Quantcast

Obama, Romney, 'Obamacare' and the Facts

Foxy Warrior Guru 2012/07/01 07:34:51
Here are a few actual facts about the ACA.

Obama, Romney, 'Obamacare'
and the Facts
National JournalBy Naureen Khan | National
Journal
– 19 hrs ago


The Romney and Obama campaigns have gone
into spin overdrive since the Supreme Court decision upholding the
Affordable Care
Act
. So what holds up to the facts and what doesn’t?


Three nonpartisan fact-checking
outfits—FactCheck.org, Politifact, and The Fact Checker (The Washington
Post’s Glenn Kessler)—have done extensive research on various health care claims that
have surfaced for the last two years. Here’s a guide to their findings on what
you have heard from the presidential candidates about the ruling, and are likely
to hear many times again before Election Day:

1. If you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it
under the Affordable
Care
Act.


One of President Obama’s go-to points is
that the Affordable Care Act won’t change things for Americans who like their
current health insurance plan. On Thursday, in response to the Court’s decision,
Obama reiterated, “If you’re one of the more than 250 million Americans who
already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”


That will be true for most people. But, as
Factcheck.org
points out, nothing in the Affordable Care Act prevents employers from switching
their coverage plans just as they could do before. Also, some of the 30 million
Americans who purchase their own insurance may have to change providers if their
plan does not meet minimum benefit standards.


In addition, while the law requires
employers to pay a penalty if they do not offer insurance, they might pay it
because they prefer that their employees purchase insurance through the
federally subsidized exchanges. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office
estimates
the law may result in "a small reduction" in the number of people
who receive employer-provided insurance.

2. The Affordable Care Act will add trillions to
the deficit.


Numerous leading Republicans have said this
over and over again, presenting the health care law as another budget-busting
initiative by the Obama administration in the same vein as the
stimulus or the auto-industry bailout. “ 'Obamacare' adds trillions to our
deficits and to our national debt, and pushes those obligations on to coming
generations,” presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney said in a press conference
following the Supreme Court ruling.


In fact, when the health care bill was passed in March 2010, CBO found that
enacting the legislation
would lead to a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion
over 10
years. Later, when congressional Republicans proposed legislation to repeal the
law, CBO
estimated that the GOP bill would add $230 billion
to the deficit if
enacted, also over a period of 10 years.


CBO did recently say, however, that the Supreme Court’s ruling might change
the math. “CBO is in the process of reviewing the Supreme Court’s decision
related to the Affordable Care Act to assess the effect on CBO’s projections of
federal spending and revenue under current law,” the agency said in a statement.
“We expect that this assessment will probably take some time.”


3. The health care law puts the federal government
between you and your
doctor
.


One of the most passionate arguments made by conservatives against the health
care law, and made again by Romney on Thursday, this too has been debunked on
several occasions. The Affordable Care Act does not intervene at all between
doctors and patients, although it does set up minimum benefit requirements for
insurance companies, according to FactCheck.org.


Many raised the specter of government rationing of care during the health
care debate, but what people are referring to—the Independent Payment Advisory
Board—is forbidden from changing benefits or eligibility requirements. It was
created to recommend savings in other areas to Congress, and Congress can
override its suggestions.


4. The health care law cuts $500 billion from
Medicare.


The frequency with which the claim has been made prompted Columbia
Journalism Review
to dub it the “$500
billion bogeyman.”
That didn’t stop Romney from repeating it again in his
response to the Supreme Court ruling.


In fact, the law curbs future growth in Medicare over 10 years, but does not
cut any benefits for participating seniors or affect the current Medicare budget
at all, as Politifact
New Jersey
reported when Congressman Jon Runyan, R-N.J.,
said it again in a press release.


5. The provision of the Affordable Care Act that
allows people to stay on
their parents’ insurance plan until age 26 has helped 6.6 million young adults obtain coverage .


Both FactCheck.org
and The
Post's Fact Checker
have concluded that the White House is fudging
the numbers on this one. The Obama team is using findings from a survey by the
nonprofit Commonwealth Fund, which estimated that 6.6 million young people were
able to join their parents’ health plan as a result of the Affordable Care Act.
However, not all those young adults were uninsured prior.


More accurately, the Health and Human
Services Department put the figure at 3.3 million young adults who would not
have health insurance without the provision.


6. Preventive care saves the government money
and, under the health care
law, has already helped 54 million people in private
insurance plans.


Obama has often touted the fact that under
the health law, all insurance plans are required to cover preventive medicine at
no cost. In his remarks after the Supreme Court ruling, he went a step further,
saying that the provision had already helped 54 million people.


While it’s true that crunching numbers from
the Kaiser Family Foundation does yield that figure for the number of people who
are receiving expanded preventive care services as a result of the health care
law, there’s no saying if their plans before included some of the same or how
much they’re being “helped” by the new suite of services.


Moreover, Obama has said that preventive
care actually saves money by catching and managing illnesses before they become
critical. Politifact,
however, found evidence to the contrary. A
2009 CBO study
found that preventive services lead to “higher, not lower,
medical spending overall,” because while mammograms, checkups, and the like are
cheap for the individual, the cost of all of them put together adds up. Because
they only catch disease and illness for a small sliver of people who are tested,
while they are good for people’s well-being, so far they haven’t brought costs
down.

Read More: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-romney-obamacare-facts...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • aneed2know 2012/07/01 07:57:32
    aneed2know
    +12
    you are not going to reach the people who needs to know this, they don't care, most are just as happy to stick to their ignorance then allow new information to replace ignorant information

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Pat 2012/07/30 05:39:29
    Pat
    +1
    According to Politico, the cost of the wars we've engaged in for over ten years would more than put a good dent in the cost of ObamaCare and Medicare.

    By TIM MAK | 6/29/11 7:23 AM EDT Updated: 6/29/11 5:58 PM EDT

    The final bill for U.S. military involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan could be as much as $4.4 trillion, according to a comprehensive report Tuesday.

    In the 10 years since American troops were sent into Afghanistan, the federal government has already spent $2.3 trillion to $2.7 trillion, say the authors of the study by Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies.

    The report calculates not only direct spending on the conflicts but also the long-term costs of caring for wounded veterans and projected war spending from 2012-20.

    At a minimum, according to the authors of the study, the final cost for these military engagements will be $3.7 trillion. But the report also points out that their estimates do not include at least $1 trillion more in interest payments and other costs that cannot yet be quantified. Indeed, the report criticized the U.S. Congress and the Pentagon for poor accounting.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/...

    Just think of all the good we could have done for our own country if we hadn't been dragged into the wrong...
    According to Politico, the cost of the wars we've engaged in for over ten years would more than put a good dent in the cost of ObamaCare and Medicare.

    By TIM MAK | 6/29/11 7:23 AM EDT Updated: 6/29/11 5:58 PM EDT

    The final bill for U.S. military involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan could be as much as $4.4 trillion, according to a comprehensive report Tuesday.

    In the 10 years since American troops were sent into Afghanistan, the federal government has already spent $2.3 trillion to $2.7 trillion, say the authors of the study by Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies.

    The report calculates not only direct spending on the conflicts but also the long-term costs of caring for wounded veterans and projected war spending from 2012-20.

    At a minimum, according to the authors of the study, the final cost for these military engagements will be $3.7 trillion. But the report also points out that their estimates do not include at least $1 trillion more in interest payments and other costs that cannot yet be quantified. Indeed, the report criticized the U.S. Congress and the Pentagon for poor accounting.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/...

    Just think of all the good we could have done for our own country if we hadn't been dragged into the wrong war with Iraq and approached Afghanistan as a matter of containment and not conquest.
    (more)
  • Schläue~© 2012/07/03 14:19:00
    Schläue~©
    Old bullsh!t quoting 3 years stale CBO figures.
    Besides, the CBO only scores what it is asked to by the current administration and is akin to providing your tax preparer with only 50% of your income data.

    Much has been revealed about this monstrosity and even 0bozo's own economic advisors were against 0bozoTax.

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/my...
  • FindingHeartInThisCrazy World 2012/07/03 03:07:33
    FindingHeartInThisCrazy World
    we're going to be just fine...just fine.
  • syl 2012/07/02 20:38:20
    syl
    wow-the 2,300 pages condensed! Ha! I have a problem with the curbing of Medicare for over 10 yrs!!!

    People on Medicare already don't have enough coverage as it is, & not enough income either.

    I heard on the news, the day of the "event", the broadcaster from the Hill, say that obamacare woud cost the taxpayers 2.6 trillion! That is probably where Romney got it-why would the Hill broadcast such a mistake?

    It was also reported that 800 billion would be cut from Medicare.

    So how is all this "manna" from heaven, going to be funded? More fake money?

    We've been fed so much phoney-bologna already-not to mention the 3.5 yrs that Obama has managed to increase the deficit by $5 trillion in-Realistically, how can anyone believe anything that comes out of this administration?

    He's tanking our country people. It's all smoke & mirrors, & he's a snake in the grass ready to bite

    YOU!!!
  • prayer warrior 2012/07/02 20:34:50
    prayer warrior
    +3
    Well this health care plan seems like something good and I hope that others will see the truth.
  • GuruA2J~#IOKIYAR~612 BLOCKT 2012/07/01 21:18:02
    GuruA2J~#IOKIYAR~612 BLOCKT
    +5
    It is so nice to have the complete truth presented. I'm sure plenty of SH CONS are gonna poo-poo these facts as it doesn't fit into their fear mongering & paranoid rantings.
  • Spizzzo BN-0 2012/07/01 20:28:32
    Spizzzo BN-0
    +5
    Great points! Well done.
  • Peacock 2012/07/01 18:56:48
    Peacock
    It has already put the Gov. between you and your Doctor. The people who will not realize this, until it is too late, are those who do NOT need to be on medication. I pay for a Family plan. The medication, Exforge, prescribed years ago for one person (high blood pressure) has been challenged for the past year. It took hours of the Drs' Nurse filing, me fighting, to get them to keep paying for it..and my premiums are expensive!! Now, for my long term (30 year) Meds...bronchodilater, I suddenly have to see my Dr. every 2 months, where as before, it was every six months, since I have been well stabilized. Same patient, same Dr. for 30 years!!!! I resent it. So from paying $80.00 per year, co-pay for 2 visits, exclusive of any other heath issues I may have, NOW it'll be $240.00 my cost of breathing!!!
  • Spizzzo... Peacock 2012/07/01 20:31:44
    Spizzzo BN-0
    +7
    I hope you realize that absolutely NONE of those troubles are due to Obamacare, which hasn't even started yet. You are just looking for excuses. In fact, what you have is what all have: An INSURANCE COMPANY between you and your doctor. Why do you prefer that?
  • Edwin 2012/07/01 17:30:11
    Edwin
    +6
    Good analysis. Thank you.
  • Peacock Edwin 2012/07/02 01:20:46
    Peacock
    WHAT CHOICE DO I HAVE? This happened right after the HCR, and the Drs. office said it was complying with what the Gov, wants. It's GHI..N.Y. I need Healthcare and this is the best of the worst..suddenly. I perfer it the way it had been..maybe if the HCR was done right, it would be different.
  • Edwin Peacock 2012/07/05 01:28:40
    Edwin
    +1
    So... you disagree with me? I thought this article had a good analysis (which was my post). You responded by saying "WHAT CHOICE DO I HAVE?"

    ...I admit it: I have no idea how your response is related to my original post.
  • Peacock Edwin 2012/07/05 03:33:08
    Peacock
    In Heath CARE..what choice do I have? Gov. mandate or not..I HAVE TO HAVE IT! I own properties, and all I'd need is to have a big bill with a Hospital, and I'd lose whatever matched what I owed. Since HCR, my Heath Care Insurance got more expensive, and it gives less coverage than before. recently, the Gov. is telling the Doctors to follow new regulations, which entail more visits, which equal more of my out of pocket costs. It is correlated with the HCR. Coincidence? Doubtful. So again, WHAT CHOICE DO I HAVE, when being uninsured, for me, is a fiscally poor choice?
  • Edwin Peacock 2012/07/05 06:49:52
    Edwin
    +1
    I guess my point is this: why are you asking me, as opposed to someone else?

