Rubber Meets the Road for Obamacare

If the law is going to get more popular, now’s the time.

National Journal
Sam Baker
Add to Briefcase
Sam Baker
Dec. 30, 2013, 12:16 p.m.

Demo­crats have said for years that Obama­care will get more pop­u­lar as people be­gin to see its be­ne­fits. Now we’ll find out wheth­er that’s true.

Many of the Af­ford­able Care Act’s most pop­u­lar pro­vi­sions take ef­fect Wed­nes­day. Be­gin­ning this week, in­surers can­not use a preex­ist­ing con­di­tion as a reas­on to deny someone cov­er­age or charge a high­er premi­um. New in­sur­ance policies take ef­fect that must cov­er cer­tain be­ne­fits. And, biggest of all, new tax sub­sidies kick in to help low-in­come con­sumers cov­er the cost of their premi­ums.

All of this is hap­pen­ing amid stub­bornly bad — and, ac­cord­ing to some polls, fall­ing — pub­lic ap­prov­al of the health care law. The latest track­ing poll from the Kais­er Fam­ily Found­a­tion put its fa­vor­ab­il­ity rat­ing at 34 per­cent, com­pared with 48 per­cent who had an un­fa­vor­able view.

Obama­care’s ap­prov­al rat­ings have been up­side-down for years, and Demo­crats had all but giv­en up try­ing to turn the num­bers around un­til the law’s most pop­u­lar pro­vi­sions took ef­fect. 

The botched rol­lout of Health­ made mat­ters worse. Ap­prov­al of the law, and Pres­id­ent Obama’s own ap­prov­al rat­ings, sank as the fed­er­al en­roll­ment web­site sputtered. Ad­min­is­tra­tion of­fi­cials say their biggest con­cern dur­ing the site’s early troubles was that people would give up on the Obama­care “brand” and simply wouldn’t come back to the site once it began work­ing.

That hasn’t happened.

Ac­cord­ing to the Health and Hu­man Ser­vices De­part­ment, more than 975,000 people se­lec­ted and en­rolled in a plan through Health­ this month. The total for all 50 states is now above 2 mil­lion — still shy of the 3.3 mil­lion sign-ups HHS ini­tially ex­pec­ted to re­ceive by the end of the year, but rap­idly pick­ing up steam.

One po­ten­tial prob­lem for the ad­min­is­tra­tion, though, is that people don’t as­so­ci­ate new be­ne­fits they might like with the health care law. As Demo­crat­ic strategists have noted, cov­er­age un­der the Af­ford­able Care Act isn’t an eas­ily iden­ti­fi­able be­ne­fit like Medi­care or So­cial Se­cur­ity. It’s private in­sur­ance, paid for in part by a sub­sidy that goes dir­ectly to the in­sur­ance com­pany.

Many in­di­vidu­al pieces of the Af­ford­able Care Act, in­clud­ing many of the policies that take ef­fect Jan. 1, are pop­u­lar on their own. The ad­min­is­tra­tion has already struggled with earli­er be­ne­fits — namely re­bates paid by in­sur­ance com­pan­ies — that poll well but which people don’t seem to con­nect to Obama­care.

And that’s as­sum­ing people like the cov­er­age they’ll get un­der the law. In or­der to keep premi­ums low, many in­sur­ance com­pan­ies have lim­ited the net­work of pro­viders they’ll cov­er in new policies, mean­ing some people who had their plans can­celed might not be able to keep their doc­tors. And con­sumers who be­nefited most from the pre-Obama­care in­di­vidu­al mar­ket — young, healthy, reas­on­ably af­flu­ent men — will see their premi­ums for cov­er­age rise un­der the new rules.

If con­sumers don’t like the cov­er­age they get, or don’t con­nect it to Obama­care, pub­lic ap­prov­al could con­tin­ue to sag, cre­at­ing a drag on Demo­crat­ic can­did­ates in 2014.

What We're Following See More »
Chef Jose Andres Campaigns With Clinton
0 minute ago
White House Weighs in Against Non-Compete Contracts
46 minutes ago

"The Obama administration on Tuesday called on U.S. states to ban agreements prohibiting many workers from moving to their employers’ rivals, saying it would lead to a more competitive labor market and faster wage growth. The administration said so-called non-compete agreements interfere with worker mobility and states should consider barring companies from requiring low-wage workers and other employees who are not privy to trade secrets or other special circumstances to sign them."

House Investigators Already Sharpening Their Spears for Clinton
1 hours ago

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz plans to spend "years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton." Chaffetz told the Washington Post: “It’s a target-rich environment. Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”

No Lobbying Clinton’s Transition Team
4 hours ago

Hillary Clinton's transition team has in place strict rules to limit the influence that lobbyists could have "in crafting the nominee’s policy agenda." The move makes it unlikely, at least for now, that Clinton would overturn Obama's executive order limiting the role that lobbyists play in government

Federal Government Employees Giving Money to Clinton
4 hours ago

Federal employees from 14 agencies have given nearly $2 million in campaign donations in the presidential race thus far, and 95 percent of the donations, totaling $1.9 million, have been to the Clinton campaign. Employees at the State Department, which Clinton lead for four years, has given 99 percent of its donations to the Democratic nominee.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.