Getting rid of the health mandate obviously forced insurers to be more competitive

When President Trump and Republicans were moving to get rid of the individual mandate, they were continuously ripped because "experts" said costs would increase substantially. Democrats and the media said millions would lose their insurance because rates would skyrocket.

They warned repeal would lead to "a significant increase in premiums" for those seeking to buy insurance on Obamacare marketplaces, which offer coverage to those who don't have insurance through an employer or elsewhere.

That increase would add about $1,000 to the annual cost of coverage for an individual health plan for the average unsubsidized family shopping for coverage via government exchanges. (The Kaiser Family Foundation breaks down which lower- and moderate-income families qualify for subsidies here.) That family would go from paying about $10,000 a year on premiums alone, which is what it spent in 2016, to about $11,000. The average unsubsidized individual, meanwhile, would go from paying about $3,800 a year on premiums to about $4,180.

And the Center for American Progress, which crunched the numbers before the House and the Senate reconciled their bills, warned that the forecast could be even more dire: "A typical middle-class family buying individual market insurance would see premiums increase nearly $2,000."

Now, rates are stabilizing, obviously because insurers now have to compete for business instead of people being forced to buy. Somehow, I can't see where Trump and the Republicans are being credited with stabilizing the market. The new lower cost options are allowing more competition for businesses. Consumers are winning. 

AP Exclusive: Stable costs may shift 'Obamacare' politics

After two years of double-digit premium hikes, millions of people covered under the Affordable Care Act will see only modest increases next year, according to an exclusive analysis that highlights the changing politics of health care heading into the midterm elections.

The consulting firm Avalere Health and The Associated Press crunched available state data, finding that "Obamacare's" health insurance marketplaces seem to be stabilizing. Customers in some states will get price cuts. And the exodus of insurers from the program has halted, even reversed somewhat, with more consumer choices for 2019.

The steady outlook means the health care law won't be an easy target for Republicans this year, an election issue that's worked well for them since 2010. But Democrats may also be looking for new talking points.  

Why are people called "experts" when they are so rarely right? Why is CBO ever trusted?

Sooner or later, new talking points will come out in the sycophant media crediting Obama and the Democrats for stabilizing the market. 

When President Trump and Republicans were moving to get rid of the individual mandate, they were continuously ripped because "experts" said costs would increase substantially. Democrats and the media said millions would lose their insurance because rates would skyrocket.

They warned repeal would lead to "a significant increase in premiums" for those seeking to buy insurance on Obamacare marketplaces, which offer coverage to those who don't have insurance through an employer or elsewhere.

That increase would add about $1,000 to the annual cost of coverage for an individual health plan for the average unsubsidized family shopping for coverage via government exchanges. (The Kaiser Family Foundation breaks down which lower- and moderate-income families qualify for subsidies here.) That family would go from paying about $10,000 a year on premiums alone, which is what it spent in 2016, to about $11,000. The average unsubsidized individual, meanwhile, would go from paying about $3,800 a year on premiums to about $4,180.

And the Center for American Progress, which crunched the numbers before the House and the Senate reconciled their bills, warned that the forecast could be even more dire: "A typical middle-class family buying individual market insurance would see premiums increase nearly $2,000."

Now, rates are stabilizing, obviously because insurers now have to compete for business instead of people being forced to buy. Somehow, I can't see where Trump and the Republicans are being credited with stabilizing the market. The new lower cost options are allowing more competition for businesses. Consumers are winning. 

AP Exclusive: Stable costs may shift 'Obamacare' politics

After two years of double-digit premium hikes, millions of people covered under the Affordable Care Act will see only modest increases next year, according to an exclusive analysis that highlights the changing politics of health care heading into the midterm elections.

The consulting firm Avalere Health and The Associated Press crunched available state data, finding that "Obamacare's" health insurance marketplaces seem to be stabilizing. Customers in some states will get price cuts. And the exodus of insurers from the program has halted, even reversed somewhat, with more consumer choices for 2019.

The steady outlook means the health care law won't be an easy target for Republicans this year, an election issue that's worked well for them since 2010. But Democrats may also be looking for new talking points.  

Why are people called "experts" when they are so rarely right? Why is CBO ever trusted?

Sooner or later, new talking points will come out in the sycophant media crediting Obama and the Democrats for stabilizing the market.