    I didn't claim you had choices. I didn't even claim the ACA was a good idea. I just said the author of the article made interesting, well thought out points.

    But... since you ARE asking me for some reason... health insurance has been rising, on average, 14% or so per year for close to a decade. So if you only now started getting hit with higher premiums, you are darn lucky. Is it because of ACA? Maybe, or maybe your "pool" (whether through employer or individual insurance) lost some leverage this year.

    But, yes, maybe it will make your premiums go up. And maybe it will change your insurance so you get better coverage, leading to better treatment. Or maybe not. Maybe all you will see is higher premiums and no obvious benefit.

    What choice do you have? Like all of us, you have the choice to buy insurance or risk devastation. And your premiums might continue to go up -- though the mandate might ultimately help with that (or not). But one thing is pretty sure: your insurance premiums will probably continue to increase, regardless of whether ACA stays in place or is somehow repealed.
  • Lester 2012/07/01 17:14:30
    Lester
    +8
    All this information has been readily available for a long time; anyone who doesn't know it has intentionally decided not to listen. The Health Care Law can be criticized for only addressing health insurance and not many of the broader issues in the health care delivery system, but to the extent that it addressed the problem, it provided a number of useful fixes.
  • Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO 2012/07/01 16:46:04
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +7
    nice article, nice summary.

    Doubt it will be digested by CON's and they will still repeat the same misinformation over and over.
  • aherbert 2012/07/01 16:44:24
    aherbert
    +5
    Excellent post! Thank you for providing the facts on the affordable healthcare act … it is unfortunate that there is a segment of our American population that will say disparaging words about healthcare reform to their detriment. These people are very bias and extremely ignorant. I am hopeful that the Supreme Court voted the right way … now we have to stand by and watched the RWNJ run amuck in due time this too shall pass … they are and descendent from people that has always been on the wrong side of history … that is most likely where they will remain … it is an insignificant segment that is dwindling away daily.
  • mk, Smartass Oracle 2012/07/01 16:03:21
    mk, Smartass Oracle
    +1
    Keep drinking the Kool Aide.




    obama kool aide
  • Edwin mk, Sma... 2012/07/01 17:31:54
    Edwin
    +11
    I like facts. If you think factual information is Kool-Aid, then I like Kool Aid, too.
  • KrSpo mk, Sma... 2012/07/01 18:06:41
    KrSpo
    +6
    Just like most Republicans, please do not allow facts to get in your way.. Enjoy your alternative reality
  • mk, Sma... KrSpo 2012/07/02 17:22:39
    mk, Smartass Oracle
    I'm Libertarian




    Libertarian
  • GuruA2J... mk, Sma... 2012/07/01 21:23:18
    GuruA2J~#IOKIYAR~612 BLOCKT
    +6
    If that's the best you've got in comparison to actual FACTS, enjoy your kool-aide on this HOT summer day. I prefer fresh squeezed lemonade in this weather.

    fresh squeezed lemonade
  • mk, Sma... GuruA2J... 2012/07/02 17:23:22
    mk, Smartass Oracle
    It is you drinking the Kool Aid
  • GuruA2J... mk, Sma... 2012/07/03 17:50:00
    GuruA2J~#IOKIYAR~612 BLOCKT
    +2
    When you accuse somebody who believes in using FACTS to support their claims, it shows that 'the accuser' is the one who is delusional.
  • mk, Sma... GuruA2J... 2012/07/03 18:03:22
    mk, Smartass Oracle
    I have different facts than you do.
  • GuruA2J... mk, Sma... 2012/07/04 00:52:13
    GuruA2J~#IOKIYAR~612 BLOCKT
    +2
    I'd suggest you check your sources then.
  • mk, Sma... GuruA2J... 2012/07/04 01:20:29
    mk, Smartass Oracle
    I have.
  • Q 2012/07/01 15:46:23
    Q
    +11
    Nice Blog Foxy, its too bad the right wingers at this site will never bother to read it and continue parroting right wing disinformation rhetoric just like they did during the original HC debates in 2009.
    refuse to see holding fingers in ears gif
  • SoD Q 2012/07/01 16:10:43
    SoD
    You act as if all of the cited information supports the PPACA, which is hardly the case. Perhaps you should read it more carefully?

