Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Julie Boonstra is potentially paying more under Obamacare
This morning on Fox and Friends, Boonstra said her new plan costs less, but she cannot afford the thousands of dollars needed to cover possible out of pocket costs. Steve Doocy asked Boonstra if she is lying about her situation, as the congressman is alleging. “I am not lying, Steve,” she said. “I lost my health care plan due to the implementation of ObamaCare, and I do not have $5,000 or $6,000 dollars in the bank.”
Ok, so Julie is saving around $1000 over the course of a year. However, what this does - the new plan subjects her to out-of-pocket expenses. On her old plan, her out-of-pocket expenses were virtually zero, but the latest information on this new plan claims out-of-pocket expense is capped at $5,100.

So let's say that Julie is forced onto this new plan on Jan 1, 2014. And she has budgeted per month $1,100 for her healthcare. But on the new plan it's only $571/mo. So she's saving a little per month.

So in March, she has to go for a specialty Leukemia treatment that isn't covered but she has to pay out-of-pocket $4,000. Under the old plan of $1,100, she was covered. But it's cancelled. So under this new plan, she now owes $4,000. In March, which is more affordable?

$1,100 or $4,000? Did she save enough to cover the expense?

So you can see, this doesn't work and potentially is "unaffordable".

“Consumers will need to balance lower monthly premiums against the potential for unpredictable, expensive, out-of-pocket costs in plans with higher deductibles,” Caroline Pearson, vice president of Avalere Health, said in a statement. “Furthermore, there is a risk that patients could forgo needed care when faced with high upfront deductibles.” Avalere is a private consulting firm that advises clients on how health policy will affect them. Its study looked at plan information from Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington to draw its conclusions, although it’s unclear whether the results are applicable nationwide. All of the states in the study except Indiana are running their own exchanges rather than deferring to the federal government. The study also suggests exchange enrollees could see higher drug co-pays and co-insurance than those in employer-sponsored plans. Read more:

No comments:

Post a Comment