The Washington Post reports on a new study commissioned by America's Health Insurance Plans:
"The report makes clear that several major provisions in the current legislative proposal will cause health care costs to increase far faster and higher than they would under the current system," Karen Ignagni, AHIP's president and chief executive, wrote to board members Sunday. "Between 2010 and 2019 the cumulative increases in the cost of a typical family policy under this reform proposal will be approximately $20,700 more than it would be under the current system." At the heart of the argument is whether the Finance Committee bill does enough to draw young, healthy people into the insurance risk pool. By postponing and reducing penalties on people who do not sign up for health insurance, industry analysts predict it would attract less-healthy patients who would drive up costs. "Market reform enacted in the absence of universal coverage will increase costs dramatically for many who are currently insured by creating a powerful incentive for people to wait until they are sick to purchase coverage," the authors of the report wrote. The analysis also examined three other provisions of the bill scheduled for a committee vote Tuesday: a new tax on high-priced "Cadillac" policies, spending reductions in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and billions in new fees that would be imposed on the health sector.
Keep in mind that the costs will be much greater when tax increases are factored in. As a reader writes:
In light of the fact that the Baucus/Obama/Pelosi "health reform" legislation is really about Premium and Tax Hikes, maybe critics should start calling it the PATH (Premium and Tax Hikes) legislation. As in, it's a PATH to less money for American families--as well as a PATH to more government control of our lives and more national debt. For that matter, it's a PATH to worse health care, thanks in part to the Medicare cuts. So maybe the legislation should be called the McPATH legislation--Medicare cuts [and] Premium and Tax Hikes? In any case, critics can point out that Congress shouldn't launch us on this destructive PATH (or McPATH), that the PATH to hell is paved with good intentions, that Columbus didn't go to the trouble of discovering America so we could lurch down this PATH, and so forth.