"The stated purpose of the Affordable Care Act was to provide coverage for
all Americans, over 40 million of whom, by most estimates, have no health
insurance. The 7.1 million signups constitute less than one-fifth of that
number. In academic terms, a score less than 20 percent is clearly a failing
grade."First off... the mandate has an opt-out provision/tax so
you can't get everyone covered without single payer (the Obama
administration never claimed it'd get everyone insured).Secondly, there's a lot of those millenials who do have insurance because
of staying on their parents plan until they're 26, otherwise a fair number
of them would be insured.Most importantly, you forget all the people
who got health insurance from the Medicaid expansion... and then the 5 million
more who would've gotten health insurance from the Medicaid expansion...
except Republican governors decided against doing the expansion so that's
hardly Obama's fault.
"Republican leadership" Now there's something that
really "doesn't hold up to scrutiny".Bring on 2016!
The Deseret News: Printing Anti-Obama, all day, every day.
Bravo Deseret NewsI've been pointing that fact out for months
now and have felt like a voice in the wilderness. Yes, Obamacare ACA is a
complete sham. It was sold to the gullible Americans on helping out the 40
million uninsured, (most of whom were just between jobs or living in their
parents basements.) Truth is, the Democrats never really had that goal in mind.
What they wanted was to begin the country down the road toward a Single Payer
system. Or socialized health care. Obama has been recorded as saying that very
thing in the past, that we couldn't change it to a single payer system in
one step, but that it would take incremental changes. His is the first really
big move toward that. So, now that we can all see what ACA was about, we can
argue the merits of MANY providers for health care, or ONE. ONE being the Big
Brother, Sister, Mother, Father, and Uncle Government. For me, I'll take
the private sector over bureaucratic medicine.
Anyone who wants to champion the success of the Affordable Care Act has to
recognize one sobering fact: Its most controversial feature, the individual
mandate, has not even taken full effect.When those millions of still
uninsured Americans (who the law was supposed to help) start getting fined ..er,
sorry, taxed for their poverty and their unwillingness to have other Americans
subsidize them, then you can return and we can have a conversation about whether
or not the law is a success.
Remember when Bill Clinton was saying "it depends on what the meaning of
what "is" is?:Conservatives have gone from predicting that
Oabamacare would lead to a "healthcare death spiral" to arguing about
"the definition of success". Now that 7 million people have signed up,
and no death spiral has occurred, the right will just keep moving the bar. When you have to start parsing the exact wording of an argument you are
in big trouble.
“7.1 million people signed up for coverage prior to April 1. Does that
constitute a genuine ‘success story?’To answer
‘yes,’ one has to radically redefine the definition of
success.”WRONG. To answer “yes,” one only has to
know and accept the definition of success.Achieving one’s goal
IS success. And the Obama administration achieved its goal of signing up 7
million people by April 1st.And that’s just one success.
Plenty of other successes lie ahead for the Obamacare.Right Wingers
can fret and fume, lie and deny, and attempt to redefine our language, but that
doesn’t change reality.You might as well get used to seeing a
string of successes for Obamacare AND America.
I am disappointed that the Deseret News continues its efforts to undermine the
law of the land. It is sad that you have gotten on board the right wing express
in its effort to subvert an effort to get more people on health insurance,
lowering costs for the rest of us and reducing the number of bankruptcies and
other problems because people, for whatever reason, do not have health
insurance. The ACA is a process. It will not have instant universal
application. Efforts like your ongoing subversions have caused many to not
comply with the law, so it will take longer than hoped to get more people
covered. I would suggest you go back and review the 12th Article of Faith. You
are not adhering to your own beliefs. The bottom line is you and your right
wingers have offered nothing of serious substance as an alternative. You have
not offered anything to tweak the law. All I see is whining and complaining,
and a failure to be law abiding voices in the public discourse. Shame on you.
I expected better.
Here we go again, the DN taking only part of the story to support their own
opinion. No where in the article does it mention the millions of others who got
coverage because of the ACA. Several million more were covered when children
were allowed to stay on their parents policy until 26. Several more million
were covered through Medicare and more were covered under other state policies
that did not roll up under healthcare.gov. The ACA has brought new, better
coverage to many more than the 7.1 million you chide.I read the DN to gain
an understanding of how others look upon the world. What I often find is
shallow reporting and extreme bias. Come on DN, we want news, not satire. Give
us the truth, the whole truth and let us make up our own opinion.
So the attitude the DN is displaying here is that regardless of what the ACA
accomplishes we will be able to find some set of numbers or previous statements
to prove it is not successful. After all we went out on the
Republican limb and declared it an abomination before it ever started and
without any kind of reasonable alternative. Why stop now?
McKinsey Research: "Only 14% of Obamacare exchange sign-ups are previously
uninsured enrollees". That's less than 1 million previously uninsured
who now have health insurance and at what cost? It would have been far less
expensive to just write them a check and avoid all the lies, the wasted money
and all the damage done to our healthcare system. November can't come soon
Schnee makes a good point. It's entirely disingenuous for the
D-News to be laying less-than-full enrollment figures at Obama's feet while
states like Utah have opted to leave many, many people with no coverage. Talk
about a set up...The double-standard is nauseating, kind of like
Utahns complaining that Utah's large class sizes are not its fault, that
school children demographics are unalterable, and then claiming victory because
Utah gets it's tax freedom day four days before other states. (Just be
honest and admit education is not a priority. The candor would be refreshing.)
The "Deniers" making up excuses for obama all day, every day.
