The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, sometimes dubbed “Obamacare,” has been touted as President Barack Obama’s big achievement by numerous Democratic-aligned pundits and voters, who say aspects of the bill have improved the health care situation in the United States. I must say I agree – extending the age to which dependents can use their parents’ or guardians’ coverage to 26 is definitely a good thing. Other small parts of the bill have invariably been helpful as well. Yet none of that is particularly important for the majority of society. In fact, average health care costs rose by nearly 10 percent in 2011, despite the rhetoric saying it would help slash costs. Regardless of whether you are a leftist or a rightist, something is fishy here.
First thing’s first: The bill was created in closed meetings between Obama and health care and pharmaceutical company officials in 2009. That doesn’t sound like socking it to the insurance companies to me. Why would it ever be in the best interests of these companies to help draft a plan that could potentially cut into their profits? It is not – and never has been – and the plan reflects that. If anything, it’s a massive bailout for what was a stagnant business model. How does that work?
It starts off with forcing all uninsured Americans to buy health care. If the cost is too expensive for an individual or family, they will be provided subsidies, paid for by the American taxpayers, to help pay for it. In essence, Obama’s health care law gave the insurance companies millions of new and unwilling customers and then helped pay for their insurance costs. Insurance companies have been able to raise premiums because they now have a captive market. Additionally, many have strong regional monopolies that have only gotten stronger. Ever since 1945’s McCarran-Ferguson Act, insurance companies have been given exemptions from most federal antitrust laws and other oversight. As such, efforts such as price collusion are actually allowed, which create easily maintained monopolies.
The “best” part is, of course, that the Affordable Care Act did not create a regulatory body to actually examine these unethical practices. The entire thing is toothless when it comes to policing any provisions. On a theoretical level, Congress could pull the operating license from one of these companies should it act against the law or in any fashion detrimental to the American people. The odds of that happening are roughly nil, since in such a case it would suddenly take away the insurance of thousands or millions of people, who would then be snatched up by other insurance conglomerates doing the exact same thing.
What I’m saying is that Obamacare sucks unless you are a stockholder in an insurance company, or one of the lucky few in the very specific circumstances where it benefits you as a consumer. There are many people who hate the law because it’s “socialist.” They’re just plain wrong, but at least they recognize it’s bad. It is a powerful piece of regulation. However, it is regulation that definitively benefits private interests and sabotages government oversight and the interests of the American people. I’m glad a federal court ruled the individual mandate unconstitutional and that the Supreme Court is taking a look at it. To be honest, I’m not sure the Supreme Court is going to overturn the law because the justices have proven themselves completely pro-corporation recently, but it’s good to have hope for once.
Tom Bradtke is a senior history major. He can be reached at bradtke@umdbk.com.
