Skip to main content

One big plus from O'Care: Number of bankruptcies due to huge health expenses will plummet.
When I visit London I am always surprised that there aren't dead bodies everywhere due to socialized medicine.
Brian Beutler:
It’s all over, Obamacare haters! Why they’ve officially lost the battle
With success stories, over 7 million sign-ups and a shift in public opinion, it's time for the right's white flag
First Read:
What happens if the negative health care headlines go away?

It’s safe to say that Monday was the Obama White House’s best health-care day since the law passed. NBC News confirms that enrollment in the exchanges is on track to hit or surpass 7 million -- which was the original goal before the website woes of October and November. And while it very well might an outlier, a new Washington Post/ABC poll shows that support for the law, for the first time we can remember in some time, is now right-side up, with 49% supporting the law and 48% opposing it. (We’re taking the poll with a grain of salt for now until we see more numbers post-enrollment deadline, but at a minimum, it’s an important political booster shot for Democrats, even if it is just for today.) Now with the end of enrollment, Republicans face this potential challenge: What happens if the negative headlines go away?

Some conservatives are admitting defeat.

Ramesh Ponnuru:

But it's clear now that one scenario with a lot of purchase among conservative opponents of Obamacare -- that the law would "implode," "collapse" or "unravel" -- is highly unlikely. A quick death spiral was always a remote possibility, even if the early troubles of the exchange websites made it look a little less remote. Many congressional Republicans wanted to believe the idea, though, especially because they viewed it as one more reason they could avoid coming up with their own health-care agenda. (This was illogical -- if the program was going to self-destruct in months, wouldn't the country need a replacement ready? -- but the psychological impulse was to avoid grappling with health-care issues.)
Ross Douthat:
We don’t know yet what the paid enrollment looks like or how successfully the program is actually enrolling the uninsured. (After some grim estimates, this Rand study is making liberals feel a little more optimistic, but still suggests a below-expectations result.) We don’t know what the age-and-health-status composition of the enrollee pools looks like or what that means for premiums next year and beyond. We don’t know if any of the suspended/postponed provisions of the law will actually take effect. And we certainly don’t know what any of this means for social policy in the long run.

But we do know that there won’t be an immediate political unraveling, and that we aren’t headed for the kind of extremely-low-enrollment scenario that seemed conceivable just a few months ago, or the possible world where cancellations had ended up outstripping enrollment, creating a net decline in the number of insured. And knowing that much has significant implications for our politics.

More politics and policy below the fold.


Understanding Special Enrollment Periods, Part 1: A Look at Some Who Will be Out of Luck
Think you know about Susan B Anthony and voting rights for women? Think again. This, from Corrine McConnaughy:
Why, then, am I asking you to forget Susan B. Anthony? Certainly not because she was unimportant to the suffrage movement — an impressive political marathon that lasted more than 70 years. Rather, as I argue in my recent book, “The Woman Suffrage Movement in America: A Reassessment,” fixation on a figure like Anthony eschews the most important political lessons of the movement. Anthony — who had died more than a decade before passage of the Anthony Amendment — was actually quite disconnected from much of the politics that delivered the movement’s policy successes. Those politics were politics of coalition-building and partisan maneuvering, neither of which were great strengths of Anthony’s. And understanding the politics of the movement’s policy successes helps us to understand the politics of voting rights generally speaking — to understand that women’s history is relevant to both political history and contemporary politics.
Read it and learn something about cialition politics.


Contrast how The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal frame the Obamacare news on their front pages:
WSJ fromt page about computer glitches on last day
The website was down for 40 minutes and it mattered not at all. The final number (for now) is 7.1 million.

Alec MacGillis and Jonathan Cohn have fun with Fox News graphics.

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

  •  Thanks for the roundup, Greg! (33+ / 0-)

    And I will continue to accord Susan B. Anthony the respect she deserves, no matter who writes what and no matter that the forced-birthers have appropriated her name for their own nefarious purposes.

    When I think of the "iron-jawed angels" who worked so hard to get votes for women, I think of Susan B. Anthony, Emmeline Pankhurst, and all the others whose names have been associated with the movement. Twenty-first century "deconstruction" of their reputations is not going to change my mind.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:37:42 AM PDT

  •  One thing that will go away rather quickly (43+ / 0-)

    is references to "Obamacare".  You can measure the success of the ACA by how seldom the GOP/TGOP refer to it as Obamacare.  I knew it tagging it with that name would bite them in the end.  teehee

    As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them. John F. Kennedy

    by JaxDem on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:43:58 AM PDT

  •  Ross doubtHat's bowl of vomit inducing spew (12+ / 0-)

    Reminds me of this angry old man down the street, bitching about everything, including rain and shine.

    What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

    by agnostic on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:45:03 AM PDT

    •  The only thing missing... (9+ / 0-)

      ...from his column (if by column you mean random black marks on a white page) was a scream of BENGHAZI!  I'd call Ross a douche bag, but at least a douche bag has a purpose beneficial to humanity...

    •  Ross wants his ex-nazi pope back now darn it! n/t (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, gffish, Stude Dude
    •  We do need more data (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      7.1 million is a good number, but it is meaningless without knowing the breakdowns that he is calling for.

      I've been saying that for weeks.. but, unlike Douchehat, I thought I would let everyone celebrate a day or two before being a Debbie Downer and asking for more data.

