Skip to main content

President Obama receives ACA enrollment update, April 1, 2014.
So now will Republicans say Gallup is cooking their books to show millions more people have gained health insurance because of Obamacare?
In the U.S., the uninsured rate dipped to 15.6% in the first quarter of 2014, a 1.5-percentage-point decline from the fourth quarter of 2013. The uninsured rate is now at the lowest level recorded since late 2008.

The uninsured rate has been falling since the fourth quarter of 2013, after hitting an all-time high of 18.0% in the third quarter -- a sign that the Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as "Obamacare," appears to be accomplishing its goal of increasing the percentage of Americans with health insurance coverage.

Chart showing rate of uninsured since 2008.
That survey, of more than than 43,500 adults, is huge, which makes these results difficult to unskew, and also makes the numbers just a little bit better than the official numbers coming out of the White House by about half a million. Gallup's numbers would be larger if they included children, as the official count does. And what about the number of young people needed to keep the whole thing working? Gallup finds that the "uninsured rate dropped by about the same amount among adults aged 26 to 64 as it did among those aged 18 to 25—two points." Yes, young people signed up.

One of the many talking points Republicans have been left with is that, sure, maybe millions of people signed up under Obamacare, but hardly any of them were uninsured, so there. Not so, says this unbiased survey. And there will be more throughout the year under Medicaid expansion, because there is no deadline for enrolling in that program, and people will be signing up there all year long.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:29 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos and Obamacare Saves Lives.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
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

  •  Tip Jar (41+ / 0-)

    "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. [...] There would be no place to hide."--Frank Church

    by Joan McCarter on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:29:09 AM PDT

  •  I can hear the RWNJs now: (9+ / 0-)

    UNSKEW THE NUMBER OF UNINSURED!

    I’ve said before, I will always work with anyone who is willing to make this law work even better. But the debate over repealing this law is over. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay. -- President Barack Obama

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:32:23 AM PDT

    •  I think the numbers have to be unskewed. (5+ / 0-)

      I hate when people compare the private insurance policies that existed before Obamacare and after. The only true insurance before Obamacare was available through employers. All private participants had was (at most) a one year respite to cover payments before he or she was dropped by a carrier for having a preexisting condition. And this doesn't even count all of the truly junk plans that people purchased before things were better standardized.

      Yes, the pure numbers are pretty. But they absolutely do not show how Obamacare has fundamentally reshaped the indusry for the better.

      •  Mostly, yes. Not in NY, which has had protection (0+ / 0-)

        for pre-existing conditions for quite a while now.  Of course, it was expensive without the individual mandate, so many went without, which is why so many of the ACA signups in NY are from the uninsured (75%).

        I’ve said before, I will always work with anyone who is willing to make this law work even better. But the debate over repealing this law is over. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay. -- President Barack Obama

        by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:53:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  the only true insurance was a federal retiree (0+ / 0-)

        DoD, VA, Civil service.

        There the plan was legal benefit and uncle sam
        was the ultimate payer.

  •  explain (10+ / 0-)

    Looks to me that Rs will claim it took Obama 5 years to just get back to W Bush's level--

    Actions speak louder than petitions.

    by melvynny on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:36:10 AM PDT

    •  Bush unleashed HELL on the ecomedy in 2008... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, shoeless, bear83, TKO333, Ellamenta

      apologies to Ridley Scott.

    •  Insurance based on employment? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AoT, Algernons Labyrinth, La Gitane

      I guess you have to compare the uninsured at a point where the numbers for the unemployed as broadly defined is about the same?

      But yeah, as it stands, not a compelling stat.

      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 Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:44:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It would be nice to see the trends going back (6+ / 0-)

        before 2008 as well. This doesn't give much of an idea of what the historical trends have been and isn't much good except as a look at the immediate effect of the ACA.

        If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

        by AoT on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:53:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Absolutely (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, La Gitane, Inland, rsmpdx, JamieG from Md

          I googled for a bit and the farthest back I found was only to 1999.  Here it is:

          http://aspe.hhs.gov/...

          I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

          by Satya1 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:44:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  These numbers are a little fishy (0+ / 0-)

          You don't need to be a Republican to see that there are some "issues" with these statistics.

          First off, the poll and chart shown in this diary includes people >64, which have increased as a proportion of the population by 1.14% (4.7 million) in the last 5 years (Census data). Those people are eligible for Medicare, so the rate of uninsured in that Gallup chart will decline regardless of the ACA if you include that age group.

