Obamacare: 6.17 Million Lost Insurance, Just 4.2 Million Have Selected New Plans

Health Overhaul Canceled Policies

Obamacare was supposed to be about insuring the uninsured, but so far the impact of the law seems to be a net reduction in the number of Americans insured. Nearly 6.2 million Americans lost their pre-Obamacare insurance policies as the law has been implemented. So far, just 4.2 million have selected new policies through the Obamacare exchanges:

Some 4.2 million people enrolled in health-care plans using government portals as of last month, the Obama administration said Tuesday, leaving millions more sign-ups needed this month to meet the Affordable Care Act’s enrollment targets.

Around 943,000 people picked plans in February, down slightly from 1.14 million who chose plans in January, a decrease that federal officials attributed to February’s shorter length.

That 4.2 million number is suspect. Just 27 percent of the people selecting plans were previously uninsured, a troublingly low number given that insurers were counting on a major influx of uninsured Americans into the risk pool to offset the expense of mandated expansions in coverage. The 4.2 million number itself is just 60 percent of what the Obama administration projected, and we have no idea how many of these people who have selected an insurance policy have actually gone on to purchase it and thus become insured.

We don’t know because the Obama administration isn’t telling us.

Meanwhile, President Obama would like you to know that Obamacare isn’t that expensive, and if you can’t afford it you should cancel your telephone service or something.

Update: Author John Lott Jr. points out on Twitter that many of the 4.2 million who have signed up for Obamacare had insurance previously.


Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Gern Blanston

    “That’s only because you and other right-wingers are making it look bad”
    Not to worry, though. Once the IRS punishes the non-compliant – after the mid-terms – I’m sure the numbers will jump up to where they’re supposed to be (30 million? 40 million? 15 million?)

  • kevindf

    Why would anyone not wait until they needed it before paying for Obamacare now?

    • Bat 1

      That has been THE prime argument against enrollment from the very beginnning. Obama cult members however are devoid of rational reasoning skills, so a practical argument such as this is simply beyond them.

    • Tim Anderson

      Isn’t there a limited enrollment time? Ending March 31st. And then you have to wait until November again?

  • http://www.flyingratz.wordpress.com/ dblack

    Did you forget to mention the 2mil who resigned with their previous carrier into a new plan? Please don’t sell the health care insurance sales professional short buy implying they cannot even sell their own current clients a new plan. please.

    • Bat 1

      Hard to credit the healthcare insurance professional when the law mandates that everyone must be covered, even those who neither needed nor wanted coverage beforehand.

      • http://www.flyingratz.wordpress.com/ dblack

        Guess you didn’t read my post too good, huh?

        • Bat 1

          Uh… yes, I did. That’s the point.

          • Guest

            So what you are saying then is Rob’s point is moot, because all of those who lost their insurance will resign. Good to know.

            BTW, Rob did forget to mention that, didn’t he? Oh, and when do I get my choice not to buy car insurance?

          • Bat 1

            “Oh, and when do I get my choice not to buy car insurance?”

            Your analogy is bullsh*t, though of course you simply aren’t bright enough to comprehend the difference. Whenever you choose not to drive on roads that are built, maintained, and owned by government then you will not have to buy “car insurance.”

            Incidentally, you really should find an alternative to “So what you are saying is…” Not only does the phrase identify exactly which “Guest” you are, but it also warns that nothing that follows is rational, truthful, or to be taken seriously. Putting on big boy tights, a cape, and a mask doesn’t change the fact that underneath it all you’re still just a scrawny little kid.

          • Guest

            That’s an astonishingly stupid statement, even for you. Are you seriously under the belief that car insurance pays for roads??

            Please, by all means explain what you believe to be the percentage breakdown of car sales tax, registration fees, gas tax, property tax……and care insurance.

            And if you truly believe the only reason car insurance exists is to pay for roads, you are dumber than I thought.

            So please, by all means, clarify.

          • Guest

            1. State Law — It’s what your mom and dad will tell you, but we have to say it too: It’s the law! The number one reason (in the eyes of the state) you must have car insurance is that it is a requirement for even having a vehicle registered in most states. States require car insurance to minimize the overall impact of property damage costs and to reduce the likelihood of huge accident-related medical bills going unpaid. Insurance companies step up to absorb these costs in the event that damage or injury does occur – they are able to do so because you pay your premiums.

