https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Health Insurance Reform Fact-Check Round-Up

The WaPo and New York Times [1] offer some consolidated fact-checking against GOP Senate and White House arguments against the ACA and in favor of their New, Improved AHCA insurance reform plans ("Now with 9% fewer people losing their insurance than the last version!").

From the NYT [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/us/politics/misleading-republican-claims-health-care.html] on
— whether the AHCA keeps the ACA's Medicaid expansion
— whether the AHCA actually increases Medicaid funding
— whether the AHCA will reduce middle-class taxes
— whether the ACA has led to doubling and tripling of premiums
— whether the ACA actually caused a gap in Medicaid coverage

From the WaPo [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/07/05/decoding-the-white-house-spin-on-obamacare-failures/]
— whether average premiums under the ACA are up 105%
— to what extent insurers are abandoning markets [2]
— how many people are dropping off of the exchanges
— how many people were penalized for not buying insurance
— how many people still don't have, or have dropped, their ACA coverage
— how much premiums have increased [3]
— whether the CBO overestimated how many people would be covered by the ACA

That's a lot of items, though the articles are themselves pretty concise (with plenty of linked backup). I'm posting them largely as reference for the future, as the assertions targeted by these items keep coming up again and again (often without detail), and being able to address them directly would be convenient.

[1] And, yes, I know, the cries of "Fake News!" ring out across the land. Now grow up. If there's a presented assertion of "fact" that's given there that you don't like or disagree with, then check it, just as they did these GOP statements. Don't just assume it's something made up because that's so much less work.

[2] I'd also recommend this article, talking about the perennial problem that highly rural markets have had in getting insurance company coverage, and how the AHCA will not improve that problem: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/29/upshot/theres-only-one-grocery-store-in-most-rural-areas-should-we-expect-two-health-insurers.html

[3] And I recommend this article on the latest-greatest GOP work-around for how to handle high-risk patients: by segmenting the insurance market, which inevitably leads to significantly higher premiums for sick people, whoever is paying them: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/upshot/ted-cruz-has-an-idea-for-how-to-cover-high-risk-patients.html




Five Misleading Republican Claims About Health Care – The New York Times
Republicans have misinformed Americans on the Senate health care bill’s impact in several areas and have exaggerated the Affordable Care Act’s problems.

View on Google+

82 view(s)  

32 thoughts on “Health Insurance Reform Fact-Check Round-Up”

  1. This is not news, we already knew this shit. Twitter-toddler and the repugs are sending this country BACKWARDS. People losing healthcare coverage, jobs will diminished behind this act. They even attacking the elders. WTF man!!! Each and everyone of these so-called politicians need a switf kick in their asses. They are worthless.

  2. +Dave Hill Liberal loons have bipolar disorder which is why they use terms 'fact' and 'claim'. What they have is 'opinions' based on personal conclusions slanted toward their desired worldview. New York Times has become the new America Pravda whose readers are on the fringes of society living in a world of TV.

  3. +Carol Davis Medicaid will in some form or another will always be available for those who are unable to work. Social services is slowly making big changes in that almost half of Americans who are able to work do not. America has become a pitiful group reaching for a big government tit.

  4. +Carol Davis Liberal loons/creeps/freaks/dullards equate health insurance with health care. Millions have the card but cannot pay the premiums or deductibles and cannot find a provider to take the card. Many conservatives are all to happy to just let Dingbat Care explode. This conservative wants to repeal Dingbat Care as promised and work on replacement up until the 2018 election with universal health care on the table for voters aka registered citizens to decide.

  5. +Jack Taylor Nobody thinks the ACA is perfect. But when you buy a new car and then aren't allowed to maintain it for 8 years, it's no surprise when it starts belching smoke — and recommendations that you replace it with a rickshaw don't make much sense, either.

  6. +Dave Hill yep. But let those who want "catastrophe has insurance" buy it at a reasonable price. Not do what the ACA does. Charge an arm and a leg and then charge you with a big deductible which ends up being no more than catastrophic insurance with a Cadillac premium. When people have no skin in the game, they tend to abuse it. That is why we have the opiate problem. And that is why we have the majority of births on Medicaid. If they had to spend something they would think twice about abusing it. . Ever sit in a doctors office and see Medicaid patients with a smart phone, tattoos, expensive hair extensions and expenses Gel nails? There is money for their healthcare but they spend it on luxury items.

  7. +Donald Huber Ah, the "poor people are just ripping off the system, having Medicaid babies and playing with their smartphones, so they should pay more, not less, for medical care until they are suitably humbled" argument. That always plays well.

    Breaking off high-risk people into a separate insurance pool doesn't solve the problem, it just makes it more complex. To make that pool affordable for those people, you need substantial subsidies — which not only become one more separate thing to cut or let get out of whack but are monies that could simply be used in a general pool to make it more affordable for everyone.

  8. +Dave Hill you shouldn't have babies if you can't afford them. How about that for a start. over spending and then printing money to put on our children doesn't play well,with me. But hey, letting those who do not contribute and not sacrifice their smart phones etc as you say, doesn't play very well. Let's not expect people to be responsible for their decisions and live within their means. That doesn't play well either.

  9. +Donald Huber Your assumptions about who actually receives Medicaid, what their employment status is, how many children they have (and why), how or why they have a smartphone, how much medical care (let alone insurance) one can get for the price of a smartphone, etc., indicates a fair amount of "Welfare Queen" myopia on the subject.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *