Of course you've heard of “liar loans”—in the heyday of subprime mortgages, unscrupulous lenders handed out mortgages to practically everyone with a pulse. “So you're saying you make $100,000 a year? Great, check this box titled 'McMansion.'”
We all know how this charade ended. Now Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D., an acclaimed expert on the subject of Obamacare, warns that the delay of the employer mandate by one year will force Americans into a single-payer system, raising insurance premiums and encouraging “liar subsidies” that might prove fiscally devastating. Not to mention that under the new health care system, you may well end up dead…
Editor, Casey Research
Obamacare is a hodgepodge of new regulations, requirements, and penalties. I'd like to start by defining three terms, which, while obscure today, should begin to enter our everyday vocabulary as Obamacare continues to take effect:
Health insurance exchanges are the basket of qualified insurance policies that meet the new healthcare law requirements for expanded coverage. These may be set up by the states (many are refusing to do so, due to high cost and fear of bankrupting the state) or the federal government. The Exchanges are supposed to be fully operational by October 1, 2013, but it is questionable whether they will actually be in place by that deadline.
The individual mandate requires that individuals purchase health insurance that meets the new, expanded federal requirements. Individuals who do not comply face a financial penalty. Individuals who fall below minimum income levels will be eligible for taxpayer-funded subsidies to buy health insurance.
The employer mandate requires that businesses with more than 50 full-time employees must provide health insurance for all employees, and that insurance must meet the new standards set forth in the new law. Businesses that do not comply must pay a financial penalty for each employee, which for large companies can run into the millions of dollars annually. This is the piece of Obamacare that has been delayed by one year.
Why delay one component of Obamacare and not the others? More specifically, why delay the employer mandate but not the individual mandate?
To answer that question, we must first understand this fact: Obama wants a single-payer healthcare system in the US.
This is not a secret:
Barack Obama, 2003: “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer healthcare system for America, but as all of you know, we may not get there immediately.”
Barack Obama, 2007: “But I don't think we will be able to eliminate employer-based coverage immediately. There is potentially going to be some transition time.”
These quotes are not taken out of context. Anyone who has been paying attention knows that transitioning to a single-payer system has been Obama's and his cohorts' ultimate goal all along:
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), 2009: “Next to me was a guy from the insurance company who then argued against the public option. He said it would not let private insurance companies compete. A public option would put the private insurance companies out of business and lead to single-payer. My single-payer friends, he was right. The man was right!”
Here, Rep. Schakowsky is suggesting that the “public option” will lead to their desired goal of a single-payer healthcare system. Single-payer proponents no longer use this term, since the public has clearly and consistently opposed it.
The “public option” has been renamed “Medicaid expansion,” which serves the public-relations purpose of confusing the public and avoiding calling taxpayer-funded healthcare “single payer.”
Jacob S. Hacker (Yale Professor), 2008: “Someone once said to me this is a Trojan Horse for single payer. It's not a Trojan Horse, right? It's right there! I am telling you. We are going to get there. Over time. Slowly. But we are going to move away from reliance on employer-based health insurance, as we should, but we will do it in a way that we are not going to frighten people into thinking they are going to lose their private insurance. We will give them a choice of public or private insurance when they are in the pool. We are going to let them keep their private insurance as long as their employer continues to provide it.”
Hacker nicely sums up the underlying goals of Obamacare: not to increase competition or patient choice, but to drive people out of private insurance as a stepping stone to a government-run, single-payer system.
Knowing Obama and his cohorts' goals, the purpose behind the delay of the employer mandate seems clearer: to hurry the “transition time” away from employer-based health insurance and to a single-payer system.
By forcing individuals to purchase compliant healthcare plans but not forcing employers to provide those plans, Obama is creating a swell of 10-13 million workers that must enroll in health insurance, but cannot obtain it from their employers. These workers thus have no choice but to use the government-controlled health insurance exchanges, or else pay a financial penalty.
