Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

A Partial Recantation

—

by

James A. Bacon
in ,

Death spiral warning still in effect.
Death spiral warning still in effect.

It turns out that the Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee were wrong when they claimed that 33% of the eight million Americans enrolled for Obamacare health care exchanges have not yet paid their premiums. A more accurate number, according to the Associated Press based on testimony of three major insurers, is 20%.

Well, that changes everything, doesn’t it? Only 20%? That’s a mere 1.6 million people. A drop in the bucket. Obamacare remains a success.

I expect you noted my sarcasm in that last statement. This story is a mixed bag. Republicans do deserve criticism for rushing out flawed numbers that failed to take into account a surge in last-minute enrollments after the House committee surveyed insurance companies around the country. They failed to qualify the tentative nature of their numbers, thus creating an inaccurate impression.

Politically, the move was stupid, too. Democrats quickly made Republican sloppiness with numbers the story. (Read the comments in “What If They Gave a Health Care Plan and Nobody Paid?“) Thus the Republican screw-up became the story, not the fact that 20% of enrollees hadn’t paid their premiums. In the daily spin cycle, Dems now can tout the number as a moral victory for Obamacare.

But the fact remains: Any number approaching 20% non-payment is very bad news. No one anticipated a figure so high. True, it’s less disastrous than 33% but it’s still high enough to send the state exchanges into death spirals, especially when you consider that those not paying are statistically more likely to be the coveted young invincibles who will keep rates low. The main point of my previous post — that the non-payment problem should have been foreseeable, given the large number of Americans who are unbanked or underbanked — holds true.

— JAB

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

50 responses to “A Partial Recantation”

  1. chris bonney Avatar
    chris bonney

    Not that simple, Jim. The issue wasn’t so much that they cited bad numbers. Mistakes can be made. (Can you say “Iraq”?) What is reprehensible about this and similar ploys is that they knowingly and purposefully presented inaccurate data purely for political advantage. American voters would be far more likely to forgive this were it not a recurring phenomenon and were it not that the Republican leadership not only doesn’t denounce it, but trades on the same data. Reasonable people can have rationale debates about sensitive issues, but not if one side–regardless of whether it’s Republicans or Democrats–is resorting to lies.

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      Chris, One side is telling lies? Really?

      Can you seriously make the claim that “They knowingly and purposefully presented inaccurate data purely for political advantage” applies only to Republicans?

      I just posted an article chastising Republicans for rushing out their data without the proper caveats, creating a false impression. At least I’m willing to call my side to account. Are you willing to do the same regarding any number of untrue claims advanced by Democrats in this debate? You can keep your plan if you want it. You can keep your doctor if you want to. The Affordable Care Act will reduce the deficit. … all lies required to pass the legislation.

      In the scale of lies, the House Committee press release was Mount Trashmore, Obama’s litany of falsehoods were Mount Everest. Do I see any indignation or even backtracking on those falsehoods? No, I see none. (If you are one of the few exceptions, I apologize.)

    2. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      re: knowingly and purposefully – EXACTLY !

      and it’s not like Jim does not know the GOPs history on such lies.

      re: ” Reasonable people can have rationale debates about sensitive issues, but not if one side–regardless of whether it’s Republicans or Democrats–is resorting to lies”

      totally agree.

      the problem with the “debate” is not only that the lies get told – but they get propagated almost in real time across every “anti” site on the web then others replicate it without vetting it… what the purpose is not vetting when you know it needs to be?

      1. James A. Bacon Avatar
        James A. Bacon

        “It’s not like Jim does not know the GOPs history on such lies.”

        On the other hand, LarryG is utterly oblivious to the Dems’ history of lies.

        1. larryg Avatar
          larryg

          both sides lie Jim. I’ll admit it – you not only won’t you’ll promote it without vetting it.

          the ONLY LIE that I know on healthcare on the Dems side is Obama’s “you can keep” – it’s a lie -plain and simple.

          now you tell me if “REPLACE” is a lie.

          and – tell me what other lies you think the Dems have told – and I will TRUTHFULLY admit the ones that true.

          you have to admit – that the opponents of which you are one – either have no real alternative OR they are just opposed to the government doing health care at all – but will not come right out and admit it.

          where is the truth and honesty in the positions?

          the Dems have never varied from their support of health care for everyone.. they support any number of ways to get there.

          the opponents on the other hand – support what?

          they seem to have no problem with lies and disinformation…and their supporters seem to have no problem ignoring it.

    3. Ghost of Ted Dalton Avatar
      Ghost of Ted Dalton

      It’s not so much the “lies” as it is what I call the Kucinich factor.

      The “Kucinich factor” is this:

      Dennis Kucinich ran for President twice for the D’s. In 04 and 08 he was by far the furthest to the left of the candidates running. And he went nowhere. Even though he was reciting the hymnal….I don’t think he ever broke more than a couple percent in any primary or caucus unless there was one of those late contests where he was the only candidate left against Kerry.

      This is REALLY important to note when you compare the parties. 90% of D’s rolled their eyes at him and some of his extreme positions. He got almost no votes. No money. No polling position. Nothing.

      Whereas, the GOP is more than happy to hop onto the most extreme of Tea Partiers. They went bonkers over Palin in 08. Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll and was near the top of the polls in 2011. Cain (a complete incompetent buffoon) was leading the national polls for a tiny while.

      And it’s not just the most extreme/unqualified candidates. It’s the most extreme or absurd statements. Republicans hear red meat and there’s not a scrap left within 10 seconds. They devour it, no matter how dumb it is.

      While the Dems have their faults, you don’t see them EVER seriously consider a Kucinich clown. You don’t see them jump on every absurd statement thrown out there as if it’s the Gospel Truth.

      That’s the huge difference. Republicans can whine all they want, but it’s true. A very large portion of their party is very extreme. They love to say “but so are the Dems”, but there’s not a lot of evidence out there.

      1. larryg Avatar
        larryg

        Ghost of Ted Dalton makes an excellent point.

        how many liberal “wackos” do you see actually running for office?

