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

















Your text to link here...
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.
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.
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!!
Those in an exchange or through their employers (57% of Americans) would see their rates DECREASE.
This bill, if passed, doesn't start the day after.
The way this bill is structured doesn't solve the problem particularly quickly.
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.
Can we demand that Republicans read the CBO reports about the bill?