CBO: Under Obamacare 7 million to lose employer-provided health insurance

Heritage ObamacareRemember the president’s assurance back when he was working feverishly to sell Obamacare to an apprehensive populace? He said repeatedly, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. Period.” The claim was so dubious that even PolitiFact rated the promise in August of 2009 as half-true.

Now a new report by the Congressional Budget Office suggests the fact-checking site might have been erring on the side of caution.

The nonpartisan government agency estimates that 7 million Americans will lose their employer-provided health insurance once the law becomes fully implemented.

The reason, Keith Koffler of White House Dossier notes, is “intrinsic to the health care law” itself. A key provision gives employers a choice. They can either continue to offer insurance to their employees, or they can drop the plan and pay a penalty (read: “tax”). Since the penalty will be cheaper in virtually every instance, the decision is a no-brainer.

Another unintended consequence of the health care law resides in the requirement that companies with 50 or more full-time employees provide health coverage or pay the penalty. Many companies barely above the threshold will either cut enough workers to sidestep the requirement or reduce their hours, effectively making them part-time.

Thus at a time when 12.3 million Americans are still struggling to find work, a new law will go into effect that provides a disincentive to employers to hire them. Talk about your lose-lose situations.

Related Articles

Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook.

Thursday, February 7, 2013 at 3:17 PM

3 comments

  1. kind of a joke in hiring finance people from universities Howard…”first you recruit them, then you un-recruit them”. The guy that was your best friend until you signed wouldn’t spit on you if you were on fire after you signed.

    I’ll let you skate on the “non-partisan” descriptor for now. But it’s on my hit list as an abused/misused term.

    • I’ll let you skate on the “non-partisan” descriptor for now.

      Wow, tough crowd.

      I would argue only that if the CBO is partisan, then it must lean right. Why else would the WH be in constant disagreement with its findings?

  2. well Drawoh…without revealing too much about why that term will be chapter 6 in my rant on abused/misused terms, it is now put out there as a “red herring” on most stories.

    Coming from the CBO (who for the most part really do “just the facts ma’am”), they lose street cred when the story is prefaced with “non-partisan”. I can’t think of a theft of a phrase that has so quickly been debunked. Just saying…

Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>