About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Cavuto distorts CBO report to claim Senate health bill will "jack up" premiums

December 01, 2009 9:12 am ET — 16 Comments

On Fox News' Your World, Neil Cavuto misrepresented the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) analysis of the Senate health care bill's effect on insurance premiums by claiming that it found that the bill would "jack up premiums by more than 10 percent for a lot of Americans." In fact, the CBO estimated that premiums would only increase for individuals purchasing insurance on their own--about 17 percent of the insurance market in 2016--and that affordability credits would substantially lower costs for many of those individuals, a majority of whom would receive subsidies through the exchanges.

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Cavuto cites CBO to claim Senate health bill would "jack up premiums...for a lot of Americans"

From the November 30 edition of Your World:

CAVUTO: Meanwhile, to something that could dampen shoppers' mood, sticker shock when buying health insurance -- the Congressional Budget Office just announcing that the Senate health care bill will jack up premiums by more than 10 percent for a lot of Americans.

Utah's Republican Senator Bob Bennett is not surprised. He's in D.C., where -- I don't know if I told you -- I will be heading this Thursday for that big old jobs summit. Senator, always good to have you.

SEN. BENNET (R), UTAH: Thank you.

CAVUTO: These are some alarming figures. How reliable are they?

BENNETT: Oh, I think they're very reliable, and they confirm what we have suspected all along.

If you go back to the campaign, President Obama promised that every American, typical American family would see their health care premiums cut by $2,500 a year. Now the CBO says, no, this program would increase them by $5,000 a year, roughly. That's a pretty bad swing, $7,500 in the wrong direction for Americans.

CAVUTO: All right.

Actual CBO: Premiums would not rise for vast majority of Americans

Premiums will only rise for nongroup market-- about 17 percent of the market in 2016. In a November 30 analysis, the nonpartisan CBO estimated that for premiums, the "largest effects would be seen in the nongroup market, which would grow in size under the proposal but would still account for only 17 percent of the overall insurance market in 2016. The effects on premiums would be much smaller in the small group and large group markets, which would make up 13 percent and 70 percent of the total insurance market, respectively."

Federal subsidies will actually lower premiums from current costs for many in nongroup market. The CBO estimated that while the average premium per person in the nongroup market would be about 10 to 13 percent higher in 2016, "those figures indicate what enrollees would pay, on average, not accounting for the new federal subsidies. The majority of nongroup enrollees (about 57 percent) would receive subsidies via the new insurance exchanges, and those subsidies, on average, would cover nearly two-thirds of the total premium, CBO and JCT [Joint Committee on Taxation] estimate. Thus, the amount that subsidized enrollees would pay for nongroup coverage would be roughly 56 percent to 59 percent lower, on average, than the nongroup premiums charged under current law."

Increase in individual premiums due to broader scope of coverage. The CBO estimated that premiums would go up because the average plan would "cover a substantially larger share of enrollees' costs for health care (on average) and a slightly wider range of benefits." From the CBO's analysis:

Average premiums would be 27 percent to 30 percent higher because a greater amount of coverage would be obtained. In particular, the average insurance policy in this market would cover a substantially larger share of enrollees' costs for health care (on average) and a slightly wider range of benefits. Those expansions would reflect both the minimum level of coverage (and related requirements) specified in the proposal and people's decisions to purchase more extensive coverage in response to the structure of subsidies.

Premiums could decrease for large and small group insurance markets. The CBO also estimated that for the large-group market, which it said would make up 70 percent of the total insurance market in 2016, "the legislation would yield an average premium per person that is zero to 3 percent lower in 2016 (relative to current law)." Further, in "the small group market, which consists of employers with 50 or fewer workers, CBO and JCT estimate that the change in the average premium per person resulting from the legislation could range from an increase of 1 percent to a reduction of 2 percent in 2016 (relative to current law)."

Major cost-saving measures kick in after 2016. The CBO analyzed the impact on premiums for 2016, but as Jonathan Cohn noted on The New Republic's health care blog, "many of the cost-saving measures in the bill aren't expected to yield savings until after that date." The Washington Post's Ezra Klein similarly wrote:

CBO is looking at 2016, which is long before the delivery system reforms will have really begun working, or the excise tax will have started restraining the growth in premiums costs, or the Medicare Commission will be aggressively experimenting to bring down costs first in Medicare and then in the system more generally. These are the numbers, in other words, from a world in which none of the cost control efforts work. In that world, health-care reform still does an enormous amount to help 30 or 40 million people, and a bit to help tens of millions more.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mk3872 (December 01, 2009 9:45 am ET)
      1  
      Actually, the CBO report estimates that 57% of Americans will see their healthcare insurance premiums DECREASE SIGNIFICANTLY with this bill.

