My view: Opting out of Obamacare a smart move for Millennials


Return To Article
  • lolrotfl Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 3, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    Daniel Leifker—I think you may be wrong about the commenters using the ad hominem fallacy against Evan Feinberg.

    An ad hominem requires an attack on a writer’s character rather than on the merits of an argument. The commenters did not attack Feinberg’s argument about whether millennials should use the ACA exchanges. They focused only his claim to be nonpartisan after they uncovered his partisan associations.

    Because his claim of nonpartisanship is untrue, saying that Feinberg has no integrity is not an ad hominem attack but a statement of fact.

  • Ralph Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 9:40 p.m.

    The Affordable Care Act:

    Better health care at cheaper prices, and more people will have access...

    And you say it was originally Romney's plan?

    Weird, Fox News never tells me that.
    They call it Obamacare, and they never actually give me any real information about it.
    They just tell me to be scared of it.
    They say it will be the downfall of this nation.

  • Tyler Ray Taylorsville, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 5:48 p.m.

    The ACA act has some good parts to it, I'm not too "Right Winged" to admit that. Insurance for all sounds great, helping those with pre-existing conditions is definitely important. There are other great pieces to this plan.

    However, as this article pointed out, this plan can cost millenials money buying insurance they don't need or want. This plan will slow economic growth as countless businesses, large and small have been forced to cut hours, cut benfits or put a freeze on hiring.

    My hope is that this country can eventually find a way to cut out the bad of this plan and incoporate the good.

  • redshirt007 tranquility base, 00
    Oct. 1, 2013 2:51 p.m.

    I got a letter that my healthcare insurance will go down 87%.

    No details or facts needed on this side either.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 1, 2013 6:55 a.m.

    The Koch brothers do not need to buy this publication, printing these articles show they already own it.

  • johnapool Van Buren, MO
    Oct. 1, 2013 6:45 a.m.

    I have read many comments about people "opting out" or being "exempted" from Obamacare. The Affordable Care Act won't affect anyone who currently has insurance. Its primary focus is for uninsured Americans. So, tell me why so many INSURED people want to keep so many UNINSURED people from having affordable health insurance? Either we help them get insurance or we pay for their care entirely at taxpayers expense, as no American is denied some sort of healthcare!!
    As long as the Koch brothers and their ilk can affect American politics with their money, the Republican party will be the party of the rich and the corporations. Any poor to middle-class Americans who thinks the Republicans are out to help them are fools. The lower income people of our great country don't really pay that much in taxes, and are the support mechanism for the rich, who are trying to convince them that life is great and would be even greater with less taxes...on the rich...

  • Christopher Stout Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 9:45 p.m.

    I can't help but chuckle at some of these comments. You can't opt out of Obamacare and buy a non-compliant policy -- insurance companies can only sell ACA compliant policies.

    Unless you owe taxes you can't refuse to pay the fine -- it will be deducted from your refund. Before the IRS will send you to prison you have to fail to file and fail to pay a LOT of taxes.

    These claims about doubling and tripling of insurance premiums seem odd since projections show that across the board increases are unlikely. I was especially amused about the gentleman who only had a claim for a preventative check-up. If this is the case, then buy the bronze plan and save some money since preventative exams are covered without cost.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 12:55 p.m.

    Anti Bush-Obama,
    The fine for breaking the law the first year is only $90. Just pay it... it's worth $90 to not go to jail.

    Do the math. It's way more economical to go without insurance and just pay the $90 fine (if you have a family and coverage is $900/month). Since they can't turn you down for pre-existing conditions... if you get in a wreck or someone in the family gets cancer... you can always just sign up for any insurance then (and they can't turn you down for your existing condition).

    I think there's some fine print in one of those 2000 pages of regulations that should address this loophole, but it won't stand up in court. The insurance company will be forced to give you coverage (even though they know they will probably drop them the month after they pay your huge bill).

    If too many people do this... obviously the insurance company you choose will go out of business OR... have to increase their premiums on the rest of their customers to pay your bill.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 12:11 p.m.

