The White House Thought They Knew What Health Plan You Should Have. They Were Wrong.

[Valin]

Are you ready for the ObamaCare victory lap?
Allahpundit

4:15 p.m. ET all across the dial. I’m looking forward to this the way I am to dental work, or to a new season of “The Walking Dead.” Our media, of course, is more excited. Here’s what landed in my inbox a few hours ago, fresh off the news that the White House has kinda sorta reached seven million sign-ups.

 

There’s no suspense about O’s announcement. Pelosi revealed earlier this afternoon that they have in fact reached seven million according to whatever definition of “enrollment” HHS is using right now. As you’ll see below, Carney was even more specific at today’s briefing, reminding us yet again that the White House is fully capable of producing up-to-the-minute data about enrollment when it’s in their political interest to do so. The big reason to watch O’s presser is to see if they saved any tidbits for him: If in fact the risk pool has improved and now consists of ~40 percent or so of young adults, or if they have to reason believe that a majority of new enrollees were previously uninsured, that’s news that Obama himself might want to break. Otherwise, this is just his way of using the bully pulpit to make things a bit easier for Democratic incumbents. Voters will spend the next seven months hearing from Republicans how the law is a trainwreck in progress. This is Obama’s big chance to reassure fencesitters that, with the enrollment target now reached, HHS is “on track” for good things. All is proceeding as hath been prophesied by our central planners/seers.

 

(Snip)

 

 

 

Why Yes I am ready.....

 

[clearvision]

It is entirely possible that we will look back on today’s deadline and administration celebrations about enrollment as Obama’s version of George W. Bush’s infamous “mission accomplished” moment after Iraq. Democrats who dream that today’s numbers will get them off the hook in the midterms should think again.

 

LINK

[SrWoodchuck]

Study Finds Just 858,000 Newly Insured Americans Have Paid Their Obamacare Premiums… http://weaselzippers.us/181439-study-finds-just-858000-newly-insured-americans-have-paid-their-obamacare-premiums/

 

A triumphant President Barack Obama declared Tuesday his signature medical insurance overhaul a success, saying it has made America’s health care system ‘a lot better’ in a Rose Garden press conference.

 

But buried in the 7.1 million enrollments he announced in a heavily staged appearance is a more unsettling reality.

 

Numbers from a RAND Corporation study that has been kept under wraps suggest that barely 858,000 previously uninsured Americans – nowhere near 7.1 million – have paid for new policies and joined the ranks of the insured by Monday night. [...]

 

Aside from the issue of the numbers’ likely decrease when non-paying enrollments are taken into account, administration officials have been coy about the RAND Corporation study, which suggests that relatively few Obamacare enrollees were previously uninsured.

 

‘What I can tell you is that we expect there to be a good mix of people who were previously uninsured who now have insurance,’ Carney said Monday.

‘Certainly, there’s a significant number who now have qualified for Medicaid in those states that expanded Medicaid who will have insurance who didn’t have it before.’

 

In addition to his claim of 7.1 million enrollments, Obama also announced that ‘three million young people’ under age 26 have gained coverage as add-ons to their parents’ policies. and ‘millions more … gained access through Medicaid expansion,’ he said.

 

Those totals – young adults attached to their parents’ insurance and new taxpayer-funded Medicaid subscribers – far exceed the 7.1 million number the White House trumpeted on Tuesday.

 

The Affordable Care Act carried with it the promise of covering ‘every American,’ and it appears to have fallen tremendously short.

The unpublished RAND study – only the Los Angeles Times has seen it – found that just 23 per cent of new enrollees had no insurance before signing up.

And of those newly insured Americans, just 53 per cent have paid their first month’s premiums.

 

If those numbers hold, the actual net gain of paid policies among Americans who lacked medical insurance in the pre-Obamacare days would be just 858,298.

 

 

Liar. The emperor has no clothing because they caught fire & burned up. No mas pantelones....Oblunder.

