Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, October 24, 2016

A new survey from Gallup shows that the percentage of uninsured Americans dropped to 16.1 percent as Obamacare first took effect, down 1.2 percent from the month before. Among the unemployed, the drop was most significant — 6.7 percent.


This modest indication that the law may be working as intended follows a government report that announced more than 6 million people had enrolled in Medicaid since October, in addition to the 2.2 million who have picked a private plan through the Obamacare insurance exchanges.

If you add in the more than 3 million young people who were able to remain on their parents’ plans, that means 10 million Americans now have coverage thanks to Obamacare, though it’s unclear how many of the Medicaid enrollees are renewals or previously eligible beneficiaries drawn in by the publicity surrounding the law. We won’t know for sure until spring.

Obamacare Whisperer Jonathan Cohn points out that “nobody really knows for sure” if the health law triggered the decline, which would suggest that 2-3 million people gained coverage.

Gallup interviewed 9,000 people for the survey and historically its number for the share of the population that’s uninsured tends to be higher than the Kaiser Family Foundation’s annual study of Census data, which will be released later this summer.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 The National Memo
  • But what good are those plans when you have to either pay $200/month and have a $3,000 deductible or pay $600/month to have a more reasonable deductible? Sure, everyone’s covered, but the plans are useless!

    • daniel bostdorf

      I do not know where you are getting this baldfaced nonsense….

      I want you to spefically detail where you got this infor and from whom.

      You need to supply us with factual verifiable data to back up your claims.

      I am a Masschsusetts resident since our version of Obamacare was implemented and NOTHING like what you stated is true.

      Obamacare ACA is excatly what we have..


      • moelarryandjesus

        I know where he’s getting it.

        He’s pulling it out of his ass.

        That’s the go-to place for RWNJ information.

        • daniel bostdorf

          actually Limbaughs 🙂

      • Dominick Vila

        The claim of high insurance premiums is accurate for individuals making over $46K and family plans for families earning over $96K. In other words, when the insured makes over the pre-defined earnings level, they don’t qualify for subsidies, and are fully responsible to pay for their insurance coverage instead of depending on ER freebies. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, it is about time we do that.

        • daniel bostdorf

          You are correct semantically on its face “is accurate for individuals making over $46K and family plans for families earning over $96K.”

          GROSS income…..not after tax deductions.

          Those very same individuals and/or families when filing tax returns can show deductions that qualify them for the lowest rate plans. They better get to a tax advisor and start filing long form schedule A….set up a DBA or business and develope “tax deductions” for their busienss…

          I agree with you “are fully responsible to pay for their insurance coverage instead of depending on ER freebies. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, it is
          about time we do that.”

          It is time for the 3% wealthiest of this country that control 93% of the economy to start paying much more in taxes and close the loopholes….and start taking care of the poor and those in poverty…

        • 4sanity4all

          Exactly right, and it is working for broke people. I am paying $575/month for excellent coverage, and I am happy because I was formerly paying $485/month for a plan that paid for nothing. My daughter, who is out of work, will be paying less than $100/month for the same policy that I have. So, depending on your financial position, you will pay what is fair. People who have an income will pay fair market value, and those in lesser circumstances will get a subsidy. Right wingers that scream about how much they must pay actually enjoy a decent salary, or they would be getting subsidized. Or they did not go through the government web site and failed to secure their subsidy because they did not want “Obamacare”. Well, if their pride made them go directly to an insurance company, so they cut themselves out of the ACA, that is on them.

    • Allan Richardson

      The cancelled plans were even worse, because you could not count on coverage even after meeting the deductibles and copays. They were written to allow the company to cancel retroactively AFTER you got sick. In other words, bye-bye sucker, thanks for the cash!

      • Independent1

        Absolutely! Here’s some excerpts from an article in the LA Times on just that subject. Eliminating ‘rescission’ is one of the big accomplishments of the ACA – insurance companies informing individuals who are sometimes on the way into an operating room that they won’t pay for the surgical procedure they’ve been needing for months and are just about to realize – can be absolutely devastating to someone who is already critically ill (not too mention the impending burden of possibly thousands upon thousands of dollars in medical costs).

        Blue Cross praised employees who dropped sick policyholders, lawmaker says.
        June 17, 2009

        Executives of three of the nation’s largest health insurers told federal lawmakers in Washington on Tuesday that they would continue canceling medical coverage for some sick policyholders, despite withering criticism from Republican and Democratic members of Congress who decried the practice as unfair and abusive.

        The hearing on the controversial action known as rescission, which has left thousands of Americans burdened with costly medical bills despite paying insurance premiums, began a day after President Obama outlined his proposals for revamping the nation’s healthcare system.

