RAND predicts health-care reform will lower cost, expand coverage
The smart folks at RAND — an actual real-life think tank, as opposed to an ideological group masquerading under the think-tank name — have taken a look at what’s likely to happen to health insurance coverage as a result of the health-care reform package signed into law earlier this year.
Among other things, the RAND study published in the New England Journal of Medicine finds that work-based insurance will grow in importance under the reform, a prediction that “is very robust to variations in modeling assumptions.”
In other words, they’re pretty damn sure about it.
“Although the model allows employers to drop coverage in response to the reform, we estimate that the law will result in a large net increase in employer-sponsored insurance offers. We predict that the number of workers offered coverage will increase from 115.1 million (84.6% of the approximately 136.0 million U.S. workers) to 128.7 million (94.6%) after the reform. This increase is not driven by penalties levied on employers with more than 50 workers. In fact, the probability of being offered coverage increases proportionately more for workers at small firms than for workers at large firms, even though small firms are not subject to penalties….
The large increase in offers provided by small businesses is driven primarily by two factors: greater demand for coverage by workers due to individual penalties for being uninsured and the availability of new, often lower-cost insurance options (because of administrative savings, for example) for small businesses that offer coverage on the exchanges.”
The folks at RAND further believe that insurance plans offered through exchanges set up under the law will be particularly appealing to business, “owing to wider risk pooling, low administrative costs, and expanded choices.” In fact, the study predicts, “firms making decisions on the basis of costs and benefits of their insurance options, including new subsidies and penalties, will frequently choose to offer insurance rather than to drop coverage and allow their workers to buy individual coverage.”
Of course, that’s not quite the health-care Armageddon that political opponents of the proposal have predicted. But hey, why listen to research conducted by non-partisan, highly trained experts in health care analysis when you can believe people such as John Boehner instead?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
481 comments Add your comment
Midori
September 2nd, 2010
12:01 pm
sorry to go off topic Jay – but another oil rig has exploded off the Louisana coast
Bruno
September 2nd, 2010
12:12 pm
“But hey, why listen to research conducted by non-partisan, highly trained experts in health care analysis when you can believe people such as John Boehner instead?”
Maybe you can try listening to someone who actually works in health care, Jay:
The third-party billing system adds layers and layers of unnecessary administrative costs to every health care transaction and opens the door wide open for fraud and abuse. Instead of reducing our reliance on the third-party billing system, Obamacare increases it. Simple logic will tell you that costs are going up and not down.
RW-(the original)
September 2nd, 2010
12:15 pm
Midori,
That explosion has been downgraded to a fire and there was only one injury.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I thought Jay B was quoting Rand Paul here at first glance. Anyhow, employer based insurance is the core of the problem in the first place. More of it can’t be good.
Palin fan
September 2nd, 2010
12:16 pm
The economy’s reaction to ObamaCare shows that it is a disaster and the country did not want it. Socialized medicine will make more Americans suffer just like it does in France and England.
Jay
September 2nd, 2010
12:20 pm
All forms of health insurance involve third-party payers, Bruno. It’s a pooling of the risk.
Your solution is to have us pay for cancer treatments, heart attacks, etc., individually, out of pocket? You’re going to have a lot of dead patients and out of work doctors under that kind of system.
Third party poolers of risk are an absolute necessity, whether those poolers are governments, employers or insurance companies.
Bubba Bob
September 2nd, 2010
12:21 pm
So one group thinks it will lower and another thinks it will raise….
The truth is we won’t know until several years from now. It’s a shame the bill is so complicated that it wasn’t read and no one can really judge it’s effects.
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:21 pm
Dream on ………………
I have some land to sell you in Florida also.
NowReally
September 2nd, 2010
12:25 pm
If it wasn’t for employer based insurance the number of uninsured (middle class) would have skyrocketed 30 years ago.
The more employers who offer insurance was bound to grow, it’s the best way to acquire insurance period. The people I know who pay for their own insurance out of pocket, without employer contributions are less happy with the cost and coverage. Their coverage is usually skeleton based, with a heck of a lot of out of pocket expenses.
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:26 pm
“OFF TOPIC” #1
Headline: “BBC had “massive bias to left:” director general”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.91cc350cfed23f483b23ec44acc183c7.201&show_article=1
Hey, Mr. Director General ……. you need to come over here and check out our “Mainstream Media”.