            If you are unconvinced that you need to do something just because the law requires it, think about the true financial costs of breaking the law – if you get a ticket for not carrying insurance, that is a couple hundred dollars lost. That money could have paid for part of your premium. If you get another ticket, you could lose your license and even have your vehicle impounded. The costs of paying tickets, regaining your license, and getting your car out of impound will definitely amount to far more than paying a year’s insurance premium. Not to mention, the time lost at work because of not having a car could create even more financial woes and familial inconveniences.

            http://www.accurateautoins.com/why-do-i-need-auto-insurance/

            You were saying???????

          • Bat 1

            “You were saying?”

            What I was saying, and will repeat since you are too willfully comprehensive deficit, is this,

            “Your analogy is bullsh*t, though of course you simply aren’t bright enough to comprehend the difference. Whenever you choose not to drive on roads that are built, maintained, and owned by government then you will not have to buy ‘car insurance.'” The authority for government to require that vehicles on public roads carry at least minimum levels of insurance derives from the fact that they are PUBLIC ROADS. That is, roads “built, maintained, and owned by government.” By comparison, an individual who owns a large tract of land on which there are PRIVATE roads not available to the public does not have to carry any sort of insurance to drive on his own provate roads, so long as that is the only place he drives.

          • ellinas1

            Your analogy is bullsh*t, though of course you simply are bright enough to comprehend the difference.

          • Bat 1

            We can argue the exact definition of an analogy some other time, but thanks for the compliment in any case!

          • ellinas1

            Shhhhh! Quiet!
            Are you trying to cause me problems?

            PS: Don’t mention it, you’re welcome.

          • Guest

            Sorry, Batty, your wrong. You can’t even drive a car off the lot without showing it’s insured when they are financed. And nobody only drives a car on their property, only. Not many people can afford to buy a car outright.

            You are just displaying our adolescent defiance to admit I was right and you were wrong. Once again, here are the real reasons why 99.9 percent of people MUST buy insurance:

            1. State Law — It’s what your mom and dad will
            tell you, but we have to say it too: It’s the law! The number one
            reason (in the eyes of the state) you must have car insurance is that it
            is a requirement for even having a vehicle registered in most states.
            States require car insurance to minimize the overall impact of property damage costs and to reduce the likelihood of huge accident-related medical bills going unpaid. Insurance companies step up to absorb these costs in the event that damage or injury does occur – they are able to do so because you pay your premiums.

            If you are unconvinced that you need to do something just because the
            law requires it, think about the true financial costs of breaking the
            law – if you get a ticket for not carrying insurance, that is a couple
            hundred dollars lost. That money could have paid for part of your
            premium. If you get another ticket, you could lose your license and
            even have your vehicle impounded. The costs of paying tickets,
            regaining your license, and getting your car out of impound will
            definitely amount to far more than paying a year’s insurance premium.
            Not to mention, the time lost at work because of not having a car could
            create even more financial woes and familial inconveniences.

            2. Financial Ruin — Besides obeying the insurance
            laws (because that’s what’s best for everyone!) another reason to carry
            insurance is because of the great possibility of actually getting into
            an accident! Who can afford the costs of an accident? Most individuals
            cannot. Whether you care about your own car or not, you could still
            hit a Mercedes, or worse yet you could hit a car full of children. And
            no matter what you may think, you have no control over this! Insurance insures that you will be financially prepared to fix that Mercedes, to pay
            those children’s medical bills, and have someone on your side in case of
            a lawsuit — whether you have any intention of fixing your own car or
            not.

          • Guest

            You’re wrong…not your.

  • Luke Livingood

    Even when I was a young 20-something ‘invincible’, I always bought health insurance. My major medical cost about $150/month. Although I would rather have had a new motorcycle, my concern was that if I got cancer or got in a car wreck I’d never be able to get insured again due to a pre-existing condition. But if I were still in my 20’s now, I would not pay $500/month health insurance. I’d get the motorcycle instead, for $500/month and I’d pay the $95 fine with my taxes. Because I’d know that I can just wait until I get sick, then I can jump online and get some of that Obamacare to pay my doctor’s bills. Why would anyone do anything different? Seems to me that for millions of healthy Americans, rather then encouraging folks to get health insurance, the new rules actually discourage folks from buying health insurance, because they can just wait until they get sick, and then get it. Or am I missing something?

