According to the New York Times, many states are delaying creating the health insurance exchanges mandated by Obamacare, waiting for the outcome of the constitutional challenge to the law. In the meantime, we get such delusional claims about the act as the following:
Proponents, including Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York, a Democrat, say the exchanges will simplify the purchase of insurance and cut costs by increasing competition.
Has there ever been a federal government initiative that has “simplified” anything? Has Cuomo never seen a Medicare form? Indeed, in the next breath, the Times goes on to note:
The complexity of the computer systems needed to verify eligibility, enroll consumers, calculate subsidies and connect the exchange to state Medicaid agencies has slowed work in some states.
As for increasing competition, why not just allow the purchase of insurance across state lines? And drive down costs by removing the tax benefits for employer-purchased insurance.
I actually support in theory the mandate to purchase insurance, since I am fed up with paying for emergency treatment for people too irresponsible to insure themselves, and I see little difference between mandated car insurance and mandated health insurance—in most places, having a car is virtually a necessity of life. But however defensible the idea of mandated insurance, the bureaucratic quagmire that it will unavoidably spawn renders the concept a nightmare and something that no realist about government can possibly support.