        The individuals in the GOP Presidential Primary save for 3 or so – the rest were certifiable whacko birds.

        and look at Congressional and Senate races. Look at the GOP wacko birds that run – and some of them WIN but list of the liberal whacko birds…

        the right calls mainline liberals wackos.. the GOP calls RINOs unacceptable. the GOP has moved so far right that anyone to THEIR left is a wacko.

        Good Point Ghost of Ted Dalton – I was unable to articulate this very well and you did it with ease!

      2. James A. Bacon Avatar
        James A. Bacon

        Ghost, Yes, the Republicans did flirt with some marginal candidates during the nomination process. Here’s what happened, though. The Rs would got disillusioned with the front runner, Romney, and would gravitate to someone new. The media attention would shine on that person, exposing the warts. Once they perceived what they would be getting into, the Rs moved on to someone else. They responded to the information that was available. They responded to reality. They ended up choosing the moderate.

        1. larryg Avatar
          larryg

          re: ” They responded to reality. They ended up choosing the moderate.”

          whom they hated and totally rejected as leader of the party after the election.

          1. Ghost of Ted Dalton Avatar
            Ghost of Ted Dalton

            Correct. The thing is, it’s easy to say, “they responded to reality”….but they really didn’t. What saved Romney is that so many primaries were winner take all. He was running against absolute buffoons and was barely able to every win a majority in primaries except in the NE and Utah/Nevada until the very end of the primary season when it was evident he would win.

            And my God, the number of Republicans I heard during the election who expressed complete disdain for Romney. And absolute HATRED for the guy after the election.

            I actually thought Romney and Pawlenty would have made ok Presidents. But Pawlenty cited Bachmann as a reason he dropped out! That’s right, the GOP blew kisses towards an absolute moron like Bachmann rather than a 2 term Governor of Minnesota who had some credible ideas. And Romney was crucified by the Tea Party. It amazed me that as an independent, I was saying nicer things about him than actual Republicans!

            Are there rational Republicans? Of course there are. Mr. Bacon is a great example. But in my opinion, they are a minority in their own party.

            It doesn’t matter that their flirtation with Cain or Bachmann or Palin was “brief”….there simply isn’t anything that corresponds with the Dems. Nothing. Kucinich is as close as you get, and Dems didn’t pay him any attention.

            I think I’m going to trademark “Kucinich factor.” : )

          2. larryg Avatar
            larryg

            re: ” I actually thought Romney and Pawlenty would have made ok Presidents. ”

            I did too but Romney was effectively neutered/emasculated by his own party on his positions – if he did not toe the right wing line – he would would have lost more of the GOP base.

            You’d THINK that for 2016, Romney would be at least a consideration but listen to the GOP … they don’t want him.

  2. TMT Avatar
    TMT

    If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. President Barack Obama – many times.

    1. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      “REPEAL and REPLACE” – 40 times… where is the REPLACE?

      1. TMT Avatar
        TMT

        Colburn-Burr-Hatch for one.

        1. larryg Avatar
          larryg

          REPEAL means you pass it legislatively guy.

          anyone can propose something but if you oppose it in legislative votes what do you honestly REPLACE it with legislatively?

          it’s dishonest TMT.

          1. TMT Avatar
            TMT

            Larry, give me a break. Do you think Reid would allow an alternative bill to come to the Senate floor? There are alternatives to Obamacare in Congress.

            And again, my problem is not with Obamacare per se. It’s because it was passed due to consistent lies from the Democrats – If you like your insurance, you can keep it. Had Obama come forth and said, “To get universal coverage, people who have insurance must make some sacrifices, including being forced to give up any policy that does not meet federal standards. In order for a new policy to meet federal standards, it must cover services that you might not want or need in order to provide subsidies for people with pre-existing conditions. You may also need to pay higher premiums and deductibles. But, trust me, in the long run, you will be happier.”

            Obama would have been very successful working for New York’s Five Families in the 1930s.

          2. larryg Avatar
            larryg

            “Larry, give me a break. Do you think Reid would allow an alternative bill to come to the Senate floor? There are alternatives to Obamacare in Congress.”

            You pass legislation in the house then we discuss it.

            what has kept the house from passing other legislation including REPEAL with no REPLACE.

            you pass legislation then we argue about the Senate.

            “And again, my problem is not with Obamacare per se. It’s because it was passed due to consistent lies from the Democrats – If you like your insurance, you can keep it. Had Obama come forth and said, “To get universal coverage, people who have insurance must make some sacrifices, including being forced to give up any policy that does not meet federal standards. In order for a new policy to meet federal standards, it must cover services that you might not want or need in order to provide subsidies for people with pre-existing conditions. You may also need to pay higher premiums and deductibles. But, trust me, in the long run, you will be happier.””

            there were no lies. it was a totally partisan vote. The GOP was opposed to it ..period. The GOP did not care about these issues you are bringing up. If the GOP had voted in favor of ObamaCare on false pretenses you’d have a legitimate claim but it did not matter to the GOP – they were opposed – period.

            It’s just bogus for you to pretend that these “lies” played any role at all in it’s passage.

            and what pray tell – keeps the GOP from coming back and proposing something that has none of these “lies” in it – and they point that out as a reason to vote for their plan rather than the Dems.

            “Obama would have been very successful working for New York’s Five Families in the 1930s.”

            Obama this, Obama that – blah blah blah – can you address THE issue without personally attacking the POTUS?

            here’s a question for you and your fears of socialism. who said this:

            ” Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
            This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”

            tell me what scummy Obama-type commie socialist community organizer said the above.

  3. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    I’m not sure what the value is in such micro-covering issues as to when people actually start paying for a new insurance policy.With private insurers you are often required to give them your checking account number and set up automatic payments — which of course is very one-sided in their favor. You don’t get 30 days to pay — you must HAVE the proper amount in the account or you face extra banking fees. It is sort of like LabCorp, a monopolistic laboratory tester, waiting for months to get your lab report through the insurance system and then when it finally pops out – you are sent these obnoxious form letter bills demanding payment — as if you are a deadbeat — when it is actually the first time you have seen the bill.

    I gather Obamacare is not requiring automatic withdrawals, are they?