        An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.

    • latebloomingrandma

      Before I got on Medicare, I had a very good plan, but with a hefty premium and large deductible. Yeah, I had to pay, but it was not “useless”, as I had several surgeries. Obamacare is not “free” health care, but the cost is tied somewhat to your means and you decide if you want a lower or higher deductible. If you are healthy, go with the high deductible and cheaper premium.

  • daniel bostdorf

    Let’s get back to the facts Jason has pointed out. His article has specific proof to back up his premise.

    Those that post here like the obvious “LimbaughLies” that were parroted below, you must back up you opinion with facts.

    Outrageous declarative, unsubstantiated claims like
    “Sure, everyone’s covered, but the plans are useless!” are simply to be ignored.

    Don’t engage with anyone that posts propaganda.

    Here are the facts from the article…

”new survey from Gallup shows that the percentage of uninsured Americans dropped to 16.1 percent as Obamacare first took effect, down 1.2 percent from the month before. Among the unemployed, the drop was most significant — 6.7 percent.”

    “Last year Kaiser found that 15.4 percent of the non-elderly population lacked insurance. That was down from a peak of 16.1 percent in 2009, just before Obamacare became law. (George W. Bush inherited a 13.1 percent uninsured rate, according to Kaiser. It was 14.9 percent the last full year of his presidency.)”

    “Republicans owned the month of November with sensational stories about the millions of cancelation letters insurers sent out because of Obamacare. Though many of those stories resulted in affected consumers ending up with much better coverage for about what they were paying before,”

    “A White House report threw water on the claim that millions of cancelations meant that millions had lost their plans. Most were simply shifted into another Obamacare-compliant policy from their previous insurer. For the 500,000 or so people left without plans, the White House carved out an exception allowing them to purchase bare-bones catastrophic plans.

    Anti Obama talking points ( also know as propaganda) — based in no factual evidence—are created by Karl Rove, disseminated down the GOP/Teaparty ranks, get fed to Fox Faux News and Rush Limbaugh creates a mantra around them….then some non-thinking troll poster post them here at NM and dozens of others sites..

  • Dominick Vila

    When their substandard policies were cancelled and they were forced to get better coverage they called foul. Now that they got better healthcare coverage they complain because it is not good enough (they forgot what they had before), and are irate because they have to pay more for better coverage…while talking about government handouts! Incredibly, don’t either don’t see the dichotomy of their claims, or are so oblivious to how ridiculous they look in the eyes of rational people, that they continue to desperately grab on to whatever they can to continue to demonize a program that is, clearly, beneficial to our society. The irony is that they could have come out of this smelling like a rose had they reminded everyone that the concept was conceived by the most conservative think tank in the country, and tested in Massachusetts by a Republican Governor.

    • daniel bostdorf

      Well stated! And yes—Massachusetts Obamacare is a giant success here in Massachusetts for past SEVEN years…..and it too had problems with roll out…

    • Allan Richardson

      Those people’s attitude remind me of the mother whose 3 year old son was playing in the surf and a wave suddenly began to sweep him out to sea. She prayed to God to save her son, and the next wave brought him back to her feet, safe and sound. Then she looked up at the sky and said to God, “He HAD a hat!”

  • jointerjohn

    There is a fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. When a starving man finds bread a liberal celebrates and says, “good for him!” A conservative says, “he didn’t do anything to deserve that and where is mine?”

  • Jimmy Agler

    the GOP rant about the roll out issues reminded me of the old story about Thomas Edison. When asked why it took 1,000 tries to make a light bulb he responded “it didn’t, it took me 999 tries to learn how not to make one”. There will be bumps along the way in implementing anything even if those supporting the status quo don’t try to impede it. I think we have all seen the lengths that some will go to in trying to derail this. 43 votes in the House,a govt shutdown that was partially tied to it, more lawsuits than anyone can name and an industry pumping untold money into stopping it. Personally I am amazed it has gone this well with all that put in the way.

  • Kurt CPI

    In fairness, that drop in uninsured should have been anticipated by everyone. What the chart doesn’t tell us is how much the group representing the gap is paying compared to those who were already insured. Previously uninsured people taking advantage of insurance that is wholly or substantially subsidized should have been the early expectation by anyone. Not that it’s a negative indicator, not at all. It’s just very preliminary and only addresses an isolated statistic.

  • howa4x

    the McConnell senate race will be a bell weather on the ACA. It is a situation where an anti Romney/Obamacare candidate squares off in a state traditionally with a large uninsured population ,against a democratic candidate that supports the law and a governor that has an exchange and is promoting it. Kentucky also took the Medicaid expansion and it will be interesting how Dr. No campaigns against it