If I were to categorize much of the Democratic and liberal discussion about Obamacare I would say, “Saying it don’t make it so.” Happily, I’m pretty sure most of us are starting to realize that the cruelty of saying everything’s fine when it’s obviously not simply reduces the credibility of the speaker or writer.
Our awareness might be a contributing factor to June 2014 Gallup poll results that found our confidence in the presidency is at about 29 percent, the lowest in many years, “Americans Losing Confidence in All Branches of U.S. Gov't, Confidence hits six-year low for presidency; record lows for Supreme Court, Congress,” Justin McCarthy, Gallup Politics, http://www.gallup.com/poll/171992/americans-losing-confidence-branches-gov.aspx.
I’m thinking it may also be part of the reason for the seeming upsurge in liberal lying about Obamacare, an attempt at re-spinning the old arguments put forth on behalf of the health reform we were promised and never got.
I don’t mean Obamacare as it is, I mean the Obamacare that propelled this president into office twice, you know, “…accessible health care for every single American - because you shouldn't have to worry about being one illness away from bankruptcy. If you like the health care you have, you'll see lower premiums under my plan. If you don't have health care, you'll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves,” 9/6/2008, Obama's Speech to the AARP Convention.
I don’t know whether now that 2014 has passed and we’re starting to get it regarding Obamacare whether the third time will be a charm for Democrats concerned about votes in the aftermath of Obamacare. But the Obama fetishists are trying and they’re spinning faster than ever.
How they mourn for the smug glory days when anyone might be persuaded by the President when he bragged that “Obamacare is a done deal,” Obama at Presser: Obamacare is “a Done Deal,” Daniel Doherty, 9/27/13, http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2013/09/27/obama-presser-n1711668.
Last week, those Obamacare fetishists who talk about how it’s law, it’s a done deal or otherwise were again reminded that saying it don’t make it so when the Supreme Court struck down the contraception mandate for closely held corporations run on religious principles.
And Democrats KNOW that Obamacare’s not a done deal, or else they wouldn’t be arguing so strongly and inaccurately on behalf of the law that remains very unpopular. On 5/29/14, a Gallup poll revealed, “A steady 43% of Americans approve of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, also known as ‘Obamacare,’ while a majority continue to disapprove of it,” Gallup Politics, “Despite Enrollment Success, Healthcare Law Still Unpopular, Affordable Care Act is most popular among blacks, least among whites,” by Andrew Dugan, http://www.gallup.com/poll/170750/despite-enrollment-success-healthcare-law-remains-unpopular.aspx.
Then of course, it’s not the first time that the “done deal” of Obamacare has been modified by the judicial branch as we all remember that the mandatory Medicaid expansion was struck down in 2012, making the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare voluntary.
There have been administrative changes, such as the well publicized change that allows people to trust people to report their income for determination of eligibility for Obamabucks (the term I use for entitlement federal dollars in the form of premium assistance). There have been legislative changes such as the 11/2011 change intended to repair a Medicaid eligibility provision to obtain Medicaid.
There’s a website that updates such changes from the “Galen Institute,” at http://www.galen.org/newsletters/changes-to-obamacare-so-far/, where in a 5/22/2014 article entitled “41 Changes to ObamaCare…So Far,” you can see that Obamacare is ANYTHING but a done deal and saying it don’t make it so.
It seems obvious that the fetishists have become so attached to “PROVING” that the law is the greatest thing ever because the FACTS of Obamacare have not supported their views and without Obamacare the view of this presidency will be even worse than they are since it is seemingly THE thing that Obama has based not only his candidacy, his re-election and his reputation on but likely will make up the largest aspect of the President’s legacy.
Yet, one wonders how long they can keep it up. Surely Republicans have made it easier for Democrats to assert just about anything with the Republican knack of tapping into extreme views and alienating Americans one enormous group at a time along various lines of poverty-wealth, male-female, and race.
Still, one wonders, how long before the credibility gap starts hitting these Obamacare fetishists? The “Things Those Mean Republicans Said that Aren’t True,” style of article is making the rounds in some liberal writing.
In a June 26, 2014 article entitled, “Zero for Six,” Paul Krugman argued “…six distinct predictions of Obamacare doom…not one of which has come true,” http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/zero-for-six/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0. Hmm…
Mr. Krugman begins with trying to counteract the Republican opinion that, “Enrollment will be very low.” Jonathan Chait, whom I considered last week in a series of posts, offered the same type of argument with more precision asserting that the number of NEWLY insured would be low.
Relying on the source document used to support this data by Mr. Chait, it seems that four-and-a-half million Americans are newly insured through Obamacare (some say five million). Considering the law was addressing 47 million uninsured people, that “enrollment” could be considered very low, couldn’t it? Very low is not a number, it’s a relational assessment and five million out of 47 million could, not is or isn’t, but COULD be considered low.
Mr. Krugman goes onto his number two that Republicans claim that people signing up won’t pay premiums. Here we’ve got Mr. Krugman playing fast and loose with numbers.
First of all, premiums are ongoing, so without a running average of how many premiums are paid EACH MONTH, in arrears EACH MONTH, and how many policies are canceled by Obamacare after three months and thereafter (yes people are given up to three months of not paying premiums before the federal government will stop paying the government’s Obamabucks portion of their bill), the numbers are fairly meaningless. You can’t make a blanket statement about premiums except for how their payments are going for each month.
