Share This Page

ObamaCare @ 6: An expensive mess

| Sunday, March 27, 2016, 9:00 p.m.

On the sixth anniversary of President Obama signing the ObamaCare law and saddling the nation with its regulatory diktats, here's a disquieting statistic that won't be trumpeted: $55 billion in waste and counting.

Investor's Business Daily crunched the numbers. More troubling still is that the hemorrhaging will continue from this health care mess. Among the losses to date:

• $1.2 billion in startup loans for ObamaCare's 12 (out of 23) failed insurance co-ops.

• $1.5 billion in failed or unrealized state-run health exchanges — and not one of the remaining 14 is fully functional, according to a government audit.

• An estimated $45 billion for the 165 million hours that businesses and individuals spent trying to comply with ObamaCare's 106 new regulations.

• $750 million in public subsidies to more than 500,000 people who weren't eligible for coverage.

• $3.5 billion diverted from the Treasury to insurance companies to help cover their losses.

For all the happy talk about gains in the public's insurance coverage (except, of course, for the unfortunate folks who signed up with one of the government's failed insurance co-ops), the reality is a burgeoning, unsustainable government bureaucracy that is on pace to cost considerably more.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.