If you think I was exaggerating about how the left's goal is to smash the private economy—paying no heed for how the government is going to actually provide health care or energy or other goods and services after the capitalist economy has been destroyed—well, here's more evidence.
I've linked before to stories about the impending collapse of several major private non-profit insurers in Massachusetts after they were subjected to price controls on their premiums by the state's chief insurance regulator, acting under the orders of Massachusetts governor and Obama ally Deval Patrick.
Now there's new evidence that the regulators were warned about the crisis they were about to create—and chose to suppress the warning. According to the Boston Globe:
The official in charge of monitoring insurer solvency at the state Division of Insurance sent an internal e-mail this spring warning that the rates the division imposed on health plans "have no actuarial support'' and could lead to "a train wreck'' in the industry.
Shortly after the division rejected proposed double-digit rate increases for small businesses and individuals, Robert G. Dynan, the division's deputy commissioner for financial analysis, wrote to members of his staff on April 6 that "our jobs of monitoring solvency just got exponentially more difficult'' as a result of "artificial price caps.''
Dynan also complained that "this action was taken against my objections and without including me in the conversation.''
But the big picture is the impact of ObamaCare, which is turning out to vindicate all of our warnings. What did we say? We said, "You Will Lose Your Private Health Insurance." And now we find that the majority of the existing policies that were supposed to be "grandfathered" under the new law will in fact fall under the new regulations, which effectively means that your existing policy will be canceled and re-written by federal bureaucrats.
The main link below lays out the facts more clearly, but even the New York Times is forced into a weasel-worded admission:
In some respects, the rules appear to fall short of the sweeping commitments President Obama made while trying to reassure the public in the fight over health legislation.
In issuing the rules, the administration said this was just one goal of the legislation, allowing people to "keep their current coverage if they like it." It acknowledged that some people, especially those who work at smaller businesses, might face significant changes in the terms of their coverage, and it said they should be able to "reap the benefits of additional consumer protections."
I considered filing this under the heading "We Told You So," but it's more appropriate to describe it as an example of the Law of Intended Consequences. The destruction of private health insurance is not an incidental, blundering result of poorly cobbled together legislation. It was the purpose of the left's health-care crusade from the very beginning.
"Administration: 51% Of Companies' Health Plans Won't Pass Muster," Sean Higgins and David Hogberg, Investor's Business Daily, June 11
Internal White House documents reveal that 51% of employers may have to relinquish their current health care coverage by 2013 due to ObamaCare. That numbers soars to 66% for small-business employers.
The documents—product of a joint project of the Labor Department, the Health and Human Services Department and the IRS—examine the effects new regulations would have on existing, or "grandfathered," employer-based health care plans….
Under interim regulations, current employer-based coverage would not be grandfathered and hence subject to the health care laws' consumer provisions if…
According to the report, by 2013 51% of all employers—66% of small employers (3-99 employees) and 45% of large employers—would have to relinquish current coverage. In a worst-case scenario, 69% of firms would lose their grandfathered status.