    The more the critics of this reform go on and on, they obscure the abuses of private, for-profit health care companies that have done a truly crappy job of providing care. Setting prices, which can vary greatly for the same procedure, is all done behind closed doors with health care companies. The clueless consumer just gets stuck with the bill and lots of rude and unneeded dunning notices.

    BTW, most docs I know say not to pay the first insurance bill you get and to make sure these idiot companies have run it through ALL of the insurance firms. That is their job and they are always trying to trick into overpaying or are forcing you to their THEIR job.

    Rather than address this, the JABs of the world are putting Obamacare payments under the microscope when they have just started.

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      You have a point — the existing system of health insurance payments is a travesty. But that was never cited as a justification for Obamacare. Too bad liberals didn’t go after this issue instead. They might have done some good.

    2. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      yes. ask yourself what the purpose of the opponents is – if they really have no defined alternative – and are spineless in truly stating their position that they truly do not want govt involved in health care?

      do we even know what the typical non-pay percentage rate is in the industry?

      do the opponents CARE?

      NOPE.

      the opponents have no agenda other than kill ObamaCAre. that’s it.

      they’ve had 20 years to develop a position – and what have they got?

      they have, as JimB puts it “ideas”.

      yes …. bizarre off the wall ideas of which they are no existing examples of – on the entire planet.

      but fundamentally, they are opposed to the govt being involved in health care but they will not come out and admit it – and declare that this is there alternative to ObamaCare and let voters decide.

      it’s hypocrisy and dishonesty – plain and simple.

  4. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    no dice Jim.

    here’s why.

    It was NOT a mistake – the GOP ..KNEW they WERE Lying

    because 1. they knew they did not have the full data and 2 they had already talked to the 3 biggest companies and their data contradicted the GOP.

    next – you willingly propagated the claim without vetting it even though you know the GOP has a clear history of distorting the issues – lying – about everything from death panels to death spirals to government doctors.

    but the biggest failure here is that the biggest lie is REPLACE so what exactly is the purpose and motivation of anyone to promote such disinformation in the fist place if you have no alternative – no real defined position.

    Who promotes anti-ObamaCare disinformation and at the same time has no real position either for an alternative health care approach or – the pure honesty of saying you are opposed to the govt being involved in any of it?

    what is the purpose are being “anti” and nothing else in the first place?

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      Larry, you would have some credibility in this department if you ever conceded (as I have done with this post) that your partisan confreres also deal in misinformation and/or falsehoods. But I have never once heard you accuse Obama of lying when he repeatedly told the American people that (a) you can keep your plan if you want it, (b) you can keep your doctor if you want to, and (c) the Affordable Care Act will reduce the deficit (just to mention the biggest whoppers) — all of which he knew to be untrue, and if he didn’t, he ranks as the most incompetent president ever. You are interested in pursuing the truth when the truth supports your position but you are far less diligent about pursuing the facts when they contradict your position. A little less self-righteousness would become you.

      1. larryg Avatar
        larryg

        re: ” Larry, you would have some credibility in this department if you ever conceded (as I have done with this post) that your partisan confreres also deal in misinformation and/or falsehoods.”

        first, I’m not partisan here – I argue FOR healthcare but I admit this is not the best approach and I DO ADMIT that Obama lied. If you do not know that – you are not reading my posts – which you SHOULD if you are going to accuse me of something like that!

        “But I have never once heard you accuse Obama of lying when he repeatedly told the American people that (a) you can keep your plan if you want it, (b) you can keep your doctor if you want to, and (c) the Affordable Care Act will reduce the deficit (just to mention the biggest whoppers) — all of which he knew to be untrue, and if he didn’t, he ranks as the most incompetent president ever. ”

        why should I “accuse” Obama of lying in the first place? and why do you not admit that REPLACE is a lie?

        then you say ” he ranks as the most incompetent president ever. ” and you ACCUSE me of partisanship. how do you conflate these two. WHY would you conflate them? Lay out your arguments guy don’t play the game the GOP is playing here.

        You want incompetent – look at George Bush.

        “You are interested in pursuing the truth when the truth supports your position but you are far less diligent about pursuing the facts when they contradict your position. A little less self-righteousness would become you.”

        As I said before – if you think I do not pursue the truth – then you call me on when you think I’m not. Otherwise you need to apologize.. you’re NOT going to put a label on me guy unless you prove it point by point.

        I’m MORE conservative than you are – .. and I’m honest about my views.

        I defend them but if you ever think I’m dishonest about my positions – call me out – and I will address it.

        If you want to classify me – classify me as a Blue Dog Dem or a GOP Rino.

        I’m fiscally conservative but socially moderate and I support universal health care – because it way more cost-effective than the known existing alternatives – including ours.

        this is no “free market” health care in the world except in 3rd world countries.

        that’s the honest truth.

        we have folks who want to pretend otherwise.. I just think that view is hypocritical when at the same time those who think that – will not be honest about the current subsidized system we already have – and those same folks refuse to be honest about getting rid of our current govt-subsidized health care system ..just keep the status quo where the government has literally created winners and losers – something most Conservatives – rail against.

        so you make your case against me – please – tell me when I’m not telling or seeking the truth here.

  5. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    You need to specify the falsehoods and misinformation that was purposely done to fool the American people …. what have the Dems lied to the American people on health care?

    I admit the “keep your” lie but will you admit the “REPLACE” lie as weall as the death panels, death spiral, government doctors, government healthcare lies?

    I pursue the truth – if you find me doing otherwise then you call me to account for it – ANYTIME!

    you confuse people’s positions – their stated positions that you disagree with – as lies. I respect stated positions even if I do not agree. What I have trouble with is dishonesty “owning” the positions.

    when someone KNOWINGLY LIES about the percent of no-pays – you need to call them on it – instead of getting propagating it especially since you know the prior history of the GOP claims – one after another.

    Please list out for me the “lies” the Dems have told to the American People.

    One more time here.

    I do not think ObamaCare or the Dems approach to health care is perfect – in fact, it is deeply flawed on a number of levels –

    but it’s the only game going… because of the feckless dishonestly of the opponents.