 

Via WeaselZippers

[Valin]

Obama: 'There Are Still No Death Panels. Armageddon Has Not Arrived.'
Igor Bobic
April 1, 2014, 4:39 PM EDT

Announcing that 7.1 million Americans had enrolled for insurance using the federal health exchange under Obamacare, President Barack Obama declared the debate over the law officially over.

"There are still no death panels. Armageddon has not arrived," Obama said. "The debate over repealing this law is over. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay."

The 7 million target, thought to be out of reach by many critics in the aftermath of a botched rollout, was reached during a surge on the last day of enrollment Monday night.



Well that certainly good to know.

[clearvision]

So how many 5 kid households were dragged in at the last minute to signup and either have to pay nothing, or will never pay their first bill?

[Valin]

How Well Is Obamacare Covering The Uninsured? A Glass Half Empty Moment
Chris Conover
4/1/14

The enrollment period for Obamacare Exchange sign-ups has officially ended–unless, of course, you are one of many given a reprieve in the last furious round of unilateral (arguably illegal) administrative changes to the law (as fellow Forbes contributor Scott Gottlieb has pointed out, ObamaCare enrollment never truly closes). The LA Times, relying heavily on as-yet-unpublished RAND Corporation survey figures, has reported a grand total of 9.5 million formerly uninsured have gained coverage. How should we assess this figure? Is that a success, failure, or something in between? Here’s how to interpret that number or any other similar number you hear in the days, weeks or even months ahead.

 

Hard Truth #1: The Total Number of Uninsured Has NOT Declined by 9.5 Million

 

The LA Times figure includes 2 million uninsured purportedly covered through the Exchanges, 3 million previously uninsured young adults purportedly covered under their parents’ policies and 4.5 million covered through Medicaid.

 

Roughly 1 Million With Cancelled Plans Remain Uninsured. The problem with the first figure is that the LA Times itself reports “Fewer than a million people who had health plans in 2013 are now uninsured because their plans were canceled for not meeting new standards set by the law, the Rand survey indicates.”^[1]This means we have to subtract this ~1 million newly uninsured group from the 9.5 million to arrive at the net reduction in uninsured of 8.5 million.

 

The Number of Previously Uninsured Young Adults Covered by Parents Half as Large as Reported. It was announced nearly 2 years ago that 3.1 million previously uninsured young adults age 19-25 had gained coverage as a consequence of the Obamacare mandate that parental plans cover such dependent “children.” This was based on an analysis of data from the National Health Interview Survey. However, there’s two other much larger surveys that both show much smaller declines: 1.8 million according to the American Community Survey (ACS)^[2] and 1.4 million using the Current Population Survey (CPS).^[3] I’m willing to split the difference and say that this feature of Obamacare reduced the number of uninsured young adults by 1.6 million, meaning the net reduction in uninsured across the entire population is 7.1 million.

 

(Snip)

[Valin]

[Valin]

[Valin]

Note; A LARGE tumbler of whiskey is highly recommended...

 

 

 

2 LARGE tumblers of whiskey is highly recommended

H/T Democratic Underground

[Valin]

The Blackwood letter
Scott Johnson
4/3/14

Catherine Blackwood is counted as a success in the statistics touted by the Obama administration as it continues to peddle Obamacare. She has procured new Obamacare-compliant health insurance. Struggling with carcinoid cancer since 2005, Mrs. Blackwood treats her health insurance as a matter of life and death.

But Mrs. Blackwood is in truth a walking illustration of the lies of Obamacare and of the destruction it has wrought. This past February her son Stephen Blackwood recounted in a devastating Wall Street Journal column:

 

(Snip)

 

At the Los Angeles Times, Michael Hiltzik found villains lurking everywhere in the story, everywhere but in Obamacare itself. I took a look at Hiltzik’s commentary in “Hiltzik’s greatest hitz” (don’t spellcheck me, bro). I found Hiltzik to be one very twisted guy. Last month Mr. Blackwood wrote:

 

(Snip)

 

NOTE: Rep. Randy Forbes take up Mrs. Blackwood’s story in “A real story of Obamacare.” More on the Blackwood family and their struggle on behalf of Mrs. Blackwood is posted at Blackwood Caring.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Opie & Anthony Slam Obamacare (Warning: NSFW)

[Valin]

Noonan: A Catastrophe Like No Other
The president tries to put a good face on ObamaCare.
Peggy Noonan
4/3/14

Put aside the numbers for a moment, and the daily argument.