      •  Of course we do (6+ / 0-)

        And when that data is produced, you and Douthat and Republicans will cry "But we need more data!".
        And when that is produced, you will cry "That data is skewed!"

        Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

        by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:53:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  to him and his ilk, truth is skewed (4+ / 0-)

          That leaves them with one choice. To skewer it.

          What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

          by agnostic on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:01:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  and payments.... (0+ / 0-)

          I suspect it will be an ongoing stream

          and whinging about Narrow Networks.

          Up in NH, they are screaming about the narrow networks

          •  So what is a narrow network? (0+ / 0-)

            And why would somebody scream about it?

            "If this Studebaker had anymore Atomic Space-Age Style, you'd have to be an astronaut with a geiger counter!"

            by Stude Dude on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:55:16 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Poor choice of doctors and hospitals (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wintergreen8694, Stude Dude

              I looked at the provider list of some of the plans offered here in Illinois, and while some were pretty good, others were downright pitiful.  The largest, best equipped hospital in my county was not included in their network.  One plan had one dinky hospital in-network.

            •  Narrow networks can be a serious problem. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              SoCalSal, Stude Dude

              A network with a very limited range of providers is probably fine for the average person who's in good health.  The story is far different, however, for those of us with chronic diseases.  One way in which an insurance company might try to lower its costs is by discouraging chronically ill people from signing up, since people with chronic diseases use a lot of medical services and are therefore very expensive.

              The ACA prohibits insurers from refusing to issue policies because of a pre-existing condition.  One way of getting around that is to limit the provider network by not including in it doctors who specialize in expensive, chronic diseases.

              For example, I have HIV.  I have to be monitored quarterly with a full range of bloodwork and a visit to my doctor, who's an HIV specialist.  I also have to take very, very expensive medication.  Because I need to see a doctor with expertise in HIV, I'm going to be very unwilling to choose an insurance plan whose network doesn't include HIV specialists.  By excluding such doctors from the provider network, an insurance carrier could steer HIV+ people away from its plan.

              So that's the problem with narrow networks.  And you could apply what I've said about HIV to pretty much any serious, chronic disease.

              "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

              by FogCityJohn on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 10:10:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  I'll wait for the data.. (0+ / 0-)

          as I said.

          Some will be a long time coming.. perhaps a few years.

          The success this week is for those people who now have coverage who didn't before.  To me, that was a given from the start.

          What remains to be seen is the sustainability of the program, and what happens in the employer provided insurance market.

      •  once we get those, then more other numbers (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FogCityJohn, SoCalSal

        will be requested. just so the goalposts keep moving.

        it's the only reason they ever care.

        we do know in some states close to 90% pay.
        we do know that in KY 75% were uninsured previously, NY was 59%.
        we do know off exchange yet to be counted.

        Those are enough to know the other questions are legitimate, interesting, and don't really matter.  The sign up numbers are large, in the millions. They are enough to sustain the program. The rest is detail.

        Here's truth: what matters most is stuff beyond the signup, all having to with how well the law works.
        Here's false: 7.1M is meaningless. Imagine the stories, for example, if the sign up number was only 4.5 million.

        "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" — Upton Sinclair

        by Greg Dworkin on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 09:03:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I disagree (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Greg Dworkin

          no surprise, huh?

          Some states like Kentucky and NY have had high percentages of previously uninsured sign up..

          So, yes..  It's good that the lower income and sicker folks have found insurance.  But there's a helluva lot of ACA to come over the next few years.

          Those are enough to know the other questions are legitimate, interesting, and don't really matter.  The sign up numbers are large, in the millions. They are enough to sustain the program. The rest is detail.
          Not really.  If most of the sign-ups are sicker and older, then no, it definitely isn't.

          The insurers will pull out and/or raise the premiums til they go through the roof.  Not sustainable.

          Are all the new taxes enough to cover the subsidies and/or new Medicaid enrollees?  Will the taxes meet the estimates?  (I'm betting the Cadillac tax doesn't, for instance)

          How many of the off-exchange and even on-exchange private sign-ups were previously insured but had their plans cancelled?  We have no idea.  The Kaiser Foundation estimates up to 6 million lost their plans.  Are you saying them purchasing a new plan that is ACA compliant should be included in these "success" numbers?  Seems like a wash to me, at best.

          But, all that aside, we are still talking about a miniscule percentage of Americans.  A simple expansion of Medicaid would have solved most of what ACA has succeeded in doing so far.  We'll have to wait to see what effects ACA has on employer provided insurance before we can call ACA a success.  And, I am not the one moving a goalpost.. that goalpost has been there from the start.  This phase of ACA just closed is merely the first baby steps.

          •  RAND estimates less than 1 million (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SoCalSal, JJ In Illinois

            lost plans and couldn't get another (the number that counts).

            I understand that this phase just closed, but this phase brought in well more than 15M enrollees (see, and not yet done since Medicaid (which counts) is ongoing as are some states.  While we will eventually get an estimate of how many previously were uninsured, we are on track to do what CBO suggested in feb: 7M via exchange (done), 13M less uninsured (TBD).

            Jonathan Cohn said it best: we don't know how well ACA works yet, but given the numbers we know it works. Not having the numbers would have meant it did not and that's why they are meaningful.