@@
September 2nd, 2010
12:26 pm
I may not care for Bruno’s “approach” to women, but he knows his stuff when it comes to what increases cost in health care.
I read your comments at Kyle’s, Bruno. You are right on the money about wherein the problem lies.
(Reuters) – U.S. companies are cutting healthcare costs further amid a continuing sour economy, scaling back benefits and shifting a greater share of the expense to employees.
The health law aims to expand access to coverage and help more small businesses offer coverage to their workers, but many of its provisions do not take effect for years.
The unintended consequences at a time when citizens are less able to cope.
Obama and his congress fail when it comes to thinking things thru to their logical conclusion.
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:26 pm
Better to spend a Trillion dollars over THERE instead of over HERE and actually “help” US Citizens… so glad so many on the right are running on “over-turning” the health care plan…and they have not ONE plan to replace it with something “better”…
They had 8 years…6 in 100% control of all 3 houses… I’ll ask those on the right to name the bills offered during the first 6 years of Bush being in office that sought to overhaul the health care in our nation. All while health care costs “skyrocketed” for the average American under his administration… with many, many, many who became “un-insured” during those years.
Those that supported Iraq from the start…please feel free to explain just HOW we “added” to the “lives” of US Citizens by doing so… also let me know how we could not have “helped” our nations citizens with that same $$$? It’s like shipping jobs overseas… glad the Bush and Cheney friends made lots of money while people were denied insurance coverage or could not afford it when their companies dropped their plans…
Funny (actually SAD) that those on the right will fight SO HARD for things that KILL humans and bankrupt a nation…and will then FIGHT SO HARD “against” things that will help THEM personally. I know for a “fact” that not everyone here on the right has health insurance. It’s simply “impossible” that all of you on the right have insurance. So go ahead and work on doing away with it…instead…let’s attack Iran or North Korea… you know…the 2 countries which DID in fact start Nuke programs while Bush was in office and idiots were buying McMansions to hang their flag off of (which they now can’t pay for…WHY? because we invested in IRAQ instead of investing in our nation)…
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:29 pm
@@
September 2nd, 2010
12:26 pm
I know you like to research things…so do tell…what was the “increase” under Bush for health care costs? Also feel free to add the number of those who LOST their insurance coverage under Bush…you know..during the “rah rah years” of our “full steam ahead” economy we had during the early and mid 2000’s….
Bubba Bob
September 2nd, 2010
12:29 pm
Saul,
Maybe we don’t want the government telling us what we have to buy. Maybe we think the Constitution is supposed to limit what the government can do. Even if we don’t have ‘it’ we may rather do without it than have it forced on us.
Bruno
September 2nd, 2010
12:31 pm
“Your solution is to have us pay for cancer treatments, heart attacks, etc., individually, out of pocket? You’re going to have a lot of dead patients and out of work doctors under that kind of system.”
Not at all, Jay. My (capitalistic) solution is to return health insurance to its rightful place as a hedge against catastrophic loss–i.e. high deductibles and copays. Using “insurance” for each and every health care transaction is just plain foolish, IMO.
“Third party poolers of risk are an absolute necessity, whether those poolers are governments, employers or insurance companies.”
If the goal is to make all health care a “shared cost”, then single-payer is the only sensible way to go. Making the purchase of for-profit insurance plans mandatory is the most expensive way to go.
Mick
September 2nd, 2010
12:32 pm
saul
Don’t you realize that we have the best health care system in the world? Yeah for the rich and richer.
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:32 pm
Scout…and you need to check out #1 rated Fox and Rush…MSM? The “right” owns it…or does a rich Saudi own Fox? (well at least he’s 2nd banana)… and I KNOW how much you LOVE Muslims. See my post downstairs…
Keep up the good fight!
September 2nd, 2010
12:33 pm
Scout….whats the matter? Can’t discuss the blog subject with any sensible commentary? If you have a problem with the RAND report, there are credible methods to discuss
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:33 pm
“OFF TOPIC” #2
Listen to Al Sharpton get his clock cleaned ………….
http://michellemalkin.com/
Tim Flagler
September 2nd, 2010
12:33 pm
RAND is certainly credible, BUT Lisa Murkowski (former R-AK), Galen Institute, House Republicans, President of Aetna insurance, Lewin Group, and many other high profile experts say the health care reforms will increase cost and decrease coverage. Rather than puff up RAND’s one study, check out many studies (and their pros and cons) here: http://www.healthcarereform.procon.org.