    @Tyler McArthur
    "When I get off my parent's plan and buy my own, I have to pay a fee simply for the option of buying a private plan???"

    No, the fee is only for those who don't buy any insurance.

    @high school fan
    "Healthcare??? "

    Medicare is extremely popular to the point that tea party protestors were yelling "get your gov't hands off my medicare" oblivious to the fact that Medicare is a gov't program...

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Sept. 30, 2013 11:53 a.m.

    If I have to drop my current family provider,(A real possibility seeing as how I got my notice telling me my premiums will triple and not being able to afford the new premiums) I will opt out of Obamacare and will refuse to pay the fine for doing so. I'm willing to go to prison over not paying this fine.

  • Utah Health Policy Project Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 11:46 a.m.

    Evan Feinberg should do more research before sending misleading op-eds to newspapers like the DN.
    His suggestion that "[I]t makes more financial sense for millennials to opt out and purchase a non-Obamacare policy on the private market," is technically impossible.
    That's because after January 1st, all new insurance policies sold on the private market will include the same ACA consumer protections (ie. 10 essential health benefits) and rules (ie. age banding changes) as the policies sold on the new marketplaces. So there won't actually be a "non-Obamacare policy on the private market." He's telling millennials to do something they can't do--at least after January 1st.

    Plus, the ironic thing is that the Utah marketplace is the only place that millennials will be able to receive premium subsidies to reduce the cost of their insurance. Those subsidies won't be on the private market. Our research shows that people under age 30 will receive the bulk of the premium subsidies in Utah, and they can still purchase a catastrophic-only coverage that will be cheaper than full insurance.
    Real Answers from Health Reform 101.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 9:30 a.m.

    This sounds like one of those social science experiments where the subject is given the option to make a move that helps himself (and he will) but if he knows that that same move would still help himself, but would help someone else more... he won't.

    Seems we are all self-centered by nature when it comes down to it. Some overcome that natural tendency... some don't.

    Why would Millennials do anything that might help protect themselves AND their parent's generation (or their grandparents)??? It's not like their parents or grandparents ever made any sacrifices for THEM!

    I have been forced to pay a good part of my pay-check into Social Security all my working life (since I was 14) knowing that I was probably never going to see a cent of it back. And I don't have a problem with that. I have to pay for the promises made by my government even though those programs are projected to be defunct before I reach retirement age.

    That's the way it is sometimes in life. Life is NOT always "fair".

  • JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt Beverly Hills, CA
    Sept. 30, 2013 8:10 a.m.

    Breaking News: The insurance mandate was a GOP idea to begin with. TALK ABOUT BIG GOVERNMENT IDEAS. GOP came up with it first. Mitt Romney made all of Massachusetts do it. Republicans now oppose it because their guy didn't sign it into law.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 30, 2013 7:57 a.m.

    For all of you who tout that Congress and their staff are exempt from Obamacare, please educate yourself.

    Google "did congress exempt itself from Obamacare"
    Look for reasonable sources, not left or right, and you will get the answer.

    At least make an attempt to find out the facts before posting.

    While the answers you find may not further your partisan slant, at least you would be able to have a factual, reasonable discussion.

  • vern001 Castle Rock, CO
    Sept. 30, 2013 7:30 a.m.

    Young people are not invulnerable. A car accident, a bout with leukemia, a skiing mishap and all of a sudden they might face catastrophic medical bills.

    The US is the only developed nation where a medical emergency can literally ruin a person financially.

    Conservatives claim to believe in personal responsibility. Well, personal responsibility means getting insurance so that the rest of society doesn't have to pay for your medical bills.

    Young people will be old someday. Today they may have to pay a little more to subsidize an elderly or ill person, but tomorrow they will be getting that money back. It is the most democratic of subsidies because we will all be getting more than we put in when we get old.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 7:27 a.m.

    Alternative to Obamacare: Do not get sick.

    Seems like a very good plan, just as long as you don't get sick.

  • Pete1215 Lafayette, IN
    Sept. 30, 2013 6:29 a.m.

    I agree with BYUalum. There should be a law against congress making themselves immune from laws they themselves pass.

  • redshirt007 tranquility base, 00
    Sept. 30, 2013 5:00 a.m.

    It seems to me that Christians are ignoring the blessings that would come from caring for all the sick in this country. Do you not believe the heavens can open?

    That and even if you're an atheist you should figure out that selfishness leads to an economy that looks pretty gray and dull without opportunities. Education, roads, safety and yes health all prime the pump for a great economy full of opportunities.

    Lindon J Robinson : "Like a bright ribbon running through the entire Book of Mormon narrative is the promise that "[if] ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall prosper"

    One awful alternative to loving God and his children is to love one's riches more than one's neighbors. Those who love their riches more than their neighbors invariably separate themselves from both God and others and break the commandment to be one. Symptomatic of this separation is the economic inequality that "exalts" those who love their riches above those with less (see D&C 49:20). The paradox is that a love of riches not only separates neighbors but also makes acquiring more wealth more difficult.

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 4:58 a.m.

    Just what is the government good at operating? The schools? Nope. The post office? Nope. The national parks? Nope. The forest service or the BLM? Nope. Airport security? Nope. Healthcare??? Why would this be any different.

  • Tyler McArthur South Jordan, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 12:58 a.m.

    I don't know much about this, so please correct me if I'm wrong:

    I'm turning 25 next month. When I get off my parent's plan and buy my own, I have to pay a fee simply for the option of buying a private plan??? If that's the case, that makes my blood boil. There's no way I'm putting my health in the hands of a government as dysfunctional as the one in Washington.

    The only way that these new exchange programs can be affordable is if 1)They are of significantly lower quality, limiting the options and types of healthcare provided or 2) They are subsidized by increases in the cost of private insurance.

    Why are we trying to fix what's not broken? This is just Econ 101: Shouldn't competition among the insurance companies maximize quality while minimizing prices? As far as I know, there aren't any monopolies. This all seems like one big negative externality.

  • Cookie999 Albuquerque, NM
    Sept. 30, 2013 12:29 a.m.

    I have not had health insurance for most of my life. I don't think the government should be involved in controlling health care until they make Medicare and Medicaid more efficient. Hospitals and doctors have been figuring out that it's not wise to make their patients go bankrupt, and they have been engaging in ways to help those who are more restricted financially either make payments or pay reduced amounts on bills. I know that because our family was in that situation more than once. Somehow, no matter how politicians try to spin this, I suspect somewhere that there are certain health care lobbyists and people at the top who thought, "Hmm, how can we make more money off of everyone in the whole country?" Maybe Obama will be on the board of some health care company after his Presidential days are over.

  • onceuponatime Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 30, 2013 12:15 a.m.

    We will all find out soon enough if if the ACA is blessing or a curse and it will effect us no matter who we voted for unfortunately.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 10:04 p.m.

    Re: "Whenever I read an op-ed piece that strikes me as bizarre the first thing I do is Google the author and the author's organization."

    No doubt.

    That's a lot easier than attempting to counter the facts laid out by someone you disagree with.

    Truth is, Mr. Feinberg makes several important and inarguable points liberals are uncomfortable addressing. Primary among them is that Obama's "Affordable Care Act" is ANYTHING but.

  • wYo8 Rock Springs, WY
    Sept. 29, 2013 9:22 p.m.

    Just look at social security. It was based upon a large number of people paying into the system to support one retired person. The problem with SS started when government started using that money for other programs. Then the ratio of the working to the retired has been greatly reduced. This is what obamacare is based upon. The only difference will be the governments ability to limit the care that the old will receive. This ratio will continue to grow smaller.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 8:56 p.m.

    Sounds like a good idea, oh right I unexpectedly ended up needing a surgery which cost 13,000 dollars if I was uninsured. I only had to pay a tenth of that thanks to my Obamacare insurance (being a student between 22 and 25 at the time so I could stay on my parents' plan). So yeah... doing what this article suggests would've been a really really stupid move for me.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 7:14 p.m.