"Seven point one million people have signed up!"

"But six million people lost their coverage and were forced onto the exchanges! That's no triumph, it's a manipulation. And how many of the 7.1 million have paid?"

"We can't say, but 7.1 million is a big number and redeems the program."

"Is it a real number?"

"Your lack of trust betrays a dark and conspiratorial right-wing mindset."

As I say, put aside the argument, step back and view the thing at a distance. Support it or not, you cannot look at ObamaCare and call it anything but a huge, historic mess. It is also utterly unique in the annals of American lawmaking and government administration.

(Snip)

 

Someone said it lacked everything but a "Mission Accomplished" banner. It was political showbiz of a particular sort, asking whether the picture given of a thing will counter the experience of the thing.

 

There's a brute test of a policy: If you knew then what you know now, would you do it? I will never forget a conversation in 2006 or thereabouts with a passionate and eloquent supporter of the decision to go into Iraq. We had been having this conversation for years, he a stalwart who would highlight every optimistic sign, every good glimmering. He argued always for the rightness of the administration's decision. I would share my disquiet, my doubts, finally my skepticism. One night over dinner I asked him, in passing, "If we had it to do over again, should we have gone in? would you support it?"

 

And he said, "Of course not!"

 

Which told me everything.

 

(Snip)

[Draggingtree]

The BO Behind the Obamacare Numbers

Frank Salvato
If there was one thing that then presidential candidate Barack Obama had right it was his assertion that words matter. That understood, it has always seemed a bit odd to me that a man who presents and proudly proclaims himself a full blown Progressive – if not the quintessential Fabian Progressive – would have alerted the electorate to this fact. Why, you ask? Well, because Progressives are notorious for manipulating the meanings of words to suit their objective needs. Remember, Progressives are the ones who insist that the United States Constitution is a "living document," meant to facilitate the needs of the times (read: allow government to morph into any authority that the elites believe is needed at any given time). So, it is with a gigantic grain of salt – a Guinness Book sized grain – that I consume the declarations being made by the Obama Administration on the "numbers of people who have signed up" for health insurance through the federal health exchange.

http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/11624

[Valin]

@Draggingtree

 

 

"Progressives are notorious for manipulating the meanings of words to suit their objective needs. Remember, Progressives are the ones who insist that the United States Constitution is a "living document," meant to facilitate the needs of the times"

 

Do they understand that it also depends on who is defining the "Needs Of The Times"? We start going down that path and things become very very dark and nasty very fast. I know I can (and I strongly suspect you can) deconstruct the Constitution so as to send these people off to reeducation camps.

 

 

[Valin]

http://youtu.be/yWWyCY34Hks

http://youtu.be/Eofq9PoVdq0

http://youtu.be/Ksj7hRUKVWo

[clearvision]

Here's more fallout from the health care law: Until now, customers could walk into an insurance office or go online to buy standard health care coverage any time of year. Not anymore.

 

Many people who didn't sign up during the government's open enrollment period that ended Monday will soon find it difficult or impossible to get insured this year, even if they go directly to a private company and money is no object. For some it's already too late.

 

With limited exceptions, insurers are refusing to sell to individuals after the enrollment period for HealthCare.gov and the state marketplaces. They will lock out the young and healthy as well as the sick or injured. Those who want to switch plans also are affected. The next wide-open chance to enroll comes in November for coverage in 2015.

ObamaCare makes it more difficult to buy insurance year-round

 

I knew the exchanges were only open a few months, but I did not realize that you can't go buy a health insurance plan (or change) on your own.

