# Oops. Looks like we were lied to about Obamacare after all. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 29, 2013, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534 "2013-10-29T07:22:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 30
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/581 "2013-11-03T20:53:44Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Did you not watch the Sunday Talk shows today? I did. It was a major topic on every single one of them. No, I rarely bother. They’re mostly about looking for cheap points to score. By “nobody else”, I was referring to those interested in actual policy substance and effects - who are \*not \*the majority of the loud, shallow, calculating self-promoters who predominate as guests on the talk shows but cannot be taken as representative of society. Well, I hope they can’t, anyway. > [@](#): > > But that’s not a slam dunk (to borrow a phrase from another administration), regardless of what some here seem to be assuming. What’s the contrary evidence we should be considering, then? > [@](#): > > However, to pretend that nobody is paying attention to this, and that no one (other than rabid partisans) would take note if Obama actually came out and admitted to lying about the ACA is… naive, to put it kindly. Do \*you \*have an answer to the question about what would actually happen, beyond some crowing about point-scoring? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/582 "2013-11-03T21:01:50Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Certainly he was “trying to make the sale”, but that term incorrectly implies he was doing it for \*his \*benefit, not ours. You do go on about wondering why he said what he said - but there’s really no need to wonder. I’m not wondering; I’m agreeing with you, or you’re agreeing with me: we both say he lied because he was trying to make the sale; you’re not wondering; why should I? Sure, you can go on to claim he did it because he believed it would be for our benefit; maybe you’re wrong about him believing that, and if not maybe he’s wrong about it being true – as the latest polling suggests – but that’s _irrelevant;_ in the best-case scenario it’s still like unto indefensible false advertising I wouldn’t give a private citizen a pass on, and in any other case it’s even more reprehensible. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/583 "2013-11-03T21:32:42Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > No, I rarely bother. They’re mostly about looking for cheap points to score. > > By “nobody else”, I was referring to those interested in actual policy substance and effects - who are \*not \*the majority of the loud, shallow, calculating self-promoters who predominate as guests on the talk shows but cannot be taken as representative of society. Well, I hope they can’t, anyway. Sorry, I don’t watch Scottish TV. :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > What’s the contrary evidence we should be considering, then? That’s kinda the point-- there isn’t any evidence, yet. We aren’t going to know until we start seeing what people do. This, I’ve heard, is discussed frequently on Scottish TV. > [@](#): > > Do \*you \*have an answer to the question about what would actually happen, beyond some crowing about point-scoring? You’re the only one talking about point scoring here. If Obama came out and said he lied about ACA, then I think a lot of Democrats would start distancing themselves from him and this legislation, post haste. It would ensure that this issue WAS a major deciding factor in the next election, and (unless Obamacare was a huge success by then) could easily cost the Democrats the Senate and some additional seats in the House, too. But this is idle speculation, because Obama isn’t going to release such a statement. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/584 "2013-11-03T21:38:09Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > If one’s plan was to not have carry any health insurance at all, does one get to complain that he had been lied to about being able to “keep it”? > [@jayjay](#): > > “Obama LIED to me! He said I could keep this piece of absolute shit insurance policy that I spend at least 3 days cursing out loud and long if I have to actually use it somehow and now they took my piece of absolute shit insurance policy away and it’s all Obama’s fault!” That’s kinda what I’m trying to get at (not that anyone has shown any particular interest in taking notice of it). As I honestly can’t imagine someone _liking_ a policy such as that, I feel it’s not dishonest to put it outside the ambit of _“plans that people like and get to keep.”_ ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/585 "2013-11-03T21:44:04Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > As I honestly can’t imagine someone _liking_ a policy such as that, I feel it’s not dishonest to put it outside the ambit of _“plans that people like and get to keep.”_ I honestly can’t imagine telling people they can keep what they like, while thinking to myself _it’s not dishonest, because I get to decide what they like – not them._ ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/586 "2013-11-03T21:54:57Z")
I feel you’re overstating any error there may be in my underlying thought processes. I’ll cop to “projection,” if you insist. ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/587 "2013-11-03T21:57:53Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > You’re required to have liability insurance( in case you hurt someone else or damage someone else’s property). You are not required to have auto insurance to cover yourself. > > Not a good analogy. The mandate under Obamacare or the ACA if you prefer, is like requiring all those people who do not own a car, who bicycle to work, who ride the bus, or walk, to be required to buy automobile insurance. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/588 "2013-11-03T21:59:30Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > That’s kinda what I’m trying to get at (not that anyone has shown any particular interest in taking notice of it). > > As I honestly can’t imagine someone _liking_ a policy such as that, I feel it’s not dishonest to put it outside the ambit of _“plans that people like and get to keep.”_ Well, if you can demonstrate that everyone affected by this has a “piece of shit” insurance policy, or doesn’t _really_ want to keep their doctor when they’re told they can’t, then I think you might have a good point. He lied, but no one was hurt by it. Can you do that? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/589 "2013-11-03T22:03:32Z")
