Private health insurance exchanges, like those created by the Affordable Care Act or in Medicare Advantage, have historically failed to control costs. Part of the reason is the basic economic issue of individuals lacking real market power and actually choosing the “best” insurance option, which is extremely complicated. Another problem is lobbying related. Whenever you needlessly create private middlemen you also create another layer of lobbyists.
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday April 2, 2013 10:20 am|
|By: David Dayen Wednesday March 14, 2012 6:15 am|
Dayen’s news roundup from Tuesday evening, sans the GOP primary, with other stories about the foreclosure settlement, HUD IG reports, Ben Bernanke, Eric Schneiderman, Spain, banksters, Rebecca Brooks, Sarah Palin, health insurance exchanges, Afghanistan shootings, T. Boone Pickens, Goldman Sachs, Rush Limbaugh, labor, Dick Cheney avoids Canada, and much more.
|By: Scarecrow Saturday December 17, 2011 1:00 pm|
The notion that the health insurance exchanges required by the Affordable Care Act would reduce health care costs using “competition” between concentrated health insurers was always one or more unbridgeable chasms away from a plausible theory.
But the myths of competitive markets are so deeply ingrained in our political discourse it was inevitable that a nominal Democratic President not constrained by conceptual coherence and a corrupt Congress would try to sell us the conceit as the only politically feasible model for health care reform. The economists — not to mention international experience — told us it was gibberish, but nobody cared.