    • JoeMN

      The only thing you are missing is the big hole in the left’s thought process that young healthy people would line up to carry the burden.

  • http://Sayanythingblog.com The Whistler

    You have to realize that the government just gained power over, not just the 4.2 million new signups but they have power over the 6.17 million people that lost their insurance because they are more vulnerable.

    This wasn’t about helping people. It was about power for the Democrat party. I’m sure there were a few people that voted for the plan out of good intentions but for the most of them it was a naked grab of power.

    • henrycat

      Dr. Emanuel, one of the plans designers said a few days ago. “You can kiss your Insurance Company goodbye forever…..” Sebelius now has some “millions” of enrollees but may need a little more time…… No one in charge of this monstrosity can tell you how many have paid for this wonderful healthcare law. But, all in all, it doesn’t really matter to these people since the grand design was for it to fail. It is important for them to delay certain aspects of the law to get by the 2014 and 2016 elections. Meanwhile, you know it will cost each us dearly to bail out this system until an opposition majority can control both houses and the Presidency.

  • Tim Anderson

    Is there a nonpartisan source for the 6.17 million number, because I’ve already read where those who lost insurance actually got cheaper plans under Obamacare with lower deductible and the “lost” plans were actually lacking a number of things included in Obamacare. I got my plan, and I get a reduced cost for my first two doctor’s visits.

    • AV

      In total, (from memory, the CBO estimates that) there’ll be about 13 million more insured people, due to the ACA, and about 97% of people will have the same or better value healthcare plans. The 3% losers are mostly the very wealthy & healthy.

      So Rob’s stats are just selective use and interpretation of data.

      • Thresherman

        Two things; first, any estimate the CBO makes is suspect because their projections have to be based on assumptions included in the legislation rather than actuality. Second, if 97% of us are going to have same or better value health plans, why is Obama delaying implementation prior to elections when Democrats would clearly benefit if what you say is true? Seriously, should they not then be demanding that implementation be speeded up so they can reap their just rewards at election time? In reality, Obama is delaying implementation because he and all Democrats are afraid that reaping thier just rewards is exactly is what is going to happen come election day.

        • AV

          1) Yup, current data shows that 2014 results will probably be worse than CBO projections (but not by too much, considering the website footshot).

          2) Since fines and govt. mandates are heavy-handed, thus bad for PR, I’m guessing that Obama is just playing electioneering?

          If people get used to the ACA, and see that the negative stories are mostly just GOP spin, then his strat. might work.

          Also, I doubt that ACA fallout is going to affect the Dem’s that much (even though few like it), because GOP has nothing better to offer here (and nearly everyone knows this) — the old system was too broken, and if people realize that they can now change jobs more freely, retire earlier, cut back hours, etc., then GOP loses.

          • Bat 1

            “GOP has nothing better to offer here (and nearly everyone knows this)”

            Apparently you are unaware of the Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility, and Empowerment Act, or the Patient CARE Act, authored by GOP Senators Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, and Orin Hatch. A concise summary can be found here http://www.hatch.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/bf0c9823-29c7-4078-b8af-aa9a12213eca/The%20Patient%20CARE%20Act%20-%20LEGISLATIVE%20PROPOSAL.pdf , and an objective analysis can be found here http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2014/02/12/a-senate-gop-health-reform-proposal-the-burr-coburn-hatch-plan/. You should read up on the differences, including the tax consequences, rather than baldly misstating that there is no GOP alternative.

            BTW, “… and nearly everyone knows” is exactly the sort of phrase that suggests that you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

          • AV

            I’m aware that proposals exist, but (GOP being GOP) they’re very “let them eat cake” flavored, so good luck trying to build popular support for them!