Two things to remember for all of you folks that are defending the
indefensible.1) This magic 7 million number is a number that was
set by the Obama administration as a benchmark of success) They obviously
didn't set the bar very high.2) Half of the 7 million are
people that were kicked off their insurance and forced to get insurance through
the exchanges.This is a dismal failure, and anyone with any
objectivity can plainly see the numbers this administration uses are
"cooked" to help their cause.
In the media frenzy where we're fed nothing but the Administrations
garbage, it's refreshing to read an editorial that gives facts about
ObamaCare. That program is an absolute failure. Next year, when people have to
pay the penalty for being uninsured this year, they will finally see what kind
of ponzi scheme ObamaCare really is. Young people think that they're
invincible. ObamaCare doesn't matter to them. They will pay the (minor)
fine rather than buy something that they think that they don't need.
That's what being an American means, having the RIGHT to NOT buy government
required insurance. That requirement is not in the Constitution. The Court
refused to rule on the Constitutionality of ObamaCare, but they called it a TAX.
They didn't rule on the constitutionality of that tax.The
Deseret News is to be complemented on telling its readers that ObamaCare is not
the "success" claimed by the Administration.
"(the Obama administration never claimed it'd get everyone
insured)." Who knows, but, let me be clear. Obama did make that claim 30+
times. The 7 million signs ups are offset by the 5 million that have lost their
insurance.I suppose you can claim tax collection is a success, since
most Americans by law are forced to pay their taxes every year. Which we all
know obamacare is a tax. Because that is the only way it could be put into law
after going through the supreme court. Have you forgotten about that? Obama
cannot force people to buy a product, but, he can tax people into submission.
And we know what a success story taxes are.Either way, time will
tell. If the system works out and everyone is happy, great. He'll have one
achievement for his 8 years in office. If it fails, then it's all of us
that will be hurting. Let me be clear, the rich will come out of this just fine.
Buffett, Clintons, Reid, Pelosi, obamas, gates.....wait all democrats! Unless
they get caught in affairs, fraud....oh wait they all have already.
Lets shut down government again, cancel all the 7,000,000 plus new persons in
the healthcare system, shut down medicare and social security. That plus losing
another ten years of elections may make the point.
Every independent analysis shows that the actual number of previously uninsured
people who now have coverage is around 9.4 million, if you include Medicaid
expansion. Those states that have rejected Medicaid money seem prompted to do so
by nothing but the pettiest of political motives. The ACA is working, and the
conservative response is, ostrich-like, to jam their collective heads ever
firmer into the sand. As evidenced by this preposterous editorial.
Almost anything Obamacare results in will be better than the current system that
has allowed:- excluding people with pre-existing conditions from
coverage- cancellation of coverage for covered people who develop a
serious illness- out of control fees by hospitals and doctors which are
now unaffordable for families and business with no plan in sight by the private
market to correct this- no realistic GOP plan in sight- a healthcare
system that is breaking the financial back of AmericaSo at least
Obamacare is a start to address these issues - albeit far from perfect. We need
to do better - so let hear what the GOP or anyone else has in mind
Wow. What a surprise.A right wing propaganda website produces
anti-Obamacare rhetoric.I wish the Dnews would go back to being a
news outlet. Sure, they can have a conservative bias. That's fine. But this
propaganda that they put out does nothing to inform or enlighten.Then again, what can we expect from an agency that recently defended Swallow?
Thank goodness the tribune actually did some reporting and got that criminal out
The big chink in the ACA armor is that this program relies upon the young and
healthy to opt in to offset the medical costs of the sick and elderly. The
problem is that the young and healthy are strapped with student loan debt. Hmm
which to pay?The ACA program was not designed to help the uninsured,
it was designed to get money for a financially broke government in the form of
fees, defined by the SCOTUS as taxes. Ever wonder why the IRS is monitoring who
By the way: what, exactly, do they mean when they say "enrolled"? Last
I'd heard, they were counting anyone who had put a plan in their cart as
enrolled, despite never moving on to checkout.So maybe under that
definition, they had "success." But under any other definition of
enrolled, like actually, you know, made a binding agreement and put in their
payment info--what's the real story? Because, heaven knows,
Obama's a paragon of truth telling, right?
Why are some people so eager to believe all the lies we were and are still being
told about Obamacare? Of the 7 million people who signed up only a small
fraction have actually PAID into the system! That's not a success, its a
total failure! Do you know what happens to any business where
"customers" do not pay?
Our state is a sad example how Republican "leadership" put over 57,000
poor Utah citizens at risk by not expanding Medicaid. It defies logic. Also
watching our government shut down by Ted Cruz and Mike Lee was horrible, and
devastating to many millions of families financially. Also the
Deseret New has got to slow down the daily axes to grind against our duly
elected President. It is so refreshing to pull up the Salt Lake Tribune and see
that they are not attacking our president every day You need to step up to a
journalistic level to a standard that shows both sides.
So we get 7 million Americans to sign up for ObamaCare... and we're told on
the news that's a BIG number.But we have over 11 million
illegal immigrants in the US (and growing daily)... and we're told
that's not a problem because it's just a small number.If
even HALF of the illegal immigrant population signed up... it would be 6
million!===86% of the people who signed up had insurance
before ObamaCare, and just moved from the people paying for private insurance
and contributing to the American economy... to government dependency.I call that a mitigated success...===IMO the
pre-existing conditions thing was a good thing. Being able to have
your parents pay for your insurance until you are 26 is no big deal to me. Who
would want to live with their parents and have them pay your way till you are
26?? I had a career and 2 kids of my own by the time I was 26.====I still think ACA was never intended to be a
"success".It was intended to make us so miserable we would
be happy with what's to come next...
What is so awful about an insurance mandate?People should have
insurance, unless they happen to have "Bill Gates money". How does
health care get paid for anyway? Does everyone, or for the matter, a
significant majority of those without insurance, have the kind of ready cash to
pay for heart surgery? Who pays the bill when a person runs up a hospital tab,
and can not pay? And don't a significant number of people annually declare
bankruptcy because of health bills? Who pays that tab?Health care
does not come free to anyone, yet we mandate that a sick person must be tended.
The medical community does nothing for free, someone always pays the tab.
Unless we have a system which requires medical insurance or a government
sponsored program for all (we like Medicare don't we?), then those who do
have insurance or do have "Bill Gates money" will be paying for those
who can not afford or obtain insurance.We should be tired of medical
freeloaders. Everyone should either have insurance or the money to pay for
their own care, or we have a nationwide system of guaranteed healthcare paid for
It’s been obvious all along that opponents of the Affordable Care Act are
tactically masking their desire to see it fail. Privately, they are quaking and
trembling in that it will succeed in the long run.The 7.1 million
signed up was just a goal the Administration set and then met, much to the
chagrin of the most determined opponents. It's far from being a final
hurdle that's been cleared but it is an encouraging indicator that the ACA
is moving forward.
Obamacare is not a success by the standards of either liberals or conservatives.
For liberals, it has not yet and may never achieve universal
coverage. For conservatives, who knowingly and unknowingly support
healthcare policies that all but guarantee an ever shrinking pool of insured
Americans, any increase in the number of insured is a failure. Obamacare – the great cyborg-like compromise between the Heritage
Foundation created endoskeleton that is the individual mandate (albeit with very
weak enforcement penalties) and market exchanges; and the external living tissue
of liberal mandates on basic insurance standards of coverage – is working
exactly how it was designed to… slow, clunky, and not very efficient.But it’s the best we could do given the only politicians we seem
to be electing these days are named either Hatfield or McCoy.
Here, I'll do DN's job and supply some data from the study.The Rand study was done in March, before the deadline.The Rand
study reports:Enrollment in employer sponsored insurance increased by 8.2
million, most of this was due to people who were previously uninsured.Medicaid enrollment increased by 5.9 million.3.9 million are covered by
state and federal marketplaces.Of those who were previously
uninsured:7.2 million gained employer based insurance3.6 million
gained insurance through Medicaid1.4 million gained insurance through the
marketplace.The uninsured rate dropped from 20.5% to 15.8%Less
than 1% of people who previously had individual market insurance became
Great editorial, well reasoned and factual.Absolutely absurd and
pathetic criticism from readers blinded by the rainbow and unicorn fantasies
repeatedly told by the Obama administration and its allies.Any good
coming from forcing 7 million people to sign up for new policies (even if they
are not paid for), or adding them to the unfunded liability of Medicaid (health
welfare) are offset by the millions of people forced off their old policies they
liked and were untruthfully told they could keep.The utter failure
of this law is proven by the fact that the Obamacare being implemented is not
that which was passed and signed into law, but is some seat of the pants scheme
illegally modified over and over by Obama to hide the law's flaws and
deflect criticism.He has indeed fundamentally changed our healthcare
system, not just the insurance portion but the delivery portion (where NO ONE
was denied treatment, even without any insurance) so that now everyone's
treatment will be less quality, cost more, and be harder to get.The
only thing Obama has done with the ACA is move us closer to single payer
socialized medicine...and bankruptcy.
Lets be clear that "signing up for coverage" in only the most basic of
steps toward a successful health plan. Since the ability and effort to sign
people up has been this troublesome one has to fear and wonder how the actual
coverage will be. Will bills be paid? Will you not get even part of what you
are expecting coverage and price wise? Then, of course, what happens to the
cost 1-3 years down the road. This is certainly an effort to show
that the goverment is already paying for such a large percentage of people
either by medicare, medicaid, and ever expanding "underprivileged", plus
giving people a choice really has not worked and is proving to be less
efficient, so why not just provide medicare for everyone from beginning to end?
That is the goal. Again, signing up was the easiest part of this
project. Now what will happen?
Tyler D,I think I'm a "Conservative". And I don't want
people to be uninsured. That costs me and everybody more (in charity care).I wish EVERYBODY was insured (just not necessarily by the government at
tax payer expense).==I think we need to do something
about the COST of healthcare, for everybody, not just for the poor. The ACA
did nothing for that, never even tried. The ACA just focused on finding
somebody else to pay for it... usual for big government solutions...
The Des News damages its credibility tremendously when its editorial board so
mindlessly engages in Obama bashing. To discuss problems with the scope of
coverage of the ACA without every breathing a whisper of the 25 or so states
controlled by Republicans that have rejected Medicaid expansion for no good
reason is to show a partisan ideology that is very troubling. Facts matter Des
News editors. And the fact is, there are no good reasons for any state to refuse
to opt in to Medicaid expansion. To do that is to engage in a war on the poor.
Imagine our collective shock.... Deseret News doesn't like the affordable
care act. This and other ground shaking news at 10 pm.I was worried
the DN was slacking of in their ever present barrage and pandering to its reader
base. Heaven forbid it should carry other news happening in the world. Without
ACA and Gay Marriage, the DN wouldn't have much to write about.
Remember kids, Sebelius resigned because Obamacare has been such a raging
success, right? Do liberals think we are stupid--wait, of course they do.
