Styles in “Truth” eg Jonathan Chait

In my Wednesday post , “Truth by a Technicality: Analysis of Jonathan Chait,”http://conoutofconsumer.blogspot.com/2014/06/truth-by-technicality-analysis-of.html I put the author of a 6/22/2014 article by Jonathan Chait, “Republicans Finally Admit Why They Really Hate Obamacare,” http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/06/republicans-finally-admit-why-they-hate-the-aca.html in the hot seat for his claim that he, “…can’t think of a single practical analytic claim they [Republicans] made that still looks correct.”

My purpose is single minded, in order for there to be meaningful legislative and practical change to the PPACA, escaping the hyperbolic support of the legislation as the BEST or the WORST and naturally, attaching those labels to either Democrats or Republicans is essential for consumers.

In support of his claim that not a single practical analytic claim they made still looks correct, (Jonathan Chait, 6/22/14), Mr. Chait identified the issue of whether Obamacare was just signing up people who already had insurance, which naturally would prove the law a failure since it was designed to reduce the 47 million uninsured in this country. We know from recent reports that of the approximately 8 million signups that the Kaiser Family Foundation recently reported that 57 percent of those based on a survey of 742 people were NEW enrollees, in other words, around four million five hundred and sixty thousand.

Enrollment IS important for both the survival of the Obamacare policies in terms of money and in terms of people having the insurance they signed up for, no pay, no insurance. Of the signups, it’s estimated that between 80 and 90 percent of the new signups have paid their first months’ premiums, (http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/07/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/) as reported by Tami Luhby on 5/7/2014 in her article, “Most People Pay Obamacare Premiums.” OK, so of the 8 million or so signups, 7,200,000 (at 90 percent) have paid their premiums. Of course, Ms. Luhby confides, “The Obama administration said it will not have data on how many people paid and enrolled for a few months.”

Other substantive issues in the law that are also part of the legitimate criticism of Obamacare were also omitted by Mr. Chait such as section 1402, the cost sharing provision of the PPACA.

Section 1402 requires individuals to report changes that could impact how much they get in premium assistance, the Obamabucks entitlement program of Obamacare, and also provides that the Obamabucks don’t immediately STOP upon non-payment of insurance premium.

Instead, consumers are given up to three months where the Obamabucks contribution will still be paid to insurance companies on behalf of consumers who fail to pay their share of premiums leaving the onus on insurance companies to keep providing health insurance for those who have policies that are only partially paid and leaving the onus on the federal government to regain amounts they pay for people for those three months who don’t pay after three months and therefore are terminated.

If during that time of partial payment a person gets sick, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVEN’T PAID THEIR SHARE OF THEIR PREMIUM, technically they would still have health insurance. (See “1402-Free Money?”, 11/19/13, http://conoutofconsumer.blogspot.com/2013/11/1402-free-money.html).

If the trend of more than half of those enrolling in Obamacare is made up of about 57 percent NEWLY INSURED is a continuing trend, that’s good for the law. But for Mr. Chait to assert he is unable to say that practical analytic concerns no longer appear correct simply reflects a lack of understanding of the PPACA.

Mr. Chait’s second point is again about enrollment, indicating how important enrollment is to the Obamacare law. He asserts that Republican worries that “Obamacare isn’t even significantly reducing the ranks of the uninsured,” is another incorrect “analytic claim.”

Here again Mr. Chait plays dirty pool, relying on a JANUARY 2014 Republican PREDICTION. So let’s fast forward to our reality, post-enrollment season. If as claimed in its best light 8.1 million people are insured via Obamacare and of those 57 percent are NEWLY insured, we’re talking about 17 percent insured through Obamacare and 4,617,000 NEWLY insured.

This means that in its BEST light that TO DATE Obamacare has reduced the number of uninsured from 47,000,000 to 42,383,000. SIGNIFICANT is an opinion and certainly in its BEST light the reduction of uninsured by 9 percent COULD be deemed NOT SIGNFICANT.

It seems idiotic for Mr. Chait to be such an Obamacare booster and to somehow reconcile Democratic claims that the 5 percent of the population who lost their plans (estimated at between 12 and 15 million people)was NOT significant (search Keep your plan, 10/2013 for coverage of that Obama lie) and that the 9 percent who gained insurance through Obamacare (4,617,000 at best) IS significant.

The rest of Mr. Chait’s argument relies on “predictions.”

This is the danger of spinning truth for the benefit of politics, it’s frequently not TRUE. Again, for consumers to have a chance at achieving patient protection and affordable health care under Obamacare, changes are necessary which cannot occur if we’re fed spin rather than truth.