The Blog

The Quarterback of Obamacare Doesn’t Like the GOP Senators’ Alternative

12:22 PM, Feb 3, 2014 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

In reality, if a 64-year-old is charged $6,000, actuarial tables suggest that a 21-year-old should be charged only about $1,000 (a ratio of about 6-to-1)—and that’s what the 21-year-old would pay in a truly free market.  But Obamacare bans this—from coast to coast.  Eschewing actuarial science, it decrees that this ratio cannot exceed 3-to-1.  So, if a 64-year-old is charged $6,000, a 21-year-old must be charged at least $2,000.  Obamacare mandates this.  (Having second thoughts yet, young Obama voters?)

In short, Obamacare makes health insurance far more expensive than it was before the Democrats rammed Obama’s centerpiece legislation through Congress without a single Republican vote.  Liberals claim that this—along with an extraordinary consolidation of power and money at the expense of liberty—is the price we must each pay to provide protection for all.  But well-conceived conservative alternatives, like Coburn-Burr-Hatch and a soon-to-be released alternative from the 2017 Project, show otherwise.

Jeffrey H. Anderson is executive director of the newly formed 2017 Project, which is working to advance a conservative reform agenda.

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 19 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers