For "Obamacare" haters

Obamacare: Myths vs Truths

Verbatum from YahooFinance.com

Starting today individuals can sign up for health care insurance by way of the exchanges created under the Affordable Care Act. So far seventeen states and the District of Columbia have set up their own exchanges, also known as insurance marketplaces; the rest will use either the federal health insurance exchange or run a joint state-federal exchange to provide coverage.

It's been a bumpy ride so far, given the complexity of the effort and the politics surrounding it. Many Republican Congressional members are hell-bent on defunding Obamacare even though it's law and the Supreme Court reaffirmed its constitutionality. They won't agree to continue funding the government unless Obamacare is defunded or delayed by a year. And Democrats -- in Congress and the White House -- are firmly committed to just the opposite: implementing Obamacare.
That leaves us where we are today: a government that is partially shut down and lots of confusion about coverage under the ACA.

Lori Robertson, managing director of Factcheck.org, spoke with The Daily Ticker's Aaron Task, about some of the major misrepresentations surrounding Obamacare.

We'll try to help set the record straight so read on:


Myth #1: Health Care Premiums are Rising.

Robertson says whether health care premiums are rising or falling for individuals depends on their particular situation. "Whether your new plan on the exchanges...is going to be more or less what you're paying now really depends on you," says Robertson. "If you have a health condition you may see a decrease. If you don't, you may see an increase."
Related: Obamacare Could Mean Lower Rates in These Three States
You health insurance premium will also depend where you buy your insurance--including the state and locality--your age and your income. (At certain income levels, participants in so-called "silver" plans--the second cheapest--can qualify for government subsidies, which would reduce costs.


Myth #2: Obamacare is Killing Jobs.

Robertson says there's little evidence that Obamacare is a job killer. "The CBO has estimated it will have a small impact on jobs and ...mainly from workers choosing to work less," says Robertson. She explains that some people may reduce their working hours because they no longer need a second or third job to pay insurance premiums, while others may choose to retire early knowing they can't be denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions.

Myth #3: You Can't Choose Your Own Doctor Under Obamacare.
Not true, says Robertson. "There's nothing in the law that's going to pick your doctor for you," says Robertson. But she notes that "some exchanges may have a small provider network," so if you choose such a plan you may have to choose a new doctor.


Myth #4: The Increase in Health Care Spending is Slowing Because of Obamacare.

Another misconception, says Robertson: "Experts have said that the overwhelming reason" for the slower rise in health care costs is "the down economy." She cites a Kaiser Family Foundation report that found that 77% of this deceleration is due to the economy.


Myth #5: Congress is Exempt from Obamacare.

Not true, says Robertson. "Congress is not exempt from the law...The law says that Congress and its staffers have to get their coverage through the exchanges that are being set up." But, Robertson says, the federal government can help pay for the premiums of that coverage, just as it does now under the Federal Employee Health Benefits program for Congress and staffers.

Scuzzbuckets of the Week

I am really at a loss as to how the GOP thinks. They continuously try to kill the Affordable Care Act (AKA Obamacare). I heard somewhere that they have fought the plan - which is now the law - over 45 different times. And the cost of their temper tantrums is unimaginable.

Their latest move is to slash Food Stamp funding in order to effort to effort to "pare the cost and size of government by reducing federal spending." As if there aren't any other alternatives to cut federal spending.

The map below shows Food Stamp averages by state for 2012. Not all Food Stamp recipients are living on the government dole, as some like to think of them. The average Food Stamp monthly benefit in 2012 is $133 per month. Yeah, that's sure dragging down government spending

Food stamp monthly averages 2012 participation in SNAP, as a percent of total state population

Here - by state - are the names of those people who voted to cut $39 million dollars over the next decade for Food Stamps.


Alabama

Robert Aderholt

Spencer Bachus

Mo Brooks

Martha Roby
Mike Rogers

Arizona

Trent Franks

Paul A. Gosar

Matt Salmon

David Schweikert

Arkansas

Tom Cotton

Rick Crawford

Tim Griffin

Steve Womack

Robert Woodall

California

Ken Calvert

John Campbell

Paul Cook

Jeff Denham

Duncan D. Hunter

Darrell Issa

Doug LaMalfa

Kevin McCarthy

Tom McClintock

Buck McKeon

Devin Nunes

Dana Rohrabacher

Ed Roycei

Colorado

Mike Coffman

Cory Gardner

Doug Lamborn

Scott Tipton

Florida

Gus Bilirakis

Vern Buchanan

Ander Crenshaw

Ron DeSantis

Mario Diaz-Balart

John Mica

Jeff Miller

Richard Nugent

Bill Posey

Trey Radel

Tom Rooney

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

Dennis Ross

Steve Southerland

Daniel Webster

Ted Yoho

C.W. Bill Young

Georgie

Paul Broun

Doug Collins

Phil Gingrey

Tom Graves

Jack Kingston

Tom Price (R-Ga.)

Austin Scott

Lynn A. Westmoreland

Idaho

Raul R. Labrador

Mike Simpson

Illinois

Rodney Davis

Randy Hultgren

Adam Kinzinger

Peter J. Roskam

Aaron Schock

John Shimkus

Indiana

Susan W. Brooks

Larry Bucshon

Luke Messer

Todd Rokita

Marlin Stutzman

Jackie Walorski

Todd Young

Iowa

Steve King

Tom Latham

Kansas

Tim Huelskamp

Lynn Jenkins

Mike Pompeo

Kevin Yoder

Kentucky

Andy Barr

Brett S. Guthrie

Thomas Massie

Harold Rogers

Ed Whitfield

Louisiana

Rodney Alexander

Charles Boustany

William Cassidy

John Fleming

Steve Scalise

Maryland

Andy Harris

Michigan

Justin Amash

Dan Benishek

Kerry Bentivolio

Dave Camp

Bill Huizenga

Candice Miller

Mike Rogers

Fred Upton

Tim Walberg

Minnesota

Michele Bachmann

John Kline

Erik Paulsen

Mississippi

Gregg Harper (R-Miss.)

Alan Nunnelee

Steven Palazzo

Missouri

Sam Graves

Vicky Hartzler

Billy Long

Blaine Luetkemeyer

Jason Smith

Ann Wagner

Montana

Steve Daines

Nebraska

Lee Terry

Adrian Smith

Nevada

Mark Amodei

Joe Heck

New Jersey

Rodney Frelinghuysen

Scott Garrett

Leonard Lance

Jon Runyan

New Mexico

Steve Pearce

New York

Chris Collins

Tom Reed

North Carolina

Howard Coble

Renee Ellmers

Virginia Foxx

George Holding

Richard Hudson

Patrick T. McHenry

Mark Meadows (R-N.C.)

Robert Pittenger

North Dakota

Kevin Cramer

Ohio

John Boehner

Steve Chabot

Bob Gibbs

Bill Johnson

Jim Jordan

David Joyce

Robert E. Latta

Jim Renacci

Steve Stivers

Pat Tiberi

Michael Turner

Brad Wenstrup

Oklahoma

Jim Bridenstine

Tom Cole

James Lankford

Frank Lucas

Markwayne Mullin

Oregon

Greg Walden (R-Ore.)

Pennsylvania

Lou Barletta

Charles W. Dent

Jim Gerlach

Mike Kelly

Tom Marino

Tim Murphy

Scott Perry

Joseph R. Pitts

Keith Rothfus

Bill Shuster

Glenn W. Thompson

South Carolina

Jeff Duncan

Trey Gowdy

Mick Mulvaney

Tom Rice

Mark Sanford

Joe Wilson (R-S.C.)

South Dakota

Kristi Noem

Tennessee

Diane Black

Marsha Blackburn

Scott DesJarlais

John J. Duncan, Jr.