    If you think the current system that has been broke since the time of Newt Gingrich is fine and no reforms are needed – say so.

    if you think the system is broke but ObamaCare is not the fix – then please put together a realistic alternative that you think the GOP should pursue.

    in that approach – you need to address the pre-existing condition issue and how it can be solved without government.

    you need to honestly say if you would also repeal Medicare since it is clearly a govt-run single payer system. You need to be honest about EMTALA. Would you repeal it or let it continue to operate by cross-billing those that are insured to pay for it?

    you get ZERO points for being an opponent with no alternatives and you get MINUS points for propagating clear lies from the right.

  6. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    “You get ZERO points for being an opponent with no alternatives and you get MINUS points for propagating clear lies from the right.”

    Wrong on both counts. I have explained my alternatives on this blog. How can you say I don’t offer alternatives — you disagreed with them! Apparently, in Larry World, when someone advances an idea that Larry disagrees with, that idea does not exist.

    As for “propagating clear lies from the right,” I just wrote this post —the very same post you are commenting on — highlighting the inaccurate information released by Republicans. When I come across inaccurate information, I correct it.

    1. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      “You get ZERO points for being an opponent with no alternatives and you get MINUS points for propagating clear lies from the right.”

      Wrong on both counts. I have explained my alternatives on this blog. How can you say I don’t offer alternatives — you disagreed with them! Apparently, in Larry World, when someone advances an idea that Larry disagrees with, that idea does not exist.”

      no.. you have discussed “ideas” . you need to say what proposed GOP REPLACE legislation you support – since you have allied yourself with the GOPs position. and that legislation and your position need to address the pre-existing problem – and you need to be honest about a consistent position about govt’s role in health care.

      You cannot be opposed to ObamaCare but in favor of Medicare and TRicare and EMTALA without explaining why you support govt health care for some but not others.

      “As for “propagating clear lies from the right,” I just wrote this post –the very same post you are commenting on — highlighting the inaccurate information released by Republicans. When I come across inaccurate information, I correct it.”

      No. you change it form a clear lie to “inaccurate”. It was a deliberate purposeful lie – guy – and you blinked. You’re pretending the GOP is not lying here… at the same time you’re accusing Obama of lying.

      Was Obama “inaccurate” or did he lie?

      are you using the same criteria for both the “incompetent” POTUS and the GOP?

      I’m tempted to say that you have to admit you were wrong.. and to not equivocate but I’ll just leave it that we all make mistakes, me included, I have my share.

  7. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Just because you pay late doesn’t mean you won’t pay. Let’s see where the 20% ends up after another 30 days.

    I do expect a fair number of drop-outs, especially among the young. I imagine that quite a few people signed up without understanding the system of fines, the cost of the insurance or the size of the deductibles. A twenty-something who never makes his or her deductible will pay about $2,700 per year for mid-grade insurance from the exchange. If they make $30,000 per year their fine will be $300 in 2014. In other words, the fine for a year costs about the same as six weeks of premiums. And even if they go to the doctor a couple of times during the year for routine medicine they still will have to pay out of pocket for the treatments.

    As for lies from the Democrats – they lie all the time. Just like the GOP.

    The whole issue of the recently-deceased boxer Rubin “Hurricane” Carter is a great case in point. Liberals reported that “innocent” or “wrongly convicted” Hurricane Carter had passed away.

    Liberals made the movie Hurricane and passed it off as true.
    A liberal wrote the musically excellent song Hurricane and sang it over and over.

    Rubin Carter was convicted twice by unanimous vote of two separate juries. The first jury was all white. The second was not.

    Carter’s conviction was overturned by a publicity hound of a judge who cited a procedural error.

    Can’t you almost hear the nasally lyrics … ” … the number one contender for the middleweight crown … he could have been the champion of the world”

    By the time of the murders Carter was ranked #9 in the middleweight class. After a promising career he went 7-7-1 in 1965 and 1966.

    Carter’s autobiography is littered with lies. In his book, The Sixteenth Round, Carter quotes Sgt. McGuire (the officer who gave the tests), as saying, “Both of them are clean. They had nothing to do with the crime.”. The actual report states, “This subject was attempting deception to all the pertinent questions. And was involved in this crime.”

    The whole story of Ruben “Hurricane” Carter became a cause celebre for liberals. Movies, books, newspaper articles and even songs have been produced that distort or omit key facts.

    Everybody seems to have their agendas. Everybody seems willing to change and omit facts to create the illusion that their agenda has been proven.

    1. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      “Just because you pay late doesn’t mean you won’t pay. Let’s see where the 20% ends up after another 30 days.

      I do expect a fair number of drop-outs, especially among the young. I imagine that quite a few people signed up without understanding the system of fines, the cost of the insurance or the size of the deductibles. A twenty-something who never makes his or her deductible will pay about $2,700 per year for mid-grade insurance from the exchange. If they make $30,000 per year their fine will be $300 in 2014. In other words, the fine for a year costs about the same as six weeks of premiums. And even if they go to the doctor a couple of times during the year for routine medicine they still will have to pay out of pocket for the treatments.”

      does anyone know what happens to people who get paid as independent contractors – on their taxes? If you know – please explain what happens in terms of “tax”.

      “As for lies from the Democrats – they lie all the time. Just like the GOP.”

      on health care? give me their top 3 lies beyond Obama’s “you can keep”

      “The whole issue of the recently-deceased boxer Rubin “Hurricane” Carter is a great case in point. Liberals reported that “innocent” or “wrongly convicted” Hurricane Carter had passed away.”

      that’s a lie?

      “Liberals made the movie Hurricane and passed it off as true.
      A liberal wrote the musically excellent song Hurricane and sang it over and over.”

      Jesus H. Keeerist.. now ALL fictional movies are “liberal lies”.

      jesus

      “Rubin Carter was convicted twice by unanimous vote of two separate juries. The first jury was all white. The second was not.

      Carter’s conviction was overturned by a publicity hound of a judge who cited a procedural error.”

      how does that become a Democrat lie?

      “Can’t you almost hear the nasally lyrics … ” … the number one contender for the middleweight crown … he could have been the champion of the world” ”

      Democrats in Congress said this?

      By the time of the murders Carter was ranked #9 in the middleweight class. After a promising career he went 7-7-1 in 1965 and 1966.

      Carter’s autobiography is littered with lies. In his book, The Sixteenth Round, Carter quotes Sgt. McGuire (the officer who gave the tests), as saying, “Both of them are clean. They had nothing to do with the crime.”. The actual report states, “This subject was attempting deception to all the pertinent questions. And was involved in this crime.”

      this is an example of Democrats in congress “lying” about Health care?

      The whole story of Ruben “Hurricane” Carter became a cause celebre for liberals. Movies, books, newspaper articles and even songs have been produced that distort or omit key facts.

      Everybody seems to have their agendas. Everybody seems willing to change and omit facts to create the illusion that their agenda has been proven.

      how in the world can you equate Democrats in Congress dealing with legislation with social activities in society?

      DJ – you wouldn’t stereotype would you?

      this is really lame guy. we’re talking about political positions of elected representatives here.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        In 2013 Kristen Gillibrand claimed on MSNBC that “Today, about 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check.”. The statistic was taken from a 1997 study. That study checks a few hundred sales. Three quarters of the sales were from the period before the Brady Bill was passed requiring background checks. Obama, Biden and Michael Bloomberg have all repeated this lie.

        Obama also said that “over the last 14 years [background checks] kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun.” Another lie. But these were only “initial denials,” not people prevented from buying guns. In 2010, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms dropped over 94 percent of those “initial denials” after just preliminary reviews.

        In a July 27, 2013 interview with the New York Times Obama claimed that the Keystone Pipeline project would, at most, create “maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline.” Obama’s own State Department actually refuted the president, asserting that almost double the number of jobs would be created by the building of the pipeline.

        In a May 24, 2013 fundraising email to supporters (read: propaganda meant to fanatically excite the Democrat base), the Democratic National Committee falsely claimed that “Republicans actually doctored emails between administration officials about Benghazi. Then, they released them to the press, trying to pass them off as real.” Never happened.

        Back on May 13, 2013, in a pathetic attempt to spread propaganda in favor of Obamacare, Pelosi lied that “The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down.”. Another lie. The truth is actually that only the growth rate of healthcare spending is down…not the actual cost of healthcare in the U.S.

        Wendy Davis, state senator, deceitfully claimed that “…each year, about 25,000 American women become pregnant through rape or incest.”. Nobody actually knows the number, especially for incest. However, the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (a DC charity) estimates pregnancies from rape (in 2005). On its website, the network takes the survey’s annual average of 64,080 rapes committed in 2004 and 2005 and applies the 5 percent pregnancy rate to reach an estimate of 3,204 pregnancies a year from rape.

        In an interview with Charlie Rose from June 17, 2013, Barack Obama said, “The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ‘is transparent.” Another Obama lie. FISA is a secret court, so how in the hell can it be transparent?

        Back on October 30, 2013, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testified in front of Congress and said, “If I have affordable coverage in my workplace, I’m not eligible to go into the marketplace. … It’s illegal.” . The truth is that employees are totally allowed to buy insurance in the Obamacare marketplace even if they already have coverage at work…it’s just that it would be cheaper for them to stay with their current, employer-based plans.

        Obama, in a speech on November 4, 2013, said, “What we said was, you can keep (your plan) if it hasn’t changed since the law passed.”. Obama actually managed to tell a lie about a lie. on 37 separate occasions, either Obama or one of his top officials specifically lied that Americans who like their plans can keep them.

        1. larryg Avatar
          larryg

          “In 2013 Kristen Gillibrand claimed on MSNBC that “Today, about 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check.”. The statistic was taken from a 1997 study. That study checks a few hundred sales. Three quarters of the sales were from the period before the Brady Bill was passed requiring background checks. Obama, Biden and Michael Bloomberg have all repeated this lie.”

          what the… has ths got to do with the GOP knowingly and purposefully lying about something they knew was a lie?

          “Obama also said that “over the last 14 years [background checks] kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun.” Another lie. But these were only “initial denials,” not people prevented from buying guns. In 2010, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms dropped over 94 percent of those “initial denials” after just preliminary reviews.”

          you’ve got different views of what a study means – confused with lying outright when you know otherwise.

          “In a July 27, 2013 interview with the New York Times Obama claimed that the Keystone Pipeline project would, at most, create “maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline.” Obama’s own State Department actually refuted the president, asserting that almost double the number of jobs would be created by the building of the pipeline.”

          again – you have two different analyses .. that normal and typical.

          Back on May 13, 2013, in a pathetic attempt to spread propaganda in favor of Obamacare, Pelosi lied that “The Affordable Care Act is bringing the cost of health care in our country down.”. Another lie. The truth is actually that only the growth rate of healthcare spending is down…not the actual cost of healthcare in the U.S.

          there are some analyses that show this and some that say otherwise. It’s not lying to report from a credible 3rd party source – a study – based on credible data.

          Obama, in a speech on November 4, 2013, said, “What we said was, you can keep (your plan) if it hasn’t changed since the law passed.”. Obama actually managed to tell a lie about a lie. on 37 separate occasions, either Obama or one of his top officials specifically lied that Americans who like their plans can keep them.

          and the GOP said : ‘We will REPEAL and REPLACE Obamacare” more than 40 times.

          you’re confusing someone knowing the data is wrong and lying about it with different studies and viewpoints – that can be different.

          you’re also CHOOSING to make this PARTISAN.

          worse – you’re attacking something you disagree with – with no alternative to it.

  8. larryg Avatar
    larryg

    Here’s a challenge to Bacon, DJ and anyone else :

    Don’t tell me why you oppose ObamaCAre or why you support the GOP opposition to ObamaCAre.

    tell me these things:

    1. – what role should govt play in healthcare – be specific.

    should we have Medicare, tax-free employer provided, and EMTALA?

    if you truly believe there is no legitimate role for govt – say so – up front and honestly.

    2. – If you think there IS a role for government but not the way it’s done in ObamaCare – then lay out the things you believe govt SHOULD be doing

    do you think govt should require all insurers to accept all applicants regardless of pre-existing conditions?

    do you think the govt should require every state to allow any company to do business in that state under one set of Federal rules so that the insurance is “portable”?

    do you think the Govt should subsidize Medicare?

    do you think the govt should provide health insurance to armed forces members or families – or give them vouchers to go find their own insurance?

    so lay out your views/position here but be explicit – don’t wiggle around and evade these central issues about govt’s role and what that role should be or not. Don’t skulk around with vague concepts – lay it out.

