Obamacare Is Working As Expected - Poorly

The Massachusetts health reform legislation, signed into law by then Governor Mitt Romney, was a model of the so-called Obamacare, perpetuated by the same architects. John Goodman wrote:

More evidence comes from a study of Massachusetts health reform – the supposed model for national health reform. A new study, published in the BMJ policy journal, examined hospitalization in Massachusetts for 12 medical conditions that wouldn't normally require hospitalization if a patient has good access to primary care. These are thought to be a good measure of access to health care, according to Danny McCormick of Harvard Medical School, the study's lead author. … Interestingly, 50 years ago many people expected a surge of demand for care in response to the creation of Medicare. It didn't happen.

Jason Millman, Washington Post:

The landmark 2006 Massachusetts health-care law that inspired the federal overhaul didn't lead to a reduction in unnecessary and costly hospitalizations, and it didn't make the health-care system more fair for minority groups.

The Affordable Health Care Act has become a bureaucratic nightmare. When will people realize that the history of the federal government proves that government, those elected to operate OUR government cannot efficiently operate as the private sector can? It is the private sector of a combination of health insurance companies and the medical institutions that need reforming in order to have more affordable, efficient, health care plans and treatments. High cost premiums are in place mainly because of the ridiculous charges and gouging rates that cause many not to have proper treatment and coverage. Corruption and fraud also plays a part when it comes to the medical billing process. Cell phones, now called “smart phones” use high-tech to perform its bells and whistles and costs one-tenth of the cost of a pacemaker that medical institutions charge $24,000 for. Hospitals pad medical bills, especially when the bill is covered by insurance – and the insurance companies only pay 80% of the bill. So people must pay the high-priced monthly payments (premiums you pay and the part your employer pays) and customers must pay 20% of a hospital stay with surgical procedures that could amount to $20,000. It is no wonder that medical bills have caused so many to be forced into bankruptcy. For example, and from personal experience: a family premium costs about $400 per month (including pregnancy coverage never to be used) and during the course of a premium with that health care insurance company no claims for a hospital stay – but refused to pay $150 for a doctor visit. Thus premiums were paid with NO coverage. The insurance company made out like a bandit.

The federal government has a bad habit/history of continuing the same approach to solutions to problems and continues to do so despite the poor results of their programs. Taxpayers end up paying for those useless and inefficient programs, a part of legislation that should never have passed or the bill's text was not properly written.

Politicians gauge their success by the number of bills they write or help pass; not the quality or the constitutionality of those bills. Quality is better than quantity. Renaming a post office is not included. Further, legislators constantly slip in text in a bill that has nothing to do with the context or result of that bill. It is part of the fraudulent way politicians conduct business and the squandering of federal taxpayer funding.

As Goodman pointed out, Obamacare has only increased fraud and kicks government spending into a higher gear when it should be operating in low gear.
It makes as much sense as the progressive delusional propaganda that those operating our government (and others) insist that they can change the natural process of climate fluctuation. Is there anything that government doesn't want to control?
Also read about the Obama administration's war against 'conversion therapy'.