Let’s Try to Keep Obamacare Anecdotes In Perspective

Examples of how the law impacts Americans are important to the conversation, but need to be observed through a wider lens.

Sen. Lamar Alexander speaks to members of the media at the Capitol October 11, 2013 on Capitol Hill.
National Journal
Sophie Novack
Add to Briefcase
Sophie Novack
Nov. 6, 2013, 9:21 a.m.

The ex­per­i­ence of “mil­lions of Amer­ic­ans” has been thrown back and forth re­cently by both parties as evid­ence of Obama­care’s suc­cess or fail­ure, de­pend­ing on who’s talk­ing.

In Sen­ate hear­ings this week, law­makers piled on spe­cif­ic stor­ies from their con­stitu­ents as em­blem­at­ic of lar­ger im­pacts of the health care law. For Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats, there are two dif­fer­ent “mil­lions of Amer­ic­ans.”

“My late friend Alex Haley used to say: Lamar, if in­stead of mak­ing a speech you just tell a story, some­body might listen to you,” Sen. Lamar Al­ex­an­der, R-Tenn., said Tues­day at a hear­ing of the Sen­ate Com­mit­tee on Health, Edu­ca­tion, Labor, and Pen­sions with Cen­ters for Medi­care and Medi­caid Ser­vices Ad­min­is­trat­or Mar­ilyn Taven­ner.

Re­pub­lic­ans like Al­ex­an­der cited the mil­lions of Amer­ic­ans who are re­ceiv­ing plan can­cel­la­tions from their in­sur­ance com­pan­ies as a shot at Pres­id­ent Obama’s re­peated state­ment that “if you like your plan, you can keep it.”

“I re­cently heard from one of those Ten­nesseans whose policy will be can­celed on Janu­ary 1,” Al­ex­an­der con­tin­ued. “Her name is Emily. She’s 39. She has lupus. She told me: ‘I can­not keep my cur­rent plan be­cause it doesn’t meet the stand­ards of cov­er­age. This alone is a trav­esty,’ she said.”

Demo­crats, on the oth­er hand, are em­phas­iz­ing the mil­lions of Amer­ic­ans who will be newly eli­gible for af­ford­able health cov­er­age for the first time, as a res­ult of Medi­caid ex­pan­sion, premi­um sub­sidies avail­able on the ex­changes, and pro­tec­tions against dis­crim­in­a­tion based on preex­ist­ing con­di­tions or gender. 

“Let me first share with you a story from Michigan that was high­lighted in an art­icle in the L.A. Times that talked about a wo­man named Ju­dith,” Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said Wed­nes­day at a Sen­ate Fin­ance Com­mit­tee hear­ing with Health and Hu­man Ser­vices Sec­ret­ary Kath­leen Se­beli­us.

“She’s 48 years old, works in a de­part­ment store, had an in­sur­ance plan that cost her $65 a month. It was af­ford­able. She thought she had in­sur­ance. Then she was dia­gnosed with can­cer and found out that her plan had a $2,000 an­nu­al lim­it for hos­pit­al ser­vices, which would give her about one day in the hos­pit­al. So she delayed her care. Her can­cer got worse, and she was in a very dif­fi­cult, dif­fi­cult situ­ation.” Stabenow noted that un­der the Af­ford­able Care Act, Ju­dith would not face caps on cov­er­age, high­er rates as a wo­man, or re­jec­tion from in­sur­ance com­pan­ies be­cause of her ill­ness.

Both types of stor­ies are hap­pen­ing across the coun­try, and both are im­port­ant. However, the health care law is far more com­plic­ated than any of these an­ec­dotes in­dic­ate at face value, on their own. Some people will face premi­um in­creases. Oth­ers will see their premi­ums de­crease. Many will be eli­gible or able to af­ford cov­er­age for the first time.

In­sur­ance works by bal­an­cing these changes. To in­crease cov­er­age for mil­lions of people, something’s got to give — some people will pay less, but some people will pay more. In any private mar­ket­place, some health­i­er people end up ef­fect­ively sub­sid­iz­ing cov­er­age for oth­ers if they them­selves don’t end up need­ing med­ic­al care.

However, it’s im­port­ant to re­mem­ber that the num­ber of people who pur­chase in­sur­ance on the in­di­vidu­al mar­ket is re­l­at­ively small. The law will not af­fect the ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­ans, and the num­ber of the newly in­sured is ac­tu­ally much lar­ger than those los­ing their ex­ist­ing policies.

So yes, some will face high­er premi­ums, while oth­ers will be newly or more com­pre­hens­ively in­sured. These are both key sides of the story to high­light as de­bate over the law’s im­ple­ment­a­tion con­tin­ues. But to get an ac­cur­ate pic­ture, the stor­ies must be re­con­ciled and told to­geth­er.

What We're Following See More »
BUT IS HE A YES VOTE?
Cornyn Attempting to Get McCain Back for Health Vote
7 minutes ago
THE LATEST
“TIME HAD RUN OUT” FOR ILL BABY
Charlie Gard’s Parents End Legal Fight
31 minutes ago
THE LATEST

"A lawyer representing Chris Gard and Connie Yates told the High Court 'time had run out' for the baby. Mr. Gard said it meant his 'sweet, gorgeous, innocent little boy' will not reach his first birthday on 4 August. 'To let our beautiful little Charlie go' is 'the hardest thing we'll ever have to do,' his mother said. Charlie's parents said they made the decision because a US doctor had told them it was now too late to give Charlie nucleoside therapy.

Source:
AGENCY SOUGHT TO DELAY IMPLEMENTATION
11 States Sue EPA Over Chemical Rule
33 minutes ago
THE DETAILS

"Eleven states have sued the Environmental Protection Agency over its June decision to delay implementation of a chemical safety rule" until 2019. "The state attorneys general, led by New York’s Eric Schneiderman (D), argue the rule is important for 'protecting our workers, first-responders and communities from chemical accidents' and should be allowed to take affect as planned by the Obama administration’s EPA.

Source:
ULTIMATUM ON ACA
Trump: You’re With Us Or Against Us
51 minutes ago
THE LATEST
$1.6 BILLION SET ASIDE FOR WALL
House Freedom Caucus Chair: Shutdown Over Wall Funding Unlikely
1 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) on Monday said that funding for President Trump's controversial border wall is unlikely to cause a government shutdown. 'The odds of a government shutdown are very minimal when it comes to that,' the conservative lawmaker said at an event in Washington, D.C. 'I do think the funding of the border wall will happen,' he added. Appropriators have set aside $1.6 billion to fund new wall and fencing sections on parts of the U.S.-Mexico border covering a few dozen miles."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login