I would hope it comes as no surprise to you that partisan web sites, whether left wing or right wing, tailor their material to fit the narratives they are promoting.
But in case there are still some folks unaware that this is happening, and would like to see how it is done, I am putting up excerpts from Jeffrey Young\’s article about ObamaCare, which is currently featured at the decidedly left wing huffingtonpost.com — in rust, with my comments in blue:
Over8 million individuals signed up for health insurance via theObamacare exchanges through April 19, according to an official reportfrom the Department of Health and Human Services that confirms anannouncementmade by President Barack Obama last month. Translation: The Obama administration, which has lied aboutObamaCare every step of the way, is having its numbers confirmed by adepartment headed by an Obama appointee. This “confirmation” is so ripe it wouldmake a kangaroo court blush.
Duringthe six-plus months of the first open enrollment period for thesemarketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act, 8.02 million peoplechose a health plan. Sign-upssurged during March and April, when 3.8 million signed up forprivate coverage through the exchanges, according to thedepartment\’s report. That total represents 47 percent of allenrollments. Eighty-five percent of those customers receivedfinancial assistance, the report said. I\’m surprised – in the positive – that the author acknowledges 8- 9 of every 10 sign-ups is being subsidized in part or in total. Good for him…and bad for taxpayers.
TheMarch and April surge also boosted the share of health insuranceexchange customers under the age of 35, a critical metric for thestability of the new state-based markets.
Bythe end of the sign-up period, 28 percent of enrollees were aged 18to 34, and 34 percent were under 35, including children. Nice try, with that “34% were under 35, including children” routine. The comparative is sign-ups, nothow many children they have. But tossing in the 34%, as if it were relevant, does make the damagingly insufficient percentage of young sign-ups look better, doesn\’t it?
Althoughenrollments of young adults came in below the Obama administration\’starget, the priceson the health insurance exchanges shouldn\’t be markedly highernext year, Michael Hash, director of the HHS Office of Health Reform,said on the press call. Againwe have a Democrat appointee seconding a White House claim — and we\’re supposed to think that adds credibility. Well, it doesn\’t. Theinsurance companies are talking about higher rates, not lower. And, in any event, common sensetells us higher premiums are inevitable due to the shortfall of youngersign-ups. But that side of the story is conveniently left out.
Thisassessment mostly aligns with guidancefrom health insurance companies, which also stress that pricesfor next year will vary geographically to a significant degree.Health insurers already are at work trying to project nextyear\’s prices based on meagerdata from their new customers. Huh? I clicked on the link which is supposed to confirm that premiums”shouldn\’t be markedly higher next year”. There are exactly twocited – both of which assure us premiums will be higher, but arenot sure of how much. To call the conclusion that insurance won\’t be markedly higher astretch, would be an insult to stretching.
By the way, what happened to the average savings of $2,500 per family? Just asking….
There is just a taste. I\’ve left out a lot of the article (use the link I\’ve provided to see it all) where, trust me, there\’s a lot more just like it.
That\’s how they do it. Both sides, not just the left.
And that\’s why you do yourself a disservice if you only read one side\’s web sites.
