U.S. says Obamacare enrollment points to stable costs

Comments (28)
gcf1965 wrote:

Why not make it 15 or 28.27 million. Oh, better yet, it should be a nice round number like 100 million. Really? In the many months leading up to the deadline their own highly suspect numbers were barely able to get 3 million, but suddenly in the last couple of weeks 10 million more supposedly signed up? Sure they did.

May 01, 2014 2:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SaveRMiddle wrote:

[So far, about 240,000 Oregonians have enrolled in coverage through Cover Oregon. More than 69,000 of those enrolled in private health plans, while 171,000 enrolled in the Oregon Health Plan, the state's version of Medicaid.] as of 4-25

http://obamacarefacts.com/insurance-exchange/oregon-health-insurance-exchange.php

8 million now enrolled in private health plans?
4.8 million newly enrolled in Medicaid?

Me no think so.

May 01, 2014 4:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

FYI OR is a small state population wise(4,000,000), and had perhaps the worst internet based exchange of ANY state.

total population of USA is about 316 million, so OR is (4/316) * 100= 1.2% of USA pop. So if 240K signed up in OR that would extrapolate to (100/1.2) *240 K= ~20 million.

So if you used OR as the basis for what total national enrollment is, the number would actually be higher not lower.

It is so easy to destroy the rightie arguments with logic and reason, as they are totally lacking in both considering they are driven by hatred for Obama.

May 01, 2014 5:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
moonhill wrote:

85% got Federal subsidies, i.e. tax dollars. Another third of those enrolled haven’t paid the first premium. Yeah, this is going great.

May 01, 2014 5:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@USAPragmatist2

That is extrapolation. You can also extrapolate that 80% of people paying means out of the 8 million in private plans, only 6.4 million have paid which is still short of the 7 million number the CBO said is needed for this to be financially viable. The other 4.8 million people are enrolling in government programs paid by taxpayers and has no benefit to the risk pool for the private health insurance companies that are going to have to raise our premiums.

This isn’t a rightie argument, it is further extrapolating the numbers provided by the government in the article we just read. I want a real solution, a public health option with no insurance required. The ACA is just going to end up driving the cost of our health insurance up even further. It accomplishes all the feel good things that the Democrats wanted, but it is going to come with the consequences of being unaffordable that all of the Conservatives warned you about, repeatedly, for the last 6 years.

May 01, 2014 5:50pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elsewhere wrote:

About half of those signing for Obamacare aren’t paying premiums. Now what does that say about stability and only 20% of the signees are under 34. This sounds like a receipt for disaster.

May 01, 2014 5:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
lysergic wrote:

GCF1965 YOU ARE THE PERSON MOST WRONG OF ANY POSTER. DO YOU GET PAID BY THE REPUBS TO POST THESE INSANE COMMENTS? ARE THE INSURANCE EXPERTS LYING ALSO. YOU ARE TRULY IGNORANT. I THINK YOU NEED TO APOLOGIZE FOR ALL THE LYING YOU HAVE BEEN DOING. BENGHAZI MORON

May 01, 2014 5:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Premiums were skyrocketing BEFORE Obamacare. Like for the past 20 years. I say this can only help. Why stand still? Try something.

May 01, 2014 6:03pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rich_F wrote:

this is the typical democrat playbook particularly under obama. extrapolate out and have an opinion that is favorable to your policy in order to hoodwink the masses before an election cycle. once you’re past the election cycle who cares until the next cycle where you can play the game all over again. in the current situation we won’t know the true premium increases until they happen AFTER the midterms. by that time it’s too late to change your mind. they did the same thing with pushing out the employer mandate.

if the american people aren’t onto this purposeful deception personally aimed at them than they deserve the folks they elect.

May 01, 2014 6:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
123456951 wrote:

Obamacare screws middle class workers in the private sector; as if they already don’t get screwed enough with all of their salary deductions. That is why Democrats are in trouble, and they know it. Obama can say whatever he wants. Words mean nothing – actions everything….

May 01, 2014 6:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SaveRMiddle wrote:

USAPrag…..

How could anyone believe more Americans are signing up for private plans than Medicaid plans? The promoted ratio in this article is outlandish.

You do realize the inspirational speaker is now a well proven “non-truth” teller…do you not? Liars never stop at one.

Forgive me if I sound like a Repub. I am not.

May 01, 2014 6:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speakerbliss wrote:

Funny how the latest report on the first quarter US economic results, the economic engine driving the quarter was increased health care spending due to more people being insured by the ACA and being able to take care of medical problems.

Note: I said healthcare spending, not increased healthcare cost. Just so you righties don’t jump to the wrong conclusion.

May 01, 2014 6:29pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speakerbliss wrote:

moonhill wrote: 85% got Federal subsidies, i.e. tax dollars. Another third of those enrolled haven’t paid the first premium. Yeah, this is going great.

Just keep on making up numbers, pure example that watching Faux News lowers one’s logical thought process.

May 01, 2014 6:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SR37212 wrote:

@Speakerbliss: So another way of looking at this is that through subsidies the Government is pumping up the economy via ACA.

May 01, 2014 6:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@Speakerbliss

If you are new to insurance companies this is how they work. Increased costs to the company due to some event, next year increased premiums to recoup those costs. This is what happens to your house insurance after a major hurricane comes through and destroys your beach community. For the next 30 years you are paying out the rear for the costs incurred by the health insurnace companies. That increased health care spending is not good news to anyone other than the insurance companies, hospitals, and every bottom feeder in the process.

May 01, 2014 6:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Time to just socialize medicine and get on with it.

Doctors already have a federal mandate (from Reagan’s EMTALA law) that they must treat the ill and injured “regardless citizenship or ability to pay.” So who pays for that reagan gem? Well, for the past 30 years…. all of us rate payers. The doctors raise their bills to those who do have insurance, and the insurance companies just raise the premiums to cover it. Doctors and the middle-men gotta eat. Socialize it. Get on with it.

May 01, 2014 7:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speakerbliss wrote:

SR37212 wrote: So another way of looking at this is that through subsidies the Government is pumping up the economy via ACA.

Government spending has always been part of the economic equation. One reason unemployment jumped was due to lower tax revenues at a state and local level dropping and having to lay off government workers. Here in Tucson, people are whining about the Air Forces shutting down some squadrons.

Consumer spending amounts to about 60% of the economy. You have some states Alaska and New Mexico where government spending to those states exceeds tax revenues, by a large percentage.

The simple thing to have done, move everyone one to Medicare and do away with the middle man, the insurance companies.

May 01, 2014 7:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

As expected, conservatives are expressing their outrage over Americans finally getting healthcare coverage. The extent of your small-minded hatred for your fellow Americans is stunningly sad. I find it repulsive and immoral.

The fact that as many as 20% of those signing up for insurance through the exchange haven’t paid yet is not surprising. Their first payment isn’t due yet. Mine isn’t due until June. Guess I’ll pay mine tomorrow so that the conservatives will be forced to return to “Benghazi!” as their favorite talking point when attacking our first black President, who I’m proud to call my President and who far too many conservatives awaken each morning hating.

May 01, 2014 9:26pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

Speakerbliss: Though I agree with moving everyone to Medicare would have been the smartest way for us to do healthcare reform, it would hardly have been “the simple thing to have done.” In fact, it would have been politically impossible. If you think the ACA was a tough row to hoe for Obama and the Dems, it’s nothing compared to what they would have faced trying to move everyone to Medicare. We would have gotten no healthcare reform, and we needed healthcare reform. In fact, I’m convinced that Obama chose the only healthcare reform plan that had any chance at all of passing, and it barely did.

It’s because our government is run by lobbyists, lobbyists who represent powerful industries. It’s why the “public option” was shot down. The insurance industry found it unacceptable. We really need to do something about corruption in our government. If we decided to have publicly financed elections, we’d be undercutting industry’s ability to bribe our politicians. Until we do something, our “democracy” is but a sham.

May 01, 2014 9:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Lol, so even when the CBO announces the numbers, republicans don’t believe them, even though they frequently cite the CBO themselves.

Is it any wonder these people sound outright crazy?

May 01, 2014 10:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

@Rick_From Texas

‘the numbers are wrong’ is all they have left. History is proving right-wing predictions of doom to be wrong. It is actually hard to think of anything they ever got right…

May 01, 2014 12:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

On the 7 million number that righties keep popping out: first, read the report. It is a prediction, not a necessity. They expected 7 million and they got 7 million. Second, get up to date. As always with righties, you are all parroting out of date information. The CBO revised the figure to 6 million, and may revise it again.