Obamacare is a success if you define success as radically raising healthcare
costs for everyone, jacking up deductibles, premiums, forcing men to get
pregnancy coverage, and on and on and on.7.1 million signed up for
what? 20,000 a year deductibles, on an 800 a month premium? That's
morally unconscionable. Yet the liberals think it's great! "Why is
America mad at us? We've only forced them to buy insurance that sucks
royally? WE meant well! Obama, make the mean people stop being mean--they
should like their new premiums and deductibles!"
The other day this paper ran an op-ed declaring victory in Afghanistan based on
the recent election as its single data point, ignoring almost 13 years of data
suggesting otherwise. Today the trend of cherrypicking data
continues, despite far, far less available data for the ACA implementation and
rollout. As messy as it's been, I have far more optimism about our ability
to shape it in a way that meets the needs of American citizens than I do about
finding meaningful, longterm success in Afghanistan.
Regardless of whether it's a "success" or not. That's pretty
irrelevant at this point. It's here and we need to make the best of
it.What I'm concerned about is... what's NEXT (IF this
fails)...===I think we need to get ready for
nationalized healthcare. The writing is pretty much on the wall.Obama himself said that was his ultimate goal (he didn't know he was
being recorded, google the video). But admitted he thought that would take 10
years, and he didn't have 10 years... so he had to do this.Many
in his administration have also stated that their ULTIMATE goal is single-payer
(government). So it should not be a total shock to anybody that it's
going that way...So the sooner this fails.. the sooner we are forced
to go to single-payer... IMO...My big concern is what that's
going to do to the economy and taxes. There's many Americans in the
insurance industry... that means a LOT of empty office buildings and
unemployment (unless the Government absorbs all those jobs to administer the new
government healthcare system).
The bottom line: Socialism isn't success no matter how many
"successful" programs are trotted out to euthanize Americans into
believing that it is success. Individual Liberty is too important to be
sacrificed at the alter of the state no matter how altruistic those programs
sound. Europe is not worth emulating. America is exceptional for a reason. We
know that liberty comes from God and government's power is clearly defined
in the Constitution for a reason. It is not God and any attempt to make it so
will only subvert and destroy liberty!
You wanted it to fail. I would hazard that you even worked to make it fail.
Except that it really hasn't, I guess it's time to declare it a
failure. Sad, really.
From the Article..."To answer “yes,” one has to radically
redefine the definition of success."This is priceless. Perhaps
the DNews would have preferred it if we replaced the phrase 'success'
with 'mission accomplished'? The latter phrase never seemed to cause
the DNews any grief.
2 bits - "Regardless of whether it's a "success" or not.
That's pretty irrelevant at this point. It's here and we need to make
the best of it."And that the real irony of the current
ideological intractability and all-or-nothing tactics on the Right. Even after a disastrous roll out of the website, in a few short months most
observers agree that Obamacare is here to stay. And since it really is a
center-right approach to healthcare (with some admittedly left leaning insurance
regulations), the smart approach would be to do everything you (conservatives)
can to make it work well.Perhaps there are some true Machiavellians
on the Left who, knowing what the knee-jerk response on the Right would be, bet
that this Heritage/Romney would fail due to lack of political will to make it
work, and would ultimately lead to the Left’s dream of single-payer.Makes one wonder if the Tea Party types are the most practical
socialists this country has ever seen.
Obamacare may be success for Obama, but it's certainly not success for the
United States of America.I bet the Soviet leaders proclaimed every
thing they did a success all the way til the end of the 80's.
What were the promises that were made to the CITIZENS before ObamaCare was
passed?- Each family's health insurance would go DOWN $2,500
per year. (Didn't happen.)- We could keep our doctors and
other health care providers. (Didn't happen.)- We could keep
our current policy. (Didn't happen.)In addition to those total
lies, over 1 million people have lost their health care coverage. Costs have
skyrocketed. How many people have signed up who didn't have
insurance before ObamaCare? How many people have lost their insurance because
of ObamaCare?What the Deseret News told us is just the tip of the
iceberg. ObamaCare is a jumble of contradicting statements. If you want to
read a real thriller, read the entire bill. You'll see how one promise
after another is removed by later parts of the bill. You'll see how YOUR
health and YOUR welfare will be determined by someone like Kathleen Sebelius
(who "resigned" from office just this morning). We
don't have a single payer system (thank the Lord) and now that Obama has
ruined health care, it will take a miracle to fix things.
"I bet the Soviet leaders proclaimed every thing they did a success all the
way til the end of the 80's."Exactly... since that is what
we are talking about here. This is full blown communism..of course they
didn't have independent health care insures... or was it through the
private sector delivered... or that our doctors are not state employees.... but
other than that, it is exactly the same.Lets completely ignore the
rest of western civilization that uses socialized medicine... that are all doing
just fine. That doesn't fit the ceiling is falling narrative here no does
it. I mean, Europe, the fact that they have extremely successful economies (UK,
Germany, Netherlands, Nordics, etc) and floundering ones (Greece, Spain), and
yet they all can offer everyone medical coverage. We surely don't want to
learn anything from that, now do we.
Presidents have "legacy lines." For instance...We have
nothing to fear, but fear itself. FDRAsk not what your country can
do for you (like provide health care), ask what you can do for your country.
JFKI am not a crook. Richard NixonTear down this wall
Mr. Gorbachev. Ronald ReaganI did not have sex with that woman,
Miss Lewenski. Bill ClintonWell, if things don't change for
Obama we already know his legacy line. Say it with me.If you like
your health care plan, you can keep it. Barack ObamaNot exactly
inspiring like FDR or JFK is it.