            Much of what we would all like to know (% healthy, next years rates, how many less uninsured) will take a long time to collect but that doesn't invalidate what we do know.

            But just because that's true doesn't make what we know now 'meaningless', your term, and only used to disparage the program. The proper way to describe the 7M in your terms is "good and necessary, but hasn't answered my questions yet"

            "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" — Upton Sinclair

            by Greg Dworkin on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 10:25:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  btw you should read this (0+ / 0-)

            it's very good.

            Obamacare Is Doomed! A Trip Down Memory Lane

            Those are good rules for talking about health care policy—or any big debate, for that matter. And maybe the best thing about Tuesday at the White House was listening to Obama adopt a similarly measured tone. “In the months, years ahead, I guarantee you there will be additional challenges to implementing this law,” he said. “There will be days when the website stumbles -- I guarantee it. … There will be parts of the law that will still need to be improved." The president was right. Obamacare's future will include rough patches, just as its past did. That won't preclude success and it certainly won't make it a catastrophe.


            "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" — Upton Sinclair

            by Greg Dworkin on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 10:31:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  you should also read this epic Sam Baker rant (0+ / 0-)

            "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" — Upton Sinclair

            by Greg Dworkin on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 01:25:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Where Were We When The October Rollout (16+ / 0-)

    started to look completely fucked? Oh yes. Ted Cruz was leading the disastrous government shutdown, setting the stage for what looked like promising midterms for the Democrats. Now that the ACA approval numbers are rising and with Ryan's contract on America budget, maybe we can get back to being optimistic about the midterms.  

    •  Democrats optimistic about elections? (5+ / 0-)

      That's impossible!

      •  Dark Cloud of DOOOOM always circling over our (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        singe, I love OCD


      •  Quite The Transition Last October (0+ / 0-)

        from optimism to a sense of doom. Setback of a bad website and Democrats start cowering. For the last couple of decades, the only successful midterms Democrats have had whether they are the incumbent party or not is when the GOP completely fucks up. They tried to impeach a popular President in 1998 and they gave us the first 2 years of Bush's second term in 2006.

      •  Within reason some pessimism helps. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes, SueDe, wintergreen8694

        Never get overconfident. I've known too many (political idiots in my opinion) that blew off an election as "we are going to win anyway" only to wake up next morning finding something the hyena puked up as tainted elected to office.

        More than once in my life I've been lonely at the polls for a "sure thing" with a sinking feeling we've just done it again.

        The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

        by pelagicray on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:19:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  One notable example of fatal overconfidence (6+ / 0-)

          is James Blanchard, running for his third term (possible back then) as Michigan governor in 1990. For some reason, he thought he had the election in the bag and didn't do much to court African-American voters, especially in Detroit. Turnout in the city was remarkably low, and in the end he lost to John Engler by 17,000 votes--a margin that could have easily been overcome by strong voting in the city, had he given people reason to vote for him.

          Now, Engler was one of the worst governors we've ever had, corrupt and disdainful toward the public good. He practically destroyed the strong safety net we had developed in the state, which had made us one of the best in the nation in terms of mental health services (for one example). He brought us into line with national policies, when Reagan rule had already decimated public housing and other essential social supports. Engler also gutted environmental protections in the state.

          Though Granholm halted the decline, she could do comparatively little to rebuild the social infrastructure. We've fallen from being a state in the top ten of many measures of citizen protections to the bottom twenty, at best.

          So for that, I hold Blanchard's arrogance partly to blame. It wasn't just himself he was running for, it was the entire state of Michigan that needed true public service. Engler's legacy is still felt in Snyder's regime, which someone better versed in Michigan's political history could detail better than I.

          Support Small Business: Shop Kos Katalogue If you'd like to join the Motor City Kossacks, send me a Kosmail.

          by peregrine kate on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:30:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Two More Legs to the Story (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            peregrine kate

            Over-confidence---which I agree is very dangerous---may well have been a factor but there were other issues and factors.

            Governor Blanchard's divorce and remarriage was also an issue that may well have cost votes, especially outside Wayne County.

            The Detroit turnout has an additional dimension. Whether Blanchard campaigned enough in Detroit is a fair question but it should also be recognized that he did not do what was necessary to induce Mayor Young to use his influence and networks to turn out the vote for the Governor.

            Mayor Young was concerned about Detroit falling below 1,000,000 in the final 1990 census count. Michigan's statutes had many special rules for cities larger than 1,000,000 which were part of the operation of the city. Young wanted to begin amending the statutes to protect Detroit's status. Blanchard did not publicly embrace that effort. I believe he wanted to wait until the census made it necessary. Given the make up of the Legislature then, the effort would have required substantial arm-twisting and exacerbated the tensions between Detroit and the rest of the state.

            Additionally because Engler controlled the state Senate, raising the issue during the election would have compelled his opposition and enhanced his position out-state.

            Whether Blanchard's assessment of the net balance of voters' positions was correct, the timing of the election, the census, and Detroit's loss of population created a difficult issue. Either position would cost Blanchard votes. As a matter of arithmetic, backing Detroit would likely switch votes out-state, but remaining silent would reduce turnout in Detroit. The former is like losing two votes, the latter only one.

            As it happened, because Detroit's final count was just above a million in 1990, Young's concern was pre-mature and Blanchard's apparent judgment of the facts was sustained, but that wasn't evident leading up to and during the campaign.

            Blanchard also declined to attack Engler on some of Engler's own weaknesses. That aspect may have reflected over-confidence.

            In sum, my take then and now is that the Detroit turnout issue was real but a dilemma whereas the management of the divorce and remarriage and the failure to highlight Engler's weaknesses were less explicable. Both issues left votes "on the table." Over confidence might have been a factor in those issues but I don't think so with regard to the turnout in Detroit.

            While we highlight different issues with respect to overconfidence in that 1990 campaign, we agree that it is a risk campaigns can rarely afford. And we most certainly agree that the adverse consequences of that narrow loss continue.

            •  Aaargh. I wrote a long reply and it got lost. (0+ / 0-)

              Let's see if I can recap.
              I do recall the divorce and remarriage brouhaha. I bet it wouldn't have nearly the impact now.
              I also recall the census issue, though as you say it was a little premature in 1990. But I think there were other political tensions between Young and Blanchard besides that one. I was a city resident at the time, and I remember the general impression that Blanchard wasn't especially invested in supporting Detroit. Now, Young wasn't averse to cooperating with white businessmen or politicians if they were promoting constructive policies, so there must have been something else there (or not, as the case may be). However, the lack of the machine turnout was certainly short-sighted of Young, since Engler's administration was catastrophic for Detroit, no real surprise given his politics and backers.
              Thank you for providing such a thorough and careful elucidation of my original point. Clearly this is a familiar topic to you; were you a Detroiter or Michigander back then? In any case, I'm happy you stopped by.
              I see you're also a relative newbie to commenting. I hope you continue to contribute to the discussions around here.
              I think that covers it!
              Oh, before I post--I should note that it is possible I'll wind up with a double-reply. The site hiccups like that sometimes. It's a mystery.

              Support Small Business: Shop Kos Katalogue If you'd like to join the Motor City Kossacks, send me a Kosmail.

              by peregrine kate on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 08:12:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  I'm crawling out from under the bed as u rite.n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skillet, 4mygirls
    •  in fairness, it's hard to be optimistic about (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PorridgeGun, FogCityJohn

      midterms when our Congressional members have a 33% approval rating.  One generally doesn't get many victories when two-thirds of voters don't like one.

      Of course, as always, our only saving grace is that voters hate the Goppers even more.

      So once again, "embrace the suck!" becomes our electoral strategy. But I'm doubting that "we suck less than they do!" is gonna generate very much enthusiasm to make most people go out and vote.

      I expect the turnout this time will be shitty just like it always is.

      Which gives us little grounds for optimism.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:19:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It would help the Democratic pessimism (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stude Dude, SoCalSal, Shawn87

        if people would quit bitching and start working to get pessimistic, apathetic and disenfranchised people registered and then make sure they could get to the polls.  Volunteer to take them, then take them back home, if you're concerned they don't have a way to get to the polls on their own.  Encourage others to help in the effort.  Many people, if they feel needed and have a purpose in the process, will willingly overcome their apathy and pessimism.  

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:35:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  alas, we do that EVERY election (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Stude Dude, SueDe

          Every year, we do GOTV. And every year, turnout is shitty anyway.

          The problem is not that people CAN'T vote--it's that they DON'T WANT TO.  Offering to drive someone to the polls who doesn't want to vote in the first place (because they think both parties suck anyway), is no help at all.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:44:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  What's the GOP approval number? (0+ / 0-)

        66? Maybe 6.6 is closer.

        •  yes indeed, they suck more than we do (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          And once again, that will be our unofficial campaign motto. As it is every year. And once again, that will not motivate anyone to go out and vote. As it does not every year. And once again, the party will blame its shitty showing on everyone and anyone--except itself.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 07:35:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  that requires the DCCC to run a 50 state presence (5+ / 0-)

      not a 25 district strategy

  •  Local radio wingnout...'The 7 million is the lower (21+ / 0-)

    end of we're celebrating mediocrity?'

    Couple of weeks ago he said no way in the world they'd make 7 million.

  •  Stop negative news? Ha! Boehner says the House (8+ / 0-)

    will go on with ACA repeal efforts, Ryan's "budget" wants to end the ACA...the media will be happy to keep reporting on efforts to end it, at least through this November.

    •  Boehner: will "remain committed to" eliminating (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      health coverage for hundreds of thousands who recently acquired it.

    •  Ryan also wants to kill the CFPB (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      I love OCD

      But don't worry, Sarah Palin is on the case!

      Ryan's budget slashes Medicare under Obamacare and contains deep cuts to social programs, but according to Palin those measures won't sufficiently balance the budget. She invoked the Wisconsin Badgers, headed to the NCAA men's basketball Final Four, as an example of the "sacrificial work ethic and discipline" she thinks Ryan would do well to learn from.

      "The solution is staring us in the face," the former vice presidential candidate wrote. "We need to rein in spending today, and don’t tell me there is nothing to cut when we know every omnibus bill is loaded with pork and kickbacks."

      I think we can count the number of omnibus bills passed since Republicans took over the House on one hand, can't we?

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:57:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Death Panels (16+ / 0-)

    I disagree with something the President said yesterday about Obamacare: "there are no death panels".

    Actually, just look at the obstruction of Medicaid expansion by Republican legislators in may states which is preventing many of their citizens from getting ACA enabled coverage and inevitably leading to unnecessary deaths.

    These are the Palin death panels.

    "One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, sourpusses." ― Pope Francis

    by GoodGod on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:55:07 AM PDT

  •  NPR just had an interview (26+ / 0-)

    with some insurance exec. Wisniewoski or something like that.

    His verdict? Be very afraid. Why? Because the folks who signed up on the ACA are probably going to need--get this--  healthcare! You see, all those folks who were denied insurance because of a pre existing condition are now going to get--wait for it--  health care! The insurance companies could never afford to pay for the service they offer, it appears to be some sort of insurance Ponzi, I guess, I don't know, you can't make this shit up, oh wait they do.

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:59:18 AM PDT

  •  That's what paid ads, Fox is for: (5+ / 0-)

    Keep negative headlines up there.  It'll always be October for many.

    The dossier on my DKos activities during the Bush administration will be presented on February 3, 2014, with an appendix consisting an adjudication, dated "a long time ago", that I am Wrong.

    by Inland on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 04:59:50 AM PDT

  •  The McConnaughy piece on Susan Anthony and (5+ / 0-)

    voting rights was eye-opening, but not at all surprising, really.  

    The lessons for today’s voting rights struggles, which are so often entangled in issues of race, class and ethnicity, is that the battle is not over those sentiments. The tactical moves required are not eliminating biases, but forging effective partnerships. And while the latter may prove quite difficult, the former seems much further off in the realm of possibilities.
    People's perceptions be damned, forge those partnerships to protect and expand rights and let the perceptions take care of themselves.

    One thing though -- what in the heck is cialition politics?

    As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them. John F. Kennedy

    by JaxDem on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:00:34 AM PDT

  •  I still wrote to the NYTimes and complained (14+ / 0-)

    about their coverage.  The headline might not have been quite as dire as the Journal (though the subhead was a downer) but the photos on the front page were all grim-faced, frustrated and unhappy people (there was a smile pic buried on the bottom of p. 14) and words like like “crashed,” “thwarted,” “struggled,” “snags” and the ever-popular “disastrous rollout” far outnumbered any tepid positive descriptions. To me, they were clearly focused on the negative political spin, the framing set by GOP obstructionists, rather than the historic milestone crossed and the positive effects on millions of American lives.  

    "It ain't right, Atticus," said Jem. "No, son, it ain't right." --Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird

    by SottoVoce on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:02:00 AM PDT

    •  Yesterday's online edition (9+ / 0-)

      only had the day before's story on the shutdown glitch -- no mention of the 7 million -- that was the FP.  Now they said it was 2 hours, Greg says it was 40 minutes, I heard it was 20 so I'll take Greg's time.

      Their coverage has been so awful that even one of my best friends who is a progressive, retired professor had completely wrong info on the ACA.  He sent me the article on the computer glitch on Monday with a note of frustration over the Administration.  Sooo, that's a smart person.  

      The media is almost worthless.  We do still depend on them for certain breaking stories that are obvious -- but not investigative journalism.

      " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

      by gchaucer2 on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:10:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I've notice a pattern (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SottoVoce, Stude Dude

      in stories, particularly in TPM or HP, that good stories have a smiling O, the bad stories have a frowning O. You don't even need to read the article, the picture sets the tone right off. But those two online news outlets are generally favorable to the Obama administration, whereas others (like the WSJ cover above) find every negative story they can to lead. Given the infatuation of the press with all the negatives and few of the positives, there are a lot of frowning Os or, as you say, grim-faced and unhappy people in the lead photograph. This really burns me...

      •  Grim unhappy people in the THREE large front page (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, Shawn87

        photos.  Three scenes of boredom, frustration and misery.  Inside, at the bottom of page 14, a small photo showed a woman helping people and huge smiles.  It was hard to be more obvious that they were carrying water for the obstructionists.

        "It ain't right, Atticus," said Jem. "No, son, it ain't right." --Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird

        by SottoVoce on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:41:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  check out this video (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I don't know how true it is

    •  In order to stop this fraud, (0+ / 0-)

      congress will have to change the law to close the loophole that allows it.  ITIN numbers are meant for resident or non-resident aliens who are required to file a tax return under the law but who are not eligible for a Social Security number.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 07:17:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Watching Fox (on an empty stomach of course) (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet, skohayes, PorridgeGun

    The themes:  

    "It's a lie!"

    "California mistakenly directed callers to a phone sex line!"

    "Sebelius wasn't mentioned!"

    "Pelosi says the Founding Fathers supported Obamacare!"

  •  Salary and Wages. (14+ / 0-)

    I like the minimum wage push, mainly because its doable. But Democrats need to start talking about wages broadly, for people who have jobs. Even if you cant get anything passed.

    The problem for us is that our folks in the political class want to talk about job training and other 'opportunity' foolishness rather than trade, labor rules, and executive pay.

  •  Saint Sara of the snow has a new meme to work; (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skohayes, tobendaro, Stude Dude

    She says Paul Ryan's draconian budget which ends ACA and guts food stamps and puts widows and orphans to work mining uranium with their bare hands is a joke and not even close to being harsh enough on the pilgrims. We are blessed that no matter how outrageous the latest right wing ideas are they will only evolve to be even more outrageous the next week. They don't act as if they can suppress the vote, they act as if there won't be a vote at all.

