Posted by Tina
A woman who is fighting for her life, Mrs. Julie Boonstra, was devistated when she learned she could not keep her insurance. She had doctors and was being given treatments under her insurance plan that allowed her stress free focus in her fight with leukemia. The passage of Obamacare changed all of that. Now coverage and expenses are uncertain. She has come forward with her story to warn the public and to help defeat Democrats so the destructive legislation has a chance to be overturned. She made an ad targeting Democrat Congressman Gary Peters in her state of Michigan. Congressman Peters voted for Obamacare and Mrs. Boonstra would apparently like to see him defeated in his bid for Carl Levins vacated seat in the Senate, which is her right as an American citizen and as a citizen of Michigan. See the ad posted at Powerline in the link below.
Democrats have taken the usual tack and begun to deomonize Mrs. Boonstra but increasingly, the Obama administration and the political left show they are willing to step beyond traditional political countering methods to use the power of government to defeat what the President has called his “enemies”. We saw this in the IRS targeting of conservative and Tea party groups applying for nonprofit status. Now the left has even targeted those who run the ad or who might defend it. Once again from Powerline:
Now the Democrats are striking back. They are calling Mrs. Boonstra a liar, and are demanding that Michigan television stations stop broadcasting the ad-an implicit admission of how damaging it is to Peters, who is running for the Senate. The Democrats’ cease and desist letter was signed by two lawyers from the powerful Perkins, Coie firm in Washington, D.C. You can read their letter here. The Democrats, using a one-two punch, also apparently complained to Glenn Kessler, who writes the Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” column.
The gist of the Democrats’ complaint is that Mrs. Boonstra has been able to acquire coverage under Obamacare that is just as good, and approximately as expensive, as what she had before.
The question is, “By who’s definition?”
Mrs. Boonstra was unable to get one of the vital medicines she is on under Obamacare without paying out of pocket for it. Not only that she was promised by this administration that she could keep her plan so the uncertainty and expense is an unwelcome slap in the face at a crucial moment in her life. A cancer patient is not helped by stress, in fact it could be very harmful.
But the Democrats are not content to demonize this woman and those who run her ads. They have also threatened to sick the FCC on the stations:
Contemptibly, the Obama administration’s lawyers have threatened to use the Democrat-dominated Federal Communications Commission to take away the licenses of television stations that run the AFP ad:
You have an obligation “to protect the public from false, misleading or deceptive advertising.” Licensee Responsibility With Respect to the Broadcast of False, Misleading or Deceptive Advertising, 74 F.C.C.2d 623 (1961). Failure to prevent the airing of “false and misleading advertising” may be “probative of an underlying abdication of licensee responsibility” that can be cause for the loss of a station’s license. See Cosmopolitan Broad. Corp. v. FCC, 581 F.2d 917, 927 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
In other words: Nice television station you’ve got here. Shame if anything should happen to it.
As Powerline points out the Obama administration and allies Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid used television stations to put forth the lie that people could keep their insurance and doctors.
The big story here is the blatant abuse of power…the obviously blatant abuse of power going on in the current administration that so far, is completely supported by the entire Democrat Party apparatus.
Let the voices of outrage in America rise to fever pitch in the coming election to defeat this caldron of corruption and oppression better known as the Democrat Party.
Geez, is there no bottom to how low the Obama administration and DNC will go?
Sick or dying, old and poor you’ll better tow our line or the gates of hell will open before you letting out our IRS pit bulls or FBI rottweiler’s.
Did you all hear about the parents who had their daughter taken away by Boston’s Children Hospital who didn’t agree with the diagnosis and treatment she’d been getting for years at Tuft’s hospital. When the parents tried to take her out of BC to return her to Tuft’s care she was made a ward of the state and her parents lost all control and are only allowed supervised phone calls and one supervised visit a week.
She was ice dancing before she went to BC, today she’s confined to a wheelchair and in extreme pain.
My point being we have lost our rights to determine what is best for ourselves and our children. Every aspect of our lives including our health is now under some type of government control.
http://article.wn.com/view/2014/02/10/Advocates_Fight_for_Teen_Justina_Pelletier_Held_by_State_in_/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qkY7DhmbE44
The blood of Julie Boonstra will be on Barak Obama’s, Nancy Pelosi’s, and the Democratic Party’s hands. God damn them.
“Sick or dying, old and poor…” is a threefer for the evil party when you die.
1. .Gov gets to keep the social security you were going to collect.
2. .Gov doesn’t have to pay for any of your medical care.
3. You’re not around to tell the younger generation how it used to be.
Can you point to an example of the left “demonizing” Boonstra? I have admittedly only read on article about the issue on the Maddow blog, but that one was pretty sympathetic toward Boonstra while at the same time questioning the accuracy of her claims.
I Googled to see if Glenn Kessler had responded to the fact-checking request, and found that Boonstra’s math doesn’t quite add up. While it’s true that her out-of-pocket costs are now higher, the amount she saves in premiums seems to completely compensate for that:
“The claim that the costs are now “unaffordable” appeared odd because, under Obamacare, there is an out-of-pocket maximum of $6,350 for an individual plan, after which the insurance plan pays 100 percent of covered benefits. The Blue Cross Blue Shield plans in Michigan that appear to match Boonstra’s plan, as described in local news reports, all have that limit.
Meanwhile, Boonstra told the Detroit News that her monthly premiums were cut in half, from $1,100 a month to $571. That’s a savings of $529 a month. Over the course of a year, the premium savings amounts to $6,348—just two dollars shy of the out-of-pocket maximum.
We were unable to reach Boonstra, but on the fact of it, the premium savings appear to match whatever out-of-pocket costs she now faces…
…The Fact Checker surely does not want to play down the emotional anguish that any cancer patient may face, but a fuller accounting is necessary if AFP is going to air ads like this. In order to properly compare the old plan and the new plan, there needs to be fuller disclosure of the costs and out-of-pocket maximums before claims that the new plan is “unaffordable” can be accepted at face value. Too many anecdotal stories, on both sides, have fallen apart under close scrutiny.
Russell passed along a quote from Boonstra: “My plan, the premiums are half, but the out‑of‑pocket costs are so high that for me, it’s unaffordable. My coverage is 80/20. Blood work, I’m paying 20 percent. If I needed a bone marrow transplant, I would only be covered 80 percent. Everything, everything I do now, I have to pay a percentage of.”
It is one thing to say there are higher out-of-pocket costs, as she did at the RNC news conference, but another to assume that those higher costs are not offset in some way by the significantly lower premium. (The $350,000 bone marrow transplant, for instance, would be capped at the out of pocket minimum.) The reality is that eventually Boonstra will hit the maximum and no longer pay anything. So over the course of the year, the difference in the costs could well even out.
We will initially set this rating at Two Pinocchios, and will update if we get more information.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/02/20/a-hard-hitting-anti-obamacare-ad-makes-a-claim-that-doesnt-add-up/
If any democrat has belittled this woman’s condition or tried to demonize her then they are an asshole, but there’s nothing wrong with fact-checking claims made in a political ad. In fact, doing so is a necessity when the claims are so extreme. If Boonstra’s claims are true, then people should be outraged. But wouldn’t you want to know for sure whether the claims are true before saying something like, “The blood of Julie Boonstra will be on Barak Obama’s, Nancy Pelosi’s, and the Democratic Party’s hands. God damn them?”
Or do you feel confident in saying stuff like that regardless of whether or not this story is true?
It’s especially important to fact-check stories like these given that so many previous anti-ACA horror stories have already been proven false.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-obamacare-horror-stories-20140220,0,3801120.story#axzz2uCPZAB6s
I love the way Democrats think they can just dismiss this woman as a liar and “decide” what’s acceptable in terms of expense, inconvenience, and stress in her life.
I have to laugh when I think of all the sob stories they constantly run to sell this and that new expensive government program.
As I pointed out when I posted this story, the BIG STORY here is the administrations blatant abuse of power.
The administrations attempt to sick the FCC on newsrooms, IRS targeting, James Rosen targeted by the IRS and the DOJ, and now an official letter sent to station managers and writers warning/advising with chilling clarity to watch the ads they run or they will be in danger of losing their livlihood.
In Boonstra’s case it is particularly galling since the President himself engaged in lying to the public over several years about being able to keep their health insurance. Indeed, the legislation would not have been supported so widely, most likely would never have been passed, except for this horrendous lie:
Left media is working overtime to label Mrs. Boonstra as a liar…and yes Chris, that’s bad enough in anybody’s book.
Incredibly it doesn’t bother the left at all that the PRESIDENT LIED!
It doesn’t bother them that a lot of people have had their lives disrupted and sent into turmoil. That their premiums have gone up or their out of pocket costs make the month to month cash flow more disruptive to their budgets.
So many of these stories have been proven false? By what standard? The left is simply saying to people what you think doesn’t matter!
We think the plan you can get now is better…therefore you are a liar.
Who is fact checking the liberal fact checkers?
Chris you are fabulous at straining at the tiniest speck while missing completely the huge boulder that has crashed down on this nation (and the world) as a result of the Obama administration.
Ah, the old “It doesn’t matter if her claims are true, because Obama lied too and everything he does is terrible” defense.
I’d say I’ve missed it, but you haven’t really given me the time to.
Look, I’ve said more times than I remember here that “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” was a lie, and Obama deserves condemnation for it. Many others, including the so-called “liberal fact-checker” I cited above, have also called him out on this, rating his claim four Pinnochios to this ad’s two. What more do you want?
The fact that Obama lied does not mean it’s OK for Republicans to do the same.
“Who is fact checking the liberal fact checkers?”
Well, you easily could. But you have no interest in doing so.
Yep, the rabid dogs of the left are doing their best to smear Boonstra a liar, including the hate mongering water boy. Disgusting. Despicable. Outrageous.
Chris: “Ah, the old “It doesn’t matter if her claims are true, because Obama lied too and everything he does is terrible” defense.”
No nimrod, its the abuse of power and the left’s sense of proportion “defense” that is startling!
“Look, I’ve said more times than I remember here that “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” was a lie, and Obama deserves condemnation for it”
BFD! Wake up! We aren’t talking about choosing the color for the drapes in the Oval office.
We are talking about power that exists outside the process of checks and balances. We are talking about a President who purposely lied to get a law passed, who refuses to accept the mistake and correct it, who continues to double down even though it is broken and doing great damage. The law is hurting people. We are talking about a President who is corrupt, who is unworthy of the office he holds.
Not only did the leader of the nation lie to the public over several years without media scrutiny or the lefts voicing objection but once discovered the presidents response is to offer a fake apology…fake as evidenced by his overt action to attempt to silence all opponents objections through legal intimidation and attacks on speech rights…using the IRS,the FCC, and the judicial.
You are straining at the speck dear boy to avoid talking about the larger boulder.
Boonstra IS NOT LYING, she is sharing her personal experience of what this law has meant in terms of her stress levels and her budget. It is her right to voice this opinion.
Weenie lefty excuses and explanations for a very bad law are the lowest of the low…a pathetic attempt to discredit her as a means of defending the lying manipulative President…and so typical.
“Well, you easily could. But you have no interest in doing so.”
What the he77 do you think this exchange is about?
Your willingness to jump on the left attack of this woman is ridiculous, Chris, since you continue to support and defend the biggest LIARS, manipulators, and deceivers to ever hold positions of power in America! And I’m not just talking about the President…I am talking about the entire leadership of the Democrat Party and the minions in media, academe, the law, activist organization, and entertainment that embrace the politics of personal destruction, laws passed through manipulation and suppression of alternative views, and the complete blocking of participation of the peoples representatives in the House. IT ISN’T A PARTY ITS A SYNDICATE.
The President was also given four Pinnochio’s by Glenn Kessler, The Fact Checker, Washington Post for his claim that seven million people “got access to healthcare for the first time” because of the ACA.
Another cancer patient steps up as her daughter tells the story of her loss of coverage to the Wall Street Journal:
“We have to pass it to find out whats in it beyond the fog of the controversy”
Now of course, we get to deal with the fog of excuses and false assurances and the dismissal of people facing real life problems UNNECESSARILY just because the Democrats wanted this central planning socialist system of healthcare.
Tina, a quick question.
Do you believe that Boonstra’s claims should be automatically accepted and taken at face value, without any further fact-checking at all? Do you believe it is inherently wrong to verify if what she says is true or not? Or do you think it’s important to determine whether her statements are accurate?
Fact check all you want. it doesn’t change the fact that her insurance was taken away, her life was filled with stress, her monthly budget has been imacted…
…and liberals don’t have the decency to exhibit the least bit of shame about what they have foisted on the American people. They find it much more important to criticize her than to criticize the party that brought the nation this crappy law.
I say this because it isn’t just Boonstra. She represents millions of people. Doctors and nurses have left the profession rather than deal with the bureaucracy and the uncertainty in the law. See also here.
Some patients have signed up but have not received cards…they don’t know if they have coverage. A few states have failed in their attempt to create a website and the federal governments site is still not working properly. Some businesses got waivers. those people will begin to lose their insurance around election time so we aren’t finished with the uncertainty and confusion or the anger and dismay at what has happened to their health insurance coverage.
The left, to put it more succinctly, is oblivious to the fact that their big plan is very bad for people, for doctors, for insurers, for jobs, and the country!
Good Lord, Chris, what will it take to get your sides attention?
Tina: “Fact check all you want. it doesn’t change the fact that her insurance was taken away, her life was filled with stress, her monthly budget has been imacted…”
Her health insurance plan was taken away, that’s correct. Obama’s “if you like your plan” lie was truly outrageous; there’s no getting around it. This law is very complex, at times needlessly so, and the implementation has only made things more confusing. I can see why Boonstra would be stressed and confused.
That said, she has managed to replace her plan with one where she pays almost exactly the same as her previous plan. The out of pocket expenses are higher, but the premiums are so low that it completely makes up for it. That’s just the math of it. In addition, Boonstra also never has to worry about being dropped from a plan because she has a pre-existing condition, or being discriminated against due to a pre-existing condition if she wants to switch plans again.
This doesn’t justify Obama’s lie. Not in the least. She shouldn’t have been told that she could keep her plan and then have to deal with the stress of finding another. Obama should have been honest from the beginning and explained that some people would have to switch plans. So I can understand her anger and frustration.
But this is far from the horror story the ad made it out to be. In the ad, Boonstra said:
“I was diagnosed with leukemia. I found out I only have a 20 percent chance of surviving. I found this wonderful doctor and a great health care plan. I was doing fairly well fighting the cancer, fighting the leukemia, and then I received a letter. My insurance was canceled because of Obamacare. Now, the out-of-pocket costs are so high, it’s unaffordable. If I do not receive my medication, I will die. I believed the president. I believed I could keep my health insurance plan. I feel lied to. It’s heartbreaking for me. Congressman Peters, your decision to vote Obamacare jeopardized my health.”
Again, because of the lower premiums, Boonstra is paying almost the exact same amount she was before in total. How can that be “unaffordable?”
She also seemed to be implying that she had to stop seeing her “wonderful doctor,” but he is still her doctor under her new plan.
And “If I do not receive my medication, I will die?” Where is the evidence that she is in danger of losing access to this medication? She’s paying the same as before.
I’m not calling Boonstra a liar, and I’m certainly not trying to discredit her. But she made claims in a political ad. It’s her right to make those claims, but at the same time, it’s my right to examine them and see whether or not they are correct.
I will give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she’s been misinformed. I will also admit that a great deal of the blame goes to the president, who did lie to her and the American people by saying “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.” That was utterly wrong. A lie is a lie, whether it’s told by a Democrat or Republican.
“I say this because it isn’t just Boonstra. She represents millions of people.”
Millions of people who…what? Had to transfer to another health plan, but who end up paying the exact same amount with additional security?
I’m sure there are some people, mostly well-off, who have ended up paying more under Obamacare. So why can’t Republicans seem to find any? Nearly all of the so-called Obamacare victims put forth have had their stories collapse under scrutiny. If you want me to believe this law is such a nightmare, find me some people who are actually in danger of losing access to critical care. I feel sympathy for Boonstra, she was lies to, but she does not appear to be correct that her new costs are “unaffordable,” since it’s the same as she was paying before, she has kept her doctor, and she does not seem to be in danger of losing her medication.
Do you see how ads like this actually damage your point? It makes it seem like you can’t actually find anyone who has been legitimately harmed by the law. I’ll admit that Obama’s lie was damaging to the Democrats and to the law itself (though that, of course, is not it’s main sin). Do you believe that false and misleading statements by your own party have the same effect?
Tina, I read the Wall Street Journal piece you linked to in comment #11. Stephen Blackwood writes:
“Because the exchange website in her state (Virginia) was not working, she went directly to insurers’ websites and telephoned them, one by one, over dozens of hours.”
Perhaps Blackwood is confused. The state of Virginia does not have its own exchange website. The reason for that is because Virginia Republicans refused to set one up, instead relying on the federal website. The LA Times points out the difference between states which have made this same decision and those who have decided to set up their own exchanges:
“The first is certainly due in part to the federal health enrollment site’s birth pains, which have been well-documented. But they didn’t have to affect Virginia residents. In choosing to let the feds do a job that the state should have taken on, Virginia kissed off more than $100 million in federal funds that would have been available to help its 844,000 uninsured residents find the insurance they need.
Neighboring Maryland had $165 million to do the job; Virginia spent $6 million. Virginia had 16 consumer helpers in the entire state, according to the Washington Post; Maryland, with about the same number of potential customers, had 325. It’s not surprising that Catherine Blackwood faced “repeated and prolonged phone waits” to get insurance information; the fault wasn’t Washington’s, but Richmond’s.”
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-cancer-medicine-20140224,0,4157578.story#ixzz2uIWePYAO
As for Blackwood’s mother’s troubles with Humana, that also seems hard to pin on the ACA, as the LA Times also points out:
“The misdirection over her medication is a different story, but it appears to be an issue between the Blackwoods and Humana. The ACA doesn’t dictate which medications are or are not offered by insurers, and the law certainly doesn’t demand that information on formularies be withheld from customers. It sounds as if Mrs. Blackwood was sorely misled by Humana’s customer reps, and it seems likely that its refusal to cover her crucial medication is unjustified.
That does point to a problem with Obamacare, just not the one Stephen Blackwood and the Wall Street Journal think it does. The problem is that the Affordable Care Act not only left commercial insurers at the center of our healthcare system, but strengthened their grip on coverage. Many of the problems that have cropped up with the ACA are reflections of the private industry’s role, including its lousy customer service.
There’s no question that confusion and complexity still govern America’s healthcare system. But for millions of Americans, there’s less of that, and more fairness, than there was before the ACA. Judging from her son’s op-ed, Catherine Blackwood is still getting her cancer treatment, with the exception of a decision about medication that Humana should be ashamed about.
Blackwood wrote that “it is precisely because health care for 300 million people is so complicated that it cannot be centrally managed.” But the ACA is the exact opposite of “centrally managed” healthcare. In fact, as advocates of a single-payer system argue, if it were centrally managed, it might work better.”
So…any examples of people that were actually harmed by the ACA, rather than by states which chose not to fully implement the law, or by the lack of transparency of private insurers?
Tina: “The President was also given four Pinnochio’s by Glenn Kessler, The Fact Checker, Washington Post for his claim that seven million people “got access to healthcare for the first time” because of the ACA.”
OK, so why did you disparage him as just a “liberal fact checker” in comment #5? Don’t you think we need people who are willing to point out falsehoods on both sides?
Chris: “Again, because of the lower premiums, Boonstra is paying almost the exact same amount she was before in total. How can that be “unaffordable?”
First of all those who seek to discredit her are wrong. Her overall yearly costs will be slightly higher. Additionally the high deductible means her costs at the beginning of the year are very high causing a monthly cash flow problem…she gets to choose between medicine or paying the rent and eating. That is something the left has traditionally thought a disastrous outcome! But in this case it creates yawns on the left! Hypocrites!
“I’m sure there are some people, mostly well-off, who have ended up paying more under Obamacare.”
You talk a lot about an attitude of privilege, Chris. You might want to examine that attitude in your self. How dare you! How dare you decide that most of the people who have come forward to say their premiums are higher, their out of pocket costs more, are just a bunch of “rich people” who can afford it…as if that should matter anyway! The entitled have apparently turned into a “privileged set” that can use the power of government to steal from their neighbors and call it “fair”.
“The reason for that is because Virginia Republicans refused to set one up, instead relying on the federal website.”
The federal exchange was not working…still is not working well…and all you can think to do is blame Republicans for not setting up a state exchange?
Her state, by the way, is apparently Michigan so there’s another error.
Are these errors the important issue? Are people’s lives going to be greatly impacted because a reporter got the state wrong or a state declined to set up its own exchange?
Is that the big story Chris, or is the big story that millions of people’s lives have been greatly disrupted, their insurance made unaffordable, their hours reduced, their doctor choosing to retire or not participate?
And exactly what about state exchanges is there to celebrate? WNLS6:
Happy reports about how wonderfully this whole thing is going are complete bull$h#t. Redirecting attention to other things to avoid talking about how terrible Obamacare is is complete partisan BS.
The LA Times is engaging in the same partisan game of misdirection that you are:
Blaming the insurers for the chaos and life changing uncertainty that flows from this extremely long, complex, ever-changing law is just pathetic.
More erroneous (odious) opinion:
There is nothing fair about this bill…nothing!
Millions of people lost or will lose policies they liked, millions find they will pay more out of pocket, and the law will not result in those without insurance being covered as was promised in a key selling point to garner support for this law.
The law fixed a couple of problems that could have been fixed without all of the chaos and expense that this law has caused and will continue to cause.
“…any examples of people that were actually harmed by the ACA…”
Mrs Boonstra was harmed. Your attempts to change the subject and her story won’t change that fact. She’s not alone:
The Washington Times responded to Democrat bullying:
Newsmax:
$58 to $78 thousand a year for a family is not rich!
Middle class Americans are basically being slapped with a hidden tax so the Obama administration can redistribute healthcare monies and benefits to the poor and so government can INCREASE THE NUMBERS OF ENTILTLED WHO OWE GOVERNMENT FOR THEIR LIVLIHOOD.
The middle class will also see higher taxes generally which will hurt their budgets. See more here, here, here, and here.
The information is there…those who carry water for the Democrats are not reporting it with the same level of furry they use when they set out to bully and discredit a Mrs. Boonstra.
You Democrats can run, you can change the subject and bully those who come forward to tell their stories but YOU CANNOT HIDE FROM THE MISERABLE DISASTER THAT IS OBAMACARE!
You should be calling for the law to be repealed and replaced! Your failure to acknowledge the weight of these problems is the biggest lie of all!
Your excuses and defense of this disaster and failure to see the importance and extent of damage in this chaotic and devastating mess is indefensible. Your attempts to make republicans and me the bad guys in this is reprehensible.
The ACA is affecting the cost and coverage of prescriptions so that people who lost their insurance face higher costs or a drug not covered.
WebMD:
Chaos…plans that worked for people dumped for the progressive agenda!
And they are not finished…the radical progressives in power in the Democrat Party want to use the chaos they created with the ACA (Obamacare) to push for single payer.
Funny Tina why don’t you explain how the fact an insurance company can no longer kick her off insurance for pre existing or for having the disease is bad.
Now Tina exactly just which article or part of the law bothers you most. We all want to make it better. Just exactly what is the wording?
I mean with all these words I have seen you must have read much of it…LOL
Bottom Line VA should have had their exchange up, and pre ACA she would have been kicked off ins and taxpayers would end up paying the bills.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/24/1279971/-Subject-of-debunked-Obamacare-horror-story-finally-speaks-to-Fox-News?detail=email
Bottom Line we still remember the debates and the Heritage dude shouting “Let them die!”
Hogwash I say read the law!
and single payer, ya know I am thinking about that…not sure yet but maybe I myself will push…Health before Wall Street profit when it comes to people
I could care less if the very profitable health ins industry gets 40% quarterly increases for investors at the expense of people dying
Dewey: “Funny Tina why don’t you explain how the fact an insurance company can no longer kick her off insurance for pre existing or for having the disease is bad.”
Funny, Republicans suggested this decades ago so your “funny” is just so much crap.
You don’t have to turn the industry on its head, destroy policies that people liked, throw people into chaos to make a simple change like that in the law.
Obamacare is not about “healthcare for everyone”
Its about greater power and control in the federal government and less liberty for all Americans!
“Bottom Line VA should have had their exchange up”
Sorry that isn’t “the bottom line”
the bottom lie is does this law deliver an improved situation for most Americans? the answer is NO!
30,000 or more will still be without insurance (No improvement)
Millions will lose the policies or doctors/hospitals they liked and counted on. (Epic lie…Epic fail)
The cost will be much greater than promised (Lie…Epic fail!)
People will lose hours at work (Epic fail)
Companies will drop insurance coverage (Epic fail)
Will/has harmed the economy and job growth (Epic fail)
Power awarded to an unelected appointee to write/change law without Congress (Epic constitutional fail)
Doctors are retiring rather than work under the law (Super epic fail)
Single payer? Really? Paid for by whom? Without Wall Street and private business profits there will be NO TAX BASE.
Wall Street does not benefit from a system of diminished opportunity for the average citizen. It has no vested interest in creating a diminished society. it benefits when the economy, and thus the lives of all citizens is vibrant.
Power in government does diminish the vibrancy and opportunity for citizens by placing roadblocks and hurdles in the path of business. Single payer will deliver an inferior product and greatly diminish private sector wealth building and opportunity for all Americans. Americans will have to pay for insurance and the big bureaucracy to manage and enforce it.
This is simple to understand.
“I could care less if the very profitable health ins industry gets 40% quarterly increases for investors at the expense of people dying ”
Dewey you have a very cynical attitude toward your fellow man and in particular the healthcare professionals that have delivered quality care to people in America whether o not they could pay for services. This lie is the sickest I’ve heard for the supposed need for a big government control unit to make things “better”.
I have to admit it…I would love to call you a pretty rotten name right now but I will hold my tongue. Suffice to say your opinions are uninformed and ridiculous.
Tina: “30,000 or more will still be without insurance (No improvement)”
Why do say such clearly ridiculous things?
First of all, the number is 30,000,000, not 30,000.
Second of all, the number of uninsured Americans prior to the enactment of the ACA was about 57,000,000. That means that under the ACA, 27,000,000 more people will gain health insurance.
So you seem to have two logical choices here:
1) You can explain how cutting the number of the uninsured by nearly half can reasonable be called “no improvement.”
or
2) You can admit you were wrong when you said that there would be “no improvement” in the number of uninsured.
JUST FOR THE RECORD:
Today, February 26, 2014, Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada)took to the floor to call cancer patient Julie Boonstra a liar — as well as millions of other Americans — for political purposes.
No, Reid did NOT call Boonstra a liar by name (Reid is far to oily a political hack for that), but the reference was unmistakeable (except to the usual hear-no-evil monkeys.)
Kinda sounds familiar, eh Tina and Jack?
Pie Guevara: “Today, February 26, 2014, Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada)took to the floor to call cancer patient Julie Boonstra a liar…”
…No, Reid did NOT call Boonstra a liar by name”
There’s that airtight Pie Guevara logic. “What I just said wasn’t factually true, but it’s still true! In your heart! As long as you believe!”
That being said, it does appear that Boonstra has made conflicting claims about the affordability of her new plan.
In the ad, she said:
“Now, the out-of-pocket costs are so high, it’s unaffordable.”
However, in an interview with Steve Doocy, she said this:
“Under my old policy, I knew what I could afford every single month because I wasn’t hit with extra charges. Now, I don’t know what I have to pay month to month based on that out-of-pocket expense. Leukemia tests are extremely expensive and I just don’t have the five or six thousand dollars in the bank to cover that expense.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/24/cancer-patient-defends-obamacare-criticism-after-dem-goes-after-ad/
And in an interview with The Dexter Leader, when asked about her monthly costs, she said, “I truly would love to show the public my numbers, but like I said I just don’t have that because I haven’t had those visits. People don’t have that certainty – they don’t have the stability of knowing every month what they’re going to be paying now and it’s the ability to actually have that sum of money to pay.”
http://heritage.com/articles/2014/02/23/dexter_leader/news/doc5307a0a1bef27208974309.txt?viewmode=fullstory
So how can she claim that her costs are “unaffordable,” then claim later that she doesn’t actually know what her costs are? That doesn’t make any sense. For all Boonstra knows, she could end up paying less or exactly the same in monthly costs.
Like I said, I can sympathize with the uncertainty Boonstra is facing. It is wrong that she was told she could keep her plan, and then found out this was not true. But that does not mean that it is wrong for others to ask for verification of her claims. Why are Democrats in the wrong for asking for more information? Even the lawyers for the Peters campaign did not simply ask for the ad to be pulled–they said that the ad should either be pulled OR Americans for Prosperity should provide verification for Boonstra’s claims. (That was conveniently left out of the Powerline article which sought to portray Democrats as a bunch of cancer bullies.) AFP has refused to meet this very reasonable request.
No one here has provided an example of Boonstra being “demonized” or personally attacked in any way. It is hardly irrational for Democrats to ask that Boonstra’s claims be verified by objective evidence before taking them at face value. Republicans seem outraged that anyone would dare question someone with cancer, and are playing the victim card, something they claim to be against when Democrats do it.
Chris: “Why do say such clearly ridiculous things?
First of all, the number is 30,000,000, not 30,000.”
Yeah yeah, my bad.
But ridiculous? What is ridiculous about noticing that one of the number one selling points for Obamacare, like so many others, turns out to be totally BOGUS?
read and learn:
Smoke and mirrors is the game always played by radical progressive Democrats because they are always selling a pig in a poke.
The third option is to show you just how far you have your head up your own pompous butt.
Using those words would be considered indelicate for a woman to say, and a bit mean spirited at least in some circles, however, since you began a recent comment on the welfare thread by taking a backhanded shot to say that I am both irrational and inhumane I frankly don’t give a rip.
So…ridiculous?
Hardly!
Pie I heard the little weasel and yes, it kinda does!
Tina: “These two projections raise the question: How can ObamaCare raise the number of insured by 30 million as it leaves some 30 million uninsured?”
Is this for real?
Tina, when you subtract two from four, you are left with two. You have also still subtracted two. This is basic math.
Looks like Julie Boonstra will actually end up saving over $1000 due to the ACA:
“Boonstra said Monday her new plan she dislikes is the Blue Cross Premier Gold health care plan, which caps patient responsibility for out-of-pocket costs at $5,100 a year, lower than the federal law’s maximum of $6,350 a year. It means the new plan will save her at least $1,200 compared with her former insurance plan she preferred that was ended under Obamacare’s coverage requirements.
…
Boonstra’s old plan cost $1,100 a month in premiums or $13,200 a year, she previously told The News. That didn’t include money she spent on co-pays, prescription drugs and other out-of-pocket expenses.
By contrast, the Blues’ plan premium costs $571 a month or $6,852 for the year. Since out-of-pocket costs are capped at $5,100 for in-network doctors and hospitals, including deductibles, the maximum Boonstra would pay this year for all of her cancer treatment is $11,952.
When advised of the details of her Blues’ plan, Boonstra said the idea that it would be cheaper “can’t be true.”
“I personally do not believe that,” Boonstra said.
She said she still fears her costs will be unaffordable because she could be hit with large out-of-pocket bills in the early months when she wouldn’t have the money to pay. She also said her out-of-pocket maximum could be higher than advertised because there’s one prescription that was previously covered by her old plan that isn’t and she now buys with a separate prescription discount card.
Hetzel said he understands patients may be confused by their benefits as they adjust. Boonstra’s health plan covers all prescriptions, Hetzel said, who advises she use the coverage instead of a prescription discount card so co-pays would go toward meeting the out-of-pocket maximum.
On the chance of being assessed the full maximum in the first month or so of a health plan, he said: “It is possible, but it’s highly unlikely.”
On Tuesday, the Washington Post’s fact checker, Glenn Kessler, downgraded Boonstra’s ad further from two to three Pinocchios, based on the new plan information from The News.
“We understand that change can be confusing and that Boonstra was annoyed at having to sign up for a new plan,” Kessler wrote. “But it appears she jumped on television without trying to understand the basics about her new coverage. … In any case, one cannot claim that a plan is ‘unaffordable’ when over the course of the year it will provide you with substantial savings.”
From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140310/LIFESTYLE03/303100100#ixzz2vhHLVmMK
Chris this information is nice for the lady if accurate, but it doesn’t change anything.
The Obama administration and the Democrats with their super majority in Congress pushed this healthcare law down the throats of the American people. Most Americans were already insured, were happy with their insurance, and had their personal budgets worked out. Many of these Americans supported the “Affordable Care Act” because they were told it would help people who were not insured to get insurance AND they were told they could keep their insurance plan and their doctor. They were told that the new law would cause their premiums to go down by $2500.00 a month!
This is not a small thing! It certainly deserves more than excuses and distractions.
Many Americans know for sure they were scammed…they have lost their insurance. Others remain in limbo because of the temporary waivers issued by the President. Some have learned their hours are being cut at work. Some have lost their doctors or hospital. Other have found the premium, copay and out of pocket costs are higher than their previous plans. Still others that were satisfied with their low cost plans have now been forced into Medicaid. This week we find out restaurants and other businesses are attaching a healthcare surcharge to customers bills because of increased costs due to Obamacare. The chaos will continue to roll out because the waivers have delayed the nightmare for many Americans. Economists tell us that the law is a drag on the economy and is causing job losses and adding to income inequality.
Defenders of this law are attempting to convince the American people that the lies, deceptions, and disruptions to their lives are a mirage…no big deal…that the budget busting co-pays and out of pocket costs are just causing them a temporary period of adjustment…change is hard!
Can we go back to the beginning where we were sold a glowing future with $2500.00 savings on premiums and a policy we could keep? What happened to that picture and why are defenders of this bill asking the American people to shut up and suck it up?
Where is the outrage…the sense of shame and disappointment from these apologist?
Where, in God’s name, is their sense of decency?
A HHS report says 11 million American workers will face higher premium costs under Obamacare…64% of small businesses will be affected:
Chris could you make monthly payments for your healthcare expenses in January, February, March…maybe May that were higher than your take home pay and budget for food, utilities and food? Would it help you budget in those months to be told, “That’s okay, by the end of the year your overall expenses will be less”? Of course not…you’d be pi$$ed!
No matter how you spin it, and leaving politics aside for a minute, this law is very damaging and disruptive for a lot of people. “There there, Dearie” excuses are pathetic. The woman was told she could keep her plan. She was told her premiums could go down by $2500.00! Shes fighting cancer! She doesn’t need this $#*%! The country doesn’t need this $#*%!
Tina: “Where is the outrage…the sense of shame and disappointment from these apologist?
Where, in God’s name, is their sense of decency?”
Why do you hold yourself and your political allies to a lower moral standard than you hold your opponents? Your side said that this woman was going to have to pay more. Pie even went as far as saying, “The blood of Julie Boonstra will be on Barak Obama’s, Nancy Pelosi’s, and the Democratic Party’s hands. God damn them.”
Americans for Prosperity, the group behind this ad, used Julie Boonstra to push falsehoods. They didn’t do any research to find out if it was true whether or not her new costs were “unaffordable.” They sent her on TV to make a bunch of unverified claims, claims which now turn out to be false.
Isn’t that also shameful?
Chris thank you for answering the question. Liberals have no shame because they can always claim moral equivalency.
According to all of you it’s exactly the same thing for this cancer patient, who is obviously upset by the up front higher costs and the stress this law has caused her, to be slightly wrong about her new healthcare than it is and was for the Democrats and Obmama to plot, plan and execute this law through lies, bribery, and in secrecy behind closed doors.
Further it is perfectly understandable, based on this equivalency, that instead of acknowledging the law was a terrible mistake creating chaos and confusion and having a negative impact on jobs and the economy, that the administration continues to defend it. It is understandable that the public’s hardships and concerns are dismissed as trivial and barely consequential.
The ad was not entirely accurate. But it was not an ad made to “push falsehoods” either.
Boonstra would not have chosen this policy for herself if she had the choice because she cannot afford the up front costs. Obamacare has screwed up her budget and created stress in her life at a time when her care providers are telling her she needs calm and positive energy in her life to fight the cancer.
She is not alone…she represents others and for some of them their entire costs are higher…or they have lost their doctors.
She is also a citizen. There is no equivalency to her power to screw up lives…NONE!
Your take is uncommonly cold and calculating given your political posture is based on empathy and fairness.
“Boonstra would not have chosen this policy for herself if she had the choice because she cannot afford the up front costs.”
Again, we don’t know that. She is still saying that she “could” have to pay more in the first few months. She has no idea whether or not she actually will, and the insurance company says that that would be “highly unlikely.”
I will respond more later.
Boonstra Story, debunked, AFP has admitted, anyone defending this hoax should reread their Duped article….
Who paid for the commercials? LOL
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-harry-reid-koch-brothers-unamerican-20140226,0,3883298.story
“Boonstra would not have chosen this policy for herself if she had the choice because she cannot afford the up front costs.”
…Oh really?
Boonstra’s old plan cost $1,100 a month in premiums or $13,200 a year, she previously told The News. That didn’t include money she spent on co-pays, prescription drugs and other out-of-pocket expenses.
By contrast, the Blues’ plan premium costs $571 a month or $6,852 for the year. Since out-of-pocket costs are capped at $5,100 for in-network doctors and hospitals, including deductibles, the maximum Boonstra would pay this year for all of her cancer treatment is $11,952.
When advised of the details of her Blues’ plan, Boonstra said the idea that it would be cheaper “can’t be true.”
“I personally do not believe that,” Boonstra said.
Read full story at link
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140310/LIFESTYLE03/303100100
So exactly how has the ACA hurt you personally?
Tina Chris provided the info, I repeated it We all know the Koch brothers are pouring millions into this …
what we do not know is exactly what language in the actual law bothers you…..
We all see the Koch ads, to my knowledge not a 1 has panned out to be factual..
So lets look at the actual law….. which part of this law has personally affected your healthcare?