On the ‘wah wah some people haven’t paid’ nonsense, try thinking instead of copying Fox. There is a time lag between enrolment and payment so there will always be people who haven’t paid – yet. It is normal. not a crisis, and trying to spin a routine characteristic into a crisis by pretending that everybody whose payment is not due yet will never pay is practically a lie. and very dishonest at best.

May 01, 2014 12:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

AlkalineState wrote:
“Time to just socialize medicine and get on with it.”

I totally agree with you. Not because I am a ‘lefty’ – in most parts of the world I ma seen as right of centre, only the rabid US right (who think Hitler was a lefty…) see me as socialist.

For me it is economics. Unless you are going to have a system that allows people to die in the street if they can’t pay, healthcare is a public good (using it doesn’t prevent others from using it) and unexcludable – people get to use it whether they pay or not. In those circumstances, simple economics says that the best answer is government financing via taxes.

If not, then freeloaders (those who insist that they have a right to not pay for healthcare) will abuse the system.

The military is another example. They protect everybody whether they pay or not in the same way that hospitals treat everybody, so the military is financed by the government via taxes. I don’t see righties whining about that, or pushing for private funding for the military.

May 01, 2014 12:19am EDT  --  Report as abuse
123456951 wrote:

The Affordable Health Care Act is a Horrible law. It’s great if you are poor, at least for now(family of four making under $30,000 a year), but totally rotton if you are middle class(family of four making $40,000 to $140,000 per year), and especially if you work in the private sector. The rich(above $300,000 per year), as usual, are not affected by it much at all(by the way, most Democrats are rich). The middle class sees the BIG DWINDLE on their paystubs one more time, all for the sake of liberals AND conservatives who really don’t give a damn. Without a middle class, say good-by America.

May 02, 2014 2:38am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JIMFITZSR wrote:

concerning health care costs, i believe that as more transparentcy becomes available free market forces will drive down health care costs.

personal example. yesterday my doctor prescribed a drug that was “over the counter” and not covered on insurance.
cvs price for 1.4 oz tube $140.00
online price 1.4 oz tube $ 44.00
HOW MUCH IS A FAIR PROFIT? OR JUST GREED BECAUSE NO KNOWS FAIR VALUE?

HAD THIS BEEN COVERED BY INSURANCE, UNDER PART D I WOULD HAVE PAID $45.00, BALANCE PAID BY MEDICARE PART D.

May 02, 2014 8:50am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JIMFITZSR wrote:

concerning health care costs, i believe that as more transparentcy becomes available free market forces will drive down health care costs.

personal example. yesterday my doctor prescribed a drug that was “over the counter” and not covered on insurance.
cvs price for 1.4 oz tube $140.00
online price 1.4 oz tube $ 44.00
HOW MUCH IS A FAIR PROFIT? OR JUST GREED BECAUSE NO KNOWS FAIR VALUE?

HAD THIS BEEN COVERED BY INSURANCE, UNDER PART D I WOULD HAVE PAID $45.00, BALANCE PAID BY MEDICARE PART D.

May 02, 2014 8:50am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

Speakerbliss wrote: “Note: I said healthcare spending, not increased healthcare cost. Just so you righties don’t jump to the wrong conclusion.”

Logic concludes if you spend more on health care, then your cost of healthcare will increase. Think hard and even you can figure that out.

May 02, 2014 9:39am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

4825 wrote:
“Logic concludes if you spend more on health care, then your cost of healthcare will increase. Think hard and even you can figure that out.”

I can totally believe that your logic says that, which is why you jumped to the wrong conclusion as Speakerbliss predicted.

Normal logic says that if more people buy something, spending on that product increases but the cost doesn’t. Let me explain. A book, lets call it “Atlas Shrugged”, costs 10 dollars. Ten right-wingers buy it. 100 dollars has been spent on the book. The right-wingers mistake the work of fiction for a reference book, and tell their fellow sheep so another 10 right-wingers buy it, still a 10 dollars per book. Now 200 dollars has been spent so spending on “Atlas Shrugged” has risen, but the cost has remained the same.

May 02, 2014 1:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.