How the Media Report on Preexisting Conditions

Michael F. CannonHealth reporters have difficulty writing about preexisting conditions accurately.Thisarticle, for example, commits a number of errors when it states: “About 54 million, or 27%, of U.S. adults under age 65 had a pre ‐​existing condition in 2018 that would have rendered them uninsurable on the individual insurance market before Obamacare, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation.”First, it is not accurate to say those conditions were uninsurable on the individual market. The individual marketcould have insured maybe 99.99 percent of them withsecure, long ‐​term coverage. All that was necessary was that those individuals purchase coveragebefore those conditions manifested themselves. The reason the individual market didn ’t is that the federal government, via the tax exclusion for employer‐​paid premiums, effectively penalizes those individuals if they purchased secure, long‐​term, individual‐​market coverage. So right there, the article is blaming the victim.Second, the vast majority of those conditionswere insured. Unfortunately, since they were insured through employer ‐​sponsored insurance, it was short‐​term coverage that would last only as long as their relationship with the employer. When that relationship ends, so does the insurance. Crucially, what would have continued to beinsured conditions on the individual market instead becameuninsured anduninsurable preexisting conditions. This is not the...

Source: Cato-at-liberty - October 23, 2020 Category: American Health Authors: Michael F. Cannon Source Type: blogs