    Mine is easy. I believe in Universal Health Care implemented by individual mandate – the law of the land – the same as it is in every single OECD country on the planet. Universal Health Care should be like FICA. we add UHC to Social Security and Medicare Part A – everyone pays just like they do now.

    I like the German system or Singapore system because they leave it entirely up to you – who you get your insurance from – and the medical system itself is private.

    I’m opposed to government doctors – including those in the VA – let veterans get the best care they can find on the open market and give them extra coverage from ordinary folks.

    tell me if you think my position is dishonest or hypocritical or partisan.

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      I have done this once before. You dismissed my ideas as mere “ideas,” not a detailed legislative program. Sorry, but I don’t have the time or expertise to cast my ideas in legislative language. If that disqualifies me from commenting upon health care, I guess it disqualifies 99.999 percent of the population as well.

      1. larryg Avatar
        larryg

        re: ” I will blog about health care solutions.”

        do better than before.

        Since you ally yourself with the GOP opposition – you should put forth a real alternative that the GOP supports.

        you can’t go play with the GOP on the opposition then run off a play by yourself on the alternatives.

        if you were truly objective – and you speak the GOP opposition talking points, you’d promote the GOP’s alternative solution.

        If you were truly non-partisan – you’d separate yourself from the GOP but still oppose ObamaCare but then you WOULD lay out a real alternative.

        you’re playing both sides of the street here.

        you’re hanging with the GOP opponents when convenient to you then claiming you non-allied with the GOP at other times when you want to promote your own personal view.

        if you hang with the GOP – you need to respond with what the GOP offers instead – otherwise – in my view – it’s not a principled position.

        and you’ve still not answered the fundamental issue about what the role of govt should be or not.

        you should not need a long blog post to explain that aspect.

        are you opposed to the govt being involved ?

        do you support the govt being involved?

        these are simple questions and you should be able to answer them – simply.

  9. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Yet another liberal lie for Larry …

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/05/08/harry-reids-claim-that-the-koch-brothers-are-one-of-the-main-causes-of-climate-change/

    1. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      once again DJ – do you know the difference between expressing a viewpoint – and purporting to create your own analyses that has bogus data in it and passing it off as a valid analysis?

      I don’t make no bones about this – with either party. If you are complicit in creating bogus data then pass it off as true to others – you are directly engaging in lying, propaganda and disinformation – with the INTENT of deceiving people – not just expressing a viewpoint or opinion.

      you do not seem to know what lying is guy.

    2. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      Harry Reid blather his opinion is not lying guy.. how can you confuse someone expressing their viewpoint as the same as purposefully trying to deceive others by claiming that credible data exists to prove it?

      and – with regard to “leftist”, “liberal”

      how can you call someone a leftist or a liberal who advocates cutting Medicare – is bizarre.

      Can you name any other liberals/leftists that advocate cutting Medicare and getting rid of other health care subsidies?

      have you yet determined what I am talking about when I say “cut” Medicare?

      do you know what I’m talking about? you should if you are going to throw “liberal” around…

      liberals most assuredly argue AGAINST cutting Medicare.

      I think Medicare is one of the reasons our health care system is screwed up.

      have you ever bothered to understand why I say that?

      you’re an inch deep and a mile wide on the “lefty”
      “liberal” blather

  10. Ken Kelly Avatar
    Ken Kelly

    The arguments in this post are very confused, and some of the assertions are just plain false.

    1) It is false that no one anticipated a roughly 10-20% drop off from plan selection to effectuated coverage in the exchanges. The very first estimates I heard – back in the fall – were on that order. Every single time Sebelius was asked about that she would say that industry execs expected that about 85% of exchange enrollees would end up paying their first month’s premium and thereby acquire coverage. Historically, the unpaid rate in the individual market was about 10%, so the assumption was apparently that this new market – poorer and often having never been insured before – would do worse.

    2) The paid rate has nothing whatsoever to do with the so-called “death spiral”. That refers to the health of the the new insurance pools compared to what the insurance companies expected when they created – and priced – their policies.

    3) The percentage paid is in itself, as measure of success, meaningless. One of the goals of the ACA was to reduce the number of uninsured Americans. The CBO projected that this year that number would be reduced by about 12 million (19 million next year and 26 million by 2017). 6 million of that was supposed to come from the exchanges. But obviously, it didn’t matter whether 8 million enrolled, and 85% of them ultimately bought insurance, or 20 million enrolled and only one third. Only the the absolute numbers mattered – or matter.

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      Ken, Thanks for jumping in. If you say that no one anticipated a 10-20% drop-off from plan selection, I’ll take your word for it. However, I would disagree that the issue has anything to do with the death spiral. The key question is who is not paying. If the non-payers are disproportionately young people — the people you most want in the insurance pool — then that aggravates the problem of adverse selection. It does matter.

      1. larryg Avatar
        larryg

        no.. the KEY question is as Ken said – How MANY MORE people are getting coverage that did not have it and the opponents are essentially cheerleading that it will fail if not enough younger ones sign -up.

        these folks have no alternatives – they just want this to fail.

      2. Ken Kelly Avatar
        Ken Kelly

        Thanks for your response, Jim. To make sure we are on the same page, though, my first point was the opposite of what you said in your reply. I claimed that everyone understood that somewhere in the neighborhood of 85% of enrollees would actually buy insurance – not that no one did!

        With respect to the risk pools: again, it’s the demographic expectations of the insurance industry actuaries versus the demographics they actually end up seeing in their risk pools that matters. The percentages that have been bandied about only matter to the extent they can brought to bear on this specific point – and I’ve seen nothing in the media that accomplishes this.

        It’s also important to remember that we are discussing the exchanges only here, but the insurance company risk pools include at least 5 million policies sold off-exchange, and the demographics there are quite different – more like 40% 18-34, compared to 28% 18-34 on the exchanges.