          Second, cutting the chart off at 2008 conveniently ignores the lower rate of uninsured shortly before the beginning of the recession, and the rapid spike shortly after (right at the beginning of the Gallup chart). That suggests that the uninsured rate is tied to the economy and at least some of the drop in uninsured now is due to the recovery.

          In answer to your question, here are rates of uninsured prior to 2008, from the CDC:

          1998-2000    16.6
          2001-2003    16.5
          2004-2006    16.4
          2007-2009    16.8
          2010-2012    17.6

          Note that these numbers do NOT include >64 adults.

          So, to recap, we have two trends unrelated to ACA that would predict decreasing rates of uninsured, in the Gallup summary data: increasing % of popn >64, and economic recovery.

          A third point: it is mentioned here and in the Gallop article that rates of younger uninsured are declining. That would obviously not be caused by the aging population effect, but could be caused by the recovery. It's also possible that this is a reporting bias or issue awareness effect. If you look at the chart for uninsured in the Gallop report with age groups split out, you see that people >64 also reported lower uninsured rates between 2013 and 2014, which, since ACA shouldn't impact >64 rates implies something else is going on.

          "Tell the truth and run." -- Yugoslav proverb

          by quill on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:55:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Employment Is Back (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rmx2630

        In the same month we're also back to the same number of people employed as in January 2008. With the same percentage of insured - the overwhelming majority of which get their insurance from their job.

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

        by DocGonzo on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:45:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I noticed that too. Ouch. (10+ / 0-)

      Understandable to the extent that unemployment has separated a lot of people from employer-provided benefits, but -- ouch when you consider how much time, effort, money, and pain has gone into this.

      OTOH --

      It does show haw ACA helps to insulate people against some of the worst effects of a wildly swinging economy.

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:50:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And self-employed people (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dinotrac, JamieG from Md, GleninCA

        like me who couldn't afford insurance anymore. I know a lot of people who had to cancel policies.

        I think that people who lost insurance for whatever reason were the easiest to reach - they were used to having insurance. The bigger challenge is still reaching those who have never had it; my guess is that the majority of those folks are unfortunately in red states where they've been refusing the expansion. I've said all along that the red state sabotage of not creating exchanges and refusing the expansion is going to hurt us. Just shows how much damage the GOP is willing to inflict in order to win. Ugh.

        Money should be treated like any other controlled substance; if you can't use it responsibly then you don't get to use it.

        by La Gitane on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:51:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was briefly in that boat myself. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JamieG from Md, La Gitane

          Then I was able to find insurance.
          Whew!

          You're right, though. We who were already used to buying insurance were going to sign up.

          Our personal experience getting insurance was just about the worst purchase experience of my life, btw -- and we never could get our college student daughter onto our plan, but I digress (always makes me made, often makes me rant).

          It is kind of stunning though, that, even with the implementation of ACA and Medicare expansion, more people are uninsured today than at any time during the Bush administration.

          Although -- Ha! I just realized: Population keeps a growin'. That's got to account for part of it.

          LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

          by dinotrac on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:11:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Recovery had bad jobs (7+ / 0-)

      And that is a problem that hasn't been fixed.

      "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

      by gjohnsit on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:00:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yep (0+ / 0-)

      All that shows is that PPACA undid some of the damage caused by the recession but has yet to improve upon the status quo ante re: the rate of uninsured. Four years later and with so much political capital thrown into it, is that really that impressive?

  •  Issa should investigate the nexus of the uninsured (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Delevie, StillAmused, shoeless

    and BENGHAZEEEEE.

  •  Clearly an "abject failure" (tm) (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shoeless

    Because it's still higher than 2008. So it's all Obama's Fault (tm). Fox Nooz will prove it with a graph that starts at 15.3.

    (/plenty of snark)

    And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

    by Pale Jenova on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:36:41 AM PDT

  •  But Fox News says.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, LeighAnn

    something different, as you would expect.  Truly pathetic.

    http://www.foxnews.com/...

    And even this story HAS to admit ACA is having a positive effect.  The pain must have been excruciating, having to write that.

  •  come on (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, MarkW53, RainDog2, quill, GleninCA

    let's get to single digits !!

    "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill

    by smartone on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:41:22 AM PDT

  •  Still up from the low (0+ / 0-)

    Clearly, Obamacare is not working.

