I hate the word "ObamaCare". I find it so derisive. It's been the moniker for the anti-health care reform factions (supporters use it, too), and it’s loaded with subliminal messages that go well beyond the debate about health care reform. But that's not why I write today. I do think it's important to consider health care reform one year in, and there's an interesting bite about the law in The Atlantic:
Unintended consequences have started kicking... The administration is granting waivers to virtually anyone who asks, presumably because they think that absent the waivers, people would be losing their insurance. And not without good reason - thanks to the rules making it illegal to exclude children with pre-existing conditions, insurers have now stopped selling child-only policies in 34 states. Both the government of Massachusetts and the administration are eagerly exploring the option of simply commanding insurance companies to sell policies at the price they would like to pay, a tactic that doesn't really have a great track record in modern industrial economies.
Quite frankly, I agree with writer Megan McArdle: So far, the law is underwhelming. The mounting waivers and exceptions to the law seem to seriously uncut the central themes of the legislation. And the sales job has been the poorest product launch since New Coke.
Well, it's only year one, right? Sit tight!
