The New York Times has a story today on one of Obamacare’s few “success” stories: young adults are gaining health insurance coverage thanks to mandates forcing employers to allow parents to add their adult children to their insurance plan. The Times reports:
Three new surveys, including two released on Wednesday, show that adults under 26 made significant and unique gains in insurance coverage in 2010 and the first half of 2011. One of them, by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, estimates that in the first quarter of 2011 there were 900,000 fewer uninsured adults in the 19-to-25 age bracket than in 2010.
Twelve paragraphs later, to their credit, The Times acknowledges that there is no such thing as a free lunch:
There have been no studies of the provision’s impact on cost. But Mr. Olson and several insurance industry spokesmen credited it for raising enrollments and premiums by between 1 percent and 3 percent at many firms.
“It’s a basic principle of economics that when more benefits are added to a policy or more people are covered under that policy there are additional costs incurred,” said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group. “The cost impact is even greater to the extent ‘adverse selection’ occurs, meaning that only people who need health care services choose to enroll in their parents’ plan.”
“It’s a basic principle of economics that when more benefits are added to a policy or more people are covered under that policy there are additional costs incurred,” said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group. “The cost impact is even greater to the extent ‘adverse selection’ occurs, meaning that only people who need health care services choose to enroll in their parents’ plan.”
Of course, if any of these “adult children” actually had a good job, they could afford to move out of their parents basements and pay for their own health care. Unfortunately, studies show that higher health spending leads to fewer jobs. From my column this week:
Just look at Massachusetts, where former Gov. Mitt Romney’s health care reform “succeeded” by expanding health care coverage to all but 1.9 percent of the population. But while almost everyone in Massachusetts has health insurance, they are paying more and more for it, thanks to Romneycare.
Health insurance premiums are rising across the entire country, but a study by the Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy found that premiums are rising even faster in the Bay State.
The Massachusetts study found that “high premium growth has discouraged job and employment growth, including especially the creation of jobs that offer health benefits.”
The Beacon Hill Institute released a report last week that put a number on the job-killing effects of Romneycare. According to Beacon Hill, the increased health care spending caused by Romneycare has decreased spending on other investments, leading to 18,313 fewer jobs created in 2010 than otherwise would have been created had Romneycare not become law.
Health insurance premiums are rising across the entire country, but a study by the Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy found that premiums are rising even faster in the Bay State.
The Massachusetts study found that “high premium growth has discouraged job and employment growth, including especially the creation of jobs that offer health benefits.”
The Beacon Hill Institute released a report last week that put a number on the job-killing effects of Romneycare. According to Beacon Hill, the increased health care spending caused by Romneycare has decreased spending on other investments, leading to 18,313 fewer jobs created in 2010 than otherwise would have been created had Romneycare not become law.
