I'll be going through the CBO's March 2015 publication 49973, Appendix:Updated Estimates of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act," that is a RESTATEMENT and in some ways a complete turn around from what they PROJECTED in January, 2015.
For starters, you can read the headlines where the CBO LOWERS THE COSTS OF OBAMACARE FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EVEN FROM ITS JANUARY REDUCTION.
But read the report. There are TWO reasons given by the CBO.
“…[T]he result of two factors in particular: A downward revision in the projection of health insurance premiums that led to a lower estimate of the costs of subsidizing health insurance through the exchanges, and New data about the sources of health insurance coverage and the number of people without coverage in previous years that led to a slightly lower estimate of the number of people who will gain insurance coverage because of the ACA.”(CBO, March 2015, publication 49973, page 21).
Projection of Health Insurance Premiums projected as "lower" than previously projected is NOT understood by the CBO that states: “Projections of spending by private health insurers are highly uncertain, especially because the causes of the pronounced slowdown in spending in the past several years are not well understood, (CBO, March 2015, publication 49973, page 21). This has already been confirmed as an UNKNOWN for the CBO, and has some not so nice reasons behind it such as lower utilization due to the recession and a huge increase in out-of-pocket costs for consumers in the form of higher deductibles, copayments and coinsurance. Common consumer sense would say we should see more than lower premiums than anticipated but LOWER PREMIUMS THAN WE HAD BEFORE since our consumer expenses have ballooned. But the CBO reserves "judgment" except to say it's obvious the government is saving money on premiums.
The second reason is even worse for consumers and that's that THE NUMBER OF UNINSURED WAS OVERESTIMATED. The whole reason for this awful law, to get people insured was based on a number that the CBO now says was much lower than we were told.
The really suspiciously convenient part of the CBO's current update is that it has gone back and RECOUNTED its numbers it started with pre-2014 to make Obamacare look like it's "working." By changing the baseline of uninsured people to a higher number, fewer people needed the coverage provided by the ACA, which the CBO confirms:"...therefore that fewer people would be likely to be uninsured in the future in the absence of the ACA..." (page 22). If fewer people were uninsured, fewer people needed health insurance.
They've also conveniently addressed other concerns such as the skyrocketing costs of Medicaid which they themselves confirmed because there were more newly eligible under expanded Medicaid than they had projected and the newly eligible cost the Federal government more. So, now they've decided to RECOUNT and argue: Because they GAVE BIGGER NUMBERS THAN WERE TRUE OF THE UNINSURED, they could now "...project that somewhat fewer people will take up coverage through the exchanges and Medicaid," (CBO,page 22, Publication CBO 49973).
This is what the headlines about "lower premiums" are about. Read it for yourself, it's a politics spin not good news for consumers.