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/03/25/young-adults-signing-up-at-higher-rates-off-obamacare-exchanges/

        1. larryg Avatar
          larryg

          the risk pool issue is not well understood by the public and especially the opponents.

          As pointed out here – in a company – insurance is not sold to individuals at individual actuarial prices – but rather to groups of individuals with the actuarials of the group – so a woman pays not more than a man and a younger person pays not less than an older person. Each plan offered has the same coverage for he same price.

          and yes – one might say that the younger person is “subsidizing” the older ones but beyond that pre-existing conditions are also treated differently than if the individual were trying to buy their own individually.

          So ObamaCare is using this same pool concept – on a community rating basis – also a group approach and the opponents are acting like this is a fundamental fatal flaw that is not “kosher” from an insurance perspective unless they can “force” everyone to sign up so that the less costly will subsidize the more costly – but this is, in fact, the very same thing that goes on in an employer plan.

          and in fact, the employer plans are not mandatory, the younger can refuse to participate and instead go buy their own elsewhere and it would seem that companies more than Obamacare with it’s “mandate” would be much more vulnerable to a “death spiral” with their voluntary approach.

          The opponents don’t seem to understand the basic concepts of insurance anyhow in that they seem to think that “pools” are fundamentally socialist type Obamacare concepts and not industry concepts that have been around a long time.

          my question is – why do companies (not all do, smaller ones often do not, can not) – uses pools to start with – what is the advantage to them in doing that rather than just giving each employee a tax-free stipend to go buy insurance wherever they can ?

          Younger people seem to participate in employer group plans – as opposed to great numbers of them not – in no small part, because the amount of money you’d receive instead is no where near what the value of the insurance is and that much reduced amount won’t buy you a plan on the open market with anywhere near the coverage of the employer plan much less protect you from things like having to pay more if you are a women or what happens to you if you get a “pre-existing” condition.

          It’s not so much that ObamaCare is ‘too complex’ – the reality is that insurance itself – as a concept – is beyond most people’s ability to truly understand things like pools and actuarials.

          Finally, consider this – America has about 60 million people older than 65 in one gigantic “pool” that not only does not deny coverage to anyone no matter their conditions – but it is sold to each of them at the same price…. and those 60 million are largely covered for about $500-600 a month of which 75% is subsidy.

          you could extend Medicare to younger folks – who would be in general healthier than an older pool without increasing costs – and at the same time just totally negate the “young paying for the old” complaint.

          finally – the idea of insurance – is not that you get back in benefits every penny you paid in premiums. Look at your auto or homeowners insurance of which you pay -year after year after year – thousands of dollars – that you don’t get back and which goes to pay for other people’s accidents.

          are you “subsidizing” others? or are you paying to be “insured” and you don’t get a penny back unless you suffer a casualty that is covered?

          someone might say – well you don’t see the government offering auto or homeowners insurance,

          true enough but have you ever heard of either “assigned risk” in some states or in other states on your premium there is a line item that say “uninsured motorist fee”.

          THAT – IS – a SUBSIDY to the other guy and you are paying it.

          and subsidized homeowners ? not generally except for FLOOD insurance which is not only subsidized by the government but it covers not only one million dollar home owned by the rich but multiple million dollar homes owned by the rich – beach homes as well as businesses – all subsidized by the very same govt that opponents of ObamaCare have never in prior times shown similar opposition to on the same grounds that they oppose ObamaCare.

          So – the opponents apparently are fine with SOME subsidies that benefit them – but not ones they perceive as benefiting others?

          or what? It’s hard to really figure out the logic of the Opponents because it’s not really based on how insurance really does work – its based more on – well – ignorance of how insurance works in general.

          clearly those who have auto insurance and don’t have accidents are “subsidizing” those that do have accidents and on top of that they subsidize the uninsured – and I’ve not heard anything about a movement of anti-govt people demanding that they stop having to pay uninsured motorist fees on their auto insurance.

          1. larryg Avatar
            larryg

            and to be fair:

            http://youtu.be/wfl55GgHr5E

          2. larryg Avatar
            larryg

            and another lie:

            http://youtu.be/pZyalgjSvrs

        2. larryg Avatar
          larryg

          re: ” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/03/25/young-adults-signing-up-at-higher-rates-off-obamacare-exchanges/”

          wait for it –

          this is a damn liberal lie concocted by the lying lame stream media to “cover up” the fact that Obamacare is going to die of a death spiral.

          sic

          😉

          wait for it

          http://youtu.be/qgce06Yw2ro

  11. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    As my Grandmother used to say, “None is so blind as he who will not see.”. LarryG excuses full time, professional politicians who intentionally use statistics from decades old studies to misrepresent the truth.

    If I wrote a column that claimed scientists believe that global warming is not happening and that global cooling is, in fact, what’s going on there would be questions. If I used a study from the “next ice age” crowd of the 1970s to defend my argument LarryG would be at the front of the line to howl about my lying. Yet when a sitting US Senator uses pre-Brady bill statistics to claim, in 2013, that “Today, about 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check.” LarryG brushes it off as no big deal. The fact that this willful lie was repeated by the President and Vice President does not concern LarryG.

    On May 8 LarryG wrote: “and – tell me what other lies you think the Dems have told – and I will TRUTHFULLY admit the ones that true.”. So, I list a series of lies told by Dems as he requested. His response? ” you’re also CHOOSING to make this PARTISAN.”

    LarryG – your “credibility tank” has run dry. You have no credibility left at all. None.

    1. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      “As my Grandmother used to say, “None is so blind as he who will not see.”. LarryG excuses full time, professional politicians who intentionally use statistics from decades old studies to misrepresent the truth.”

      no I don’t I said equating “liberals” to politicians you don’t like is wacko and it is. you are unable to differentiate between the two apparently.

      “If I wrote a column that claimed scientists believe that global warming is not happening and that global cooling is, in fact, what’s going on there would be questions. If I used a study from the “next ice age” crowd of the 1970s to defend my argument LarryG would be at the front of the line to howl about my lying. Yet when a sitting US Senator uses pre-Brady bill statistics to claim, in 2013, that “Today, about 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check.” LarryG brushes it off as no big deal. The fact that this willful lie was repeated by the President and Vice President does not concern LarryG.”

      no – LYING is when YOU – intentionally misrepresent data – that you generated and KNOW is false and your intent is to deceive people.

      you confuse different viewpoints guy. having different viewpoints about a study is not lying. having different viewpoints about data is not lying.