          • Bat 1

            “…they’re very “let them eat cake” flavored…”

            Translation: You haven’t read it, and have no idea what’s in, much less how it’s provisions compare to the 2500 page ACA monstrosity that no one was allowed to see until after it was passed and signed into law.

      • Drain52

        More rumination than question, but I wonder how hard the other shoe will drop when Obamacare affects already-existing employer health care plans in 2015.

    • Drain52

      Do those alleged lower costs include the Obama subsidies?

      • Tim Anderson

        Of course Drain, I got a Bronze plan for 4,200 dollars, from Anthem Blue Cross for Zero cost to me. Do I like getting govt. assistance for the first time in my life? No. But I’m self employed and I’m 56…no way I can afford a 4,000 dollar plan or health insurance. The system is broken, costs have skyrocketed, I paid for my own health insurance until I was 49 and then the costs went up dramatically. I’ve been without, praying I don’t get sick. Let’s remember, the only GOP ” plan” is a write-off on your taxes for the same plan bought from Anthem…so really it’s a tax break (revenue lost to the govt.) vs. a subsidy (revenue lost from the govt.)…they’re both the same thing unless you have no income. Then, what do you do under the GOP plan?

        • JoeMN

          The system is broken, costs have skyrocketed, I paid for my own health
          insurance until I was 49 and then the costs went up dramatically.
          ________
          Tim

          The cost of care is still high
          The only difference is that now someone else pays your premiums.

          In other words, the system is still broken.

        • JoeMN

          I’ve been without, praying I don’t get sick.

          ______________
          What a coincidence.
          Under Obamacare, the young and healthy are now without coverage, hoping and praying they wont get sick.

          I said this before, and I will say it again;
          It’s amazing that a boomer generation so enamored with hope and change, and allegedly concerned with the greed of others is so quick to vote exclusively their own personal economic self interests.

          • Tim Anderson

            That’s absolutely not true. You can stay on your parents plan until you’re 26. The Obamacare plan is BEGGING young and healthy people to sign up…if they’re without coverage it’s their own fault. Neither party can force responsibility.

          • JoeMN

            The Obamacare plan is BEGGING young and healthy people to sign up..

            ________

            Of course they are.

            In fact, a 260 % premium increase means they are now expected to subsidize YOUR plan

            http://americanactionforum.org/research/premium-increases-for-young-invincibles-under-the-aca-and-the-impending

          • Tim Anderson

            Nice half truth…you can’t make a valid point unless you have a basis to begin with…260 percent on a 100 dollar a month policy is 260 dollars…the horror. AAforum is a right wing 501 c 3 PAC, I’m sure they have no agenda to slant the figures.

          • JoeMN

            , I’m sure they have no agenda to slant the figures.
            __________
            Yet all you can do is discredit the source ?
            What this means is that the average non smoking 30 year old North Dakotan working to feed his family will pay an extra $1,728 on just his own policy annually, so another spoiled boomer who voted for hopeandchange (and who also currently hold 70 % of all disposable income) can retire early with free healthcare.

          • Tim Anderson

            Again, you don’t post annual income…if he’s making a million a year that sounds reasonable. How come you and Bat 1 won’t post your hypothetical examples with an income figure so it can be checked because it’s pretty easy to do on Healthcare.gov??? A person in N. Dakota, 30 years old making 23,000 can get an Obamacare plan for 36 bucks a month. At 40 grand a year it’s 204 a month…if he makes more than that, you’ll still be able to write that off on your taxes. The President makes 450k a year, and his Bronze plan was 400 a month…so if your buddy makes more than that…quit whining.

          • JoeMN

            It’s so easy to dismiss those working 30 something year olds with families who do not qualify for subsidies as millionaires, isn’t it ?
            The cutoff for government subsidies is $46,000 for a single person, not $460,000..
            They are the ones Obama expects to cancel cable, and cell phone service.
            Yet these same yahoos pushing consumer debt as economic growth still expect them to pay down that student loan debt, buy a house, ect ect

            BTW what gives you the right to denigrate those who must now pay exorbitant prices for health insurance when THEY are the ones expected to pay so you can get covered for free ?

            I can only imagine demonizing them assuages you and your feelings of envy

          • Tim Anderson

            You keep making straw man arguments…you change the criteria of your argument so it makes a point completely different from what I posted. I never said the cutoff…I’m saying you can buy insurance on the exchange AT ANY INCOME LEVEL. Before if you had a preexisting condition, you couldn’t buy it AT ANY PRICE. What part of that do you not understand? Those that make a lot of money have to contribute more to tax payments because we live in a society. Even if you take welfare and food stamps out of the entire equation, we still need trillions to pay for roads, defense, education etc. The 400 richest Americans have as much wealth as the bottom 150 million. Think about that. They pay, because of cap gains and dividends, as average annual rate of 16 percent. That’s why they pay the taxes, because they have the money. This isn’t a matter of jealousy, it’s a matter of fairness.

          • tony_o2

            “The 400 richest Americans”
            I thought we were talking about middle class, healthy, young people that are now paying more so you can get it for free?

          • two_amber_lamps

            I don’t think Tim-may knows WHERE he’s going with his meandering, mewling diatribe. He’s just got to remember to touch on all the liberal talking points and make sure to demonize “the rich” in there somewhere.

            You know, touch all the bases, check all the boxes.

            Frankly I doubt the likes of Tim-may cares where the funding for his gimme-dats come from, middle class, rich, or the 27 y.o. healthy male population this Obomination was intended to be facilitated upon.

          • JoeMN

            We were.
            It’s just that Tim, after realizing his weak position of trying to justify his free care on the backs of those young healthy people, has now decided to switch to a class envy argument.

          • Onslaught1066

            His universe is divided into the “Haves” and the “Why Not’s?”.

          • JoeMN

            you change the criteria of your argument so it makes a point completely different from what I posted
            _______
            My focus has been and remains on those who are expected to pay for your free insurance policy under OCare.

          • Bat 1

            “Neither party can force responsibility.”

            Apparently, the Obama cult does not agree, since the very foundation of the ACA is to force people who neither need nor want health insurance coverage to buy it, or face IRS “penalties” for not doing so.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Oh that gop plan!

            It’s like socialnazicommieism!

        • Bat 1

          Tim, If a $4,000 health insurance plan is beyond your financial resources, why don’t you do as Obama has suggested and cancel your cell phone and/or cable service to be able to pay for your healthcare premiums?

          • JoeMN

            That’s what 30 something working folks will have to do.

          • Tim Anderson

            I don’t have a cell phone or cable. Bat 1…45 million people in my same boat…you’re like the guy using a tea cup to bailout the Titanic. Keep pretending the rest of the world is the problem and not the runaway health care cost.

        • Bat 1

          Tim Anderson, BTW, if you’ve actually spent the past 7 years self-employed yet unable to pay $400 per month for health insurance, seems to me you are long overdue to find another, more remunerative line of work.

          Of course, it could also be that you are cheating on your tax returns in order to qualify for the subsidy from the taxpayers. If you’ll post a copy of your returns for the past couple years, minus your name, address, and SSAN, I’ll be glad to review it for you and see if I can find a way for you to be less of a financial burden on your fellow Americans. As a semi-retired mortgage broker, I’ve probably reviewed and evaluated 100 times more returns than you have prepared in your lifetime – personal and corporate – so it really wouldn’t involve any great effort on my part. Really.

          • JoeMN

            A key feature of OCare to Tim is that it provides a huge advantage for the “cash poor asset rich” self employed

            To be eligible for subsidized coverage, your income would have to be between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($11,490 to $45,960 for a single person in 2013).

            “Income” in this case means modified adjusted gross income

            “Assets would not be counted, except for any income that’s generated from the assets

            http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/features/insuring-your-health/2013/070213-michelle-andrews-answers-readers-questions-on-assets-and-student-health-plans.aspx

            Given these facts, we can now understand why Tim was so quick to deride the GOP plan, which would provide tax incentives to the individual rather than outright subsidy.

            It’s because Tim (just as his pal Warren Buffet) is likely able to adjust his taxable income downward.

            The GOP plan conversely would reward only those self employed individuals who show taxable income.

            As a 56 year old boomer, Tim is likely to consume a lot more healthcare than a 30 year old family man with less means.
            But “fairness” to Tim is that this 30 year old should pay more, so that Tim can pay nothing.

