One of President Obama’s constant refrains during the battle over health reform has been that expanding coverage would reduce inefficiency in the system. In particular, he often cited expensive expensive emergency room visits as something that reform could help reduce. But it turns out, Obamacare, like Romneycare before it, is likely to increase emergency visits, maybe substantially.

MIT News reports on a newly published Harvard study of Medicaid users in Oregon:

Adults who are covered by Medicaid use emergency rooms 40 percent more
than those in similar circumstances who do not have health insurance,
according to a unique new study, co-authored by an MIT economist, that
sheds empirical light on the inner workings of health care in the U.S.

Emergency room visits are many times more expensive than primary care visits for similar treatment. This is why, both before and after health reform was passed, politicians cited reducing emergency room visits as a reason the law was a good idea.

Wonkblog cites two examples today, Republican Gov. Rick Snyder and HHS Secretary Sebelius who said back in 2009 “Our health care system has forced too many uninsured Americans to depend on the emergency room for the care they need.”

But perhaps the person who has made this case more than anyone else is President Obama. He has repeatedly said over the past six years that reform would reduce ER visits thereby creating greater efficiency in the system (i.e. saving us money). Below are 17 examples:

Obviously if Obamacare raises the number of emergency room visits by 40 percent, that isn’t saving us money. Even if insured visits cost less on average than uninsured visits, it wouldn’t still not be a move in the right direction (according to the President).

There were a few people pointing out back in 2010 that this method of cost control was probably illusory. Massachusetts, which served as a model for Obamacare, also saw increased emergency room visits after reform.