Military Families Get A $2,400 Bill From ObamaCare

At least one of those free “benefits” President Obama promised us from ObamaCare turns out not to be not so free—for those in the military.

Every time the president points out the ways he believes his health care legislation helps Americans, the first or second item on the list is the ability for children up to age 26—if you can call a 26-year-old a child—to remain on, or return to, their parents’ health insurance plan.


There Is No Conservative Case For ObamaCare
Merrill Matthews
Contributor

Obama Bends the EPA Rules When It Helps Him
Merrill Matthews
Contributor

The Coming 'Obama Recession' Of 2013
Merrill Matthews
Contributor

Obama's Jimmy Carter Redux On Economic And Foreign Policy
Merrill Matthews
Contributor

As any actuary could have explained to Democrats had they taken the time to ask, this mandate will dramatically drive up the cost of health insurance for children. Of course, they didn’t ask. They believed that by expanding health coverage to millions of uninsured people health spending, and therefore premiums, would actually go down.

Most workers with employer-based coverage won’t see much of an increase because the employer providing their health insurance often covers most of the premium cost. Except, it turns out, for the military.

As the Wall Street Journal reports, “Families covered by Tricare, the health program for active and retired members of the military, must pay as much as $200 a month to let an adult stay on their plan until age 26.”

That would be $2,400 for the first year of coverage for a family on a military salary. As President Obama might say, it’s arithmetic. If it’s two young adults, it’s $4,800 a year. Thank you for your service!

The most important thing this revelation does from a policy standpoint is it exposes an oft-repeated sham coming from defenders of ObamaCare: that this kind of coverage can be expanded without imposing more costs on those who are paying the premiums.

And it contradicts Obama’s constant drumbeat that he is helping the middle class.

Health insurance for children is the most affordable coverage there is. That’s because children between the ages of two to 18 are the healthiest segment of the population. As a result, when a young family that has to buy its own coverage adds a child or two to their policy, they usually find the additional coverage cheap when compared to the cost of premiums for adults. And that low cost has made it easier for young families, which tend to have lower incomes, to get their children insured.

In addition, most standard health insurance policies allowed children to remain on their parents’ policies until they were between 23-to-25 years old as long as they were dependents, such as full-time students. (Mine did.)

But now insurers must accept young adults up to age 26, well into their child-bearing years, and they don’t even have to be dependents. And they can drop the coverage when they don’t want it and return to their parents’ policy when they need care. Talk about gaming the system!

As an aside, an insurance agent told me last summer that one of his clients who owned a company provided full coverage for his employees. One of those employees has an adult son who had gone to work for the employer’s competitor. Well, the son decided to go back on his father’s policy, thanks to ObamaCare. But the company owner complained that he was now paying for the health insurance of one of his competitor’s employees.

Thus the president’s much-touted benefit means the cost of children’s coverage will go up—dramatically. And now we know by how much: for military families between $175 and $200 a month in the first year.

The law that extended this requirement to the military—which is separate from ObamaCare—didn’t provide any funds for the coverage, according to the Journal article. So the government must charge our men and women in uniform that additional premium.

Premiums will also go up for those with traditional (i.e., non-military) health insurance, though it may be less obvious in employer-based group policies. But that young, healthy, low-income family that buys their own coverage and used to be able to add a child to their policy for a song? Well, they will have to pay more.

Of course, ObamaCare defenders might claim that the increased price won’t be a problem; the government will provide most families with subsidies. But that doesn’t mean the policy costs any less; it just means taxpayers are paying for it.

Or maybe not. Families will only get that subsidy if they are in a health insurance exchange, and there is now a major argument over whether exchanges created by the federal government, rather than the states, can provide the health insurance subsidies.

So one more of the many “benefits” of ObamaCare actually doesn’t seem like much of a benefit when people are forced to pay for it. The president may not mind sticking the public with that additional cost, but that’s no way to treat our military.