[Valin]

All Those Obamacare Stories You Told Us Were Untrue

Amy Payne

April 7, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

Theres plenty of horror stories being told. All of them are untrue.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)

 

Many of the tall tales that have been told about this law have been debunked.

President Barack Obama

 

Last week was victory lap week for liberals on Obamacare. After years of telling the American people that we just dont understand the health law enough to love it properly, the president and his allies are now crowing that all debate should be over.

 

Our readers have told us about Obamacares effects in their liveshiking their insurance costs and canceling many of their plans. I guess Harry Reid thinks you guys made these up.

 

[Valin]

[Draggingtree]

 

Individualism must be the basis for the freedom to practice our values--religious or otherwise. When government violates the principle of individualism, it harms everyone.

The Only Basis of Freedom in Medicine

 

Tuesday April 8, 2014

The US Supreme Court will consider whether Obamacare's provisions to mandate the coverage of contraceptives violate the right of private employers and employees to practice their religious beliefs. We have reached a very sorry state in America if the basis for preventing government intrusion in our decisions about our own healthcare is an appeal to religion. It is understandable, however, when citizens resist government force that compels them to violate their religious values. If the teachings of, say, Zoroaster, are incompatible with Obamacare, we shouldn't have to reassess our views of Zoroastrianism in order to maintain our health or our principles. But that is beside the point. The writers of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights did not expect or want Americans to share the same religious view. Based on the American experience, they expected the exact opposite, or there would have been no need to protect the practice of any religion, conventional or not. They required the government to stay out of decisions about religion and views on any subject expressed by speech or in the press. The principle on which all of this was based is individualism...

 

http://capitalismmagazine.com/2014/04/individualism-basis-freedom-medicine/

[Draggingtree]

The Right Prescription

No, the Obamacare Debate Isn’t Over

Phony stats won’t make it popular or legal.

 

By David Catron – 4.7.14

 

Last Tuesday, our President swaggered into the Rose Garden to announce that 7.1 million people have signed up for health coverage through Obamacare’s exchanges and that all further argument about the future of his “signature domestic achievement” was pointless: “The debate over repealing this law is over. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay.” The problem with this claim is that no one with a basic grasp of arithmetic believes Obama’s enrollment figures, only about a quarter of the electorate supports his “reform” law, and it is still the target of multiple lawsuits challenging its constitutionality.

 

Beginning with the enrollment figures, the President’s pronouncement gave new meaning to the old saw about “lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Charles Krauthammer succinctly disposed of Obama’s sign-up stats thus: “This is a phony number.… These guys go six months without any idea what the numbers are, and all of a suddenhttp://spectator.org/articles/58645/no-obamacare-debate-isn%E2%80%99t-over

[Valin]

RAND Comes Clean: Obamacare's Exchanges Enrolled Only 1.4 Million Previously Uninsured Individuals
Avik Roy
4/9/14

Last week, I wrote about an article in the Los Angeles Times, on a then-as-yet unpublished report from the RAND Corporation. The report indicated that only one-third of Obamacare’s purported 7.1 million exchange sign-ups were from the previously uninsured. But Noam Levey, the author of the Times article, didn’t disclose RAND’s actual findings as to the actual number of previously uninsured exchange enrollees. Well, now we know why. RAND published the full report yesterday; it indicates that Obamacare’s exchanges only enrolled 1.4 million previously uninsured individuals.

 

That 1.4 million is out of a total of 3.9 million exchange enrollees overall. That is to say, a little over a third of enrollees—36 percent—were previously uninsured. RAND’s figures don’t take into account the last few weeks of the Obamacare open enrollment period, and they contain a substantial margin of error, due to the study’s small sample size. (RAND surveyed 2,425 individuals aged 18 to 64; the 1.4 million figure has a margin of error of 700,000, meaning that there is a 95 percent probability that the actual number is between 700,000 and 2.1 million previously uninsured enrollees.)