  •  The Obamacare death spiral has been downgraded (12+ / 0-)

    to a GOP pout spiral.

    If cats could blog, they wouldn't

    by crystal eyes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:11:37 AM PDT

  •  When Fox News hosts slam Ted Cruz (10+ / 0-)

    for continuing to insist Obamacare needs to be completely repealed, then it's time to shut up about it already.  Don't hold your breath though:

    'Fox & Friends' Point Out that Ted Cruz is Stupid and Nobody Wants to Repeal Obamacare

    “I think at this point it is abundantly clear this thing it isn’t working,” Cruz told the Fox News hosts the morning … “You can’t fiddle around the edges. I think it is the essence of pragmatism to recognize this thing isn’t working, and let’s start over, let’s repeal every word of it.”

    “You know, you’re kind of in a minority when it comes to that,” host Steve Doocy pointed out. “You look at the polling, Senator, and a lot of Americans like parts of it, would like to see parts of it continue. So, to blow the whole thing up, I don’t know if people are behind that.”

    Soooo, exceeding the projected enrollment figures are "fiddling around the edges".  OMG, Cruz, don't go changin'.

    As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them. John F. Kennedy

    by JaxDem on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:14:36 AM PDT

  •  Not 100% convinced the anti-ACA (5+ / 0-)

    message is behind us. IMHO, it's wishful thinking. It will be part of the GOP message in the fall & if Dems do not get out & vote I see it pickling up steam again,.,.,.,.will believe it when I see it.

  •  ACA Saved My Ass... (16+ / 0-)

    Broken arm in June 2013, lingering bone infection requiring surgically inserted plate and 2 months IV antibiotics in Jan 2014. COBRA ran out in Dec 2013.

    $58,000 for care since Jan 2014, and rising. This would have bankrupted me. ACA saved my ass. That is exactly what it was intended to do.

    The boomers in their late 50s and pre-medicare whom get laid off are saved by the ACA. With age come health care issues, without health care we were bankrupting boomers.

  •  I dont know why the Grimes Campaign is so weak (7+ / 0-)

    on ObamaCare. Considering what a success Kynect has been in Kentucky, and how many Democrats she's going to need to beat McConnell. Gov. Steve Bashear is way out in front on ObamaCare. She should be echoing Bashear's message loudly.

    Sorry not seeing a candidate who can beat Mitch McConnell.

    •  Grimes leading McConnell in polling (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ellid, PorridgeGun

      But I agree that with the expansion of the ACA in KY, she should be getting behind it to get Democrats to come out and vote for her.
      Why don't Democrats remember the last midterm, when most of the House ran away from the ACA, and the voters didn't turn out for them?

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:09:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, shes not. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        These folks arent modeling the electorate properly. She needs to be 7 or 8 points up in Kentucky's electorate because shes so unknown compared to McConnell. Especially being a Democratic woman. Theres almost nothing coming from her on policy, nothing signature.

        •  She has time (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Remember, Warren was running behind Brown around this time in 2012, and she beat him handily in November.  

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

          by Ellid on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:48:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  LOL....shes not Warren. lol (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Thats not even a fair comparison. Warren is a total dynamo with her fingers right on the pulse of the electorate and a national constituency long before she got into the race. And when she did, she went kaboom from day one.

            Grimes is actually running more like Martha Coakley.

            •  Warren ran a lousy campaign at first (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              It turned a LOT of people here in Massachusetts off, especially when Brown pointed out how much of her money came from out of state donors.   I don't know where you got the idea that she was a star here from the beginning, but it's not all that accurate.

              As for Grimes - I hope you're wrong.  I really hope you are.  Because Martha Coakley's campaign was a horror show from beginning to end, and I have this awful feeling she's going to do exactly the same thing in the gubernatorial race and ensure that Charlie Baker is our next governor.

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

              by Ellid on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 07:27:41 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Mitch has no worries. It's still Kentucky. (0+ / 0-)
    •  Kentucky's embrace of the ACA, or "Obamacare" (0+ / 0-)

      depended to a large extent on making sure Kynect was in no way connected to the president's law.  Grimes and Bashear may have agreed to further downplay the connection during Grimes' campaign in order to keep Kentucky voters from making the connection.  Complete speculation on my part because nothing else makes sense, and maybe Grimes will publicly support and endorse the law later this year.  After all, she has a helluva uphill struggle to dethrone McConnell, and she's going to need every policy position that could possibly provide an advantage.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 07:43:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  still assume ACA will be a negative for many Dems (5+ / 0-)

    We can't be naive or pollyannaish.

    With the GOP-leaning media outlets, including FauxNews, still harping on the woes and ACA horror stories (whether story is true or not - does not matter since listeners and viewers will hear or see the negative story, not any later "fact check" debunking the story), and

    with the GOP-supporting outside groups plus GOP Senate and House candidates running HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars of attack ads on TV and radio against Dem Senate and House candidates regarding their support for the ACA and with some parts of the ACA still not fixed (the "if you like your plan, you can keep it" misstatement), I assume the ACA will continue to be a net negative for Democrats for the 2014 elections, only 7 months away.  