          • Tim Anderson

            Joe…I paid for health insurance from 28 to 49. I never got sick. Sorry, my bad.

          • JoeMN

            And this makes you entitled to health insurance on someone else’s dime exactly how ?

          • Tim Anderson

            Bat..which is it, there are no jobs for people because Obama’s economy stinks, or it’s pretty easy to just run out and find a new job at 56? I got hit pretty hard by the recession. I’m still weighing my options right now. Medical debt is the number one source of bankruptcies in America now. The fact that I can pay all my bills with the exception of health insurance means I have it better than most.

          • JoeMN

            It’s obvious you have weighed your options.
            And you choose to stay self employed, and obviously adjusting your taxable income downward so as to gain insurance coverage at someone else’s expense.
            Other boomers who formerly worked for insurance benefits are now choosing to quit their jobs for the same reason.
            Obamacare is basically a tax on young working folks (many with dependent children of their own) who are now expected to pick up the tab

          • Tim Anderson

            You guys like to portray Europe as a socialist hell hole, but a teacher there makes around 61,000 a year, has free health care, free elementary and secondary education for all of their children, a longer life expectancy rate and they only pay about 10 percent more in taxes than we do. Keep defending the rich…I’m sure they’ll thank you. Mitt paid a whooping 14 percent in taxes on 20 million in income. In your world, that’s paying your fair share…in mine it’s actually making a middle class person making 50k a year pay more or for the country to go into massive debt. The GOP in this country has chosen the later starting with the tax cuts in 2001 which left us 6 trillion in debt.

          • Onslaught1066

            Sounds like a really nice place to be… question is, why don’t you?

            Are you too stupid, too lazy or too undesirable for European tastes?

          • LastBestHope

            The happy headline, printed everywhere: Obamacare Enrollment Hits 5 Million!

            The Fine Print, Part One: “Officials have not said how many of those who have enrolled have paid their initial premiums.

            The Fine Print, Part Two:

            Americans buying health insurance outside the new Obamacare exchanges are being forced to swallow premiums up to 56 percent higher than before the health law took effect because insurers have jumped the cost to cover all the added features of the new Affordable Care Act.

            According to a cost report from eHealthInsurance, a nationwide online private insurance exchange, families are paying an average of $663 a month and singles $274 a month, far more than before Obamacare kicked in. What’s more, to save money, most buyers are choosing the lowest level of coverage, the so-called “bronze” plans.

            The Fine Print, Part Three: Heck of a year for Obamacare; not only did it trigger the Lie of the Year, but opportunistic sleazebags — I mean the ones outside of Congress — used it for what the Council of Better Business Bureaus called, “The Scam of the Year.”

            Jim Geraghty, NRO

          • LastBestHope

            “Scammers had a field day with the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, using it as a way to fool Americans into sharing their personal information. Scammers would call claiming to be from the federal government and saying the would-be victim needed a new insurance card or Medicare card. However, before they can mail the card, they need to collect personal information. Scammers do a lot to make their requests seem credible. For example, they may have your bank’s routing number and ask you to provide your account number. Or, they may ask for your credit card or Social Security number, Medicare ID, or other personal information. But sharing personal information with a scammer puts you at risk for identity theft.

            “That’s not the fault of the administration!” Democrats will scream. Yes, but enacting a massively complicated, confusing, constantly-changing piece of legislation that affects the health insurance and care of every American is pretty much setting the stage and opening the door for every shyster from Topanga to Berlin.”

            Jim Geraghty, NRO

    • Bat 1

      “I’ve already read where those who lost insurance actually got cheaper plans under Obamacare”
      I would treat the source of what you’ve read with a great deal of skepticism. A friend and neighbor of mine who has been self-employed for more than 20 years is a cancer survivor for the past five years. His previous insurance carrier had kept his policy in place with annual rate hikes averaging roughly 4%, despite his “pre-existing condition.” He was cancelled solely because of Obamacare, and the policy he was forced to buy through the exchange did not have anywhere near the coverages that his previous policy had and his premium and deductible were more than double what he had been paying.

