About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Quick Fact: Baier distorts CBO report to claim premiums "will actually go up" under Senate bill

December 01, 2009 11:47 pm ET — 3 Comments

On Fox News' Special Report, anchor Bret Baier misrepresented the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) analysis of the Senate health care bill's effect on insurance premiums by claiming that "depending on how you read" the report, insurance "premiums for many people will actually go up" under the bill. In fact, 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 those 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

Baier cites CBO to claim, under Senate health bill, insurance "premiums for many people will actually go up"

From the December 1 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier:

BAIER: The Congressional Budget Office's assessment of the Senate bill -- in part, depending on how you read it -- says that premiums for many people will actually go up and that costs will not be driven down. The White House says that's not true. So what is the truth?

Fact: CBO found bill would actually result in lower premiums for most individual enrollees

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 about 57 percent of the individual 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."

Premiums would remain unchanged and 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 oscar the grouch (December 02, 2009 12:23 am ET)
        1
      "only" 17% of 300 million is a pretty good sized number, could even be classified as "many". It's "only" in this case, if we were talking about poverty levels, it would be a disaster. Still some details to iron out, so it's hard to say the 17% figure will be accurate in the long term (or even the near term). There still exists the likelihood that a good number projected to be on company sponsored programs will be transferred to the "buy it yourself" category when all the details are worked out.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by truthseeker77 (December 02, 2009 8:55 pm ET)
         
      By the way, Obama broke a promise. He promised to sign a bill reducing premiums for the "typical family" (a typical family has employer-sponsored insurance) by $2,500, and this bill reduces it only by $100-200 according to the CBO.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by rrastro (December 02, 2009 10:04 pm ET)
         
      the bill wont increase premium, only taxes and the penalties for not buying wast some neither want nor need
      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.