  •  New Yorker cover...Take your medicine! (6+ / 0-)

    "There is just one way to save yourself, and that's to get together and work and fight for everybody." ---Woody Guthrie (quoted by Jim Hightower in The Progressive Populist April 1, 2012, p3)

    by CitizenJoe on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:43:20 AM PDT

    •  Looks like a turtle. (0+ / 0-)
    •  Outstanding. That is not only a must see, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ellamenta

      I think most Kossacks would want to buy that issue.  I sure do.  Love the artist's comments:

      “This whole enterprise was just an elaborate excuse,” says Barry Blitt about his cover for this week’s issue. “I enjoyed drawing Ted Cruz, John Boehner, and Michele Bachmann as petulant children—and I especially wanted to draw an open-mouthed Mitch McConnell being spoon-fed his meds.”

      I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

      by Satya1 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:37:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I have a question: (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, nextstep, RainDog2, Satya1, Eric Nelson

    Why did the uninsurance rate grow between 2009 and 2013?

    I would have expected it to slowly decline in tandem with the unemployment rate.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:44:05 AM PDT

    •  Probably because health insurance (9+ / 0-)

      kept getting more and more expensive so people were priced out of the market.

      •  Interesting way to test that: look further back. (0+ / 0-)

        Health care inflation has been going on for a long time. If the trend from 2009-2013 looks like the trend from 2000-2008, then it would probably be safe to say that the increase just before Obamacare is merely an extension of a longer trend.

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:35:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'd expect in large part because (5+ / 0-)

      the unemployment rate is not a terribly accurate portrayal of the number of people who aren't working, and add to that the fact that a lot of us who were employed were employed part time and didn't have insurance and couldn't afford insurance. Most jobs these days don't have benefits in my experience.

      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

      by AoT on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:56:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And in a few cases (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, Eric Nelson

        Because a severance package covered health care insurance for a while. Or because an individual purchased COBRA insurance while he/she still had money and hoped to get a new job quickly. Or because one spouse changed to family coverage that later got dropped, either when it became too expensive, or when he/she got laid off as well. Or ...

      •  Whether the unemployment rate is precise or not... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson

        it's continual downward trend is real. You don't have to find the absolute numbers to be entirely accurate to recognize the, yes, the economy was better in 2013 than it was in 2009.

        Art is the handmaid of human good.

        by joe from Lowell on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 10:32:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Labor force size bottomed out in 2011 (0+ / 0-)

          right about the time that the number of uninsured jumped up to its near high of 17.5. The peak last year doesn't make much sense though.

          Also, this is all from a survey so there are problems with it in that respect. I wouldn't be surprised if more awareness led to people being more likely to know they're not insured. Which is a bit weird. But the most likely culprit is the shitty type of jobs that have been available during the "recovery".

          If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

          by AoT on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 11:43:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  With Baby Boomer retirements driving up.... (0+ / 0-)

            the out-of-the-labor-force numbers - retirees who go onto Medicare - it's a leap to cite that as either the best measure of when the economy turned around, or the driving force in the uninsured numbers.

            Look, let's make this real simple: was the economy better in 2013 than in 2009?

            Art is the handmaid of human good.

            by joe from Lowell on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:03:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm not disputing what you're saying (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              joe from Lowell

              I'm just looking for a decent explanation for what you pointed out. The boomers retiring should have bumped up the numbers on the people who have government provided insurance, and the number of people enrolled in medicaid under the expansion would also increase the numbers with government insurance.

              I don't see anything that would contribute to that increase to 18% there though. I guess it could be people who just turned 18 and whose parents couldn't afford insurance, since this is just for adults.

              If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

              by AoT on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:23:20 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I wonder if it could be a b.s.-generated number. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                I wonder if a measurable number of people, at the end of 2013, reported "no insurance" inaccurately, because they expected to soon lose their insurance because of Obamacare-ocalpyse.

                People who got "cancellation notices" that were really "You're going to be on a different insurance plan" notices, or people who actually lost their insurance but shortly thereafter signed up on the exchanges, Medicaid, or elsewhere.

                I cannot help but notice that it 1) spiked and then plummeted in a self-reporting survey, and 2) took place right at the exchange rollout/dawning of the universal standards regs.

                Art is the handmaid of human good.

                by joe from Lowell on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 12:40:20 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Employment-population ratio? (0+ / 0-)

          Iron sharpens Iron. Normal is a dryer setting. STOP illegal immigration NOW! -- Make it LEGAL. If Corporations are People--Let's draft them.

          by benamery21 on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 12:12:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The 18% peak draws my curiosity (4+ / 0-)

      It makes me wonder if there were some insurance companies dropping more people for political reasons, or there were non-ACA compliant issues that suddenly reduced the number of insured.

      I'm guessing the longer pattern from 2009 is about the inferior types of employment with fewer benefits that tended to be a disappointing feature of this jobs recovery.

      I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

      by Satya1 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:42:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wellpoint one of the largest raised premiums 39% (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joe from Lowell

      ..in 2009.

      INDIANAPOLIS — Health insurer WellPoint blames the Great Recession and rising medical costs for its planned 39 percent rate increase for some California customers. To President Barack Obama, however, it's Exhibit A in his campaign to revive the health care overhaul.

      Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who received the company's explanation in a letter Thursday, said "it remains difficult to understand" how premium increases of that size by can be justified when WellPoint Inc. reported a $2.7 billion profit in the last quarter of 2009.


      I just recently heard this being discussed on MSNBC.
  •  Graph scaling? (0+ / 0-)

    I thought we were against starting the axis at a number other than zero?  Kidding, mostly, as the point of a graph is to highlight differences in the data displayed.

    Anyway, I hope this is just the start of a much bigger drop - if we spent so much time, energy, and political capital to drop the uninsured rate to 2008 levels - still almost 1 in 6 Americans - well, then, why did we do that?

    I expect that number to continue dropping (a la Romneycare) but let's be wary of embracing preliminary results.  

  •  The 15.6% is the 3-month (15+ / 0-)

    rolling average. In the second half of March the rate was 14.7%. Expect the average to keep dropping in the next few months.

    And within March, the rate dropped more than a point, from 15.8% in the first half of the month to 14.7% in the second half -- indicating that enrollment through the healthcare exchanges increased as the March 31 deadline approached.
  •  Note this about the data... (9+ / 0-)
    The results from the first quarter are based on more than 43,500 interviews with U.S. adults from Jan. 2 to March 31, 2014, as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index.
    This measure is going to decline much farther in the next two quarterly polls (assuming this is done every quarter).

    Back around 2000, the uninsured percentage was about 13.5% and personally I would like to see us blow through that toward 11-12% by the end of the year.

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:47:20 AM PDT

  •  The number understates the actual drop (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask, bear83

    as it's the average uninsured rate over the whole first quarter. It averaged 14.7% during the second half of March.

  •  But.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, MPociask

    Will these kinds of positive things actually resonate to the general voting populace come November?  That's the key issue, isn't it?  The opposition has numerous responses to things like this showing how it is skewed information and so far, it is being bought in large part.

    •  They don't need to resonate (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TKO333, La Gitane, amsterdam, rsmpdx

      with the public. The people who now have insurance who didn't before know exactly where the insurance came from, thanks to the GOP tying the "albatross" of 'Obamacare' to the Dems.

      In either the next presidential election or the one after that I can guarantee that the GOP will start taking credit for Obamacare. Guarantee it. They'll just call it the ACA and point out the heritage institute's healthcare plan that was similar.

      But people know where it came from and this drop in uninsured rates mean a rise in the number of people who are going to come out and vote dem when the GOP is running on repealing Obamacare.

      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

      by AoT on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:06:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  True (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, La Gitane

        I just read a reply where someone said that democrats are being disengenuous in lauding the lower number of insured in America because, after all, this is a law and people are required now to get insurance so, in their analogy, if you made it a law that people shave their head or be subject to fines, most people would then shave their heads.

        They're so silly.

        •  My rebuttal to that would be: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          saucer1234

          Well, is having more people insured better or worse than having less people insured?

          I'm sure the response would be some convoluted Randian freedumz bullshit, but the short answer would be obvious: yes, it is better.

          Money should be treated like any other controlled substance; if you can't use it responsibly then you don't get to use it.

          by La Gitane on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:56:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  This is where the rubber meets the road (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, rsmpdx

    And this is how you can hammer Republicans this summer and fall.

    "The oppressors most powerful weapon is the mind of the oppressed." - Stephen Biko

    by gjohnsit on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 07:58:37 AM PDT

  •  Republicans have a problem... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lencialoo, TheLizardKing, TKO333, rsmpdx

    Too many purported 'cooks' in the GOP's imaginary Data Kitchen.

    Coming soon: Republicans Deny Gravity, Jump Up And Down To Prove It

  •  I suspect..... (0+ / 0-)

    We will see in the next couple years data on an established correlation between more people having health coverage and the abortion rate going down.

  •  Difficult to unskew, you say? (3+ / 0-)

    Sounds like a challenge to me.  Dean Chambers, where are you?  We have an emergency unskewing to undertake!

  •  Has anybody heard if (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT

    the increase in revenue for insurance companies is another indicator of the failure of Obamacare?   I would think that the Republicans would somehow spin the purchase of millions of insurance policies and the added revenue from these policies as a negative for the insurance companies.

  •  Wow Can't Believe Some of These Comments (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AoT, amsterdam, rsmpdx, askew

    Saw that many people here seem to think this is nothing. I am shocked. Many of these people are trying to compare all this to before the worst economic recession since the great depression and the excessively weak job market that has been generated in this country since that point. You can't do that. The reality is we've dropped from around 17.5% to around 14.7% in March and will likely drop to 12.5% to 13.5% by the time this is all done.  That is around 12.5 to 16 million people.  That is tremendous.  Furthermore, the ultimate baseline is around 5% uninsured since illegal immigrants cannot obtain health insurance through the ACA and the Republicans have prevented millions more from obtaining insurance through Medicaid.  That means that we will be dropping from around 12.5% to around 7.5% for those eligible to participate.  This is a big deal.  

  •  It had better fucking be lower. (0+ / 0-)

    When you spend that much time and money on something, results are expected. Right?

    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

    by HairyTrueMan on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:22:04 AM PDT

  •  So - the states that decided to forgo Medicare exp (0+ / 0-)

    Are they locked out? Or could a sensible governor/legislature later bring these states into the fold?

    "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery. None but us can free our minds." - Bob Marley

    by nightsweat on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:32:25 AM PDT

  •  This is not huge (0+ / 0-)

    The numbers need to get a lot better than this.

    These number correlate with the unemployment rate.

    Since many get insurance through their employer, it makes since that the number of uninsured would go up after 2008 when the unemployment rate went up and would be decreasing once unemployment started to go down.

    •  Just goes to show (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ChuckChuckerson

      That the jobs that "came back" are much shittier than the jobs we had before. Less pay and less benefits. And the recovery is not as strong as it looks.

      Money should be treated like any other controlled substance; if you can't use it responsibly then you don't get to use it.

      by La Gitane on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 08:58:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree that (0+ / 0-)

      the numbers should be better, and that employment and insurance , in many cases go hand in hand. But what's interesting in this survey is the rate of decrease of the uninsured during the 4th quarter, and that time period correlates roughly with the open enrollment for ACA.

       Correlation does not imply causation, but when the two events(a bill and the result it's designed to affect ) have such a close legislative and societal tie-in, it approaches being suggestive in my opinion.

      This is evidence that directly contradicts the arguments of many conservatives that the ACA caused a net increase in the uninsured. That position will become less and less tenable if more and more evidence like this comes in.

  •  Now that more people have insurance (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rsmpdx

    we MUST continue to demand improvements to health  insurance laws.

    The Democratic Party is now married to the health insurance industry; shenanigans from insurers will reflect badly on the ACA and on the Democratic Party in general. This is dangerous because the insurance industry is still under-regulated and prone to malfeasance.

    We don't want to be stuck defending the undefendable in a few years.

     "But healthcare would be even more expensive and worse without the ACA!" IS NOT an argument that we want to be forced to make, but this is what we will be stuck doing if we don't continue to reform health insurance.

    The ACA was sold to us as a first step and we need to hold our representatives to that promise.

  •  Remember, kids, (0+ / 0-)

    any "facts" that do not validate the GOP/conservative position, ideology, politics, talking points, &c. are by definition false, made-up, "skewed," and/or the product of insidious "liberal bias."

  •  offending some 10 million voters (0+ / 0-)

    that's not the formula for victory.

  •  People Prefer Obamacare (0+ / 0-)
    One of the many talking points Republicans have been left with is that, sure, maybe millions of people signed up under Obamacare, but hardly any of them were uninsured, so there.

    If those millions were already insured, that's the best proof Obamacare is good. Because they preferred it to their previous insurance. That's the free market in action, undeniably - except for where Democrats forced the market to better serve customers.

    Talking points are for liars.

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

    by DocGonzo on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 09:43:53 AM PDT

  •  Game Over! (0+ / 0-)

    Thank you and drive through.

  •  Good But . . . (0+ / 0-)

    It's good if the actual number of uninsured has dropped. It's good that people with pre-existing conditions can no longer be refused insurance. It's not so good that the economic premise that ObamaCare is built upon is flawed.
    The insurance industry will aggressively attempt to maintain profitability.
    Using tax monies to protect that profitability is a poor idea.
    What do USA needs will probably never happen, that is a true single-payer system similar to Sweden's, funded by a progressive health care tax paid by all except the poor.
    Motivation to provide excellent healthcare, and motivation to maintain maximum corporate profitability are deeply at odds with each other.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site