Skip to main content

Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent to lie about Obamacare (Affordable Care Act). Millions have been sent to discourage Americans from enrolling in Obamacare. Yet, Americans are still signing up in droves.

Even with the latest lie about the CBO Report saying Obamacare causes job losses, Americans will continue to enroll. Why? The need for affordable health insurance and the security of not going bankrupt is personal. It is real. I personally know people who enrolled quietly even as they disparaged Obamacare. They will not risk the well-being of their families. That is what many of those who oppose Obamacare do not realize. This is an issue that touches every American. Americans have a tendency to hold on to ideological rhetoric even as they do the right thing.

The Health Insurance Marketplace: February Enrollment Report has been released. The key findings from the HHS press release follows.

Key findings from today’s report include:

  • Nearly 3.3 million (3,299,500) people selected Marketplace plans from Oct. 1, 2013, through Feb. 1, 2014, including 1.4 million in the State Based Marketplaces and 1.9 million in the Federally-facilitated Marketplace.
  • Of the almost 3.3 million:
    • 55 percent are female and 45 percent are male;
    • 31 percent are age 34 and under;
    • 25 percent are between the ages of 18 and 34;
    • 62 percent selected a Silver plan, while 19 percent selected a Bronze plan; and
    • 82 percent selected a plan and are eligible to receive Financial Assistance, up from 79 percent during the Oct. 1 through Dec 28, 2013 reporting period.
Many grassroots organizations are working with the masses on a personal basis. They are working to overcome the millions of dollars spent to misinform those that need the coverage the most. It is a breath of fresh air to watch grassroots action overtake the massive dollars of immoral plutocrats.

Originally posted to ProgressiveLiberal on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 09:12 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  sounds like Catholics & birth control: (37+ / 0-)
    I personally know people who enrolled quietly even as they disparaged Obamacare. They will not risk the well-being of their families.
    People will do what they have to do - regardless of the stupidity of the Catholic priests in the pulpit or the GOP priests on Fox News.
  •  Propagandists have to believe that their words (9+ / 0-)

    influence behavior. Otherwise, they are useless. And, if their words are useless and they have no other skills, what are they to do?

    I used to think fear-mongering was a put on attitude. But, more recently I've become convinced that the fear-mongers are fearful, and with good reason. They are incompetent. If they can't suckle at the public teat, how will they survive?

    by hannah on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 09:28:02 AM PST

  •  Exceeds who's expectations? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheHalfrican, rigso

    Certainly not the CBO, Congress or the White House's.

    But I'm glad you feel that Insurance companies - who are pumping dollar after dollar into advertising - are the 'grassroots'. After all, we know that the Insurance companies are allies - just wanting the best for you and me.

    Look, I tried to be reasonable...

    by campionrules on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 09:34:13 AM PST

  •  82 percent selected a plan and are eligible to (10+ / 0-)

    receive a subside.

    ^^ that is my new favorite number.

  •  That 25% between 18 and 34 is a good figure for (11+ / 0-)

    ACA viability.

  •  I went online to go through the process (5+ / 0-)

    to see how it worked so that when I went out with the community team from the Health Science Center, I'd know. I'd have forgotten about doing that except I keep getting alerts both via email & telephone to remind me of it. This is a great feature (although I feel badly a bit as I don't need it).

    In San Antonio, where we don't have the benefit of Medicare expansion, there are still a lot of people who not only need, but are signing up to get, healthcare. It's a great thing to see people who might otherwise have nothing get this much needed benefit.

    •  We just picked and paid for our plan today. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I have very mixed feelings about our personal experiences and new plan. But the greater good is much more important and I'm thrilled that things are picking up.

      Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

      by Smoh on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 04:12:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Numbers are pumped up (0+ / 0-)

    The 3.3 million number is pumped up.  Early returns from the states indicate that non-payment rates range from a low of 15% in Rhode Island to almost 50% in Washington.   Meaning, the 3.3 million new "insureds" rate is probably inflated to the tune of 500k-1 million.

    •  Unlikely (unless you're watching Fox News) (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh, kefauver, Mokurai

      Take a look at brainwrap's careful numbers, and Paul Krugman's piece in today's NY Times on the campaign to "unskew" or deny numbers that don't fit the right-wing narrative of "failure failure failure." These numbers are real. (And the "non-payment" rates include people who just signed up and their payments aren't due until later in the month.)