      Lying is when you generate the data with the intent of using it to deceive others.

      The POTUS, the administration is entitled to their viewpoints and to their initiatives … that’s not lying just because you don’t agree with them.

      “On May 8 LarryG wrote: “and – tell me what other lies you think the Dems have told – and I will TRUTHFULLY admit the ones that true.”. So, I list a series of lies told by Dems as he requested. His response? ” you’re also CHOOSING to make this PARTISAN.”

      LarryG – your “credibility tank” has run dry. You have no credibility left at all. None.”

      my challenge remains and it is valid.

      you simply do not know the difference between intentional lying and holding a viewpoint. Not KNOWING THIS means essentially that anything you do not agree with – you think is a lie.

      I do not think that..but when someone releases a “study” with data that they generated and they KNOW that data is bogus – that’s lying guy. And when folks latch onto it without at least fact checking it – they are helping to spread the lie. But why would you do that guy? what would you call the Dems liars but not fact check the GOP also?

      if you think that I “lie” – then I challenge you to show it – to find me saying something that is demonstrably not true.

      you think because any politicians makes any statement you disagree with they’re lying and in your case – only the Dems do this?

      jesus DJ… have you really veered this far off course guy?

    2. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      re: ” politicians who intentionally use statistics from decades old studies to misrepresent the truth.”

      the first thing you and others here need to do DJ is forget initially who is promoting the study – and go directly to the study – and see if the group doing the study is an objective 3rd party known to not be partisan and known to not do biased studies. For instance, you KNOW that a study to prove things that Heritage.org advocates for – done by Heritage or a “scholar” working for Heritage or other groups that share Heritages views is not likely to be totally objective.

      next – you need to look at the references in the study to see if those references also go to non-partisan groups that are known to not choose sides.

      once you ascertain the legitimacy of the study –

      go back to the person who is citing it as proof of something.

      if that person is ALSO allied with a biased group who did the study..

      YOU KNOW – or YOU SHOULD KNOW that the whole affair is questionable.

      this is EXACTLY what happened with the GOP “study”. It was biased and pre-ordained FROM the GET GO – AND the GOP KNEW the data was not only not complete but they had also heard from specific companies that their experience – to date was better than 80% sign-ups.

      So YOU and JIMB either knew this – or you should have done due diligence FIRST – BEFORE – you went online to offer the study as a legitimate one proving that signups were not paying.

      this goes back to whether or not you are seeking to confirm your own biases or are you really seeking legitimate data and information – performing due diligence and not just siding with partisans of one side or the other that you may agree with.

      both sides engage in referencing bogus studies done by folks who are of the same view as the folks citing the study.

      you can verify that – and you should – no matter whether you are a liberal or a conservative or an independent – you should be careful about what you think is the truth in other words.

      but you ALSO know that when a specific group does it’s own study then goes public to tout it’s own study as proof – that it’s a red flag – a clear warning signal that if nothing else merits you to go verify it – BEFORE you start offering it to others as “proof” of something.

      Now – I want you to show me an equivalent thing done by the Dems – where they have done their own “study, knew it was bogus, and went public with it.

      find me an example.

      The GOP has a history of this – these days – from death panels to death spirals to government doctors forced on folks signed up for health care, etc

      show me examples of the Dems making false claims on health care – beyond the one that you can keep your doctor – which I would agree with – if you agree that REPEAL and REPLACE is ALSO a blatant lie.

  12. virginiagal2 Avatar
    virginiagal2

    Okay, pointing out some factual issues here. For background, early in my career, I spent several years providing support, including programming support coding the actual calculations, for pricing health insurance rates.

    Standard benefits are not set to provide subsidies for people with pre-existing conditions. Standard benefits are set for two reasons – first, to provide a reasonable level of coverage, presumably to meet the goal of avoiding medical bankruptcy.

    The second reason is so you can properly pool risk so you can price it. The more you divvy up the risk pool into teeny tiny subsets, the harder it is to price it, the less accurate those projections are, and the more fudge factor you have to add to the rates. So you will not see an experience-rated company with one set of benefits for women and another for men. Most medium and large companies are experience-rated.

    The insurance that you get through work has essentially one risk pool – every employee for that organization, regardless of age, gender, or health status – and one or two options for standard benefits. Even for very big groups, you rarely have more than 3-4 options of benefits, and they are not divided by gender or age.

    The ACA model is basically mimicking the model used to price business group health insurance. The model IMHO is not correctly described as transferring money from the young to the old, or subsidizing the sick with the well. What it’s doing is putting everyone in the exchanges into one risk pool, with the idea being that over a lifetime, people start off young and become old, and most people are relatively healthy for most of their life but most people will be sick during part of it. Essentially, you’re leveling the premiums over time.

    Basically, that pretty much is the concept of insurance.

    1. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      re: that’s the way insurance works

      ” The insurance that you get through work has essentially one risk pool – every employee for that organization, regardless of age, gender, or health status – and one or two options for standard benefits. Even for very big groups, you rarely have more than 3-4 options of benefits, and they are not divided by gender or age.”

      but DJ, Jim and some others will tell you that – that means that some are subsidizing others… like for instance – age – and to them that PROVES
      that the ACA is a scheme to subsidize some at the expense of others.

      they never acknowledge that employer-provided does the same thing – NOR do they every bother to ask – WHY virtually all employer-provided works this way.

    2. larryg Avatar
      larryg

      virginiagal2 – would you be willing to explain a little further as to why most larger employers have one pool instead of each employee paying a different rate like they would if they bought it on the marketplace?

      when we say “community-rated” in the context of the ACA – how does that related to employer-provided pools ?

      for instance, in the ACA – if you smoke – you are in a different pool…right?

      but if you are a women – you are not – you are in the same pool as men, right?

      if you have employer-provided insurance – and you smoke – don’t you stay in the same pool as non-smokers?

Leave a Reply

Read More