Skip to main content

Today the LA Times reports that at least 9.5 million people who were previously uninsured have gained coverage because of the Affordable Care Act.

In the course of interviewing pollsters who track the uninsured, the LA Times quotes Gallup promising a further drop in self-reported uninsured Americans in its forthcoming March data. Another key report is that several insurers who avoided offering plans on the exchanges this year are indicating they want to offer plans in the next enrollment period.

Below the squiggle for choice quotes.

[The RAND Corporation] has been polling 3,300 Americans monthly about their insurance choices since last fall. Researchers found that the share of adults ages 18 to 64 without health insurance has declined from 20.9% last fall to 16.6% as of March 22.
The decrease parallels a similar drop recorded by Gallup, which found in its national polling that the uninsured rate among adults had declined from 18% in the final quarter of last year to 15.9% through the first two months of 2014. Gallup's overall uninsured rate is lower than Rand's because it includes seniors on Medicare.

Gallup Editor in Chief Frank Newport said that March polling, which has not been released yet, indicates the uninsured rate has declined further.

Republican critics of the law have suggested that the cancellations last fall have led to a net reduction in coverage.

That is not supported by survey data or insurance companies, many of which report they have retained the vast majority of their 2013 customers by renewing old policies, which is permitted in about half the states, or by moving customers to new plans. "We are talking about a very small fraction of the country" who lost coverage, said Katherine Carman, a Rand economist who is overseeing the survey.

"It's way beyond our projections," Blue Shield spokesman Steve Shivinsky said.
In several states, including Rhode Island, Connecticut, Kentucky, Iowa and South Dakota, more insurers are looking to join state marketplaces when second-year enrollment begins this fall, according to marketplace and insurance industry officials.
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

  •  Wow. A Republican nightmare. (31+ / 0-)

    Certain people are going to be having some real bad days ahead — the people for whom ideology trumps real-life solutions. For average people, real-life solutions almost always trump ideology. Hey Mitchie, Teddy and all your little buddies, take your ideology and stuff it where the sun don't shine.

    Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

    by anastasia p on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 10:35:09 PM PDT

  •  Obamacare's proponents assumed that (25+ / 0-)

    there were distortions in the marketplace for health insurance which allowed certain knowledgeable players to collect economic rent (meaning extracting money from customers without providing any real benefit) and which created unknown risks that were difficult to price for, which meant higher prices and exclusionary tactics.  By instituting a series of reforms intended to tackle those distortions, Obamacare is proving that health insurance doesn't have to be that exclusionary or expensive and that the money that flows through the system can be put to more efficient uses and provide better results. It is working because the economics are sound, the policy purpose is sound and the demand is real.  The barriers to health reform are all political.

    Global Shakedown - Alternative rock with something to say. Check out their latest release, "A Time to Recognize": Available on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Spotify and other major online music sites. Visit

    by khyber900 on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 10:43:13 PM PDT

    •  it's not about knowledge (11+ / 0-)

      it's about risk tolerance.  Your life or their money, well, they can wait for you to die.

      And on an unrelated note, I finally signed up for medicaid today.

    •  Insurance is still wicked expensive (7+ / 0-)

      The only thing that makes it "affordable" is the Federal subsidies.

      Analogy: If the Feds agreed to subsidize everyone's rent proportional to their income, rents would actually rise, but the amount paid by renters would drop dramatically. We'd be marching for "Section 8 for all" and it would be the new cause.

      I'm encouraged by the meager evidence that other ACA reforms are actually bending the cost curve for medical care, and the profit margins for insurance companies. But the policies themselves are still way too expensive for most people if there are no subsidies.

      •  Yeah, but employer subsidies existed (0+ / 0-)

        long before these new private insurance policy subsidies did.

        Like our subsidies in the individual market, they are actually a tax credit. Employers get a tax credit to pay half or more upfront to the insurer in a lump sum.

        Now the IRS is taking all of our individual tax credits and paying a percentage upfront to the insurer, just like employers did for decades.

        Thanks Democrats! My Obamacare is permanent coverage no one can take away - and saving $3,000 is nice too

        by sotiredofusernames on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 01:33:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The last barrier is the political might of (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the health insurance industry.  As long as insurance companies continue to take 20% cut of health care spending, costs will remain uncontained.  It's simple math:  at best, the US health care system will be more expensive than a single payer system.  Medicare's administrative costs are ~3%, compared to insurance companies being federally guaranteed a 20% cut.  So conservatively, our health care will be 15% more expensive than it needs to be.  

      This doesn't even touch upon the erosion of medical service quality that results from insurance accountants micromanaging doctors' prescribed treatments.  

      Unfortunately, the ACA only serves to build the political power of the insurance industry.  All those new customers and profits will enable even greater spending on lobbyists and propaganda.  The ACA has in a sense inoculated the US against single payer reform.

      "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

      by Subterranean on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 09:20:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You know some people refuse to be (0+ / 0-)

        happy, satisfied, or grateful.  But it's all good... in America you can be anything you want to be.  God bless America.

        And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28 KJV

        by looking and listening on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 10:48:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm supposed to be grateful (0+ / 0-)

          for Romneycare?  

          Sure, it's an improvement, but I believe it's a small improvement that inoculates against single payer.  

          If you want to disagree I'd welcome it, but to just put me down as being unhappy doesn't add to the discourse.

          "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

          by Subterranean on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 11:05:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  You are wrong on several counts (0+ / 0-)

        Medicare's costs are actually much higher because the fraud was so great and the expenses of the DOJ and HHS investigators and fraud divisions are high.

        Outright fraud in billing for services and devices never received or even needed amounted to over 10% of what Medicare was spending. Other less obvious types of fraud are ongoing.

        You overestimate the effects of what insurers do. Often the problems come about because of doctors and hospital mistakes. Some of the same bureaucratic snafus occur in Medicare also. I can't get my C-Pap mask because of the doctor's office failing to submit the proper documentation to the provider for Medicare.

        Single payer by itself won't improve the US healthcare system nor would it save as much money as you think.

        I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

        by samddobermann on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 01:20:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Who'd a thunk it? (42+ / 0-)
    more insurers are looking to join state marketplaces when second-year enrollment begins this fall
    I was just told in an email from my GOP House Rep. that insurance companies are fleeing the marketplace.

    The Republicans have nothing.

    Plain and simple.

    "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." - 17th-century French clergyman and statesman Cardinal Richelieu.

    by markthshark on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 11:29:30 PM PDT

    •  In a sense, if insurers are coming under the (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      karmsy, Onomastic, LookingUp

      umbrella of the ACA, then they are leaving the predatory free market behind. "Fleeing" is perhaps a bit overblown, but it's verbiage that's consistent with an earlier politically induced exodus known as "white flight."

      by hannah on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 12:58:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The general contractor (0+ / 0-)

        assigned in Oct to replace CGI is a company called QSSI; they have been involved in the project from the outset but after the flawed launch in Oct, one of the first changes made was to replace CGI as general contractor with QSSI.

        QSSI is a subsidiary of a company called Optum.

        Optum is the healthcare IT consulting subsidiary of United Healthcare.

        Other insurers have been involved at various levels as stakeholders. While the 'predatory' part has changed the free market part has not; the insurers made sure of that.

        Fear doesn't just breed incomprehension. It also breeds a spiteful, resentful hate of anyone and everyone who is in any way different from you.

        by awesumtenor on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 02:31:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Because (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      As we all know all Free Loving FREEEEE the Market Corporations love just one thing more than the FREEEEEE Market and that is subsidies.

    •  Unfortunately (0+ / 0-)

      fear and disinformation are something.  But that's all the something they got.

  •  This Is Really Going To Tick Senator Barrasso Off (20+ / 0-)

    He was just on FOX this weekend claiming that Kathleen Sebelius had "cooked the books" on Obamacare signups.  And that "certain cancer hospitals in the country want very little to do w/ Obamacare"

    He's a vague little names of which hospitals are refusing to accept cancer patients.  He also didn't explain how these certain cancer hospitals had access to
    federal websites signing up Obamacare patients.

    Looks like it's time for another email to Barrasso w/ all the good news reported in your diary, caseylaw!

    •  A tick off Barrasso? He still has a a tick up (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sound of progress

      Quote of the week: "They call themselves bipartisan because they're able to buy members of both parties," (R. Eskow, Campaign for America's Future.)

      by mbayrob on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 11:54:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He probably meant those Cancer Treatment Centers (8+ / 0-)

      That advertise on TV...and since those are for-profit and not associated with research hospitals like Memorial Sloan-Kettering or Mass General, small loss.

      This isn't freedom. This is fear - Captain America

      by Ellid on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 06:34:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  the problem is narrow networks (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      murrayewv, Fonsia, MKSinSA, ColoTim

      That some insurance companies are offering, that exclude some hospitals/doctors. They claim they need to do this to keep costs down. It will be interesting to see if networks widen with more competition from new providers in the next enrollment period. I know United decided to sit out the initial enrolment. They may be worried about losing their share of the pie, after seeing the response, even with all the republican obstruction.

      Today's problems are yesterday's solutions. Don Beck

      by Sherri in TX on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 06:52:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But all insurance companies (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hbk, MKSinSA, splashy

        use well-defined networks. Which makes it disingenuous (at best) for people like Barasso to cherry-pick data like this. I bet anyone could find a regional "cancer hospital" excluded from most insurance plans, long before the ACA ever came into existence.

        PS. I wouldn't be surprised if some insurance companies on the exchanges start to expand their networks going forward. They'll have customers demanding it - and if competition on the exchanges improves, people will easily be able to switch to the plans with the networks that best suit their needs.

        •  Many have abandoned narrow networks (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Outside of traditional HMOs like Kaiser Permanente (of which I happen to be a member), many health insurers have abandoned narrow networks and complicated referral processes because they were not shown to be cost effective (outside of very expensive procedures, like bone marrow transplants, that insurers case manager on an individual basis). Additionally, many consumers and employers opted for PPO plans, rather than more manged care, because of their open networks. It will be interesting to see if the same process occurs within the exchanges.

          Cruelty might be very human, and it might be very cultural, but it's not acceptable.- Jodie Foster

          by CPT Doom on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 08:07:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Blue Cross Spokesman Steve Shivinsky Just Said.... (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin, rsmpdx, theKgirls, hbk, splashy

          re Obamacare "It's way beyond our expectations".

          Rand Corporation economist Katharine Carmen also said "We are talking about a small fraction of the country who
          lost their old coverage".  In Rhode Island, Connecticut, Kentucky, Iowa & South Dakota more insurers are
          looking to join the state marketplaces said insurance industry officials.  

          Several insurers who avoided offering plans on the exchange this year want to offer plans in the next enrollment period.

          Bad.....Bad....Bad news for Republicans, I fear!  Hee Hee Hee!

        •  Networks are bullshit, anyways (0+ / 0-)

          It's the same skill set of professionals, the same supplies, and buildings in the same neighborhoods. It's only the capital structure that differs.

          I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

          by CFAmick on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 09:39:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Some Hospitals have built up (0+ / 0-)

            "Brand Names" that have inflated their sense their own value and they have inflated their prices accordingly.

            Until we, enough of us, can say NO to the ultra expensive places we will continue to have the highest costs in the world.

            See the Pew article on the big differences in charges for childbirth in California hospitals.

            Recent reports have shown that hospital charges for the most common procedures can vary widely. A new report, published by BMJ Open and funded by the National Institutes of Health, looks at two of the most common procedures and finds wide variation in the cost of giving birth, both through normal delivery and Cesarean section.
            Researchers compared data from over 100,000 uncomplicated births in California hospitals and found the charges for a vaginal delivery ranged from $3,296 to $37,227, with a median cost of $14,620. For uncomplicated births by c-section, the cost ranged from $8,312 to $70,908, with $27,481 median. Researchers Renee Y. Hsia, Yaa Akosa Antwi and Ellerie Weber found the highest hospital charge was 11 times higher than the lowest hospital charge for a vaginal birth. They found similarly large ranges for c-sections: The highest hospital charge was 8.5 times that of the lowest.
            The study found that insurers pay on average 37% of the charges.
            So both we and the insurers are getting gouged in some areas.

            I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

            by samddobermann on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 02:51:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  that's why they are saying the numbers are cooked (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      flavor411, Subterranean, ColoTim

      If the MSM starts reporting the truth about ACA, Repubs have a lot of 'splaining to do.