I gotta quit reading these inane op ed pieces. My blood pressure is taking a
hit. Um, guess what. Everything is not going to happen overnight. Nor did
Obama say it would -- I believe 7 million was the goal for this sign up period.
But I guess, in my opinion, having some previously uninsured people covered is
better than having NONE, which is apparently, to you, the better course. Lots
and lots of sick people who can't get healthcare. Yeah, that's what we
should strive for as a society. Unbelievable.
When Obama took office there were 46 million uninsured Americans. Now that
number is down to about 31 million Americans. I wouldn't call that a
disaster. It would be even less but several states didn't expand
medicaid.Republicans had many years where they could of tried to improve
the health care system, but it was never a priority. In the meantime the cost of
health insurance doubled when Bush was President and he added an unfunded
entitlement (Medicare Rx benefit).Give Obama credit for getting
something done. The Republicans have been the party of no and complain, but they
didn't seem to care about the injustice to the individual marketplace were
those with preexisting conditions were denied coverage. They were fine with
health care protections and mandates as well as tax benefits for employees of
corporations that indivuals and families in the individual market were denied.
The ACA gives the responsible Americans the ability to purchase insurance at a
marketplace (Republican idea). The subsidies aren't outlandish to help the
poor thus many don't sign up. Also the deductables are typically high so
people won't overuse healthcare.
Of course one must reckon with the fact that Obamacare is being fought hammer
and tong by the Deseret News and its allies. Half of the states, including
Utah, have refused to participate. Against this backdrop the ACA's success
Most of what I was going to say in response has already been said by others.
Despite overwhelming opposition from conservative opponents of the bill, the ACA
is working and has reduced the number of uninsured. In fact it mirrors the
experience of Massachusetts in its first year. Conservatives will continue to
chirp about the ACA because they are afraid they will loose politically as the
public notices that the Death Panels never materialized but affordable health
I think there will come a day when Democrats look back on Obama with regret.
Much as I now regret some of the support I gave Bush when he was in office.It won't come while he is in office... that takes too much
self-reflection and will to overcome the partisan urge to defend your guy. But
once he's gone, and you don't have the knee-jerk response to defend
your guy.. it changes, and reality gradually seeps in.THEN... we
will be able to have a real conversation about this. Much as we now can have a
more open and realistic conversation about Afghanistan and Iraq (without the
partisan knee-jerk responses we had when the President who did it was in
office).It takes time...
I notice not many of you Big Obamacare supporters are over there on the other
story defending the woman who was in charge of this great program, and resigned
because of it. What does that tell you? Tells me there is "something
rotten in Denmark." You can quote me.
We haven't begun to see the disaster of the ACA. Remember all those
corporate mandates the President has been pushing back behind the November
elections. When they hit and multi-millions lose their corporate provided
health care, your going to see Rome burn. The Dems in Washington are really
going to with the Republicans are in office when it hits so they can pretend it
was not them that did it.
Your position on the ACA is one of a long series going back to the 1930's.
You have opposed virtually every progressive measure which has made life for
little people like me, tolerable. You hated social security at is inception -
still do. You oppose medicare, and now you oppose the ACA. It's a sad
record, and the fact that you are the primary media outlet for my church makes
it even harder to take. But take it I must.
Does anyone have the courage to tell the truth? Of the reported 7 million people
who signed up, only a small fraction (14%) of those were previously uninsured,
the other 6 million+ either had their previous healthcare coverage cancelled by
Obamacare or have NOT paid their Obamacare premiums, period! Only in a
liberal's mind is 14% a success! Anywhere else, school, business or private
lives is 14% considered a success!
@2bits"Being able to have your parents pay for your insurance until
you are 26 is no big deal to me. Who would want to live with their parents and
have them pay your way till you are 26?? I had a career and 2 kids of my own by
the time I was 26."My Utah Mormon relative has her married
It really gets tiring reading the biased complaints of the uninformed who
hypocritically claim DN bias. Are they really so naïve they cannot fathom
the financial damage already perpetrated by the Unaffordable Care Abuse? How
long will they stick their fingers in their ears when scores recount their lost
coverage, lost doctors, higher deductibles, higher premiums, higher costs all
across the board? That is, except for those underwritten by an extremely
inefficient government. The liberal mindset doesn't understand we easily
predicted this would happen as surely as B follows A. As for the charge
the DN is attempting to undermine the "law of the land," let's not
forget the dozens of times the president has illegally undermined this fiasco
for purely political purposes.Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.
@SCfan[Tells me there is "something rotten in Denmark."]You know what's not rotten in Denmark? Their healthcare system.Besides, Sebelius is not a tech expert. She's not the one who made the
federal rules where contracts have to be awarded to the lowest bidder.
That's where the blame should be for the website being absolute garbage in
October, with the contractor, and the hiring process used to select such a
contractor. Romneycare got off to a slow start too, as did
Bush's Medicare Part D expansion. These things take time to implement and
it's working a lot better now. I'm not going to say Sebelius is
perfect, but I find some of the criticisms of her to be over the top.
@Mountanman"Only in a liberal's mind is 14% a success! "Um... Obamacare doesn't care if people who already had insurance
use the exchange. That 14% number is completely meaningless in that the
Administration doesn't care what percentage it is.Want to know
a statistic that does matter? The percentage of people who are uninsured. The
RAND American Life Panel study estimates that the percentage of people who are
uninsured fell from 20.5% to 15.8% (comparing mid-March 2014 to September 2013).