    Actually it would be a smart move for everyone.

    Even leftist leaders and advisors to Obama like Krugman, have admitted their are the so-called "death panels" deciding who gets care and how much.

    Many of Obama's friends or supporteres and congress are are getting exemptions from it, they know how bad it is.

    If only we could all opted out or be expemted!

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 5:46 p.m.

    Interesting that the "Congress exempted itself from Obamacare" myth is still circulating.

    Instead of bouncing this idea back and forth to yourselves within the FOX-fuel echo chamber, how about looking up the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995? It specifically made sure that laws dealing with civil rights, labor and workplace safety regulations applied to the legislative branch of government. The independent Office of Compliance was set up to enforce the laws in Congress.

    And while you're at it, look up both the Snopes and FactCheck web pages for this topic.

    Spoiler alert: If you believe Congress exempted itself from the Affordable Care Act, you're 100% wrong. FactCheck rates it a "pants on fire" lie.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Sept. 29, 2013 5:42 p.m.


    Hate to burst your bubble--but it is a well known fact that Congress and their staff are not exempt from ACA/Obamacare.

    Congress will be picking their insurance plans from the exchanges along with those not now covered by an employer insurance plan.

    Except, for Ted Cruz. He is covered by his wife's health insurance plan provided by her employer--Goldman Sachs.

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 4:30 p.m.

    Really. This is another counter factual, biased piece which ignores the fact that our existing American Healthcare System is broken. It is way too costly and the quality outcomes are lower than countries that spend far less on Healthcare than the USA does. While Obamacare isn't perfect, it is a good start!. With Obamacare, greedy insurance companies can no longer deny folks with a preexisting conditions (like dwarfism for example)from having health insurance. It is ALREADY EXREMELY EXPENSIVE to buy individual or family health insurance if your employer doesn't offer it. Many employers do not. There are a lot of misrepresentations out there about Obamacare including this article. When corporations, certain small employers and the healthcare empire start thinking more about the health of the American people, and less about huge profits, we can re-visit Obamacare. Until then, it is probably the best solution for over 40 million uninsured or under insured Americans. Thanks President Obama for bringing Healthcare to All Americans!

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 4:25 p.m.

    Just for the record. Ronald Reagan was the last Republican President I voted for, so when someone says that Republicans are just against Obama, that may be true. Not for me! I'm against anything that destroys initiative and accountability, whether Republican, Democrat, or Tea party. Those who keep thinking that government should provide healthcare haven't thought much about how it erodes responsibility and accountability. The African American family has almost been completely wiped out and a major part of that can be laid at the feet of Democratic and Republican lawmakers that thought providing free everything would make a difference. It hasn't. Now, who is destroying Character? Is the citizens who believe in responsibility or Democrats and Republicans that want to maintain power and control by handing out free stuff to keep the slaves quite?

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 4:14 p.m.

    If Obamacare is such a good deal for all Americans, why has Obama, all who work under him, Congress, and 9 million federal employees (including the IRS who will oversee the whole mess) opted out and will be entirely exempt from it. They will have their own private healthcare plan, NOT Obamacare! If it is good enough for us, why isn't it good enough for them?! You can't dispute that one! That fight needs to be heralded from every rooftop in this country. Too many people are under-informed about this.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Sept. 29, 2013 4:14 p.m.

    All we need to know about Obamacare is that the hypocritical Democrat politicians who forced this mess down our throats have exempted themselves from Obamacare! Amazing hypocrisy for them to tell us its good for us but not enough for them!

  • TeaPublican Houston, TX
    Sept. 29, 2013 3:37 p.m.

    Yes…….most Americans won’t be much affected. The online marketplaces are focused on the roughly 15 percent of the population who are uninsured or buy plans individually. Yes, it’s a new place where people can shop, compare and buy health insurance in a way that was not available before obamacare. Yes, when the new plans take effect, insuers can no longer deny coverage based on health status or preexisting conditions. And all plans must cover essential benefits, such as hospitalizations, maternity care, and mental health services….and insurance companies cannot drop coverage just because someone gets sick….and small business will have more options for insuring workers, and get tax credits to pay for it. But remember what TeaPublicans are trying to accomplish here. Just like Sen. Gram said…if obamacare succeeds, then that woman hillary Clinton will be president in 2016! This “war on health care” is about taking back our American and making that guy obama fail and stopping that woman hillary! This is about taking back our American and no true Republican wants to be seen as helping the president! Just not going to happen!

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 3:32 p.m.

    Yep, I hope all the kids sign up! Yes sir, as long as all the young-un's sign up, I looking at getting me some low-cost healthcare paid for by the 20-somethings.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    The 'social justice' crowd continues the mantra of a utopian society built by force and compulsion and those 'noble' feelings that will surely run through every human until we all can 'imagine' no possessions, war ete. As long as man is running things, and as long as people continue to support government intervention to solve all of the worlds ills, chaos and problems will literally plague the process. It is also something that was bound to happen and anybody who thinks that the young are going to be signing up in droves because of their noble desires to support the system are deluded. Ah, just for the record, this is the Entitlement generation that believes that money grows on trees and accountability is something meant for someone else. Sorry to be the bearer of the truth.

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 2:59 p.m.

    "These problems, along with others, have even caused Congress to exempt itself from the exchange."


    Yeah, Congress has been great at saddling us with all sorts of garbage from which they have conveniently made themselves exempt.

    Little wonder that the counties surrounding DC has been consistently listed among the areas with highest average incomes for several decades. They and their former colleagues turned lobby shills feed on the industry and gullibility of the rest of the country. For example, you can see several classic examples of the gullible Obama sycophants here in the commentariat.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 2:59 p.m.

    "Generation Opportunity, a nonprofit financed with $5.04 million from a fund controlled by the Koch brothers’ lobbying team, just launched a new television advertisement to kick off an anti-Obamacare campaign. " The D-News could be a little more explicit about the origins of the opinion pieces they quote.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 2:56 p.m.

    "The simple fact is that they are a bad deal for young people." But they are good deal for their parents who will have to cough up the money to pay for their care if they get sick, a simple economic fact which seems to elude the author.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    Sept. 29, 2013 2:46 p.m.

    My problem is not with Mr. Evan Feinberg, after he is doing what his bosses pay him to do. My concern is with DN a so called Christian newspaper. ACA may be imperfect but is the beginning of the most serious attempt to provide health insurance for most if not all Americans.

    10CC said perfectly "Guess what? Intergenerational subsidies have been with us since before the beginning of time, known by another (perhaps increasingly derogatory) term: parenthood. Thus far, nobody has come out of the womb ready to take on the world, which is apparently some kind of new neo-conservative fantasy, intended to divide society."

    I work for public schools system where more than 70% of its population doesn't have children in our schools. We are a village and we all should work together. May be the DN needs to read the book of Acts 2:44 or the history of the LDS Church.

    I have a very good health insurance. Should that be enough? Of course NOT! Everybody deserves be protected, and the young paying to help for the older, why not? We (the old) support the infrastructure of society for the benefit of the young generations.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Sept. 29, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    Does Generation Opportunity have some money they would give you should you actually have a medical problem? No? So their only gamble is that their ad might be ignored, right? What could possibly go wrong? What other advice are they willing to share?

  • leonard Oakley, ID
    Sept. 29, 2013 2:18 p.m.

    Government knows best? Give me a break!

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 1:14 p.m.

    Daniel L.: "I got a letter yesterday that my medical premiums will rise 76% in 2014. "

    A letter from whom? Your employer? Your health insurance provider? A political fundraising group?

    Context, please.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 12:20 p.m.