    •  Might be early to put much stock in the non- (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh, kefauver

      payment rates.  Given how screwed up the data integration is, I'll believe that many of the non-payment people are stuck in the system until maybe six months have elapsed.

      •  That is part of brainwrap's analysis eom (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brainwrap, ybruti

        Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

        by Mokurai on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 09:13:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Saw it & skeptical (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Saw Brainwrap's analysis, but he makes some very heavy duty assumptions that could skew things the Administration's way.  

          Not saying he's wrong, just not ready to accept his analysis.

          As for things going well, the best indicator to me seems to be how much the GOP/Obama are talking about the program.  As soon as things started to get rocky in the fall, the Administration started talking heavily about income inequality and the minimum wage.  They almost seem to avoid discussion of ACA unless forced into it now.  As for the Repubs, they can't talk about it enough.  

          Meanwhile, the President keeps pushing deadlines back for various sectors impacted by the law.  If things were good, I don't think we'd be seeing this dynamic.  Scientific? Hell, No.   Do I put more faith in these indicators than Paul Krugman? You bet.

          •  Glad you read my analysis, and not asking you (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ybruti, on the cusp

   accept it at face value...but you actually agree with it.

            You said that you suspect between 500K - 1M "inflation" out of 3.3M.

            OK, that means you suspect it's between 15-30% haven't paid yet. I said that I suspect that it's about 25% (which is actually higher than the NY Times claim, FWIW).

            The more important question isn't WHETHER they've paid or not, it's WHY they haven't paid yet.

            I guess the thing I'm not understanding is what the actual "attack" is...are they saying that a huge percentage of ACA enrollees are deadbeat losers, or are they attacking the exchanges for paperwork issues?

            Both are worth looking into, but as Mokurai noted, it'll be a couple more months before this can be clearly stated.

    •  Actually, not so. (0+ / 0-)

      What is overlooked is that there are 3 million young adults who have been able to stay on their parents policy until age 26.  That is a big deal.  That 3 million should be counted; sometimes I see it in reports, but mostly it is left out.

    •  We need to "unskew" them, fast. (0+ / 0-)

      ODS results in Obama's amazing ability to humiliate his biggest critics, on the right and the left.

      by NoFortunateSon on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:57:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Signed up Tuesday (15+ / 0-)

    for coverage for myself, my husband and 2 still of our kids who are still in college.  All in all it was pretty easy--hardest part was paying the premium.  Apparently CareFirst BC/BC's online button on the site is not working.  After several attempts to pay by online (on hold for over an hour each time), I  registered directly on their website and paid my first month's premium.   My husband has been recently diagnosed with a serious health condition and I was relieved that there were no health questions to answer.  Also got a good plan with fairly low deductible and out of pocket maximums.  All in all very satisfied

    Not being able to do everything is no excuse for not doing everything you can. - Ashleigh Brilliant

    by dmac on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 10:13:59 AM PST

  •  Yes but if 9/10 were already insured (0+ / 0-)

    is it really a success? Don't get me wrong, I'm not sure that number is right, but if it is, this law is useless if the previously uninsured will largely stay so. Again, IF, that is correct and even if we assume it goes down and let's say 7/10 were already insured by the time enrollment ends - it doesn't bode well.

    I could see that getting better as the penalty goes up over the next few years, it's only $95 this year. If my choice as a 27YO was to pay 1200/year or just $95 and I felt I didn't need insurance - I'd go for the $95 penalty.

    •  Don't think that number is right (8+ / 0-)

      The NY State Exchange released figures that 66% of enrollees to date did not have insurance at the time of the application.

      Although that is just one state, it's a large one and indicative (potentially) of nationwide trends.

    •  Likely more than $95... (6+ / 0-)

      It's the greater of $95 or 1% of taxable income. For it to only be $95, your taxable income would have to be only $9500. There is also a family cap.

      Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

      by Ian S on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 10:56:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Look at the Gallup poll (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh, Mokurai, kefauver

      showing that the number and percentage of people uninsured is also dropping noticeably.

      The speed with which people are signing up, and the fact that so many qualify for Medicaid, says to me that it's nowhere near 9/10 people substituting ACA coverage for other coverage. It's people like me for whom the private market was absolutely unaffordable, and suddenly have some decent options available, and grabbed one.