      So, 1. Obama is cooking the books and 2. If you are getting a good deal, then you aren't on Obamacare--it is something else (like the guy in KY who was so happy with the state plan and so glad he didn't have to have that awful Obamacare).

      Basically, their only hope is smoke and mirrors.

  •  How many need affordable health care, in the US. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mostel26, ColoTim

    I see much  variaion:  i've seen up to 50 million uninsured or under insured, in another words with rip-off policies which the Affordable Care Act cuts into by defining the minimal needed to pass muster as a viable policy for us publicans.

  •  New rules for Medicaid estate recovery unavailable (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The problem of Medicaid claw backs for people over 54 needs to be addressed.  If people 55+ are put on Medicaid they may have to pay 100% for all community-based services and prescriptions if their state chooses to take their assets after they die.  States can put a lien on the home and probably other assets while the Medicaid recipient is still alive.

    This is a partial descripton from medicaid .gov:
    State Medicaid programs must recover certain Medicaid benefits paid on behalf of a Medicaid enrollee. For individuals age 55 or older, states are required to seek recovery of payments from the individual's estate for nursing facility services, home and community-based services, and related hospital and prescription drug services. States have the option to recover payments for all other Medicaid services provided to these individuals, except Medicare cost-sharing paid on behalf of Medicare Savings Program beneficiaries.

    Does anyone know where to find current details for each state?

    •  This is only for certain Medicaid (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      long-term Medicaid benefits, like payments for long-term living facilities.

      Anyway, CMS is telling States not apply this to new enrollees.

      •  There is no way to force the states to listen. (0+ / 0-)

        States that choose to do so can apply it to all community-based services and to prescriptions.  There is more information on this at:

        SMDL #14-001 ACA #29
        RE: Application of Liens, Adjustments and Recoveries, Transfer-of-Asset Rules and Post-Eligibility Income Rules to MAGI Individuals
        . . . .

        Due to the potential barrier to enrollment that future estate recovery may create for some individuals, CMS intends to thoroughly explore options and to use any available authorities to eliminate recovery of Medicaid benefits consisting of items or services other than long term care and related services in the case of individuals who are determined eligible for Medicaid benefits using the MAGI methodology.

        I had to read it several times to figure out the abbreviations, but HHS knows there is a problem.

        •  The term "community based services" (0+ / 0-)

          refers to those long term services and supports which are in lieu of nursing home care.

          It doesn't apply to ordinary care. Which is what the CMS document cited above tries to explain.

          And always there is the exemptions granted for "hardship."

          The simplest thing would be to get legislation to make clear that all the recoveries just apply to long term care related expenses.

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 04:23:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  in over half the states it applies to everything (0+ / 0-)

        not just long term care. You might want to visit my diaries for more info. Here's the latest:

        If you act out of anger, the best part of your brain fails to function. - the Dalai Lama

        by beverlywoods on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 07:03:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  They Can't take Assets (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      But I still agree it should be done away with. You have to meet a spend-down test. I know because I dealt with with an Aunt with Dementia.

      It was really horrible for me because my relative (another Attorney) who was her POA decided to keep her in a "nicer" place than a 2 bed Medicaid room (when she didn't even know where she was). So sold her house and ALL her possessions. I am still livid. I worked at Hospice even people who know they aren't going home want to believe they have one.

      Anyways you are right. I do believe it's most all state as it's federal. You are talking about Long Term Care facilities. Say a house up to 150k, Car, household things. Etc. To a certain value are excluded. If you have 150k in the bank you are going to have to spend it. You can't give it away . . . there's a 5 year lookback (you can prior to that 5 year lookback create an irrevocable trust and they can't touch) but if you gift or give away anything not for FMV they use a multiplier of a poverty/monthly figure and you are ineligible for that amount of months (gift say 10k, multiplier 2? 5 months ineligible). So you can retain your things.

      But yes. After you die your kids aren't getting your house if you live too long. Sad.

      •  I can appreciate (0+ / 0-)

        being concerned about the quality of care, but don't understand how an Alzheimer patient who doesn't know where she is, knows she has a home.  My Aunt had Alzheimers'  she didn't remember where she lived or anything like that when she went into care.  Selling her house to give her a better facility, cleaner, more staff per patient, better food certainly made sense to us.  She wasn't going to need the money after she was dead.