Second, Mr. Krugman cited an APRIL 30, 2014 Fox News report saying that 67 percent had paid premiums rather than the 80 to 90 percent of the 8.1 million Obamacare signups currently “estimated” at this moment of time to be “paying.”
In a CNN article, (and I don’t think Mr. Krugman would argue CNN has a Republican bias) of MAY 7, 2014, a week after the report of the 67 percent premium payment rate, Tami Luhby reported in, “Most people pay Obamacare premiums,” http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/07/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/ , “The Republican-led House Energy and Commerce Committee last week issued a report saying that only 67% of those signing up for Obamacare had paid their first month's premium. But the insurers appearing before the subcommittee said the figures in the panel report were incomplete.”
Ah, incomplete. And they will continue to be so because to tally up who has or has not paid each month has not proven a task producing numbers that are being reported.
Third, the liberal CNN did report that, “Insurers did raise several concerns, including the fees and taxes associated with Obamacare [as well as concern about] potential duplicate enrollments.” Duplicate enrollments. We haven’t heard much about that yet.
Mr. Krugman then adds the issue of people who lost their insurance plan, contrary to what was promised by the President and Obamacare. Mr. Krugman puts forward the alleged untruth of the “Republican” assertion that “more people will lose coverage…than gain it.”
First of all, let’s not distract from THE LIE, that if you like your plan you can keep it. Second, even going to the most liberal efforts at cleaning that up, (read the convoluted reasoning at http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/01/republican-hype-people-losing-health-insurance-proves-overblown, in a 1/2014 article entitled, “Report: Hype Over Canceled Plans Under Obamacare Was Overblown,” by Patrick Caldwell, in making his argument Mr. Caldwell notes that there were five million who lost their insurance. Back to NEW enrollees through Obamacare exchanges after enrollment ended and we’re at about four-and-a-half million, 57 percent of the 8.1 million (yes some are throwing around the number five million, still only equalizing the number of those who lost coverage and those who gained coverage through Obamacare exchanges. Not sure what Mr. Krugman’s arguing here.
Mr. Krugman then goes to his number four “untruth,” regarding “rate shock.” Hmm…CNN, again, not known for Republican leanings, reported on the insurance industry’s testimony, “With attention turning to the next open enrollment period, which starts in mid-November, lawmakers repeatedly asked the witnesses whether premiums would increase for 2015. Some insurers have said rates could rise by double-digit percentages in certain markets,” (emphasis added) Tami Luhby, “Most people pay Obamacare premiums,” http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/07/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/.
Perhaps Mr. Krugman knows better but no, he’s just manipulating reports. He relies on the 6/18/2014 HHS release that says very specifically that “…with tax credits paid an average premium of $69 per month,” for silver plans in the marketplace. OK, so if you’re getting Obamabucks and you can use the exchanges, you’re getting a bargain. Yeah, that’s how entitlements work, if you get federal dollars to help pay your costs, you get a bargain.
This has NOTHING to do with the RATE SHOCK everyone else is experiencing as promised by insurers for the REST OF US, “Some insurers have said rates could rise by double-digit percentages in certain markets,” (emphasis added) Tami Luhby, “Most people pay Obamacare premiums,” http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/07/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/.”
And the essential health benefits and mandatory free preventive services that Obamacare requires are reasons for the increases, “Federal requirements, mandates specific categories of health care benefits be included in health insurance plans. Costs associated with these new benefits are factored into premiums," http://www.timeforaffordability.org/2015premiums/.
For his number five, Krugman attacks notions of young people signing up and concludes, “Pretty good demographics.” Naturally, Mr. Krugman omits that the signup of young adults was supposed to average out the expenses of those obtaining Obamacare who were sicker therefore helping controlling the costs of the different plan levels that provide better coverage which sicker and older people would tend to sign up for.
And, as expected, and also omitted by Mr. Krugman, the young sign-ups is again, an opinion of what qualifies as “pretty good.” Younger signups tended to sign up for catastrophic plans, the cheapest plans, “On the federal exchange, about 89,000 people, or 12% of people signing up without subsidies, opted for catastrophic policies. Of those, 85% were age 34 or younger,” Why Young Sign-Ups Aren't A Healthy Sign, Investors Business Daily, June 5, 2014, http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-young-sign-ups-arent-214900883.html.
The last bit of alleged untruth according to Mr. Krugman is that Obamacare will feed soaring health costs. Mr. Krugman seems to think not, but it might be worth reading articles such as the one he cites from “Bloomberg View,” 5/1/2014, Megan McArdle, “Watch Obamacare Make Health-Care Costs Soar,” http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-05-01/watch-obamacare-make-health-care-costs-soar. You can also look at the rarely considered Republican, “New York Times,” article by Elisabeth Rosenthal of 1/18/2014, “Patients’ Costs Skyrocket; Specialists’ Incomes Soar,” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/health/patients-costs-skyrocket-specialists-incomes-soar.html.
With understated contempt Mr. Krugman concludes, “It’s quite an impressive track record, actually,” http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/zero-for-six/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0. Yeah, not one thing asserted by Mr. Krugman could be viewed as 100 percent “true,” that IS a track record. Wow.
