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

  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/01 19:24:05
    Reichstolz
    So for those that are not risk adverse it is my responsibility to pay for their lack of personal responsibility? That is the fallacy of this bill, punish all for the ignorant few. Social darwinism at its finest.
  • luvguins Reichstolz 2012/07/01 20:42:22
    luvguins
    +1
    Afraid not. Social Darwinism is what you righties and Randites want. Survival of the fittest. This bill is about personal responsibility for buying health insurance in 2014.
  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/02 03:18:03
    Reichstolz
    With our current government both right and left it is survival of the witless. The bill is not about personal responsibility, it is about putting government squarely at the top of everyone's worries. No longer can you live your life without worrying about what whim government is going to tax you for not doing now. Don't be surprised when government feels everyone should protect themselves and they can tax you for not buying a gun. That is what this farce of a law was about, dictating your every waking moment. Great job, your advocacy of the end of individual sovereignty , won. Now we are subjects to the government, no more We the People, it is We the Governed.
  • luvguins Reichstolz 2012/07/02 13:01:24
    luvguins
    +1
    Nice try, but it is really this.
    We the Corporations We the Corporations
  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/02 13:47:33
    Reichstolz
    So once again, we come back to the only workable solution for both our concepts, which is to limit government to only its constitutional duty. Then there is no advantage to be purchased because government isn't large enough to influence the market. I find it funny that when government is the problem, you want to expand its reach into your life. Sorry, I have not become successful by making problems bigger. My success comes from eliminating problems. If you think government is corrupted, then the only way to limit that corruption is to shrink its influence.
  • luvguins Reichstolz 2012/07/02 14:09:40
    luvguins
    +1
    Better to shrink the corruption of capitalism and the influence they have on elections with Citizens United now for the candidates who will allow them to continue their corruption. If not the next bubble they are recreating now will not be recoverable from when it busts.
  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/02 14:22:16
    Reichstolz
    Who fosters that bastardization of capitalism, politicians. Again limit government to only its constitutional role and both our issues are solved. We as a People, do not control external influences, we control those who are allowed to be influenced. Take the power to influence the market away from government, and it will no longer be the whore for the market.
  • luvguins Reichstolz 2012/07/02 14:59:09
    luvguins
    +1
    You think Congress will take the money out of their pockets with reform and repeal Citizens United? Doubtful.
  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/02 15:13:01
    Reichstolz
    That is why government must be reduced to have no influence, then citizens united does not matter.
  • luvguins Reichstolz 2012/07/02 15:17:44
    luvguins
    +1
    That is putting the cart before the horse. Governmentr won't be reduced with corporate bribed politicians still there.
  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/02 15:56:42
    Reichstolz
    Exactly, let it collapse so we can rebuild. The time is coming near, thankfully.
  • luvguins Reichstolz 2012/07/02 15:59:52
    luvguins
    +1
    Not with the GOP. Deficits only matter to them when out of power. They run it up to the military and their other rich buddies.
  • Reichstolz luvguins 2012/07/02 16:07:48
    Reichstolz
    You are correct and the dependency party only cares about union monkeys who cannot make their way in the private sector. Time to let it fall, which thankfully, due to the path we are on and the ingrained ignorance of the majority of the population, it will be soon.
  • Skeptikat luvguins 2012/07/01 14:04:10
  • Reichstolz Skeptikat 2012/07/01 13:44:28
    Reichstolz
    Did you actually read the crap you post?
    "I do not recall the man's name"
    "one that will take effect on January 1, 2014, "

    "she still has issues with the bill.

    “I feel like we’re being forced," she says"

    "My profession prevents me from speaking specifically "

    "I’m sure some people might say I’m at fault for my own situation"

    What a joke, thanks for documenting the ignorance that is an Obama supporter.
  • Skeptikat Reichstolz 2012/07/01 14:05:50
  • Reichstolz Skeptikat 2012/07/01 14:09:48
    Reichstolz
    I guess you don't expect to present anything resembling the truth either. I know the accuracy thingy just doesn't compute for you.
  • Skeptikat Reichstolz 2012/07/01 14:36:36
  • luvguins Skeptikat 2012/07/01 14:41:58
  • Reichstolz Skeptikat 2012/07/01 16:19:59
    Reichstolz
    Honest, that is a stretch. Oh that is right, according to your views the ends justify the means.
  • aherbert Skeptikat 2012/07/01 16:47:32
  • ehrhornp 2012/07/01 08:11:15
    ehrhornp
    +3
    Obama care is little more than Nixon care. It is just a baby step in a long march to fix the system so that it will be efficient and not cost an arm and a leg.
  • Skeptikat ehrhornp 2012/07/01 08:47:24
  • ehrhornp Skeptikat 2012/07/01 12:55:10
    ehrhornp
    +2
    I agree. I was against nixon care when it was first proposed and I still think it is inefficient. Still something needs to be done about health care. I see this as just a baby step towards it.
  • Skeptikat ehrhornp 2012/07/01 14:10:25
  • ehrhornp Skeptikat 2012/07/01 16:00:39
    ehrhornp
    +3
    Clinton really made a difference during his second term. Maybe Obama will too. I have been hoping for that. Hopefully he will end the war on drugs, a huge money sucking failure. Much will depend upon the house and senate. Americans are not the smartest people around however and probably will vote for too many of the same republican idiots in congress or DINOs.
  • 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
  • Foxy Wa... aneed2know 2012/07/01 08:17:21
    Foxy Warrior Guru
    +5
    Very sad, but very true, my friend.
  • aneed2know Foxy Wa... 2012/07/01 08:44:02

News & Politics

2013/05/21 21:35:40

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals