Obama's "Uninsured Americans" Lie

[Patrick_R]

Figuring the number of unemployed adults who, by losing their insurance take two,three, maybe four dependants with them, my figure is still in the ball park.

When a father loses his job, he is not the only person screwed out of insurance.

S-CHIP doesn't get everyone.

S-Chip doesn't even get the people eligible for the program...

Our health insurance should not be tied to our job but government has created incentives to make this pretty much the norm. We can do better without having a government run system.

 

[Rolfe]

Yes, it could very well be perfectly acceptable. They could all be deciding to spend their money on other things.

All right, if you choose to be pedantic, I'll rephrase.

Is the exact number of people unable to afford health insurance all that important? Even if it's 30 million, or 20 million, is that acceptable in a modern, civilised, first-world country?

Rolfe.

 

[Ziggurat]

Is the exact number of people unable to afford health insurance all that important? Even if it's 30 million, or 20 million, is that acceptable in a modern, civilised, first-world country?

The difference between 20 and 30 million is not a matter of exactitude, but is a rather significant difference. And yes, the number does matter. You may find either number "unacceptable" (whatever that means), but the scale of a problem can have quite a bit to do with what solutions one should adopt to try to fix or ameliorate it. If one can't correctly diagnose the scale of a problem, why should I trust them to correctly diagnose the causes, or correctly deduce a solution?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Why do Obama and democrats keep regurgitating this obvious lie about the number of uninsured Americans? Have they no shame?

Granted, the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005,” placed the number of uninsured people living in the US at 46.6 million ... and there probably are more now.

46.6 million uninsured in 2005. Then saying there are "nearly 50 million uninsured" now is not a lie.

In fact, it sounds more accurate.

Your citing of figures of how many chronically uninsured there are who make less than a certain number doesn't change the fact that "nearly 50 million" uninsured is a pretty reasonable, if conservative, estimate.

 

[Ziggurat]

46.6 million uninsured in 2005. Then saying there are "nearly 50 million uninsured" now is not a lie.

You're missing BAC's point, which is that a large fraction are not Americans, but illegal immigrants.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Not necessarily. Contract and part time workers are neither unemployed nor necessarily have health insurance through their employer.

I fall in that group. I'm self-employed and uninsured. If I don't work, I simply don't get paid---no unemployment available.

Using unemployment figures to calculate how many uninsured there are seems to me like an inaccurate way of going about it. I'd sooner rely on the Census data.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You're missing BAC's point, which is that a large fraction are not Americans, but illegal immigrants.

He has no evidence of that claim.

According to this 2007 information:

The large majority of the uninsured (80 percent) are native or naturalized citizens.2

The footnote cites a Kaiser Family Foundation report.

ETA: And that's without quibbling over whether immigrants (legal or not) living in the U.S. might not reasonably be considered "Americans". My ex-wife, for example, is still a permanent resident, though she is a professional, living and working in the U.S. continuously since 2000.

ETA again: Also, I don't see where BAC makes quite that point. In fact, he said, "And if truth be told, the Census figure was probably an underestimate of the number of illegal aliens back in 2005." That means that the 46.6 million was probably an undercount for the number of people without insurance since the Census underestimated the number of illegals. Surely he doesn't suppose that the 46.6 million figure somehow included all the illegals, but the Census underestimated illegals at the same time.

 

[joobz]

You're missing BAC's point, which is that a large fraction are not Americans, but illegal immigrants.

And they shouldn't be treated because.....?

I understand the moral point you are trying to make: People here illegally do not deserve benefits of being american. I understand this.

But you are then faced with the very real issue of what a free market economy means for health care.

Hospitals refuse preventative and maintainance health care, but do not turn away people in life threatening conditions. They can not. If they do, it would be one heck of a PR hit. No hospital wants that, so they treat everyone who would die otherwise. Typically, life saving measures are much more expensive than measures which would be preventative. What this means is that the hospital has to raise rates to cover the lost costs. Insurance companies aren't going to take a hit, so they reflexively increase our premiums as a result.

So the real question is, do we cover all patients when it's cheap to or do we cover all patients when it is expensive to?

 

[Rolfe]

Hospitals refuse preventative and maintainance health care, but do not turn away people in life threatening conditions. They can not. If they do, it would be one heck of a PR hit. No hospital wants that, so they treat everyone who would die otherwise.

It seems to be worse than that, Jim. Hospitals are compelled - forced at the point of a gun! - to provide their product free to people who have no possible way of paying for it.

The Republicans appear to think this is a great way to provide "health care for all".

Rolfe.

 

[Ziggurat]

He has no evidence of that claim.

But you just provided evidence of his claim. 20% is a big fraction. And it drops the number of uninsured Americans from around 50 million to around 40 million.

And they shouldn't be treated because.....?

I never said they shouldn't be treated. But it's not correct to call them Americans, because they aren't.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

But you just provided evidence of his claim. 20% is a big fraction. And it drops the number of uninsured Americans from around 50 million to around 40 million.

I think the figure, even with your narrow definition of "Americans" is still "nearly 50 million" given the economic trend since 2005. At any rate, it's not a lie to rely on Census figure.

I never said they shouldn't be treated. But it's not correct to call them Americans, because they aren't.

I disagree. My ex-wife, who is not native and not a citizen is an American. She is Ecuadorean-American. I don't think we need to derail this discussion into the history of immigration and who counts as "American". (And this is without getting into the side issue that all people in the New World are in fact Americans.)

These are people who are definitely a part of our economy. I see no reason to construe Obama's remarks as referring only to citizens.

And it's entirely reasonable and fair to rely on the Census data as he obviously did. Sorry, but this is just another case of BAC calling "lie" when there is no lie.

 

[casebro]

(snip)
The Kaiser Family Foundation, a liberal group, puts the number of uninsured Americans who make less than $50,000 and do not qualify for current government health programs at between 8.2 and 13.9 million (http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2007/20070718153509.aspx ). The reason for the spread is that the 8.2 million figure only includes those uninsured for more than 2 years. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 45 percent of uninsured people will be uninsured for less than 4 months.
(snip some more)

Well, that does give a cite that can be examined, and a number at odds with Obama, and much of the rest of the people in the discussions.

So, I'd say that much of the 'crisis' in manufactured. Which viewpoint makes me wonder about ulterior motives. Can we discuss who gains from national healthcare in a slightly esoteric manor? A couple points along those lines:

Much of the Social Security funding could be viewed differently if Medicare is taken out of that trust fund, and put into a new "universal healthcare" column. Rescues SS, perhaps? Thereby benefiting all us old folks.

Healthcare which is now employer based, and is considered a labor cost, drives up the price of American products on the world market. Shifting the cost to ???( who gets the bill anyways?) means manufacturers get benefit.

HMOs will get somewhere between 9-50 million new customers. You don't think congress will mandate that all doctors become a government monopoly? In America?

Liberal pols, out to get votes, for saving those mythical 50,000,000 poor, starving, sick children from sure death.

C'mon, folks. Try some skepticism. Lets put on our thinking caps, and get away from "it's for the poor sick children", and look at who else may have a vested interest in passing universal health care.

 

[Ziggurat]

I think the figure, even with your narrow definition of "Americans" is still "nearly 50 million" given the economic trend since 2005.

You mean you think the number has expanded from 40 million to 50 million? Perhaps. But that's unsourced, so Obama would just be guessing if that's what he's relying upon.

At any rate, it's not a lie to rely on Census figure.

Except the Census figure measures uninsured people living in America. But not everyone living in America is an American, as those same Census numbers indicate. So that doesn't help much.

I disagree.

Then that is the basis on which you should defend Obama's comment. Because if you use a narrower definition of "American", then Obama is using bad numbers.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Because if you use a narrower definition of "American", then Obama is using bad numbers.

Even with that narrower definition of "American", I've yet to see the proof that Obama lied.

Even under the narrow definition, figuring the 2005 Census was an undercount of illegals (meaning the 46.6 million figure was MORE than 80% narrowly-defined Americans), given the trend of the economy in the recent years and the skyrocketing health insurance costs, I think "nearly 50 million" is about right. In other words, even if the number of narrowly-defined "Americans" uninsured in 2005 was only 40 million, it's completely reasonable to estimate the number at "nearly 50 million" today.

At any rate, the burden of evidence is on those claiming Obama is lying.

As Darat mentioned earlier, BAC has a pretty bad track record on supporting his claims that Obama lied.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You mean you think the number has expanded from 40 million to 50 million? Perhaps. But that's unsourced, so Obama would just be guessing if that's what he's relying upon.

I suspect Obama was relying on information like this (showing a trend in increasing numbers of uninsured). And this:

Spending for health care services continues to rise, in total ($1.4 trillion in 2001; $3.1 trillion projected for 2012) and as a share of the country’s gross national product (14.1% in 2001; 17.7% projected for 2012).

Premium costs for people with private insurance have risen dramatically in recent years, with double-digit rate increases each of the first three years of the new millennium. At the same time, consumers have seen their out-of-pocket costs for deductibles, copayments, and other cost sharing rise significantly over the same period. While coverage availability has declined only modestly for those with job-based coverage, a slack economy and high unemployment have focused attention on access and cost issues faced by consumers seeking individual coverage. Coverage and cost issues have led to debate about how to control increases in health care costs and how to provide coverage for the uninsured.

We know the number and proportion of Americans who are uninsured has been rising. We also know the trend for health insurance costs (premiums) has gone higher, and it's reasonable to assume that this trend make insurance unaffordable to even more Americans.

Add to that the dramatic increase in unemployment in the past year, and, again, the "nearly 50 million" figure sounds like a reasonable, if conservative, estimate.

 

[boloboffin]

As I understand it, Obama's plan is to mandate everyone purchase health insurance. That will include all these illegals, especially since most are here to work and they will be purchasing it through work. So if the illegals pay for health insurance here, why shouldn't they be allowed to access healthcare here?

 

[Meadmaker]

And there is no way in hell that a minimum wage worker is going to be able to save enough money to pay a thousand or so a month for insurance.

When I met my wife, she had an income of $18,000 and was self employed, and she had health insurance. That's slightly more than minimum wage, but not much.

I'm for some form of government guarantee of health care for everyone, but we may as well be honest about things. A lot of people who "can't afford" health insurance could find a way if they made it their top priority.

I can assure you that if I join the ranks of the unemployed, I will not join the ranks of those without health insurance, because it will be my second priority, after food, but before a mortgage, and way before entertainment.

If I remain unemployed for a very long time, things may be different, but I doubt that will happen, either.

 

[Meadmaker]

46.6 million uninsured in 2005. Then saying there are "nearly 50 million uninsured" now is not a lie.

In fact, it sounds more accurate.

Your citing of figures of how many chronically uninsured there are who make less than a certain number doesn't change the fact that "nearly 50 million" uninsured is a pretty reasonable, if conservative, estimate.

I think BAC's claim is that Obama was lying because he called those 46.6 million people "Americans", when some of them are illegal aliens.

Of course, he's still wrong. It neglects the fact that the number of uninsured Americans has gone up since 2005. I'm fairly certain that some of those illegal aliens also have health insurance, but I suppose it's possible that that number is negligible.

 

[Patrick_R]

Maybe Obama is misleading or maybe he just doesn't know. As you pointed out some of those people have chosen not to buy healthcare. Others already have access to government programs that can help them. That knocks the number down in half who are uninsured for no fault of their own (as far as we know).

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Maybe Obama is misleading or maybe he just doesn't know. As you pointed out some of those people have chosen not to buy healthcare. Others already have access to government programs that can help them. That knocks the number down in half who are uninsured for no fault of their own (as far as we know).

Wait a second. The claim is that Obama lied by saying that the number of uninsured Americans is "nearly 50 million".

From the Census information, that sounds like a pretty accurate estimate.

You're reducing the number because you don't count all the people who live here as Americans. You're further reducing that number by not counting people who have access to some form of health care (even though they are still uninsured). What do you base this on?

Are you claiming that Obama is lying?

The best information I've been able to find shows that there are in fact "nearly 50 million" uninsured. I've yet to see any reasonable evidence to support a figure that is substantially different.