      If what those “lost” plans were lacking include such things as maternity coverage for women over 55 or Alzheimer’s coverage for thirty-somethings, its hard for a rational mind to regard that as an improvement. If your own plan is an improvement, that’s good for you. But that hardly excuses the wholesale rape of the rest of American society by a “signature achievement” that even Obama himself is now coyly backing away from.

      • Tim Anderson

        You know it’s free to look up the price at the Healthcare.gov website. Wholesale rape? Please, that’s just hyperbole a very sad debating technique that usually means you’re lying or you need sensationalism to drive home a point. Give me your friend’s age, sex, state they live in, and income (no personal info. please) and I’ll run the numbers for you. Please give me the monthly fee they’re paying now and we’ll see where this lands.

        • Bat 1

          Hyperbole means you’re lying. Hmmm… Dealing as I do with so many liberal screechers, here and elsewhere online, I will definitiely have to remember this. Since he is my friend, and has been for 20 years, I have no reason to doubt what he told me, much less intimate that he lied. Sorry.

          As for “wholesale rape” that may seem hyperbolic to those enamored with Obama’s “signature achievement”, but when you carefully consider the lies, distortions, and deceit by those who made it happen, from Obama to Pelosi, to Reid. to Sebelius and of course Jay Carney, the term is hardly as over-the-top as you portray it.

          Nor has the dishonesty stopped. Yesterday the HHS Secretary testified that she has no way of knowing how many of those who have enrolled (and we have only her Department’s word on that number) have actually paid the premium and have the coverage they are reported to have. If that isn’t a lie, it is indicative of gross incompetence. And in the real, private sector world, reason enough to fire her on the spot.

          • Tim Anderson

            So you don’t want to run the numbers? Gotcha…. Well, I think it’s pretty obvious you haven’t actually run the numbers, and now you’re afraid to go to the website because all these false allegations can be proven at Healthcare.gov. That’s sad.

          • Bat 1

            As I said above, I have known my friend for 20 years. I have financed projects for him, partied with him, helped him with his taxes, been there for him through his divorce, and his cancer treatments. I have no reason to question his veracity or his motives.

            You, on the other hand, I don’t know at all. And to be honest, what you think isn’t much of a concern to me. Sorry.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            Give Tim some numbers, B O.
            Go on. Do it.

          • Guest

            You have always been there for your friend, but now that he’s in real need of healthcare, you abandon him. Too bad. It seems to me a real friend would ask him for some help and help him find insurance. But, that’s just what I would do if I cared about someone. What will YOU do, BO?

            Why not let Tim help out, if you aren’t willing to be a good friend?

          • Guest

            Revision: It seems to me a real friend would ask him for some data.

          • Bat 1

            It seems to me you know almost as little about friendship as you do about insurance, mortgage underwriting, or really any other subject you witlessly comment on here.

          • Guest

            Give Tim the numbers Bat, give your friend some help that he needs.

          • Guest

            Read my lips: No New Taxes.

            You know what that means, The Ends Justify The Means…or communism, Nazi’s….or something, right? Isn’t that the card you play all the time, you big intellectual you?

      • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

        Exactly, B O!

        Oh, well, here’s a story from a long time gop and former gop chairman who said he is saving about 50% under the ACA.

        But like most gops, you can’t trust them, because they’re liars, right?

        …Whatever problems existed last October, the site is pretty impressive now, intuitive for people who are used to using smartphones and tablets.…There are plans available that could save us money and are compatible with our Health Savings Account.

        http://www.unionleader.com/article/20140313/OPINION02/140319368

        • Guest

          Bat One: “But Obama made some campaign promises and it didn’t work out as they expected…so, LIARS….or something. The ends justify the means….Nazi’s and Communists….er somethin.”

  • mickey_moussaoui

    We need insurance to protect us from Obamacare insurance

  • bobg

    got mine and very happy

  • schreib

    How do the young buy health insurance when THEY HAVE NO JOB??

    • Bat 1

      Well, since the Obama economy can’t provide gainful, full time employment opportunities, perhaps what’s needed is a source for bogus documentation so that “the young” can stay on their parents’ insurance until there is a substantial change for the better in Washington. Perhaps if there was someone with experience in bogus birth certificates…?

Top