCare, a response to the agency’s targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups.

The Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act passed the House in a 232-185 vote. Four Democrats — Reps. John Barrow (D-GA), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Mike McIntyre (D-NC), and Collin Peterson (D-MN); all of whom are potentially vulnerable next year — voted with Republicans to pass the measure.

Under ObamaCare, the IRS was given 46 new powers, including the authority to enforce the individual mandate, the employer mandate, and distribution of various tax credits and subsidies. This measure would remove enforcement authority, rendering the individual mandate, which requires Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a tax, and the already delayed employer mandate, completely meaningless.

Treasury official can’t give straight on individual mandate delay discussions

Mark Iwry

The Obama Administration’s one-year delay of the employer mandate is prompting questions about whether or not they also considered extending the same courtesy to Americans who will be forced to comply with the controversial individual mandate at the beginning of the year.

During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) put the question to Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who wasn’t inclined to give a straight answer.

“Have you had any discussions at Treasury about the possibility of a delay of the individual mandate?” asked Price.

“Mr. Price, I’m not part of all the discussions at the Treasury, of course,” Irwy nervously replied.

The Georgia Congressman asked again, but rephrased his question due to Irwy’s evasiveness. “Have you, Mr. Iwry, had any discussions at all about considering a delay in the individual mandate?” he pointedly asked.

“Congressman, I do not recall being part of any discussion that involved a view on our part, or my part, that there would be a necessity to provide more transition relief than Congress has already provided for individuals under the [individual mandate],” Iwry told Price.

You can watch the exchange below. While there’s nothing but speculation that the Treasury Department weighed a delay of the individual mandate, Iwry clearly didn’t want to answer, which you can tell by his reaction to the line of questioning.

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.