The premise of Obamacare was to make health care affordable for the less fortunate. It doesn’t. That’s the conclusion of the notably right-wing, anti-Obama, Republican-mouthpiece newspaper The New York Times:
As technical failures bedevil the rollout of President Obama’s health care law, evidence is emerging that one of the program’s loftiest goals — to encourage competition among insurers in an effort to keep costs low — is falling short for many rural Americans.
While competition is intense in many populous regions, rural areas and small towns have far fewer carriers offering plans in the law’s online exchanges. Those places, many of them poor, are being asked to choose from some of the highest-priced plans in the 34 states where the federal government is running the health insurance marketplaces, a review by The New York Times has found.
(Via the PJ Tatler.) It’s not true that competition is intense in populous regions either, so it’s particularly damning if competition is even less intense in poor regions.
So if Obamacare isn’t about helping the poor afford health care, what is it about? One thing, the same thing they’ve always wanted: government control of your health.
Internet Scofflaw 