      BTW the penalty is higher than you think -- the $95 is the minimum, but it's I think 1% of your income. So if your income is above $10,000, the penalty will be more than $95. (And if you earn below $44,000, as most 20-somethings do, the subsidy will bring the cost of your insurance down quite low.) I was a tax preparer in RI/MA in the early years of Romneycare, and people were shocked at how much penalty they had to pay that first year. A lot of them rushed out to get insurance after that, because it was cheaper than the penalty.

    •  Good luck to anybody who feels they don't "need" (0+ / 0-)

      insurance.  Just keep crossing your fingers and hoping nothing bad happens before the next open enrollment period.

  •  Get Ready for the Anti-ACA Trolls to Roll In . . . (8+ / 0-)

    Oh wait, I see a few already posted.

    They're like Japanese soldiers at the end of WWII.

    I'm a "right-wing freak show," or at least that's what one nobody on DKOS seems to think.

    by kefauver on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 10:54:14 AM PST

  •  The 55-45% gender split (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    evidently reflecting the similar asymmetry in intelligence and responsibility.

    •  Probably reflects who gets insurance at work (0+ / 0-)

      (are more men in jobs with benefits?) and who has pre-existing conditions (such as having a uterus and breasts) that make the non-exchange market a disaster for us.

      I've read that married (heterosexual) men live longer than single ones -- have always assumed it's because their wives nag them to go to the doctor. I wonder if single men also don't buy health insurance, while single women do.

      And then there's the "free birth control" piece, so for many young women, the cost of the insurance is offset by the savings.

    •  lol, I could like you a lot! (0+ / 0-)

      Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

      by Smoh on Thu Feb 13, 2014 at 04:20:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Get Over It....We Don't Have Single Payer! (0+ / 0-)

    What we do have, however,  is the Affordable Care Act/Obamacare.

    Our current President is the one & only who has EVER delivered healthcare @ this magnitude for those earning $46 GRAND or less & for those w/ pre existing conditions, & for 26 yr olds allowed to stay on their parents policies & closing the donut hole of Medicare Part D for millions of seniors.

    Who else even got close to delivering this product?  


  •  Heard something interesting today (7+ / 0-)

    It seems that the only ones spending more money than the Koch brothers attacking the ACA are the insurance companies spending promoting health care.  Anti Obamacare will soon be religated to "Get off my lawn" status. May actually help the midterm elections for the Democrats since it makes the GOP look stupid, OK stupider.

    Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. John Leland

    by J Edward on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 07:46:04 PM PST

    •  I suspect you're right. (0+ / 0-)

      By the time people are signed up, pay their premiums, and start getting the deferred health care they need, or start experiencing the health care needed for rehab, or for more expensive treatment (cancer, surgery, etc.), their own factual personal experience will begin to trump the spin they're being fed. Especially if they start to see loved ones benefit.

      "Fast, Cheap, and Good... pick two." - director Jim Jarmusch

      by AnnCetera on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 08:07:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I suspect you're right as well... (0+ / 0-)
        ...their own factual personal experience will begin to trump the spin they're being fed. Especially if they start to see loved ones benefit.
        Perhaps, at some point, individual experiences could/will reach a critical mass and produce a phase shift 100th Monkey Event in the popular paradigm.  Next thing you know.... we all wake up one morning "knowing" that quality, universal health care for all is just basic s.o.p. for any civilized society worthy of the name because the truth of that reality is in evidence everywhere around us.  

    Babu G. Ranganathan

    Many in society have been taught to believe that the public has no right to tell corporations what to do with their money any more than a private citizen has the right to tell his neighbor what to do with the money he earns from a business or store. This is not a fair analogy.

    True enough that a private citizen doesn't have the right to tell his neighbor what to do with his money but the public does have the right to tell corporations what to do with their money. Why? Because corporations couldn't exist without very special and unique government help. Corporations are special legal entities that have unique rights, privileges, and protections given by government that ordinary citizens and business owners do not have. And, since the government in a democracy like ours comes from the people (the majority in society) the people have the right to determine how corporations act and how they spend their money. The majority in a democracy own the franchise of government!  

    Therefore, the public has a right to demand something from corporations in exchange for giving corporations the right to exist. Would I not have the right, even as a private citizen, to demand something from a business built on my property? The same logic applies to the relationship between the public (society) and corporations. Corporations cannot hide behind the specious argument of rugged individualism!

    Many in our society have been brainwashed to believe that an absolutely free market place with no government controls or regulations would automatically fix our nation's problems. Have we forgotten already that the Great Depression of the early 1930's was the direct result of a free market economy with no government control or regulation?

    Rugged individualism teaches that the individual has the right to benefit from social and economic interactions with society, but that society has no right to demand any benefit from the individual.

    However, if it is true that a person has a moral right to be a rugged individualist, looking out only for himself, then it also follows that individuals (plural), by mutual consent and agreement, have a moral right to look out for themselves. Such a moral right of individuals (plural) is the basis for majority rule and unions in our society.

    Certainly, if an individual is benefiting from commerce with the many individuals of society, then the many individuals of society have a right, by mutual agreement among themselves, to demand certain benefits from the individual, benefits such as decent wages, clean air, clean water, safe working conditions, safe products, etc.

    No one has absolute individual rights in society. Those who want absolute individual rights must live outside of society. Those who want to be part of society with the benefits of government and law must be willing to grant what the majority want, even if it's at their own expense.

    Yes, minorities have rights, but the majority has more rights.

    Absolute individualism is absolutely unfair. The majority has the right to tax an individual and collect money to build a park even if that individual doesn’t want the park and will never use the park. The majority has a right to tax an individual and use the money to provide welfare or help those who genuinely can’t help themselves in society.

    Self- proclaimed rugged individualists in society want all the benefits of what the majority has to provide - government, law, security, and protection - but they do not want to give up anything to the majority in exchange for these benefits. These so-called rugged individualists are the real leeches and parasites of society.

    The fact is there are no real rugged individualists in society!  

    If capitalism and social consciousness cannot coexist then how is it that modern industrialized nations such as Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and others can have a high degree of social consciousness and still be capitalistic with a thriving free enterprise.

    The rich are not paying their fair share of the taxes. Even billionaire Warren Buffet has said that his office secretary pays more in taxes in proportion to her income than he does.

    In fact, one of President Obama's ideas for reviving our economy is by the federal government spending money to repair the infrastructure in our country (roads, bridges, highways, etc.). Much of this money would come from taxing the wealthy and corporations and making them pay their fair share taxes.

    People can still become wealthy in a socialist society but not at the detrimental expense of others in society.

    Many of the basic rights, especially regarding safety in the work place, that we take for granted were not graciously given to society by the rich but won by the blood of bludgeoned workers and strikers in the early twentieth century.

    The Bible doesn't say that money is the root of all evil, but that "the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil." That love of money must be constrained in society or the worst aspects of capitalism will make a living hell for millions. Thank God, of course, that there are some capitalists who don't put money first or love money. God bless them!

    The Christian Scriptures have much to say against the rich and wealthy who obtain and maintain their wealth through the detriment of the rest of society (James 2: 6, 7; 5: 1-6).

    Read the author's Internet article:


    The author, Babu G. Ranganathan, has his bachelor’s degree with concentrations in theology and biology and has been recognized for his writings on religion and science in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who in The East.”

  •  Ignore the GOP spin (0+ / 0-)

    This is what matters. Millions of Americans are signing up and having health insurance. Something to applaud, so screw the GOP!

  •  It is not working for my family (0+ / 0-)

    I saw a  navigator and despite having five kids and being in school and on SNAP I did not qualify for any subsidy and the cheapest plan was far an away more than I can afford.  I am without health insurance and have no options to get any.  Thankfully for the moment the kids are still covered under MCHIP, but my husband and I are SOL.  I just paid $260 out of pocket for my flu/Tamiflu after having paid out of pocket for a clearly useless flu shot last month.  I am just so down on Obama's entire "legacy". My life is actually far worse off since he was elected.  I worked hard to get him elected and really my main issue was healthcare.  I feel really down about it.  I am working harder, achieving less, and have less security.  I don't think it would have been better under Pres. Romney, but I no longer feel either party works for my benefit.

  •  I still want Single-Payer (0+ / 0-)

    Drop the age limit on Medicare…

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site