Skip to main content

New Jersey's uninsured rate has fallen more than one-third since before the federal deadline to sign up on HealthCare.gov, The Bergen Record reported last night.

The number of people without health insurance in New Jersey has fallen to its lowest level since 1990, dropping more than a third even before the late March surge in insurance sign-ups, according to a report released on Thursday.

An estimated 430,000 people in New Jersey gained coverage from October through March, said the report by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Rutgers Center for State Health Policy.

More below the fold.

The number of New Jersey residents who gained coverage by the end of the Affordable Care Act’s first enrollment period on April 1 probably exceeds 430,000 because the survey was completed March 6.

“These findings suggest that uninsurance in New Jersey is at its lowest level since 1990,” the study authors said.

“It’s exciting and an encouraging trend,” said Katherine Hempstead of the Johnson Foundation, a co-author. “But we need to see some more quarters of data and then see then see the census data to really see the trends.”

The reporter unfortunately drags out the old "but how many have paid?" But overall, this is more good press for Obamacare. Not that good press has gotten the same attention as all the negative press, which kind of explains the whole reason people still rely on the worn out tropes like "but how many have paid?"

Originally posted to EPNJ on Fri May 23, 2014 at 07:30 AM PDT.

Also republished by 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

  •  Actual number will be closer to 46% (4+ / 0-)

    As stated in the piece, the survey ended March 6.

    Charles Gaba of ACAsignups estimated it this way:

    In other words, between QHPs and Medicaid, it looks like the uninsured number in NJ may have dropped up to an additional 127,000 people since "early March". Some of these folks were switching from an existing policy of some sort, of course, and there will have already been a bit of churn even among the rest, so let's call it an even 100K.

    The article doesn't give the actual "starting" number of uninsured in New Jersey, but according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, it was roughly 1.25 million last fall.

    Assuming the 38% is based on this, that means a net reduction in the inuinsured of around 475,000 through "early March" and another 100K since then, which would mean the reduction to date should actually be closer to 46%.

    http://acasignups.net/...
  •  Good stuff, thanks! n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    i saw an old tree today
  •  Tipped & rec'ed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    i saw an old tree today

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Fri May 23, 2014 at 07:58:37 AM PDT

  •  REPEAL, REPLACE (0+ / 0-)

    whimper...

  •  carrot & stick - how big is the stick? (0+ / 0-)

    As I recall, the ACA includes a penalty (the "Stick") for states that do not expand Medicaid.  Those states that do not expand Medicaid will have the federal payments to hospitals to assist with their care of uninsured patients reduced.

    Is there a state by state list of how much each state's such payments will be reduced in 2014?

    Here in PA, tea party GOP Governor Corbett has refused to expand Medicaid (except on proposed Republican terms, which terms are under review by the Obama HHS).  It would be helpful to be able to argue with undecided voters how much federal money PA is losing because of the Governor's decision not to expand Medicaid.

    •  That was not designed as a stick (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jfromga

      It was simply that with Medicaid expansion, there would be no need to reimburse hospitals for ER services for the poor, as had been done under a law signed by Ronald Reagan.

      But the Supreme Court's decision to make Medicaid expansion optional has turned it into a stick that hospitals are using to beat up on Republicans.

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

      by Mokurai on Fri May 23, 2014 at 09:34:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site