 

If you assume that 80 percent of signer-uppers will eventually pay their premiums, the true number of previously uninsured exchange enrollees is likely closer to 2 million. That’s far from what the Congressional Budget Office has projected; the CBO estimated that 80 to 90 percent of the first-year enrollees would come from the previously uninsured population. Instead, it appears to be more like 24 to 36 percent.

[Valin]

[Valin]

Liberal Wonks Take Up Single-Payer Advocacy
4/10/14

Ezra Klein’s “explain the news” site Vox has just gone live, and it’s already calling attention to the case for a single-payer health care system. Sarah Kliff, who formerly worked with Klein atWaPo’s Wonkblog, profiles Vermont governor Peter Shumlin and his plan to bring single payer to his state. In 2011, at his urging, the Vermont legislature passed a law requiring the state to transition to a single-payer system by 2017:

 

(Snip)

 

The piece mentions some of the arguments against single payer, and provides a fair-minded assessment of where ACA supporters want to take the health care fight. While critics of the ACA are still working on repealing and replacing Obamacare, progressives are already testing out the next stage of their preferred health reforms. The shift in focus from Obamacare to single-payer is coming faster than many realize, and sites like Vox will do what they can for the new cause.

 

(Snip)

 

Still, Obamacare supporters and detractors alike are still prone to the same mistake: framing the health-care debate in terms of the problems involved in how we pay for care. Rather we need to focus on improving the ways in which we deliver care. U.S. health care delivery is to expensive, period. Until that changes, it won’t much matter whether the government or private insurers shoulders the burden.

[Valin]

Advice and ObamaCare Consent

Sebelius's replacement deserves a full-scale Senate vetting.

4/11/14

 

Kathleen Sebelius has been let out a rear door of the Health and Human Services Department, and her exit is an opportunity for getting some ObamaCare accountability. President Obama tapped Sylvia Mathews Burwell as her replacement on Friday. The Senate should try to use her confirmation to expose the law's continuing troubles and improve HHS transparency.

 

Ms. Burwell, the White House budget director, was confirmed for that job 96-0 last April. But the bureaucratic sprawl of HHS deserves more than another congressional rubber stamp. Beyond the ObamaCare exchanges, the HHS Secretary controls a $1.01 trillion budget for fiscal 2015 with 79,540 employees that includes Medicare, Medicaid, the Food and Drug Administration, Head Start, the National Institutes and dozens of other programs.

 

(Snip)

 

A major reason that ObamaCare's prescriptive regulations and first six months have been such a rolling failure is that decision-making is centralized in the Oval Office. Most of the important choices were never Ms. Sebelius's. They were usually first resolved to the satisfaction of the political shop. Ms. Burwell has been part of this insular policy-making.

 

 

(Snip)

[Valin]

ACA Threatens Promise of Concierge Medicine
4/12/14

Doctors in Texas are showing us what a medical system without comprehensive insurance might look like. The NYT profiles the rise of Texan “direct primary care” practices that don’t accept insurance. Instead, patients pay flat fees out-of-pocket. In return, doctors save both time and money that they can then pass on to patients. By not having to process reimbursements through third party payers, fill out convoluted forms, or hire administrative staff, they can charge their patients less and spend more time with them. Here’s some examples of how different practices are implementing this approach:

 

(Snip)

 

One of the perverse results of the structure of US health care is that it takes doctors away from the kind of care they wanted to do when they entered the field. Replacing insurance with concierge medicine will not only reduce the bureaucracy, distortions, and over-spending that comprehensive insurance introduces into our system, it will also allow doctors to live their vocation more richly.

 

But there’s a catch here, as the article points out. Concierge medicine isn’t a new trend—we’ve covered it here before. But now that Obamacare is swelling the ranks of the comprehensively insured, doctors who don’t take insurance are increasing the pressure on the system. There’s a hint in the NYT piece that other doctors think it’s irresponsible for their colleagues to stop taking insurance just as the Obamacare rollout promises to strain practices and hospitals past capacity. This bias against innovators is what happens when federal legislation cements a dysfunctional system in place. Doctors who want to experiment with new models of payment face social pressure to abandon these experiments because of policy choices made in Washington.