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:34 pm
Mick…don’t worry…all of those “right” posters here have GREAT insurance…all of them… and their costs went DOWN under Bush. Don’t you know that???
Doggone/GA
September 2nd, 2010
12:35 pm
“It’s a shame the bill is so complicated that it wasn’t read”
You can repeat those lies all you want…they NEVER become true.
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:35 pm
Saul & Good Fight:
Is someone there with a knife to your throat making you read my posts ?
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:36 pm
Tim Flagler @ 12:33:
Thank you sir but the libs. won’t bother. They run on emotion …….. not logic.
Bruno
September 2nd, 2010
12:37 pm
“I may not care for Bruno’s “approach” to women”
I’m a sweetheart in “real life”, @@. I know it, you know it, and the American people know it.
Keep up the good fight!
September 2nd, 2010
12:37 pm
Not at all Scout…I ignore most of your nonsense. Just hoping that maybe one day you’ll decide to join intelligent discussion.
barking frog
September 2nd, 2010
12:37 pm
the md(milliondollar) degree is why health care costs
will continue to grow.
Bubba Bob
September 2nd, 2010
12:38 pm
Doggone,
Baucus, one of the main sponsers admitted it.
“Said Baucus: “I don’t think you want me to waste my time to read every page of the health care bill. You know why? It’s statutory language. We hire experts.”"
They hire “experts”…..right.
Tell me one person that you know of that voted for the bill that read it.
AmVet
September 2nd, 2010
12:39 pm
The people I know who pay for their own insurance out of pocket, without employer contributions are less happy with the cost and coverage.
NowReally, being the rube that I am (and accuse others of!) I paid for private medical insurance for decades. An endless list of legalized thieves like United Health Care, BCBSGA, etc…, though I was honorably discharged in 1977.
I always viewed the VA as for other guys “more deserving”.
About seven years ago I got so fed up with the horrific “non-service” of some insurance company and was rally unable to pay the ever-escalating premiums – not to mention that I had a $10,000 deductible! – I finally listened to reason, and another vet buddy, and joined the VA system.
About a year later I became deadly sick with massive blood clots but miraculously survived. And on a scale of 1 to 10 the VA was a 10. (I’ve since discarded my old rule about nobody gets a 10 – these guys really do.) Every step of the way, up to this very day.
I am blessed and never thought I would be saved, literally and financially, by an organization that I enlisted in 38 years ago.
I truly feel sorry for most non-veterans and the criminal debacle that they must now endure…
Mick
September 2nd, 2010
12:39 pm
scout
Why is it that one groups lord is always better than the others? Jesus talked about health care with the telling of the good samaritan and the beatitudes. Some moderns christians believe that if you accumulate wealth, you are blessed. The less fortunate among us are cast as lazy bums, not all but many. Malkin is a loon.
Bruno
September 2nd, 2010
12:39 pm
“I thought Jay B was quoting Rand Paul here at first glance”
RW–Your clue should have been the lack of an accompanying racist photo of Lester Maddox.
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:43 pm
Mick:
Do you believe that Jesus miraculously healed people ?
Mick
September 2nd, 2010
12:45 pm
scout
Although it is my opinion that malkin is not a worthy resource for reliable information, I challenge you to watch rachel maddow for the full hour, no one on tv gets the FACTS more correct than her – she presents totally fact based information. Please check her out.
AmVet
September 2nd, 2010
12:46 pm
“It’s a shame the bill is so complicated that it wasn’t read”
What is the shame is that like many or most bills, they are actually at least partially written by the thousands of K-Street lobbyists who advocate FOR and protect at all costs the big corporations who handsomely reward them and AGAINST we the people.
Ostensibly under the canard that they have the “knowledge” needed to do so…
Mick
September 2nd, 2010
12:46 pm
scout
With god, nothing is impossible.
Midori
September 2nd, 2010
12:46 pm
AmVet,
when I got sick with my initial gall bladder attack, I went to the VA Hospital Emergency Room.
My cost?
$17!!!!
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:46 pm
Bruno: “If the goal is to make all health care a “shared cost”, then single-payer is the only sensible way to go. Making the purchase of for-profit insurance plans mandatory is the most expensive way to go.”
