This blog already has noted that Obamacare crippled the market for “kids only” health insurance policies. Unsurprisingly, that is just the beginning of the bad news. The latest development is that health policies designed to provide insurance to low-income workers may no longer be economically feasible. The Wall Street Journal comments.
Among President Obama’s core health-care promises was that Americans can keep their current coverage if they like it. Among the reasons that a new ObamaCare squall blows in every other day is that this claim simply is not true, as people are discovering. The latest fracas was incited by Janet Adamy’s scoop in the Journal this week that McDonald’s Corp. may be forced to cancel its current coverage for 29,500 employees as a result of ObamaCare. McDonald’s told Health and Human Services regulators that new mandates will make its plans “economically prohibitive” and cause “a huge disruption” unless it gets a waiver. …The entire philosophical and policy architecture of ObamaCare is explicitly designed to standardize health benefits and how those benefits should be paid for. Those choices and tradeoffs will be made for everyone by Ms. Sebelius’s regulators. …Around 2.5 million consumers are covered by “mini-med” policies, most of them concentrated in low-wage industries like fast food, hospitality and retail that have large numbers of part-time or temporary workers. In the case of the restaurants, 75% of the workforce turns over every year and nearly half are under age 25. Mini-med plans are a temporary stopgap for businesses that have low margins and face high labor and health costs. But Democrats hate mini-med and other skinny-benefit plans, calling them “underinsurance.” ObamaCare is meant to run them out of the market by mandating benefits, eliminating coverage caps and certain technical rules about how premiums must be spent. …In other words, the choice is between relatively affordable coverage that isn’t as generous as Democrats think it should be and dumping coverage entirely. McDonald’s may eventually offer the high-cost plans that Ms. Sebelius favors, or get its waiver, but many of its less profitable or smaller competitors won’t. While subsidized ObamaCare options will be available in 2014, those costs will merely be transferred to taxpayers.
[…] I started writing about groups victimized by the law. But after highlighting how children, low-income workers, and retirees were disadvantaged by government-run healthcare, I soon realized that I wasn’t […]
[…] that have been disadvantaged by Obamacare, including ones that deserve sympathy, such as children, low-income workers, and retirees, as well as those that don’t deserve much sympathy, such ascongressional staff, […]
[…] that have been disadvantaged by Obamacare, including ones that deserve sympathy, such as children, low-income workers, and retirees, as well as those that don’t deserve much sympathy, such as congressional […]
[…] we shouldn’t joke. It’s not funny that low-income workers are being hurt. Just like it’s not funny that young adults, retirees, and kids are being […]
[…] I began to maintain a list of groups that were victimized by the law. But after listing kids, low-income workers, and retirees, I quickly realized this was a senseless exercise because virtually everyone in the […]
[…] I began to maintain a list of groups that were victimized by the law. But after listing kids, low-income workers, and retirees, I quickly realized this was a senseless exercise because virtually everyone in the […]
[…] Though I imagine she thinks we just need some clever messaging so we understand why it’s okay that bad things are happening to children, retirees, and low-income workers. […]
[…] Or required employers to provide health insurance. […]
[…] Though I imagine she thinks we just need some clever messaging so we understand why it’s okay that bad things are happening to children, retirees, and low-income workers. […]
[…] the victims are many relatively powerless people, including children, low-income workers, and […]
[…] the victims are many relatively powerless people, including children, low-income workers, and […]
[…] written how it victimizes children, low-income workers, and […]
[…] Though I imagine she thinks we just need some clever messaging so we understand why it’s okay that bad things are happening to children, retirees, and low-income workers. […]
[…] Though I imagine she thinks we just need some clever messaging so we understand why it’s okay that bad things are happening to children, retirees, and low-income workers. […]
[…] required employers to provide health […]
[…] required employers to provide health […]
[…] 6, 2010 by Dan Mitchell We’ve already identified kids and low-income workers as groups that are being hurt by the new scheme for government-run healthcare. Now we can add […]
Their Wikipedia page says there are over 31,000 McDonald’s restaurants worldwide employing over 1.5 million people, so I assume the article refers to McDonald’s corporate.
One thing that needs to be clarified is just who these 29,500 employees are. Most, if not all, McDonalds restaurants are individually owned and operated. The healthplans for their workers are the responsibility of their respective owners. Is McDonalds speaking for these owners when it is talking about the 29.5? Or is it talking about the people who work at their corporate headquarters?
Good post and nice blog. Looking forward for new RSS-Feeds 🙂
Best regards