    In other words, opposition to the ACA (whether based on facts or myths) will motivate more voters in November 2014 to actually get out to vote than support for the ACA.

    Polls continue to show an enthusiasm gap, with more Republicans excited about voting in November 2014 than Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents.

    If we have a steady drumbeat of positive news stories about the successes of the ACA between now and November 4 (hardly likely), we could see the polls turn around to show support for the ACA greater than opposition to the ACA become new polling "norm".  So far we have one favorable poll out of a gazillion polls over the last 4 years?

    I'll still be phone-banking and walking precincts and donating money for Dems but I still believe that the ACA will again be a net negative for many Democratic candidates in 2014.  For Dems in comfortable blue states or districts, that will not matter, but for Dems in tougher races and states or districts, every negative factor will hurt.

    Longer term, by November 2016 the ACA's implementation will be more efficient and the ardor of the opposition will have waned.  The ACA should be a net positive for voters in November 2016 - but we have to get through a possibly brutal 2014 before we can get to 2016.

  •  Barely Green and Barely Breathing (0+ / 0-)

    When did our nation get so screwed up and politicized that every 'victory', no matter how contrived and PRd, became a big social media talking fest? Where are the medical, economic and legal analysis pundits? This is all cheerleading and flagwaving and tambourine banging.

    Come on, only 7M out of 360M is pathetic! It will take 50 years at that rate to enroll every American. And nobody has paid a penny into the system yet!

    Who do you think they got in their database: barely green 20 - 30s with 50% real unemployment rate and 80% don't make enough to pay income taxes or pay for ObamaCare. The rest are the uninsurables, and the barely breathing, with catastrophic major medical costs happening to them every year, either as permanently unemployed or on fixed income, and neither cohort paying income taxes or able to pay for ObamaCare.

    Who's going to pay for all this? The US taxpayers!

    All ObamaCare did was to increase Federal government tax revenues and the Mil.Gov.Sci.Edu bloatocracy. Oh, and greatly decrease the 13 minutes average you get with a typical American doctor visit, and greatly increase the average $3,250 doctor bill you'll have to pay. How is this a victory? The House had to ram through an emergency funding measure after their proposed -24% cut to doctor's fees failed!

    I mean, God bless the unemployable and perennially unhealthy, but this is hardly anything to celebrate. It took Twitter, one of the most popular social media ever, almost four years to enroll 300M subscribers at nearly no subscription fee, ObamaCare will take 40 years to break 30M, that's the 1/0th no insurer would touch.

    The wheels on the bus go round and round ...

    •  only 7 million out of 360 million? A numerical (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      al23, salmo, Brooke In Seattle, Shawn87

      statement Fox would be proud of. You expected everyone in the country to sign up even if they already had insurance?

    •  Hey chipher (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      konving, tikkun, Caniac41, Ellid, offgrid, Shawn87

      Red State is thataway ===>

      You might be more comfortable over there?

    •  You are obviously ill-informed (5+ / 0-)

      the ACA was never designed to cover 100% of Americans.
       photo jesusnodependency_zps666cb6b2.jpg

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:13:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  WTF? (0+ / 0-)

        Subsidized health insurance premiums were never intended to be available to 100% of the population, but the ACA most definitely was designed to cover 100% of Americans.  317 million Americans - i.e. all of us -

        -- Potentially benefit from the requirement that insurance companies provide flu shots, HIV screenings, prostate exams, mammograms and FDA-approved contraception for free, without a co-pay.

        -- Plus, we all benefit from new requirements that insurance companies must spend at least 80% of our premium dollars on our health care as opposed to marketing or administration.

        -- We all benefit from the new requirement that insurance companies publicly justify their actions if they want to raise premiums by 10% or more.

        -- We all benefit from knowing that our insurance can now never be capped or canceled at the whim of insurance companies.
        •  As I said, the ACA (0+ / 0-)

          was never designed to COVER 100% of Americans.
          And while the column you link to is really good, Sally Kohn neglects to mention the 26 states like mine that did not expand Medicaid or set up their own exchanges.
          With the way the ACA is set up, there are lot of people too poor to afford their own insurance that cannot qualify for Medicaid in these states because they make too much money.

          Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

          by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 10:10:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Average $3,250 doctor bill? (4+ / 0-)

      Huh? For what?

      Many of the people who need the ACA insurance are (a) working full-time, and (b) basically healthy. Many more are either children of working parents, or people who took or were forced into early retirement before Medicare kicks in.

      Many of us (I'm in that formerly-uninsured pool) will not draw much out in terms of medical care.

      I don't know how you get your health insurance, chipher, but whatever pool you're in, it has a chunk of people who require a lot of medical services, and a lot of people who get their checkup and their flu shot and that's about it.

      As for the hit to the US Treasury, it's a lot less than the cost of the stupid Iraq war, or the subsidies to gentlemen "farmers" and already wealthy oil/gas companies.

    •  My kids had insurenace after they (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      graduated, have insurance because three of them have preexisting conditions and I have peace of mind because I don't have to shell out thousands a month to help them pay for meds that keep them alive.  Well worth it to me and them considering the jobs they had didn't offer insurance or it was too expensive to purchase.   If you are affected negatively, who cares?  I don't.  You apparently didn't care when my kids were uninsured so back at ya. Have to give up time with your doc?  Whaaaaaa!