    During the original health care debate I read ~800 pages of the PPACA, which was more than enough to inspire my contempt. How much of it did you read?
  • Q SoD 2012/07/01 17:15:35
    Q
    +8
    Nope I didn't miss it, I just commented that many people here tend to reply to these threads based on the headline alone without even reading the content let alone the supporting links. Perhaps I should have included the fact that some on the left do it as well? But there's a well established pattern of low information cons here doing it on a regular basis.

    And no offense but I seriously doubt that you were able to fully comprehend the information contained in the 800 pages that you claimed to have read. That is unless you have a long career in the healthcare field since the bill was so complex and nuanced that even the legislators who voted for it had their staff lawyers and industry experts read it and then explain it to them.

    And frankly I get a little annoyed at all the people here who keep asking me if I have read the bill and because I reply no they dismiss me out of hand even though we all know they haven't read the bill either. Its pretty obvious that they tend to rely on the cherry picked portions from conservative bloggers posted on sites like World Nut Daily or the Heritage Foundation.
  • Edwin Q 2012/07/01 17:32:58
    Edwin
    +5
    Awesome reply.
  • Q Edwin 2012/07/01 17:49:10
    Q
    +7
    Thanks Edwin.
    I bet I've been asked if I've " even read the ACA law" at least a half dozen times over the past two days then summarily dismissed when I reply no. Its usually from the same right wingers who seem to think they have a better understanding of the Constitution than five Supreme Court justices and our Constitutional scholar/professor President.
    face palm gif
  • Edwin Q 2012/07/05 01:32:45
    Edwin
    +2
    It's funny (well, not) how so many people think the SCOTUS is working *just fine* when they agree with the decisions, but they think it is filled with partisan idiots when the decisions are not to my liking.
  • Spizzzo... Q 2012/07/01 20:39:55
    Spizzzo BN-0
    +6
    Interestingly, during the SCOTUS oral arguments on it, Justice Scalia said something like, "Heh, you don't expect me to actually READ the whole thing, do you?" And yet he was ready to throw out the whole thing based, apparently, only on what he assumed was in it.
  • Q Spizzzo... 2012/07/01 21:07:11
    Q
    +5
    LOL...I forgot about that!
    justice Scalia political cartoons
  • Spizzzo... Q 2012/07/01 21:37:11
    Spizzzo BN-0
    +4
    I'd never noticed before how an exploding head on a body looks like a stalk of broccoli.
  • Pet Roc... Spizzzo... 2012/07/02 04:05:35
    Pet Rock Whisperer
    +2
    Burnt broccoli!
  • GuruA2J... Spizzzo... 2012/07/01 21:29:39
    GuruA2J~#IOKIYAR~612 BLOCKT
    +4
    Excellent point Spizzzo.
  • SoD Spizzzo... 2012/07/02 00:09:40
    SoD
    The best thing to do with a contract you don't understand is not sign it.

    The best thing to do with a legislative document you don't understand is not support it.

    If you do one, you are just as foolish as someone who does the other.

    When you buy a car, do you take the word of the dealer regarding how great a deal you are getting or do you read the contract? Unless you're an utter boob, you read the contract.

    A car loan will be a lot easier to get out from under than the PPACA, yet you've given those who offered it your absolute trust and support without reading line one of the PPACA.

    THAT IS EFFING STUPID AS HELL!!!

    Nancy Pelosi saying we would have to pass the bill to find out what was in it was a big red flag for me. That would be like my car dealer telling me I would have to sign the contract before I found out the terms of my loan.

    Think man, this is not rocket science. Politicians left and right are all thieves an liars. You made the mistake of trusting the ones who say things that you like. I don't trust either side based on what they say, but I look at their voting records to find patterns.
  • Spizzzo... SoD 2012/07/02 01:33:41
    Spizzzo BN-0
    +2
    Hey, you're a great one to talk--after all, YOU are the one who is so darn proud of having read the WRONG BILL!

News & Politics

2013/05/25 04:14:49

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals