Yesterday I blogged about what the fraudulent 7.1 million “sign-ups” being claimed by the Obama administration…and its now-gloating media flaks – the most obnoxious being Ed Schultz at (where else?) MSNBC, who smirked out that there is no longer any excuse for Democrats not to run on ObamaCare this year.
Let me assure Mr. Schultz that Republicans all over the country would be orgasmically happy if Democrats took Schultz\’s advice.
Why would Republicans want ObamaCare as the central issue of this year\’s political campaigns? After all, it delivered on – even slightly exceeded – its promise of 7 million sign-ups by the end of March, didn\’t it?
Uh, no. It didn\’t. Because that number is as bogus as Mr. Obama\’s promise that if you liked your current insurance you could keep it.
As noted above, I blogged about this yesterday. You can read my comments by clicking here.
But there\’s plenty more, from plenty of other sources.
One of them is Ben Shapiro, writing at breitbart.com. He offers five key reasons why the “7 million” number is a pathetic sham. Please use the above link and read his entire piece. But, in the meantime, here are a few salient excerpts:
Obama\’s tone was nothing short of exuberant: “7.1 million Americans have now signed up for private insurance plans through these market places. 7.1! Yep!”
Nonetheless, the 7.1 million statistic is a meaningless one. It\’s meaningless for a variety of reasons:
It Doesn\’t Measure How Many People Have Actually Paid. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted yesterday that of the 6 million people who had signed up for Obamacare at the time, “What we know from insurance companies…tell us that, for their initial customers, it\’s somewhere between 80, 85, some say as high as 90 percent, have paid so far.” In other words, about five million people were signed up.
7.1 Million Enrollees in the Private Exchanges Doesn\’t Mean 7.1 Million Who Were Previously Uninsured. Some five million Americans saw their policies cancelled thanks to Obamacare. Those Americans were forced into the Obamacare exchanges by the government. According to a RAND Corporation study, only 858,000 previously uninsured Americans had actually joined Obamacare. That\’s a far cry from 7.1 million.
The Chief Beneficiaries of Obamacare Have Been Medicaid Recipients and 26-Year-Old Basement Dwellers. There are approximately 6.1 million people who have gained coverage through Obamacare\’s non-private exchange program. 4.5 million were beneficiaries of Medicaid expansion, and another 1.6 million 26-year-old “children” were forced onto their parents\’ policies. That far outweighs any supposed gains in the private insurance market.
The Huge Majority of Those Signing Up Are Getting Subsidies – and Even Those Who Are Subsidized Aren\’t Signing Up. In March, the Obama administration reported that 83% of those who had signed up were eligible for subsidies.
The 7.1 million statistic is not all that important, in the end. Obama will hit his numbers, by hook or by crook. Likely by crook. But conservative opposition to Obamacare should not be predicated on its ineffectiveness in forcing sign-ups. Instead, it should be based on deprivation of liberty and destruction of medical care.
The bottom line? Exactly what it was yesterday…and what it will be tomorrow, and the day after, and every day after that until election day: the “7 million” number is a pathetic fraud.
Republicans, if they are smart (how\’s that for optimism?) should embrace the “7 million” number, even as Democrats are touting it. But then define it by reminding voters of who those people were supposed to be, and who they actually are – as shown by blogs like mine and Mr. Shapiro\’s.
Then, continuing the dream that Republicans are smart, they should remind voters of how many people have lost their insurance due to ObamaCare, and how many more will when the corporate waivers – the ones that were created, extra-constitutionally last year – kick in.
Not only would this make the “7 million” fraud a winning issue for them instead of Democrats, but it would wipe that smirk off of Ed Schultz\’s face.
In other words, a win-win situation.