That IS the direction we should have gone…but as long as people eat crap and watch Dancing With The Stars while being couch potatoes…. our health costs will continue to skyrocket… I mean the gov’t can’t “force” people to get off their a$$es and quit smoking…but those who do (sit on their a$$es and smoke) need to pay a BIGGER share… because we ALL fund Medicaid and the BIGGEST cost is “end of life”… much spent on those who made the WRONG choices in life (not all…)…but…we DO spend so much on of our $$$ on those who simply sat around smoking, and stuffing their bodies with crap the majority of their lives…THEY cause some of the BIGGEST “costs” we all finance. $500K for a triple bypass for someone who smoked since they were 14 and who was obese? I mean…do we SAVE them? Of course we do ALL we can to save them… but why does THAT person get to help bankrupt the nation and medicaid? Yes…they deserve healthcare… but this nation needs to STOP being a nation becoming MORE obese and if so…we’ll save LOTS of money..because too much $$$ is spent on those who never cared for their bodies in the first place…
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 2nd, 2010
12:47 pm
Sorry Jay, but common sense and a long history of disastrous outcomes from other massive federal intrusions and “entitlement” programs says otherwise. Somehow we’re to believe that covering more people and dictating gold-plated benefits while driving providers out of the market is going to decrease health care spending AND reduce the deficit?
You’d have to be one of the many brain-dead Idiot Messiah acolytes to believe such a fantasy. Let us hope there is a good Oprah show on election day so the parasites stay on the couch.
When Democrats lose, Americans win.
Midori
September 2nd, 2010
12:48 pm
Mick,
you are spot on about Rachel.
All facts; very little “emotion”.
Unlike our wingnut bretheren.
When you look at conservative television, all you get is fear, anger and lies.
Nothing but emotion.
Scout really needs to keep his projection in check.
Granny Godzilla
September 2nd, 2010
12:48 pm
If we found the third tablet on Mt Sinai, the one Moses couldn’t carry (he only has two hands afterall) and carved into that stone tablet were the words “Health Care will lower cost and expand coverage”
the GOP would claim Stanley Anne Dunham got there just before Moses and planted it.
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:48 pm
Scout… nope…but I saw that someone called you out for NOT being a Marine..and YOU never answered. maybe you were…maybe you were not…it’s the internet..you can be ANYONE who you wish to be…but you DO dodge questions you simply can’t answer.
Union
September 2nd, 2010
12:49 pm
we know we have medicare fraud and abuse to the tune of billions.. and all of a sudden im supposed to believe the govt is gonna get it right this time?
Mick
September 2nd, 2010
12:49 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
When republicans win, americans lose.
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:49 pm
Mick:
Then why didn’t He provide “Universal Health Healing” ?
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:51 pm
Saul :
I was the Commandant of the Marine Corps. Twice.
AmVet
September 2nd, 2010
12:52 pm
Nice Midori! And salute!
My little six day “adventure” complete with 5 and half days in the ICU, two operations, dozens of other tests, procedures, injections, etc, cost me about $70.
And now ironically, the VA is the Gold Standard of health care that the do-everything-better-than-the-government “free market” is desperately trying to keep up with…
Saul Good
September 2nd, 2010
12:53 pm
Scout: if you say so…I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt…and I appreciate what you did by serving. Yet again I’ll say: This is the “internet” and your word is only as good as what you say in the past which can be found “truthful” or not.
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:54 pm
Saul:
You must mean “popeye” from last night. I’ve had my reply ready since this morning but haven’t seen him yet. However, since you brought it up I will give YOU a preview ……………
popeye says:
“No sailor here scout. But, I’ll put my ribbons against yours any day of the week….and, in the day you would have called me SIR…”
Ribbons huh? Well, if you were in the Air Force or Coast Guard you probably do have more than me. You guys got one for making it to the mess hall and back. And if you were in the Army, well, that stands for:
“A”in’t “R”eady to be a “M”arine “Y”et.
P.S. And in the day you would have had to call me “Marine” and I’ll take that over “sir” in any other outfit any day of the week.
Union
September 2nd, 2010
12:54 pm
screw health care reform… i have benny hinns email address.. so im set!
Scout
September 2nd, 2010
12:55 pm
Saul:
Ask me any question about the Corps you want to …………….
Mick
September 2nd, 2010
12:55 pm
scout
There will be the poor and the sick among us always – we have a duty to help our brothers and sisters less fortunate because but for the grace of god that could be you or I.