It'd be a couple percentage points lower if all states did the Medicaid
expansion as the bill intended when passed.
I think this article brings up some very legitimate issues. While success is a
matter of opinion, it is reasonable to question the success of a program that
reached its numbers artificially the way this one did. It seems to me that the
success of Obamacare program is at the very least still in question. It’s
shameful that so many people continue to judge everything a politician does
based on whether the politician is part of the correct party or not. We seem to
have lost our ability to have a discussion about facts. If there is
disagreement, far too many people are willing to label the other side in an
attempt to silence their views. We should be willing to judge the performance
of our politicians honestly. If it is a mistake, it is a mistake whether
republican or democrat. Please stop being so quick to condemn the other side
and dismiss the viewpoints of others. Additionally, please also consider that
the success of a program is a moot point if we cannot pay for it.
Schnee. What you meant to say is Obamacare doesn't care how many millions
of Americans lost their healthcare insurance because of Obamacare. Obamacare
doesn't care how many millions of Americans are now paying higher premiums,
higher co-pays and higher deductibles. The 14% figure that you summarily
dismissed is the % of people who were previously UNINSURED who signed up. Do the
math! 7 million signed up but less than a million uninsured GOT insured! Wow! If
that is success, please explain what failure looks like!
The marxist/Socialists commentary is interesting. Without defining liberty, it
is easy to talk about the universal brotherhood of man. If it isn't
defined, then the Utopian dream that ends in ashes is always under girded with
the philosophy that 'It will be different this time. Our Socialist dreams
will be different because WE are in charge?' 7,000 years of human history
illuminates the contempt they eventually feel for mankind. It reveals the truth
about their desire for the ACA or any other program. It isn't about
others; It is about me! A question Doestevsky asked is pertinent,
"“Do you despise or respect mankind, you, its coming saviours?”
I believe that Democrats and Republicans are made up of people, for the most
part, who want to use the power of the government to expunge their guilt for
empty living. When you import a solution, as the Democrats and Republicans like
to do for their favorite programs, or you are doing something out of showing
that you are better than someone (most government programs), it will fail. The
free market is the fairest, most desirable system the world has ever known. It
allows Christianity to flourish.
@Moutanman"What you meant to say is Obamacare doesn't care how
many millions of Americans lost their healthcare insurance because of Obamacare.
"You don't go from around 20% uninsured to around 16%
uninsured without there being many more gaining insurance than losing it.
It's the insurance companies fault people lost insurance because all plans
in place when the ACA passed are grandfathered in. Only those created after the
ACA was signed into law that failed to meet standards got dropped. "Obamacare doesn't care how many millions of Americans are now paying
higher premiums, higher co-pays and higher deductibles."The last
three years have seen the slowest increase of healthcare expenses in half a
century, where are the numbers that show that healthcare costs are increasing
substantially?You want to know what failure is? Failure would be if
we weren't seeing a sizable drop in the percentage of people uninsured
(which has gone from around 20% to 16% already despite half the states not
expanding Medicaid). People getting insurance on the exchange rather than their
old plan, whether that number is 500k, 6 million, or 30 million, it doesn't
Like I've pointed out...Is it just me, or has the Deseret
News Editorials really, REALLY turned uber-far-right-wing just the past
couple of months?
As others have pointed out, saying only 7 million have signed up overlooks the
millions still on their parents insurance while in college--previously
impossible--as well as those that have signed up under the states' expanded
Medicaid programs.Another element being left out is that the ACA is
intended to roll out piece-by-piece, so as not to shock the system so
drastically. They knew the young and healthy would be reluctant to participate
until they are older. The penalty is the incentive to make them do so. The
first year it is minor, to nudge those already on the edge. Each year it goes
up, allowing for several years of preparation. At some point, the youth will
balance the penalty with the cost and opt-in.
"Blue Cross Blue Shield, one of the largest insurers in the country, has
said 80-85% of people have paid the first month’s premium for plans
obtained through exchanges."To look only at the exchanges (what
DN does)is not giving you the full picture," said Christine Eibner, a senior
economist at Rand Corporation.The Rand report found 9.3 million
Americans gained health insurance from September 2013, which preceded the most
recent open enrollment period, and mid March 2014, the last month of that
period. The Rand numbers are estimates based on surveys of a 2,425-person
sample."The CBO estimates that by 2019, 27 million people will
have signed up on the marketplaces. There will still be roughly 31 million
nonelderly residents who will be uninsured by 2024 due to being undocumented
immigrants, would-be Medicaid enrollees who do not sign up or live in a state
that did not expand coverage* and others who just don’t sign up.(politifact)*According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly 5
million people are not insured due to states refusal to expand medicare. (57,000
in Utah, 1 million+ in TX 700,000+ in Fl)
LDS Liberal: "Is it just me, or has the Deseret News Editorials really,
REALLY turned uber-far-right-wing..."Judging from all the
uber-far-left-wing commenters on this forum...its obviously not just you that
thinks that way.When 99% of the media in this country are lock-step
in complete agreement with the Obama administration, anything to the right of
Nancy Pelosi or that even hints at criticism to this president's policies
seems "far right" to many liberals.Those of us who believe
in limited government (you know the stuff the U.S. Constitution was built
around) see such restraints as common sense. Unfortunately, sense isn't as
common as it used to be.