      Everyone! Arms akimbo! 68351

      by tobendaro on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:40:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Please translate this into English (0+ / 0-)

      Because I don't understand ANY of it.


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

      by Ellid on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:50:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I, for one, await the next apoplectic republican (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    salmo, skohayes

    talking point (lie) about Obamacare The ACA.

    I enjoyed NedSpark's piece on the Morans getting ready to jettison the "Obamacare" label as that has utterly backfired and the Morans will want to distance the Kenyan for the ACA's success as quickly as possible.

    God...they are suck scum.

    Legal means "good".
    [41984 | Feb 4, 2005]

    by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 05:24:36 AM PDT

  •  All that money down the toilet (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xxdr zombiexx, skohayes, I love OCD, Ellid

    We probably only know a fraction of the bucks spent to skew public opinion on the ACA. The problem is, actual people benefitted and went down to the donut shop and talked about it.

    It's really hard to figure what the Koch's stake in this was. Yes, in general they want to drown government in a bathtub. But this wasn't really even government.

  •  Exactly one pattern for October House Ads (12+ / 0-)

    Individuals--real ones this time--who couldn't get insurance before and now have it. (I'll volunteer my son)

    Saying:"Congressman Goper didn't do much last year, but he did vote 40 times to prevent me from getting health care. No thanks to him I'm now insured and I can see a doctor."

  •  Argh, Ross Asshat (5+ / 0-)

    I can't stand him, why does he have such a national platform???  I remember first hearing of him when he wrote a feature-length whine in The Atlantic about how cheated he felt after having the privilege of spending four years at Harvard.  (or was it Yale? anyway my point stands)  Thankfully he isn't writing in The Atlantic anymore so I'm not stuck with him every month.

    •  Douthat, Douchehat? (0+ / 0-)

      Whatever his name is, is a concern troll. Much like all "conservative" columnists who's "solutions" to America's problems consist mainly of "why can't everybody just attend an Ivy League school like I did?" or some form or other of blindness to their extreme lifetime of privilege. These asshats really bug the shit out of me with their casual disregard of everyone who struggles. I wonder if any of them, Douchhat, Will, Brooks, etc. have EVER spent anytime with anyone outside their current happy, shiny, bubble of money and power. I hate these guys so very, very much. End of rant.  

      "Because we are all connected...."

      by Shawn87 on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 02:05:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Strong finish (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WorkinJoe, skohayes

    to open enrollment was great news.  And here  in Connecticut, a special congratulations to the folks running Access Health Connecticut (and our great Governor Malloy) for creating the best exchange in the nation!

  •  Well Fared State (4+ / 0-)

    How about we change Russ Douhat's disparaging "welfare state" remarks to the more positive "well fared state;" that is, a populaton well served by its government through a program designed to meet its citizenry's basic needs and improve its citizenry's lives.  Obamacare addresses issues that the private market ignored or actively worsened at the expense of the public's welfare.  This is what government should be doing.  Welfare state?  How about a well fared state instead.  

  •  Suppose we did this ourselves? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Set up a framework for 30 second videos, uploaded to YouTube, and created a repository here? I bet we could get hundreds!


    GOP Senator Asks How Equal Pay Bill Makes Sure Men Aren't Paid Less Than Women

    Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) on Tuesday inquired how the Paycheck Fairness Act makes sure that men are not paid less than women, according to the Huffington Post.
    Gohmert: ‘Separation Of Church And State’ Really Means The ‘Church Plays A Role In The State’
    Gohmert pointed out that a Congressional Research Service report revealed that President Thomas Jefferson, who coined the phrase "separation of church and state," had also attended church services at Statuary Hall.

    "But it was to be a one-way wall, where the state would not dictate to the church," the Texas Republican insisted. "But the church would certainly play a role in the state."

    Gohmert logic says because Thomas Jefferson attended non-denominational church, he didn't really mean all that crap about separation of church and state.

    This Is What the GOP's War On Science Looks Like

    (House Committee on Science, Space and Technology member Bill Posey (R-FL):
    You know, obviously, we've had global warming for a long time. You can't have one single ice age encompassing three ice ages. We had to have warming periods between each one of those, so that is a natural phenomenon. You know, just because we're alive now, the tectonic plate shifts aren't going to stop, the hurricanes and tsunamis aren't going to stop; the asteroid strikes aren't going to stop. These things have been going on for eons and they're going to continue to go on for eons....What do you think the temperature was on Earth before the disappearance of the dinosaurs?

    Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

    by skohayes on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:23:54 AM PDT

  •  Ross Douchebag makes me ill (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, Shawn87

    Seriously.  He is so consistently wrong, and so very, very hateful toward women, that I still don't understand why he has a job.  

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

    by Ellid on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:25:00 AM PDT

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

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Wed Apr 02, 2014 at 06:28:51 AM PDT

  •  Wow Ross Douthat! (0+ / 0-)

    That sure is a lot of "We don't know"'s about a program that's been conclusively pronounced by conservatives and republican elected officials as a "catastrophe", a "trainwreck", a "failure", and the worst thing to happen to the nation since slavery.  All of a sudden you "don't know" whether it might be working?

  •  What? (0+ / 0-)

    "extremely-low-enrollment scenario that seemed conceivable just a few months ago"

    This was only a "truth" under the RW misinformation bubble.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site