<p>“You may have noticed the White House and CMS are no longer putting out enrollment numbers because they don’t have a clue.” </p>
<p>Well, I think they have a clue or could pretty easily if they cared one whit. They just wanted something, anything passed. Now, they’re done with it and on to the next check mark on the to-do list. That’s the unfortunate reality.</p>
<p>Dstark - I am not seeing what your problem is with the headline. Sorry</p>
<p>“Assuming the most positive estimates—that 85 percent of the 8 million enrollees have paid their premiums and 43 percent had coverage before—the newly insured would number only about 3.9 million. By this time, CBO had projected 19 million would have been removed from the ranks of the uninsured, and CMS predicted 26 million.”</p>
<p>Why even bother to focus on when they will release their next report? Oh, because then one can speculate on them not having a clue. Bosh. You don’t know that. It just sounds good and affords another opportunity to diss. Speculation just feels so powerful, eh? </p>
<p>I posted the paragraph from the story that explains the headline. Yes, it works for me currently. Also, if they had a clue and it was great news we would have heard something. Instead, crickets.</p>
<p>"“Assuming the most positive estimates—that 85 percent of the 8 million enrollees have paid their premiums and 43 percent had coverage before—the newly insured would number only about 3.9 million. By this time, CBO had projected 19 million would have been removed from the ranks of the uninsured, and CMS predicted 26 million.”</p>
<p>Headlines are written by headline writers. They are intentionally attention-grabbers with an element of truth. That is the definition of a headline. The bigger and bolder the better. It’s not really fair to call a headline a lie. The story had some facts in it and I found it to be pretty balanced, actually. It’s really not a hatchet job, despite the headline.</p>
<p>The number of uninsured has dropped by far more than 4 million, according to all sources <em>including the article’s text itself.</em> The four million number is just a lie. My problem with it is it’s a lie, and I’m sick and tired of people posting lies that they know are lies and then pretending to believe them. If you want to believe lies, go ahead, but don’t expect me to believe them and don’t pretend you don’t know they are lies.</p>
<p>“Assuming the most positive estimates—that 85 percent of the 8 million enrollees have paid their premiums and 43 percent had coverage before—the newly insured who got their insurance on the exchange would number only about 3.9 million. In addition, over 1.5 million people who were previously uninsured bought insurance oof the exchange. A further 8 newly eligible, previously uninsured people got their insurance from Medicaid, bringing the total to over 13 million.**”</p>
<p>Fixed it for you. And that’s why the headline is a lie, and the graphic is a lie.</p>
<p>Yeah, the article is at least true with respect to the CMS estimates. The following chart by CMS published in 2010 indicated that the exchanges would enroll 17 million uninsured in 2014, Medicaid would have an additional 23 million, other private insurance would lose 13 million, for a net increase of 26 million in 2014. As for the real number of newly insured, who the heck knows. Any number anyone throws out there is purely speculation.</p>
<p>“A further 8 newly eligible, previously uninsured people got their insurance from Medicaid”</p>
<p>That number is garbage. Are you including the states not participating in the expansion? How many of these people would have qualified without the higher income eligibility? How many were uninsured? The truth is no one really knows, so don’t act like you are some expert who is smarter than everyone else.</p>
<p>Take a look at this video of Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC (pick it up at the 6 minute mark) reciting the details of a very bad car accident in which he was badly injured. He was flown from the Virgin Islands to the Hospital for Special Surgery in NYC. In his words, the best hospital in the US for this type of injury and, therefore, the best in the world. He was taken to the David Koch Pavilion of the hospital. Believe it or not, he thanked David Koch for his generosity.</p>
<p>The only thing he didn’t mention is that anyone stuck in a Obamacare plan can’t go to this hospital. Maybe someday he might want to talk about this slight problem with Obamacare.</p>
<p>Maybe someday you might vet something before posting. According to their web page, the Hospital for Special Surgery accepts the following Exchange plans:</p>
<p>GP, that chart was published in 2010, before states were given permission to refuse the Medicaid expansion. Also before it was know just how fiercely ACA opponents would fight to suppress enrollment.</p>
<p>What? ACA was so unpopular it was passed sneakily in the middle of the night on a holiday weekend. In other words, opposition was hardly a secret. Who is suppressing enrollment? Seriously, people who don’t even qualify are being urged to sign up and deal with the details later. I am just baffled by this thread.</p>
<p>Now I’m going to suggest some of you vet your own statements. You know how many bills are passed late into the night? Spin, spin, spin. Wasn’t the “people who don’t even qualify” concept from…another disputed link?</p>