      Your text to link here...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by boulderhippy (December 01, 2009 10:13 am ET)
           
        That is good if you aren't in the 43% that get their rates jacked up.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by jediknight65 (December 01, 2009 10:43 am ET)
           
        yeah but its neil cavuto and its fox business. they will lie through their teeth to their graves and beyond
        Report Abuse
      • Author by dexteritas0071418 (December 01, 2009 2:20 pm ET)
           
        That's not what it says...that statement was in reference to individual purchases, not Americans as a whole.

        I pay $360/mo for health ins for my wife and I, and we're in that "small group" where my employer has less than 50 in the plan. If my and other's like me's premiums go up significantly, you can guarantee:

        1. I will never vote for another Dem unless they un=reform healthcare, or institute single-payor, which will be a lot more fair than THIS crap

        2. Small businesses will suffer from lack of young talent because healthy 20 and 30-somethings are going to go to work for large employers that can offer better premium situations than small employers.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mk3872 (December 01, 2009 3:11 pm ET)
             
          If you bought your health insurance on your own as opposed to through your employer, then you would expect a premium increase of about $36/year.

          Naturally, your premiums will increase with or without a new healthcare bill, as you well know already.

          Of course, you could look this up yourself. But I image that you are more likely than not going to just continue to put out misleading information instead of looking at the actual facts.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by TX (December 01, 2009 10:40 am ET)
      1  
      What is the "nongroup" market?

      17% is still a BIG number of people that would have increases....if you base 17% of the population (eg. 300 million people) -- that is 51 million people that would have an increase!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mk3872 (December 01, 2009 10:58 am ET)
           
        The CBO estimates premiums would increase 10% on individuals who buy their own insurance.

        Those in an exchange or through their employers (57% of Americans) would see their rates DECREASE.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by TX (December 01, 2009 11:06 am ET)
             
          What happens to the premiums BEFORE 2016?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by caels (December 01, 2009 12:22 pm ET)
            1  
            Virtually nothing, the bill doesn't take affect for several years. Almost none of the provisions even take place until 2014 and you won't see most of the cost control things take affect until 2016.

            This bill, if passed, doesn't start the day after.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by TX (December 01, 2009 3:57 pm ET)
                 
              But it's supposed to go into effect in 2013 -- so we would be paying into the system for a service that doesn't start until 3 years after the fact?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by caels (December 01, 2009 8:11 pm ET)
                1  
                It actually doesn't really go into affect by 2013. Some of the excise taxes, reinsurance payments, and subsidies go into effect starting in 2013. But the real mechanisms to start controlling cost begin the phase in around 2014. However, the premium estimates are determined based on the anticipated response to the legislation. The market response is not instantaneous once the legislation goes into full effect. It would take a minimum of one year after the price-controlling phase ins to see real cost reduction and probably even closer to two years. This is why they likely chose 2016 (the explanation they give it not satisfactory for my tastes, so I'm having to conjecture here). Since the insurance market wouldn't really change 2014-2016, it would seem frivolous for them to estimate it.

                The way this bill is structured doesn't solve the problem particularly quickly.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by mk3872 (December 01, 2009 3:13 pm ET)
            1  
            Good question. Not sure. But since premiums and costs increase every year without any controls, at least we can look forward to finally having some controls over those endless increases.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by bsherman (December 01, 2009 12:00 pm ET)
        1  
        I am in this "nongroup" market. It means people who buy individual policies. Generally, it's people who don't receive healthcare benefits through work or are self-employed.

        I fully support this healthcare reform. Why? While my premiums may go up, the coverage will be much better. I may come out better on an annual medical cost basis. Why? Currently my policy limits prescriptions to $2000 per year. The legislation would eliminate that cap. Secondly, it will cover things like colonoscopies. Since my father died very early from colon cancer I have to get checked once every 3 years. Because my deductible is so high - essentially I bore the cost of that completely.

        Additionally, my coverage is much more secure. They can't drop me, set lifetime caps, etc. I'm happy to pay the extra 10% for the added security and reduction of potentially very high out of pocket expenses.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by caels (December 01, 2009 12:25 pm ET)
      2  
      Republicans demand that Democrats "read the bill."

      Can we demand that Republicans read the CBO reports about the bill?
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.