Merrill Matthews is a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas. Follow at twitter.com/MerrillMatthews

Source: Forbes

---

The UNaffordable Health Care for America Act: States Balking at New Insurance Exchanges

Military personnel and their dependents receive free health care, it's part of the deal. Why is it unreasonable to require that they pay for additional coverage beyond the normal age when a military dependent's free health coverage expires?

Should a 25 year old college graduate with a job get free health care just because his dad or mom is in the military?

Ridiculous, just like the rest of your stupid, time-wasting posts.

bitch if its free, bitch if theres a co pay ..

bitch bitch bitch

try adding an extra driver on your auto ins policy at no cost to the poilcy holder, and lemme know how that works out ..

Military personnel and their dependents receive free health care, it's part of the deal. Why is it unreasonable to require that they pay for additional coverage beyond the normal age when a military dependent's free health coverage expires?

Should a 25 year old college graduate with a job get free health care just because his dad or mom is in the military?

Ridiculous, just like the rest of your stupid, time-wasting posts. Originally Posted by timpage

Then why do you continue to read my posts?
You STILL think there's a difference between the left and the right.
The majority of your posts are about BS 2012 election polls and how Obama will save us all. You are just another brainwashed idiot who can't comprehend reality. You and people like you... the reason why America is a shit hole.
Glad I don't live in the states anymore. Enjoy the debt, the police state and the welfare/warfare state that people like you help build by supporting people like Obama. The United States of America... Once a great Republic.

lets see ..

obviously you rail against the healthcare bill because of cost issues and expense to the country, and now you apparently disprove of copay that offsets some of the expense you are against that lowers the cost of the bill to the country ..

bout right?

lets see ..

obviously you rail against the healthcare bill because of cost issues and expense to the country, and now you apparently disprove of copay that offsets some of the expense you are against that lowers the cost of the bill to the country ..

bout right? Originally Posted by CJ7

The government should not be involved, plain and simple.
Plus name one program run by the government that has not went over budget.

so say that rather than make some vapid attempt to prove a point without steppping all over your hypocritical gland ...

CBJ7 has a proven disability when it comes to comprehension. You are spot on in your posts, and we all know Obamacare is a fraud. CBJ7 is simply waiting for a response from the Obamatron in Chicago.

CBJ7 has a proven disability when it comes to comprehension. You are spot on in your posts, and we all know Obamacare is a fraud. CBJ7 is simply waiting for a response from the Obamatron in Chicago. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

so bitch about healthcare ... hypocritical horseshit does absolutely nothing to support the point ... In your case COF put on a hat like Ive been telling you.

so say that rather than make some vapid attempt to prove a point without steppping all over your hypocritical gland ... Originally Posted by CJ7

Like I said government should not be involved...
Me, I'm going to keep profiting again and again from the great Keynesian experiment and people like you who love it... guess so... more fun many miles away! You have no idea what America has become.
Good Luck.

more fun many miles away?

will you vote?
do you pay taxes?

Don't worry the right will post a thread and by the time the argument is over they will be talking against the original thread.

musta activated the eject button with those 2 questions ..

more fun many miles away?

will you vote?
do you pay taxes? Originally Posted by CJ7

Yes, I'm a futures and options trader.
A lot more fun not living in the states.
Yes
Yes... lots.

FACTA laws go into full effect next year.
That's why more and more Americans have a hard time dealing with financial institutions overseas.
I have had overseas accounts and allocated gold and silver accounts for years.
Everything is legal.
There are no current laws prohibiting, not yet at least.
Only a fool would keep their wealth in America... and in dollars and or in dollar denominated investments... unless your "Short" dollar denominated investments.

LMAO!

"FINANCIAL REPRESSION" Pension Funds Assess Investments In Government Debt

The fact that the parents will be charged to get kid coverage is a non issue. That is the only way that allowing kids to stay on their parents policies will work. What we should be complaining about is how high the premiums are and that it just reinforces why Obamacare will not lower the cost of health care. The problem with Obamacare is not the objective of getting everyone coverage. The problem is that it just makes the problem of high healthcare costs worse. $2,400 annual premium for ayoung adult is proof of that.