> [@Dallas\_Jones](#): > > The mandate under Obamacare or the ACA if you prefer, is like requiring all those people who do not own a car, who bicycle to work, who ride the bus, or walk, to be required to buy automobile insurance. OK, I can buy that (pun intended). And note that such people are NOT required to buy auto insurance. So the analogy is bad, right? (Not sure if you were agreeing with me or disagreeing.) Remember, the original question was: “why do you think you’re required to have auto insurance if you drive on public roads?” Not, “why do you think you’re required to have auto insurance even if you don’t own an auto and don’t drive on public roads?” ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/590 "2013-11-03T22:11:40Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Well, if you can demonstrate that everyone affected by this has a “piece of shit” insurance policy, or doesn’t _really_ want to keep their doctor when they’re told they can’t, then I think you might have a good point. He lied, but no one was hurt by it. > > Can you do that? Incidentally, [here’s](http://kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-october-2013/) the poll I was referring to earlier: _“Most of the public (64 percent) continues to say that they haven’t been personally impacted by the health care law so far, though the share saying they’ve been negatively impacted is somewhat higher than the share who feel they’ve personally benefited (23 percent versus 14 percent)”_. If that trend holds, I guess folks will conclude it (a) didn’t help most people but (b) hurt more folks than it helped. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/591 "2013-11-03T22:31:50Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Incidentally, [here’s](http://kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-october-2013/) the poll I was referring to earlier: _“Most of the public (64 percent) continues to say that they haven’t been personally impacted by the health care law so far, though the share saying they’ve been negatively impacted is somewhat higher than the share who feel they’ve personally benefited (23 percent versus 14 percent)”_. > > If that trend holds, I guess folks will conclude it (a) didn’t help most people but (b) hurt more folks than it helped. With the web site a disaster, I wouldn’t worry too much about that poll. We should give things a few months to settle down before worrying about what the polling is. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/592 "2013-11-03T22:33:21Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > With the web site a disaster, I wouldn’t worry too much about that poll. We should give things a few months to settle down before worrying about what the polling is. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/593 "2013-11-03T22:39:56Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > A strained, but nonetheless fair, analogy. Particularly if you might have an infectious disease which ought to be detected. And if you cannot afford such care, and end up in the ER, and cannot afford that either, you have a minimal but nonetheless real effect on my property. You are not forced by an uninsured person to pay for an ER visit. It has no effect on your property in absence of government. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/594 "2013-11-03T22:56:58Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > That’s kinda what I’m trying to get at (not that anyone has shown any particular interest in taking notice of it). > > As I honestly can’t imagine someone _liking_ a policy such as that, I feel it’s not dishonest to put it outside the ambit of _“plans that people like and get to keep.”_ Speaking of not getting any notice, I’ll say it again: These “piece of shit” “good for nothing” plans that are outside of Obamacare are plans that don’t offer maternity benefits or oral contraception to males. Let that soak in. As a man, I don’t need maternity care or twice yearly mammograms. If I have a plan that doesn’t offer maternity care, that’s fine with me or any other man on the planet because we have absolutely no use for such a policy. But Obama’s media lackeys are including a lack of maternity care for men in the definition of “piece of shit” health insurance policies. Can you now imagine a man “liking” a policy that does not include maternity benefits? If you can, then that is part of what we are talking about. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/595 "2013-11-03T23:02:46Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > I hope you have the integrity to stand by this. You are asserting that the result of the elections in Virginia are a referendum on the topic of this thread? I will hold you to that. You miss the point. McCauliffe opened a big lead that coincided with the threat to close the government. As the main topic has become Obamacare and the lies of the President, the big lead he had has shrunk some. So, no, the VA race cannot be seen to be a referendum on Obamacare. Unless McCauliffe loses. Because that would be the only reasonable explanation for the change in voter attitudes over the past couple of weeks. Can you offer another explanation should that come to pass? ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/596 "2013-11-03T23:09:27Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Speaking of not getting any notice, I’ll say it again: These “piece of shit” “good for nothing” plans that are outside of Obamacare are plans that don’t offer maternity benefits or oral contraception to males. > > Let that soak in. As a man, I don’t need maternity care or twice yearly mammograms. If I have a plan that doesn’t offer maternity care, that’s fine with me or any other man on the planet because we have absolutely no use for such a policy. > > But Obama’s media lackeys are including a lack of maternity care for men in the definition of “piece of shit” health insurance policies. > > Can you now imagine a man “liking” a policy that does not include maternity benefits? If you can, then that is part of what we are talking about. Do you have a link to show that many of the plans were good plans aimed at men were disqualified solely because they didn’t cover oral contraceptives or mamograms and similar maternity care? Not challenging just asking and I’ve already gone on record as saying I thought it was really stupid for the administration to so blatantly lie to the American public. I’m reminded of a cable provider saying “Yeah, we know you liked your old plan that was a eighty dollars a month less than the new one but it gives you a hundred extra channels…Oh, you don’t think you’ll ever watch any of those channels? Well, you should have them just in case.” ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/597 "2013-11-03T23:11:17Z")