"Obamacare's 'success' doesn't hold up to
scrutiny"There really isn't much about this administration
that DOES hold up under close examination. Which explains why there is so
little interest in the mainstream media for doing that.Whether it is
the Benghazi debacle, the IRS malfeasance, the "Fast'n Furious"
scandal, the overreaching executive actions, the under-reaching immigration
enforcement, sluggish recovery, the stagnant employment numbers, the vacuous
foreign posture, this ridiculously mismanaged and unilaterally supported
"Obamacare" fiasco or any of the many, many other examples of poor
governance, this administration does not "hold up to scrutiny". And, we
all pay for that poor performance.
This whole argument can be broken down into two opposing view points: Those who
think that government is our savior and those who think that government is our
servant. I'm part of the second group. We can read. We have read the
Constitution. We can clearly see that the Federal level of government has been
assigned only 17 duties. Health care and personal welfare are not on that list.
Others who have not read the Constitution or who disagree with the Constitution
think that government has whatever authority THEY want it to have. They
disregard the Constitutional process that is required to add duties to the
Federal Government by amending the Constitution. They want THEIR will to
prevail, without going through the process.Mr. Obama has taken an
oath to uphold the Constitution as it is written, not as he thinks it should be
written. ObamaCare would not be allowed if he honored his oath and kept his
promise to uphold the Constitution.The 10th Amendment assigns the
State or the individual the responsibility to handle all duties not specifically
listed in the Constitution. No cheating is allowed.
There are many stories about the gravely wounded rising up and doing heroic
deeds. And in the words of that great New York sage "It ain't over
till its over".The fact that so many conservative republican
businessmen are spending so much time and energy to defeat Obamacare is a clear
indication to me that it might be something very good. It may not
be perfect but it seems to be better than the condition of health care by
businessmen. Honest, decent, moral doctors and health care workers will cheer
that which serves people better.
@Mike Richards – “This whole argument can be broken down into two
opposing view points: Those who think that government is our savior and those
who think that government is our servant.”And this cartoon
caricature of the world, not to mention the nuances and complexities of specific
issues (where tradeoffs have to be and there’s no such thing as a perfect
solution), tells us everything we need to know about the conclusions you
consistently reach.Personally, I prefer to think using facts, logic
and reason and not an ideological algorithm.
20% is considered "success". And these guys want to control our schools
next? YIKES!!! (By their standards, the worst inner city schools are a success
now.)This article just a slam on Obama?? Can't be. It never
mentions his name, not even once. Paranoia anyone?
Obamacare's 'success' doesn't hold up to scrutiny’Not even in the "meant to be a slam" headline?This
whole argument can be broken down into two opposing view points: Those who
think that government is us, and we are them. Those who think the
government is some kind of alien or non-tangible object bent on the destruction
of America for no apparent reason.I don't think Obama is
worried in the slightest about his place in history, not reagan mythology, but
Re: Mike Richards "This whole argument can be broken down into two opposing
view points: Those who think that government is our savior and those who think
that government is our servant." It's actually a whole lot more
complicated than that.I have been part of hired labor most of my
life, except for two short stints as a self-employed businessman. As such I
have been a servant of capital. I have sought to use government to help me
survive against capital. As my late father said "the first thing you have
to do in life is figure out how you're going to survive." True. This
country's halting steps into socialism have helped me survive. In the
future socialism will help many more, to survive.
Please - I beg you all to calm down. As all of us know the President told us
over and over again that we will be taken care of because we can keep our
doctors and insurance policies period (trust them). The promises have just got
to be true.
Most people don't realize what a success the ACA is because they have never
been one of the have not's or unprotected class of american society. You
could play by the rules and a small percentage of the populace without the
voting power to change things would unjustly be denied coverage in the
individual marketplace due to pre exhisting conditions or lack of protections or
the means to afford healthcare. In the meantime employees of corportations
healthcare benefits weren't taxed and they benefited from coverage mandates
like maternity (without the $7500 co pay commonplace in the individual
marketplace) etc. While Bush was President the price of
healthcare about doubled leaving more and more people unable to afford
insurance. They were in effect priced out of the market of healthcare and more
and more companies quit providing healtcare or increased deductables. The ACA
gives subsidies to those that can't afford it. There are a ton of people
that make $12 or less (not freeloaders) that struggle to pay premiums that
average over 12K for a family. Pharmacutical pricing is obscene but
Republicans won't even discuss price controls that could make healthcare
more affordable and accessable like other countries.
For all of you applauding Medicaid Expansion, your applauding those who
Obamacare hurt the most in the expansion. The elderly, and the disabled who need
Medicaid. The elderly and disabled that Medicaid was originally intended for,
those who are not capable of earning a living, and have no funds. The expansion
to those who are capable of working a living to obtain insurance are taking away
funding from the elderly and the disabled. How proud they must be! What a lazy
segment of the population to take away or reduce services to the elderly and the
disabled. The expansion funding is not enough to keep services! Those who need
it the most, have already had needed medical supplies taken away, and personal
aide services reduced. All because of the healthy refusing to help themselves,
and a liberal people willing to take it away for votes. I work within the
People in Utah are supposed not too want affordable health care, at least that
is what the neighbors and the D News state daily.
@Mike Richards… you said "This whole argument can be broken down into
two opposing view points: Those who think that government is our savior and
those who think that government is our servant."You are right,
and wrong. There are two sides. There is one side that sees this as a
government of the people, for the people, to do the peoples business. There is
the other side who thinks that the government is some foreign entity that by its
own nature is our enemy.That is the difference. One side sees it
as how we as a people do things as a society that could not be done otherwise.
Others… the government is to be attacked at all cost.I
don't think out governmental situation is perfect, but we will never
achieve perfection in this existence. We can only strive to do those things
that move us closer to that end - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked,
protecting those who can not protect themselves. We are not just stewards of
ourselves, but our fellow brothers and sisters… how we do that is the
subject of debate in my mind.