This represents a doubling of the number of workers forced to get health insurance on the exchanges.
Importantly, the IRS has ruled that if workers have access to affordable health insurance through their employer, their dependents are not eligible for taxpayer-funded subsidies on the Obamacare health insurance exchanges.
Now that businesses will not be required to offer health insurance until 2015, workers and their dependents will be eligible for taxpayer-funded subsidies to purchase health insurance on the exchanges.
This will cost taxpayers an estimated $60 billion dollars in 2014 alone to cover the increased costs of subsidies—and the loss of revenue from employer penalties.
This $60 billion figure is before we take into account the “liar subsidies” that will invariably occur now that the administration has quietly removed eligibility verification for taxpayer-funded subsidies.
Community organizers are already being hired around the country to sign people up for the health exchanges. There are no penalties for failing to verify eligibility, and no penalties for signing up people who cannot afford to pay the monthly insurance premiums.
It is set up for disaster, much like the “liar loans” that helped topple the mortgage industry when people were not required to verify their income to qualify for a mortgage.
Remember, by enacting the dual mandates, Obamacare ostensibly was designed to ensure that its costs were borne by businesses, not taxpayers. But when the president decided to enforce only certain portions of the healthcare law and delay others, he shifted the cost of health insurance onto the backs of taxpayers.
This is all on top of the burdensome costs Obamacare has already created. Various studies have projected that private insurance premiums will rise between 20 to 60% in 2014, and some as much as 100%.
How long will the private-insurance market survive with such exploding costs? People will not be able to afford such massive premium increases. That seems to be the point: drive up costs and drive everyone into the arms of government-controlled medical care.
Jeff Smith from Seattle summed it up nicely in a Wall Street Journal letter on June 12:
“I was going to leave my job… to start a business until I shopped around for a healthcare plan: At Group Health, a health-maintenance organization in Seattle, I was given a quote of $842 per month for me and my family. But that would increase to $2,320 starting in January 2014 when Obamacare kicks in—a 276% increase. Why? Because I would be forced to carry coverage I don't want and don't need, such as maternity care. Welcome to the world of socialized medicine, courtesy of the Un-Affordable Care Act.”
The delay in the employer mandate is but one of dozens of negative impacts Obamacare will have on your medical services. As an independent physician, I've been discussing these issues with my patients for the past few years, helping them to prepare for what's ahead.
Here are the ten most important points that I tell my patients:
If you are denied treatment, you have no appeal of IPAB decisions; you are simply out of luck, and possibly out of life. This is a radical departure from the appeals process required for all private health insurance plans. Further, the IPAB is accountable only to President Obama, and cannot be overridden by Congress or the courts. IPAB is designed to have the final word on your health.
The bottom line is that Americans are losing more and more of their medical freedom. By 2015, so many workers will be trapped in the government-run health insurance exchanges that there will be no going back to the private plans we have today. At this rate, single-payer proponents will drive private insurance companies out of business, which has been their intention all along.
Americans need to become far more proactive about taking charge of their health. The healthier you are, the less vulnerable you are to our degrading healthcare system. It's also wise to consider proactively planning for medical treatment options outside the US.
Dr. Vliet will share her thoughts on what Obamacare will do to medical freedom and privacy—and the steps Americans can take now to preserve both—at the upcoming Casey Research Summit 3 Days with Casey, October 4-6 in Tucson, Arizona.
Aside from Dr. Vliet, our blue-ribbon faculty includes keynote speaker Dr. Ron Paul, economic and investment experts Catherine Austin Fitts, Lacy Hunt, James Rickards, John Mauldin, Rick Rule, Chris Martenson, and many more. Most of the speakers have agreed to attend the conference for the entire three days and mingle with the participants.
This is one conference you don't want to miss, but seats are filling up fast. Get all the details now—if you sign up today, you can still get our $100 first-come, first-save discount.