    Tackling one point: the insidious nature of "inter-generational subsidies":

    Guess what? Intergenerational subsidies have been with us since before the beginning of time, known by another (perhaps increasingly derogatory) term: parenthood. Thus far, nobody has come out of the womb ready to take on the world, which is apparently some kind of new neo-conservative fantasy, intended to divide society.

    It gets worse: young parents, in their desire to provide for their children, shamelessly rely on overt and coerced "intergenerational subsidy", otherwise known as tax money for childrens' education.

    Sure, everyone since Thomas Jefferson has glorified the education of children, and young parents blithely steal from older generations to satisfy their own selfish instincts to raise their children. Furthermore, the tax code is biased toward more irresponsible production of children, punishing those who have raised their kids or otherwise don't have children, and shifting benefits toward un-established young parents who somehow think it's a gift to society for them to produce children.

    It's no wonder the offspring of this corruption is raised to perpetuate the theft.

    Or, maybe we all benefit. You decide.

  • Winglish Lehi, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    Sorry, Evan. It turns out that insurance premiums under Obamacare can be had for less than half of what premiums are going for in the so called "private" market. Obamacare is the better deal for the cost conscious individual of any age!

  • Daniel Leifker San Francisco, CA
    Sept. 29, 2013 10:35 a.m.

    I think some of the authors of these comments would do well to find an introductory textbook on logic and look up "ad hominem fallacy." The validity and soundness of an argument do not depend on the wealth or political preferences of the arguer.

    I got a letter yesterday that my medical premiums will rise 76% in 2014. The only medical claim I ever make is for a routine annual physical. It's very much in my interest to look at ignoring Obamacare, paying the penalty, and finding catastrophic medical insurance outside of the exchange system for emergencies... if that's even possible. You may despise the author of this article because he's outside your political bubble, but his argument makes perfect sense for me. And I'm older than a twentysomething.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    If only we'd have been able to get to the point of a single payer system, we wouldn't have to play these games.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 29, 2013 7:11 a.m.

    Whenever I read an op-ed piece that strikes me as bizarre the first thing I do is Google the author and the author's organization.

    It took 30 seconds to find this from Yahoo News:

    "Generation Opportunity, a Virginia-based group that is part of a coalition of right-leaning organizations with financial ties to billionaire businessmen and political activists Charles and David Koch, will launch a six-figure campaign aimed at convincing young people to “opt-out” of the Obamacare exchanges."

    This movement could care less about the health of young people - they're shills for the Koch brothers and the insurance industry.

    Also, the author got his start at the conservative Heritage Foundation, which originally came up with the key elements of the Affordable Care Act, including the individual mandate that he now says young people should ignore.

    The hyper-conservatives who are now throwing fits over "Obamacare" not only are disconnected from reality, they've also lost their appreciation for irony.

  • Stalwart Sentinel San Jose, CA
    Sept. 29, 2013 7:06 a.m.

    I sure hope there are no Millennials gullible enough to believe this article or that Generation Opportunity is a "nonpartisan organization." The sheer fact that he calls the ACA "Obamacare" and cites the National Center for Public Policy Research is proof positive that his organization is anything but nonpartisan.

    The President of this group won't even come clean about his organization, why would he be honest about the ACA? Seriously, some people have no integrity.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Sept. 29, 2013 5:34 a.m.

    Generation Opportunity, a nonprofit financed with $5.04 million from a fund controlled by the Koch brothers’ lobbying team, just launched a new television advertisement to kick off an anti-Obamacare campaign. The creepy ads, which provides no actual information about healthcare reform and instead seem designed to scare people away from doctor visits, have already been dissected by many in the media. What’s more revealing is Generation Opportunity’s real agenda, which was explained to Yahoo News in a story unveiling the new campaign (emphasis added):

    Their message: You don’t have to sign up for Obamacare. “What we’re trying to communicate is, ‘No, you’re actually not required to buy health insurance,’” Generation Opportunity President Evan Feinberg told Yahoo News in an interview about the campaign. “You might have to pay a fine, but that’s going to be cheaper for you and better for you."
    (The Nation)