What I find most interesting about this editorial, as well as almost all other
editorials and letters printed in this ultraconservative newspaper, is that the
moderate and liberal comments get consistently higher "likes" compared
to the conservative comments. What this tells me is that either the left-leaning
comments are more well-reasoned or the conservative readers are more complacent.
Or maybe both. Whatever. This is a trend I have noticed for a long time now.
@liberal larry "no death spiral has occurred"Your comment
makes me believe that you don't understand what the death spiral is. The
death spiral occurs when there are not enough younger, healthy people in the
program to cover the costs of the older, sick people. Insurance companies then
must raise their rates in order to make up the difference. As a result, fewer
young people are able to afford insurance. Repeat until collapse.At
this point, no one knows what the mix is on new enrollees. Is it more young,
healthy people? Or more old, sick people? Obama's not saying. How would you
know whether death-spiral conditions exist? When you declare that we are past
danger, it's only cheerleading. It's just as misleading as
Obama's self-cheerleading the other day.
The controversy indicated in the article is about religious freedom. As in, my
religious right to not participate in something that does not conform to my
sacred rights protected by the Constitution. Though I may be denigrated for this
reference, please consider this: "Unfortunately, people are re-interpreting
the Constitution as a living document, and it's not. It's a
solid-based document and it shouldn't be played with." - Chuck Norris.
It isn't about enrollment numbers, extended cost basis, who did
what to whom in regards to success or failure of the program. It is about the
multisided attack upon personal freedoms that has transpired under both
conservative and liberal governments. Platitudes about your party or my party
are part of the plan of divisiveness that is being played by both parties to
keep us mollified into believing that politicians actually care about us
commoner's needs. Ambrose Bierce said it best - "Politics
is the conduct of public affairs for private advantage." I've lived in
countries with "public health care". All of them were/still are
disasters. How is the ACA any better? Don't know. I do know it's
infringing upon my basic freedoms.
The bottom line with Obamacare - we can do better for us and our kids. This
nation has smart people - perhaps not a majority anymore but enough to create
and vote for a good health care law that will help everyone. Obamacare is not
it. We can and must do better otherwise our kids have no future - we will pass
to them a bankrupt country in dept so far to China that even our freedom is
questionable. When the US goes bankrupt and China calls our loan it effects all
of us - liberal, conservative and everyone in between. Got to get it together
people - set aside your political bias and ideology and do what is right for
your kids and grandkids. This isn't that hard people. Really. This is
economics 101. Everyone - including liberals - knows Obamacare is disaster but
pride keeps us from doing the right things. Swallow the pride and just do the
right thing for the country - not the party or the ideology. Your kids deserve
There is also the consideration that many people who had a health plan and liked
it because it met their needs (physically and financially) had their policies
canceled because they didn't meet the governments definition. Estimates
place this number as high as 5 million. If that number is correct, then 5
million subtracted from 7.1 million is 2.1 million. Also, how many people are
being subsidized or not paying the premiums? A friends ACA premium is $875 a
month but is 100% paid by the government, so giving a product away is not the
same as selling a product. This is all smoke and mirrors just like the quote
that all the jobs lost during the Great Recession have been replaced, if so, why
are three of my academic colleagues with PhDs in science, math and law still
unemployed after 3 years. If they get jobs at Walmart, is that the same as
having their jobs replaced? Hardly.
The objective of Obamacare was NOT to cover the uninsured; that is merely a
byproduct. The first objective of Obamacare was Democratic
fundraising. Tens of thousands of new IRS agents are required to enforce
Obamacare (both to ensure accurate delivery of tax credits & also to audit
companies & individuals for compliance), all of whom will join the National
Treasury Employees Union, a left-wing public sector union, that in turn collects
dues & funnels them to the Democratic Party. In addition to the new IRS
agents, other governmental organizations have hired hundreds to thousands more
-- all of whom reliably contribute any politician (Democrats) who will promise
raises and increases to their gold-plated pensions & Cadillac health
care.The second objective of Obamacare is to create a permanent
underclass reliant upon Big Government for ever-increasing handouts from the
productive class. The permanent underclass will reliably vote for more
The recent results showing it will lower the deficit makes all conspiracy spins
irrelevant. the program is successful because the private health care industry
is the main engine.
All I know is that my wife is one of those 7 million people. She has been in
terrible pain for the past 3 years and unable to afford healthcare since she
lost her job 2 years ago. She took about 30 minutes to sign up for the ACA on
the exchange and now she has affordable healthcare and is being treated and
hopefully soon she will get better so that she can re-enter the workforce and be
a productive member of society again. Without the ACA her options were to stay
in pain or die. I think that it very much successful and "holds up to
scrutiny" for me.
It seems many commenters don't understand the difference between a news
story and an editorial - such as freedomfighter41. The Affordable
Care Act will not lower health care costs. Adding layers of bureaucracy and
regulations will only add costs. More people may become insured, but most of
them will be heavily subsidized, so the government piles on more liability.
Someone may have to pay for that eventually. I heard it said one
time that the ACA will lower costs by reducing corporate profits, which is funny
in its absurdity. Profit motive in tandem with competition lowers costs by
increasing efficiency. True competition in the health insurance industry would
lower costs. Government regulation will not. Remove profit motive you have no
reason to cut costs and be more efficient. Witness government agencies and
divisions of corporations spending money on petty projects so they don't
"lose" that money out of next years budget.