        A person who has their mental faculties is a different situation.  And the Medicaid rules allow them to keep their homeplace and take it after death to help repay the payments made during their lifetime.

      •  There seems to be a bad new interaction with ACA. (0+ / 0-)

        The situation with your aunt was terrible. ACA has created a new problem that even the people at HHS do not seem to have really figured out.  People used to have to spend down assets before they were put on Medicaid.  ACA only looks at current income. This means that older Medicaid recipients may loose all their assets even though most younger people will not have to repay the state for their care.  People who get Obamacare insurance subsidies do not have to repay the money, either.  
        Many of my concerns about the effect of forced Medicaid enrollment for people from the ages of 55 to 64 come from information that can be found in the following HHS memo:
        Department of Health & Human Services Office of Assistant Secretary for Policy & Evaluation
        Medicaid Eligibility for Long-Term Care Benefits Policy Brief #1

        This can be found at:
        OBRA ‘93 requires states to recover, at a minimum, all property and assets13 that pass from a deceased person to his or her heirs under state probate law, which governs both property conveyed by will and property of persons who die intestate. . . .
        States may use the narrow Federal definition of “estate” and limit Medicaid estate recoveries to only those assets that pass through probate. Alternatively, they may choose to define “estate” in a broader context, which enables them to recover from some or all property that bypasses probate. Such property includes assets that pass directly to a survivor, heir or assignee through joint tenancy, rights of survivorship, life estates, living trusts, annuity remainder payments, or life insurance payouts. . . .
        At a minimum, states must recover amounts spent by Medicaid for long-term care and related drug and hospital benefits, including Medicaid payments for Medicare cost sharing related to these services. However, they have the option of recovering the costs of all Medicaid services paid on the recipient’s behalf. The majority of states recover spending for more than the minimum of long-term care and related expenses. . . .
        States can then spend their share of recovered funds to preserve or expand their Medicaid coverage of services for needy populations,38 although they are not required to do so. . . .
        Opponents of Medicaid recoveries argue that the practice is unfair in that it mainly affects people of very modest means, while sparing those who are able to access advice on estate planning techniques that shelter assets.

        My greatest concern is the possible effect of "pre-death" liens which are described in a footnote:
        TEFRA or “pre-death” liens are permitted under section 1917(a) of the Social Security Act. Detailed Federal guidance is in Sections 3810.A.1. and F. of the State Medicaid Manual.

  •  Best news of the day (5+ / 0-)

    This was always about the injustice of leaving people with no safety net against things that happen to everyone -- cancer, diabetes, arthritis, lupus, a sick child, a broken leg.

    I am very critical of the Obama administration, and I wish the health care struggle had gotten further in his two terms, but hats off to 20 percent fewer scared Americans.  It's a great start, and the GOP should be quaking in their boots if half of those people decide to get off their ass and vote their own interests in November. Please.

  •  What will Ted Cruze say? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    se portland

    And what will Ted Cruze and Rand Paul and Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney and Chris Christie and all the foolish right wingers say?

  •  "...more insurers are looking to join state (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    LOL! You snooze, you looze ;)

  •  Why wasn't this part always obvious? (11+ / 0-)
    "We are talking about a very small fraction of the country" who lost coverage, said Katherine Carman, a Rand economist who is overseeing the survey.
    This is a fraction of the fraction of the country in the individual health insurance market.  "If you like it you can keep it" probably held close to true for more than 97% of the country, yet it was anointed LIE OF THE YEAR.

    Republicans run around spewing 100% lies about the ACA and they are praised and rewarded for it; the president fails to take into account every contingency and it's wall-to-wall negative coverage.

    And yet despite all of that, and all of the website troubles, they're going to get damn close to the original 7 million goal.  Unreal.  I guess people want to be covered after all.

    •  stop telling lies about the Democrats (7+ / 0-)

      I ran into this quote from Adlai Stevenson yesterday, and I think it is more true today then when he said it in 1952.

      I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them.

      “We can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities.” - Winston Chuchill

      by se portland on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 08:13:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Because It Was a Lie (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      While Republicans are spewing 100% lies about Obamacare, it is also true that Obama didn't say "a very small fraction of the country will lose insurance they like". He said over and over "if you like your policy you'll keep it". 3% of the country is still almost 10 million people.