> [@PhillyGuy](#): > > That feature of a good paper, which strives for objectivity, has to do with misstated facts. Every politician misstates facts, and gets called on it. It’s almost impossible to make a strong case while getting all your facts right. > > Do you have a link showing that the Washington Post Fact Checker stated that the President lied? Or was that an innocent misstatement on your part? > > You are perhaps thinking that you made no misstatement, because misstatement and lie are synonyms. By I don’t think that. I think that saying something is a misstatement is factual, while saying it is a lie is an inference. :rolleyes:I already supplied the link. Did you read it? I also supplied the link to the page where the explain how they determine the number of pinocchios a statement gets. They have a system that takes into account the casual misstatements, etc. But they gave Obama on the claim in question FOUR pinocchios, which for them equates to WHOPPER. Now, if—IF—you are playing a game that “whopper” does not equal “lie”, then you’ll have to find someone else to play with you. But IF that is your game, you need to take a step back and appreciate the knots you’re tying yourself into in order to build some still-not-plausible-scenario that Obama didn’t lie. If you’d like to try to craft that narrative into some alternative reality, you might do better with a Private Message conversation with Elucidator, Hentor and Elvis. Enjoy. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/598 "2013-11-03T23:12:56Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > I wonder\< should a person be forced to have Insurance, if they don’t, should other people be forced to pay the costs if they don’t or should they just be led to suffer the consequences? It was that way in the 40’s and early 50’s. > > I also find it strange that so many who call them selves pro-life do not want to help another to live or have the opportunity for a healthy life. One bad illness could either break them or they could die! We make drivers have a license. etc. So , perhaps if people realized they could go without Insurance they would get no help, would they then rebel? Looks like you might have posted in the wrong thread. This is the one talking about the fact that Obama lied—repeatedly. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2013, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/599 "2013-11-03T23:21:01Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Do you have a link to show that many of the plans were good plans aimed at men were disqualified solely because they didn’t cover oral contraceptives or mamograms and similar maternity care? I’m not sure of exactly what you were asking. My guess would be that none of these plans simply folded up, but added maternity care to be compliant with the ACA. Further, to be compliant with the ACA, the plan can’t do normal underwriting and charge me based upon their risk (with is $0 for maternity care for me). Further to be complaint with the ACA, the plan can’t charge me less than a woman who could get pregnant or even for a woman who is ALREADY pregnant (remember pre-existing conditions are excluded). In many ways, it is like your cable TV example. If you had the Star Choice XLT plan that was $40/month for 100 channels, but now the Star Choice XLT plan is $90/month for 300 channels, people could claim that you still have the Star Choice XLT plan and you are paying less per channel. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2013, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534/600 "2013-11-04T00:57:19Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > As I honestly can’t imagine someone _liking_ a policy such as that, I feel it’s not dishonest to put it outside the ambit of _“plans that people like and get to keep.”_ Bare-boned policies are cheap and can be particularly attractive to healthy people who don’t want tons of features or coverage options. They just want to make sure catastrophic illnesses are covered, for example. Now, this is a spectrum, but picture a negative correlation between the health within populations of people and the level of coverage they’re willing to pay for. The healthier that subset, the less coverage they’ll generally be willing to pay for. In other words, the very features Obama is “protecting” them from are the ones they prefer, at least people in this demographic. It is very advantageous to ACA’s success to force these folks into pricier policies. They’re healthy, they pay higher premiums, and defray the costs of the sick guys (e.g., those with pre-existing conditions). This was not some inadvertent and unintended consequence, IMO. I will be very surprised if the people currently being forced out of their individual policies, on the whole, end up paying less, even considering subsidies (which, frankly, I don’t consider “paying less” from a societal perspective; overall, it’s going to cost more to insure these guys with the ACA-compliant policies they don’t want and were promised they wouldn’t have to get). But you can see why the truth would have been a tough sell. “Yes, millions of you will have to get new, pricier coverage, even if you don’t want that level of coverage. But somebody has to pay for the sick guys!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534.md?page=29) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oops-looks-like-we-were-lied-to-about-obamacare-after-all/672534.md?page=31)