Most people don’t care about the mandate – very few people actively don’t want insurance. And as we’ve seen in various state programs, the mandate is necessary to keep the whole program from falling apart.
The President says the program is already sustainable despite the fact that only 1 in 10 uninsured have signed up.
All the exchanges have proved so far is that people who have insurance want insurance. So if you cause it to be cancelled, they’ll go buy new insurance.
Question, does the one in ten number you use include people who get picked up in the Medicare expansion?
“That doesn’t count because … hey, look over there!”
No. The survey only counted those who qualified for private plans.
However, if the numbers were much better among those eligible for Medicaid, we’d be seeing better numbers than Gallup shows.
Would it surprise you to learn Boehner’s making shit up again?
I’m sure he does believe it. Because belief is the strongest power on Earth, stronger than mere factual reality. Which is:
Boehner’s wrong, but so is the 13 million number. Gallup’s numbers would look much better if that many people had gotten insurance.
You forgot to link to your cite.
It’s in the OP:
The number of uninsured Americans has dropped by three to four million since Obamacare coverage took effect Jan. 1, according to a new Gallup survey
That’s less than 13 million.
That’s 3 million to 4 million since January 1, 2014 and 13 million to 14 million in the years since the law went into effect. Are you having that much trouble with this?
You seem to be. The exchanges weren’t open in the years the law went into effect, neither was the Medicaid expansion. The young going on their parents’ insurance was, so you can have that 2.2 million if you want. Now you’re up to 5 or 6.
John Boehner may not be reliable, but you’re trusting Charles Gaba despite not checking his numbers. Why?
Because he reported actual numbers. You’re saying “that number can’t be right because I said so.”
No, I’m saying it can’t be right because it conflicts with Gallup. And his numbers come from the government, which has an interest in making the numbers look rosy. Gallup is unbiased.
You’re agreeing with it because you want it to be true.
The Gallup number only refers to people getting insurance through the exchanges. The larger figure includes the people who have gotten coverage through a variety of other ways, all of which stem from the ACA. This isn’t that complicated, so I suspect you’re “struggling” to understand it because it doesn’t serve your argument.
No, the Gallup number has been used for decades to measure the number of uninsured. That is still what it is measuring.
Can you cite the poll please. I looked at your previous posts and I didn’t find it.
The poll is in the OP and it’s the subject of this thread:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/republicans-obamacare-choice
TAking another look at the data, it appears there was a big spike in the uninsured in the last quarter of 2013, probably caused by cancellations. If we assume that all of those people got insurance back(and you’d better hope they did if you want to see Obama not be a lame duck after the elections), then Obamacare improved our uninsured rate by 0.4%.
That’s some Fox News-worthy math! The “spike” was an increase of 200,000 after a decrease of 1.5 million over a couple of months. If you look at it on a quarter-by-quarter basis that “spike” doesn’t even show up.
I’m referring to the spike from 16.3 to 18. A number which equals 5 million people losing their health insurance, which is close to what the media reported in cancellations.
I doubt the rise from Q4 2012 to Q3 2013 (16.3% - 18%) account for the cancellations. I was one of the 5 million and like many others, I was automatically enrolled in a new plan and would have never been listed as uninsured.
Does Gallup have an explanation for that rise or is that just your analysis?