      The consequences of the difference from the truth are very legitimately arguably well worth it, and even worth it to people who lost policies they liked but shouldn't have liked. But that doesn't change the fact that "if you like it you'll keep it" was a lie. And one that the ACA deliberately made a lie by ending coverage that didn't meet its new standards. So of course Republicans are going to make a big deal out of it. And for people who liked their bad, cancelled policies that lie is a big deal.

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

      by DocGonzo on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 08:19:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What you say is true, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        however the ramifications were frequently misreported and exaggerated, and mitigating circumstances (namely, the opportunity to get subsidized rates on the exchange for qualifying individuals) largely ignored.  

        Meanwhile the Party of 100% Lies is given a platform to spew their BS, like that CBO report which was heralded as a confirmation of Republican fears, until somebody actually read the thing and found out they were lying again.

        Obama didn't make any carve-outs or caveats?  Okay, that was false in terms of truth value.  Now is it the Worst Thing That Ever Happened, or are the details less frightening than the hype?

      •  I think he assumed we were smart (0+ / 0-)

        that people were smart enough to not like plans with a lifetime max (now illegal) or that had fine print to deny stuff (now illegal) or that you had to stick with because you have a pre existing condition you cannot get treated or you will never get covered again (now illegal to medically discriminate)

        People are not.

        He also assumed that the media would tell the truth, that these are great improvements. But they instead struck fear into people for four years.

        Thanks Democrats! My Obamacare is permanent coverage no one can take away - and saving $3,000 is nice too

        by sotiredofusernames on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 01:41:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you so much for this, caseylaw (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The good news just keeps on rolling. At some point MSM just won't be able to ignore it anymore.

    I'm waiting for a GOP replay of Rove's reaction to the numbers coming in from on Ohio on Election Night last year.

    Oh, wait. It's already started.

    There is something in us that refuses to be regarded as less than human. We are created for freedom - Archbishop Desmond Tutu

    by Onomastic on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 07:53:54 AM PDT

  •  40 Million Newly Insured (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I thought the ACA was supposed to get 40 million insured of the 45 million uninsured in 2008. I'm pretty sure I remember Clinton and Obama arguing over whose approach would actually achieve that. And I'm pretty sure I remember Republican nutpickers whining that would leave about 5 million still uninsured.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 08:13:58 AM PDT

    •  This is still the goal (6+ / 0-)

      As with Romneycare, the first year is not the year where you reach the "fully-insured" mark, far from it. Subscription is going to be exponential and it is going to take a couple of years to reach 40 Million.

      The only thing that could cut the original 40 Million number are the states refusing to expand Medicaid, but those states are going to face increasing pressure to do it.

    •  So helpful... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Why do you ignore the fact that any plan(even single payer) would  require people to sign up?

      They all can sign up for ACA, but if they do not, that is not the fault of the plan or of the President, but you know that, and only want to find ways to rip on the President.

      As they said, this is a long term plan, and they expect to pick up another 18-20 million over the next two years as people make the effort to get covered.

      •  So What? (0+ / 0-)

        I'm at present "ignoring" any number of facts, while I ask about a fact that is interesting. As are you. We are not each required to inquire about every fact on each other's agenda. Just because I ask a question about something whose answer you don't like doesn't mean I "only want to find ways to rip the president".

        However, your answer shows that you're interested in answers only when they make the president look good. So I will now ignore you. Goodbye.

        "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

        by DocGonzo on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 11:20:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ok,. (0+ / 0-)

          I did not mean to jump down your throat with my nasty response....sorry.

        •  5% of seniors aren't covered (0+ / 0-)

          by Medicare for various reasons.

          If 5% of people don't get covered under the ACA that would leave some 15 million uncovered.

          Don't take campaign sniping too seriously.

          Plus everyone is making the same mistake. 7 million signups doesn't meant 7 million people got coverage — it means policies which cover families.

          If you guess average family size is 3 then some 21 million have gotten coverage on private  plans as well as all those who are now covered by Medicaid.

          If family sive averaged 5 ……...

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Fri Apr 04, 2014 at 05:04:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  A big win for the 99% (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    looking and listening

    I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

    by CFAmick on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 09:37:39 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site