Obama's "Uninsured Americans" Lie

[BeAChooser]

http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49986

June 24, 2009

(CNSNews.com) – An Arizona orthopedic surgeon testified in Congress on Tuesday that President Obama's claim that 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance is not accurate because it does not reflect exactly who those people are and why they are “uninsured.”

Dr. Eric Novack testified before the House Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Health about the Obama administration’s proposed health care legislation. ... snip ...

“If we start breaking down those numbers a bit--and again these will be round numbers--but about 9 to 10 million of those people are in the country illegally,” Novack said.

Another 15 million are what he called “chronically uninsured,” because of pre-existing health problems or other mitigating factors.

Novack ... snip ... said another 10 million or so “uninsured” Americans have chosen that status.

“We have young people between 18 and 30, probably about another 10 million or so, they’d rather buy applications for their iPhone than buy health insurance,” Novack said.

He said some of the approximately 46 million Americans referred to by Obama and members of the subcommittee include others who may be eligible for existing government health care programs, such as S-Chip and Medicaid, but don’t sign up.

... snip ...

“The solution that we should be seeking out is not to change the health care of the other 97 percent of Americans,” Novack said.

 

[oldhat]

“We have young people between 18 and 30, probably about another 10 million or so, they’d rather buy applications for their iPhone than buy health insurance,” Novack said.

"If those dope smoking hippie kids with their rock music and bleak employment prospects would just stop fiddling around with those gold-darn newfangled videya games, they'd have health insurance. Also, it's a fact dirty Messicans in sombreros are taking your jobs."

 

[fullflavormenthol]

I know. If I just quit paying rent, and eating. And tell those student loan people to go (rule 10) themselves I could afford to buy a 6 month plan with a deductable I could NEVER AFFORD!

No I am too busy with my iPhone and my computer and my interwebs to go out and donate money to a industry that won't do jack for me when I actually need it.

Blame the Victim.

 

[oldhat]

I know. If I just quit paying rent, and eating. And tell those student loan people to go (rule 10) themselves I could afford to buy a 6 month plan with a deductable I could NEVER AFFORD!

But it gets even BETTAR, think about it: If young people would just not buy gas and save up for three or four months, we could all buy a month's worth of health insurance coverage! Sounds like a plan to me!

Best. Health. Care. System.

IN THE WORLD.

Obama = Socialist

Never forget.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

But it gets even BETTAR, think about it: If young people would just not buy gas and save up for three or four months, we could all buy a month's worth of health insurance coverage! Sounds like a plan to me!

Best. Health. Care. System.

IN THE WORLD.

Obama = Socialist

Never forget.

Well I suppose if I got cancer there is I way I could receive care....commit a crime and go to prison. Isn't that great? Finally a motivation to commit crimes!

 

[tyr_13]

Well I suppose if I got cancer there is I way I could receive care....commit a crime and go to prison. Isn't that great? Finally a motivation to commit crimes!

On motivation. I heard parts of some 'Dr. Senator' Republican talking about how terrible this new bill is and how it will destroy our economy, blah, blah. Most things were red herrings, as they had nothing to do with the bill or health care. One thing specifically that I thought was just about the dumbest criticism of the bill was how it didn't give people any incentive to stay healthy and avoid injury.

Because the only thing stopping me from smoking or jumping off the roof is the fact that I'd have to pay for the treatment. NOT the fact that I don't want to die or go through the horrendous pain involved.

It kind of goes to show how people can project their own priorities (money is one of his main motivators, so it has to be everyone's) onto other people. Maybe nothing would stop him from putting a tack hammer through his hand if someone else would foot the bill, but I don't think I would do it. What's that? He's a senator and has his health care already paid for by the people?

Tack hammer it is then.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Except that Obama and the democrats are also on record months ago stating that the number of uninsured Americans is 46 million, exactly what the 2005 census said. Now if they want to claim that the number of uninsured Americans has grown to nearly 50 million, perhaps we should look at the growth in uninsured illegals since 2005?

You think 46 is not "nearly 50"? (ETA: Plus back in post #39 I showed you the information that shows the trend is that the number of uninsured has been increasing.)

And *that's* what you're making such a fuss over?

Sorry, dude, your guy lost the election. Get over it.

Just because you don't like the economic policies of the current administration doesn't mean Obama is lying.

 

[Lemastre]

So? Fifty million, thirty-one point two million, ten million -- whatever the number, it's the result of a faulty system. Do you quibble over the number of Jews the Nazis did away with in WWII? That situation needed fixing, and so does our health-insurance system. My problem with Obama and the Democratic Congress is that I fear they haven't the balls to defy the lobbyists and make significant changes.

 

[Patrick_R]

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.

You misread the point. Obama isn't just saying there are 50 million uninsured. He's saying there are 50 million uninsured Americans and that is so horrible we have to give it to them.

Clearly, about half of the people could get insurance if they wanted it...and that is from the conservative estimates that look at only income and not the line item family budget.

When taking my statement in context, the intent of Obama's plan, we can know he might be misleading (assuming he knows that half of the uninsured could get some if they wanted it, he may not know that).

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Are you both obtuse and blind, "dude"?

Are you also downright obtuse?

Oh good, since you've utterly failed to support your claim, you resort to name-calling.

Better you explain how 46 is 35.

How 46 is 18.

Because those are the real discrepancies between what Obama claimed and the truth ...

... a logic that was clearly explained in post #58.

35 and 18 million are both numbers that are inaccurate estimates of the number of uninsured. I've already sufficiently refuted your arguments, and I've shown sources.

Obama said nothing about limiting the number to U.S. citizens or limiting the number to people below any specific income.

"Nearly 50 million" is a legitimate and reasonable estimate of the number of uninsured. 35 million and 18 million are terribly low estimates that only work (possibly) if you add a series of qualifiers to the claim.

So your claim that Obama is lying is another failure in your on-going series of threads that claim Obama is lying.

Quit the name calling.

 

[Rolfe]

The [....] plan that I just did get on is about $60 a month.

Very affordable right? Well my deductible is $1000. If it costs less than that, I have to pay. The co-pay is also 20%. That means that if I had to have a life saving surgery, that cost $100,000, I'd have to pay $21,000. Not only that, but all the tests and whatnot that lead up to it? Yeah, I'd pay for 20% of each of them. No dental. No prescription. No eye. No nothing of the sort.

So that's the "insurance" you've got, so you're not one of the "uninsured".

My God, man, that is terrible cover. You might as well keep your £60 a month for small items, and just declare bankruptcy if you get a big-ticket problem. You'd probably be better off doing that actually, and at least you wouldn't be contributing to an insurance executive's private jet and gold cutlery.

Why you people put up with this I'll never know.

Rolfe.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

So that's the "insurance" you've got, so you're not one of the "uninsured".

My God, man, that is terrible cover. You might as well keep your £60 a month for small items, and just declare bankruptcy...

I know that is my strategy if something bad happened tommorow. Unfortunately that would not help if I got cancer or something that needed long term care. The people that argue that our system is so great ignore the people who die everyday because they can't afford necessary medical care.

Why you people put up with this I'll never know.

Rolfe.

Because honestly our government is full of people who take a lot of money from the insurance lobby. That and the insurance lobby will spend millions to put out scare ads to focus on the anamolies within other systems while ignoring the people that again die from lack of necessary care.

 

[Ducky]

So that's the "insurance" you've got, so you're not one of the "uninsured".

My God, man, that is terrible cover. You might as well keep your £60 a month for small items, and just declare bankruptcy if you get a big-ticket problem. You'd probably be better off doing that actually, and at least you wouldn't be contributing to an insurance executive's private jet and gold cutlery.

Why you people put up with this I'll never know.

Rolfe.

Don't get me started on how much my spine continues to cost, or what my liability for the cost of it and recovery treatments were. I didn't have insurance when I was first diagnosed.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

In fact, you can find numerous instances on the internet where the 46 and 50 million Americans figures spouted by Obama and his crowd are described as "citizens".

So of all these quotes, how many of them were made by Obama?

Your claim, after all, is that Obama lied.

The statements of other people is irrelevant to your claim.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I started at the bottom of your list of quotes, working my way up. I'm tired of this silliness. You're quoting bloggers and anonymous forum posts. These quotations are irrelevant to your claim that Obama lied. Quantity doesn't make up for the fact that you're not quoting Obama.

http://deepfocuscinema.blogspot.com/2007/07/sicko.html "Not just for the nearly 50 million American citizens that don't have health insurance"

This is from the blog of one CLAYTON L. WHITE in his review of Michael Moore's Sicko.

http://www.wowowow.com/politics/us-declares-health-emergency-swine-flu-278392 "Right now, there are 50 million American citizens — what is that? one-sixth of the country? — who have no health insurance"

Quote by Rudi G., a reader comment to an article written by the "the Staff at wowowow.com".

http://neighbors.denverpost.com/viewtopic.php?p=911367 "we leave over 50 million American citizens with no health plan at all."

This is from a reader forum. The quote was by a user named "HolierThanThou".

http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/219987 "extend health insurance coverage to the nearly 50 million American citizens currently without."

This was by a clearly-labeled opinion piece by someone named Van Allen of Columbia, MO.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...ck-how-the-u-s-had-its-confidence-stolen.aspx "Nearly 50 million American citizens have no health insurance"

A user comment following an opinion piece. The quote is from a user named "charleschaplin".

 

[Foolmewunz]

Nice going, Joe.

It's always interesting to track BAC (trackback) material back to the source.

It's not 50, it's 46, HE LIED. This is yet another exciting thread. Why is it that the image of drowning conservatives clutching at a handful of rhetorical straws comes to mind.

 

[Rolfe]

Because honestly our government is full of people who take a lot of money from the insurance lobby. That and the insurance lobby will spend millions to put out scare ads to focus on the anamolies within other systems while ignoring the people that again die from lack of necessary care.

Having read that, I went to find the online version of an article I just read in my dead-tree paper, which included some figures for the insurance lobby's spending.

It seems I misread.

So far this year, insurers, hospitals and drug companies have spent $1.4 million (£857,220) a day on lobbyists. A Washington Post investigation found that 350 former government employees or members of Congress have been hired to influence the debate. This is nothing new, of course. The medical lobby has been adept at framing the discussion, despite damning statistical evidence that the profit motive has corroded America's healthcare system.

Bolded is the part I missed when reading the first time.

This is money paid by hard-working Americans towards meeting their healthcare costs.

Now, I might consider characterising that sort of misappropriation of funds as "theft".

Rolfe.

 

[BeAChooser]

The statements of other people is irrelevant to your claim.

No, it's not irrelevant. They demonstrate the way that Obama's and other democrat's statements about uninsured "Americans" who "cannot afford" health insurance (and sometimes they even say health care) are perceived and interpreted by the general public. By using the language they do, democrats know that they are going to create the impression in the mind of the public that the uninsured problem is much bigger than it really is and therefore more urgent. They do that to help promote their political agenda. It's dishonest.

Obama surely must know the real figures. He's supposed to be a smart guy. Right? And he's also an expert in the meaning of language. That's what a Harvard Lawyer is trained to be ... and according to his supporters, he was one of the best and brightest. And Obama has demonstrated over and over that he's very careful about the way he phrases things in speeches and interviews. It's part of the reason he uses a lot of "uhs". It's no accident he said "Americans" rather than "US citizens". It's no accident that he fails to point out that over 17 million of the uninsured earn more than the median income in the US. It was your side that led me to believe that Obama was going to be something special ... a change ... not the usual dishonest politician. Boy am I disappointed.

 

[tyr_13]

So that's the "insurance" you've got, so you're not one of the "uninsured".

My God, man, that is terrible cover. You might as well keep your £60 a month for small items, and just declare bankruptcy if you get a big-ticket problem. You'd probably be better off doing that actually, and at least you wouldn't be contributing to an insurance executive's private jet and gold cutlery.

Why you people put up with this I'll never know.

Rolfe.

Yeah, it's horrible, but if I need any long term care, bankruptcy isn't the easy solution. Sure, they can get the $3,000 or so that I've managed to save up over the last year, but they can't start going after my family to pay.

And as someone who has back problems, but refuses to stop practicing the martial arts, I couldn't stand the thought of passing on the cost my theoretical injury to others. Even if it is only most of whatever that is covered.

I'm not putting up with it. I voted for Obama. Something has to be done, even if it isn't perfect.

Even if it is 'only' 38 million people. Especially if a large chunk of the people who do have coverage have my type of 'coverage'.

 

[Rolfe]

Especially if a large chunk of the people who do have coverage have my type of 'coverage'.

Well, yeah, that's what I'm thinking. Some of the insurance coverage I've heard about in the USA is pretty much in the chocolate teapot category. Then when something disastrous happens, and a child's life is in danger for example, the right-wingers simply blame the parent for not having made a better choice of insurance policy.

While, if something similar were to happen in a country with universal healthcare, it's "oh noes, universal healthcare sucks and it's slavery and theft to boot!"

Rolfe.