Stephen Fincher

Chuck Fleischmann

Phil Roe

Texas

Joe Barton

Kevin Brady

Michael C. Burgess

John Carter

Michael K. Conaway

John Culberson

Blake Farenthold

Bill Flores

Louie Gohmert

Kay Granger

Ralph M. Hall

Jeb Hensarling

Sam Johnson

Kenny Marchant

Michael T. McCaul

Randy Neugebauer

Pete Olson

Ted Poe

Pete Sessions

Lamar Smith

Steve Stockman

Mac Thornberry

Randy Weber

Roger Williams

Utah

Rob Bishop

Jason Chaffetz

Chris Stewart

Virginia

Eric Cantor

Randy J. Forbes

Bob Goodlatte

Morgan Griffith

Robert Hurt

Scott Rigell

Robert J. Wittman

Washington

Doc Hastings

Cathy McMorris Rodgers

David G. Reichert

West Virginia

David McKinley

Wisconsin

Sean P. Duffy

Thomas Petri

Reid Ribble

Paul Ryan

James F. Sensenbrenner

Wyoming

Cynthia M. Lummis

Five Obamacare Myths

Five Obamacare Myths
By BILL KELLER
of nytimes.com


ON the subject of the Affordable Care Act — Obamacare, to reclaim the name critics have made into a slur — a number of fallacies seem to be congealing into accepted wisdom. Much of this is the result of unrelenting Republican propaganda and right-wing punditry, but it has gone largely unchallenged by gun-shy Democrats. The result is that voters are confronted with slogans and side issues — “It’s a tax!” “No, it’s a penalty!” — rather than a reality-based discussion. Let’s unpack a few of the most persistent myths.

OBAMACARE IS A JOB-KILLER.
The House Republican majority was at it again last week, staging the 33rd theatrical vote to roll back the Affordable Care Act. And once again the cliché of the day was “job-killer.” After years of trying out various alarmist falsehoods the Republicans have found one that seems, judging from the polls, to have connected with the fears of voters.

Some of the job-killer scare stories are based on a deliberate misreading of a Congressional Budget Office report that estimated the law would “reduce the amount of labor used in the economy” by about 800,000 jobs. Sounds like a job-killer, right? Not if you read what the C.B.O. actually wrote. While some low-wage jobs might be lost, the C.B.O. number mainly refers to workers who — being no longer so dependent on employers for their health-care safety net — may choose to retire earlier or work part time. Those jobs would then be open for others who need them.

The impartial truth squad FactCheck.org has debunked the job-killer claim so many times that in its latest update you can hear a groan of weary frustration: words like “whopper” and “bogus” and “hooey.” The job-killer claim is also discredited by the experience under the Massachusetts law on which Obamacare was modeled.

Ultimately the Affordable Care Act could be a tonic for the economy. It aims to slow the raging growth of health care costs by, among other things, using the government’s Medicare leverage to move doctors away from exorbitant fee-for-service medicine, with its incentive to pile on unnecessary procedures. Two veteran health economists, David Cutler of Harvard and Karen Davis, president of the Commonwealth Fund, have calculated that over the first decade of Obamacare total spending on health care, in part by employers, will be half a trillion dollars lower than under the status quo.

OBAMACARE IS A FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF HEALTH INSURANCE.
Let’s be blunt. The word for that is “lie.” The main thing the law does is deliver 30 million new customers to the private insurance industry. Indeed, a significant portion of the unhappiness with Obamacare comes from liberals who believe it is not nearly federal enough: that the menu of insurance choices should have included a robust public option, or that Medicare should have been expanded into a form of universal coverage.

Under the law, to be sure, insurance will be governed by new regulations, and supported by new subsidies. This is not the law Ayn Rand would have written. But the share of health care spending that comes from the federal government is expected to rise only modestly, to nearly 50 percent in 2021, and much of that is due not to Obamacare but to baby boomers joining Medicare.

This is a “federal takeover” only in the crazy world where Barack Obama is a “socialist.”

THE UNFETTERED MARKETPLACE IS A BETTER SOLUTION.
To the extent there is a profound difference of principle anywhere in this debate, it lies here. Conservatives contend that if you give consumers a voucher or a tax credit and set them loose in the marketplace they will do a better job than government at finding the services — schools, retirement portfolios, or in this case health insurance policies — that fit their needs.

I’m a pretty devout capitalist, and I see that in some cases individual responsibility helps contain wasteful spending on health care. If you have to share the cost of that extra M.R.I. or elective surgery, you’ll think hard about whether you really need it. But I’m deeply suspicious of the claim that a health care system dominated by powerful vested interests and mystifying in its complexity can be tamed by consumers who are strapped for time, often poor, sometimes uneducated, confused and afraid.

“Ten percent of the population accounts for 60 percent of the health outlays,” said Davis. “They are the very sick, and they are not really in a position to make cost-conscious choices.”

LEAVE IT TO THE STATES. THEY’LL FIX IT.
The Republican alternative to Obamacare consists in large part of letting each state do its own thing. Presumably the best ideas will go viral.

States do have a long history of pioneering new ideas, sometimes enlightened (Oregon’s vote-by-mail comes to mind) and sometimes less benign (see Florida’s loopy gun laws). Obamacare actually underwrites pilot programs to reduce costs, and gives states freedom — some would argue too much freedom — in designing insurance-buying exchanges. But the best ideas don’t spread spontaneously. Some states are too poor to adopt worthwhile reforms. Some are intransigent, or held captive by lobbies.

You’ve heard a lot about the Massachusetts law. You may not have heard about the seven other states that passed laws requiring insurers to offer coverage to all. They were dismal failures because they failed to mandate that everyone, including the young and healthy, buy in. Massachusetts — fairly progressive, relatively affluent, with an abundance of health providers — included a mandate and became the successful exception. To expand that program beyond Massachusetts required ... Barack Obama.

OBAMACARE IS A LOSER. RUN AGAINST IT, RUN FROM IT, BUT FOR HEAVEN’S SAKE DON’T RUN ON IT.
When Mitt Romney signed that Massachusetts law in 2006, the coverage kicked in almost immediately. Robert Blendon, a Harvard expert on health and public opinion, recalls the profusion of heartwarming stories about people who had depended on emergency rooms and charity but now, at last, had a regular relationship with a doctor. Romneycare was instantly popular in the state, and remains so, though it seems to have been disowned by its creator.

Unfortunately, the benefits of Obamacare do not go wide until 2014, so there are not yet testimonials from enthusiastic, family-next-door beneficiaries. This helps explain why the bill has not won more popular affection. (It also explains why the Republicans are so desperate to kill it now, before Americans feel the abundant rewards.)

Blendon believes that because of the delayed benefits and the general economic anxiety, “It will be very hard for the Democrats to move the needle” on the issue this election year.

He may be right, but shame on the Democrats if they don’t try. There’s no reason except cowardice for failing to mount a full-throated defense of the law. It is not perfect, but it is humane, it is (thanks to the Supreme Court) fiscally viable, and it comes with some reasonable hopes of reforming the cockeyed way we pay health care providers.

Even before the law takes full effect, it has a natural constituency, starting with every cancer victim, every H.I.V. sufferer, everyone with a condition that now would keep them from getting affordable coverage. Any family that has passed through the purgatory of cancer — as mine did this year, with decent insurance — can imagine the hell of doing it without insurance.

Against this, Mitt Romney offers some vague free-market principles and one unambiguous promise: to dash the hopes of 30 million uninsured, and add a few million to their ranks by slashing Medicaid.

If the Obama campaign needs a snappy one-liner, it could borrow this one from David Cutler: “Never before in history has a candidate run for president with the idea that too many people have insurance coverage.”