Remember our success story highlighted by the President?

[Savannahmann]

Well, things didn't work out as we hoped.

It turns out she is not eligible for the tax credit, and thus can't buy the insurance, and can't afford it. This is one of our supporters, who was screwed by the ACA in her opinion, and how many others opinions?

Do you now see the millstone that is the ACA, and why I now wonder if we can keep the Senate? We are in serious trouble, and if we don't figure it out, we're going to be well and truly fucked in November 2014. I can't stress this enough, we have seriously fucked up on our reporting of what the ACA would do, and what we promised the people. Remember George HW Bush was defeated by his read my lips broken promise. How do you think we're going to fare in November now?

[geek tragedy]

1. People like you who bash the ACA every chance you get and refuse to acknowledge the people

it helps are part of the problem, not the solution.

[Savannahmann]

8. Really?

I did this? I somehow got the woman confusing information and then finally told her she wasn't going to get any tax credits? I managed to make that happen? Or am I secretly as a second job directing the news reporting of CNN?

I'm trying to wake you all up to what the rest of the population, you know, those folks who go and vote, are thinking about the ACA. They aren't reading the propaganda posted her about how awesome it is. They aren't reading the Propaganda posted on the RW Sites about it being some secret takeover by some new world order. If they heard or read that stuff, either side, they would reject it as BS.

I'm telling you how the average person, the ones who drive trucks, who work for unions in town. Neighbors in the rural community, and folks about town. People who consistently elect and re-elect John Barrow, a Democrat to the House. People who may not re-elect John Barrow to the house over this shit and the promises we make and aren't keeping.

That's the fucking thing about a promise. If you make it, you had better keep it. Take your loved one. You promise to be home by six to take them to dinner at a Family Owned Italian Restaurant for their birthday. You instead go out with your friends and party until the bars close. Do you think your loved one would understand you went out with friends from work because you all just got a big contract and won't be losing your jobs for at least two years thus giving you a semblance of job security? No, that significant other will think you lied, and you don't care about them at all.

So I'm the friend who is pointing out that your significant other feels betrayed and hurt, and you're angry that I am not telling them what a wonderful person you are, with those few exceptions. I should be telling that significant other that you are really awesome, and think of all the good things you do.

[geek tragedy]

18. You're hopping up and down over someone who is having trouble with a state

exchange giving her inaccurate tax credit information.

Someone who is currently without coverage under the ACA, not someone who was promised they could keep their coverage and lost it.

Your agenda is pretty transparent.

[Bluenorthwest]

29. Would you be kind enough to specify which Union for truck drivers or other workers does not

provide Health Insurance as a Union benefit? The Union truck drives I have known have been Teamsters and they have great health insurance. I have never known a full time Union worker without health insurance.

[okaawhatever]

67. I call bullshit on all of it. Either there's been an error with the state or she's delusional. She

claims in the story she's

1. 47 yrs old
2. single mother I calculated with one child, if she has two or more then the premium will be higher but her income would have to be about 12k higher per year to not qualify for subsidies.
3. She doesn't qualify for subsidies. If that's the case, and it's real easy to figure out, she would have to make over 400% of poverty level income. For herself and one child that number is $62,040. And that number is net business income. She mentioned she was self-employed so who knows what her deductions are.

4. I don't know where she lives in Washington state so I used Seattle. For a bronze plan the premium each month for her and her child is $319.48 for the bronze plan. Now, that $319.48 is only an extra expense if she has zero covered medical expenses each year. If her child is involved in any sports he would need a physical. That is covered, her physical is covered, their flu shots are covered, her mammogram is covered, and that is the stuff that is normal. Those items are close to $700 where I live. If that is all she does, a physical once a year for her and child, flu shots and a mammogram her monthly expense is $261.15!!! And that's for someone who makes $62,040 per year. She's claiming she can't pay that amount for insurance, and that she hasn't had insurance in years. Give me a friggin' break.
I don't know what you're all sideways about. Chances are it was a clerical error and CNN jumped all over it. shame on them and others for all these stories about people who can't afford insurance. The math doesn't work. If this chick makes less, then the only problem is someone at the state messed up and the woman opened the door for that in the interview. (either they miscalculated or...)
Here's some numbers:
We know if she makes the $62,040 net biz income her premium for her and one child is $319
If she makes $35,000 her premium would be $213 for her and one child
If she makes $20,907 or less she would be covered under medicaid.

Something is wrong here. You have to be suspicious when these reporters offer no facts. She claims the state said she didn't qualify for subsidies, was it because she qualified for medicaid? Was it because she made over 400% of poverty level? Those are the only 2 options. Period. And if she does make 62,000 has a child and can't afford $319 per month for health care she has issues anyway.
Chill out and support the President. What he has done is give a self-employed woman WORST CASE SCENARIO Bronze level health insurance for the first time in years with no pre-existing conditions, and free check-ups for $319 per month. That is what will get us elected in 2014.


https://www.wahealthplanfinder.org/HBEWeb/Annon_ShowIndividualFamilyPlans

[Autumn]

28. You know this made the actual news media.

Why blame a DUer for posting a news article on a political discussion board? It's not like the poster pulled this story out of thin air.

[geek tragedy]

30. Because that DUer has made it his goal to reinforce misleading media narratives

so long as they further his agenda of bashing all things attributable to President Obama and pushing libertarianism.

See, e.g., http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021307310?com=search#op

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023012354#post1

[Autumn]

33. Then point out what's misleading in this article that leads you to believe

the poster is bashing the ACA . What was posted is true. This is a political message board created for people to post current political articles. If you don't approve of people who post, put them on ignore or trash the thread.

[geek tragedy]

36. No, what was posted was that a woman who wrote a gushing letter

to the President is now getting mixed messages from a state-run exchange, and the media is hyping it as proof that the OMG THE ACA IS DOOMED.

Quite honestly, if liberal Democratic blogs don't attempt to push back against misleading media tropes, they really have no purpose for existing.

[Autumn]

39. My problem is with the incompetent idiot in the White House

who gave Obama this story to tout and didn't make sure it was verified as true before he used it as a "success" story. That person is the one who is part of the problem, not the solution. That is where your ire should be directed, not the poster who posted the story from the news.

[geek tragedy]

41. It was true. The problem is that the state exchange changed its mind

on her tax credits.

[Autumn]

44. Then there's your culprit. Not the fellow

Democrat and DUer who posted the article on our web site.

[geek tragedy]

45. Perhaps you missed the foaming at the mouth and pants-wetting commentary

the poster attached to the video.

[Autumn]

46. Yes, I missed the foaming at the mouth and pants-wetting commentary

because that's all in your mind. I saw his opinion and a question. Not everyone is going to live in your mind where everything is great.

[geek tragedy]

49. Mmmm hmmm

This is one of our supporters, who was screwed by the ACA in her opinion, and how many others opinions?

This is a lie. She was not 'screwed' by the ACA as she had no possibility of buying insurance before the ACA was passed.

Do you now see the millstone that is the ACA, and why I now wonder if we can keep the Senate?

Pants-wetting.

We are in serious trouble, and if we don't figure it out, we're going to be well and truly fucked in November 2014.

I can't stress this enough, we have seriously fucked up on our reporting of what the ACA would do, and what we promised the people. Remember George HW Bush was defeated by his read my lips broken promise. How do you think we're going to fare in November now?

More pants-wetting.

[Jesus Malverde]

59. You nailed it. Bit shocking really...nt

[Autumn]

60. That's very shocking to me.

What isn't shocking is that no one seems bothered by that, they are more bothered that a DUer who doesn't meet their standards posts an article on it. The person who gave this to Obama and had him go with it should be fired.

[Jesus Malverde]

61. Yeah I actually googled obama's chief of staff. Did you know his name, I didn't.

All those resources wasted.

I suspect it will get harder for the President to surround himself with quality staff as the more ambitious and marketable move on to 2016.

[Autumn]

62. The pukes are going to use this to make Obama and the ACA look bad. Over and Over

And it was done by someone in the White House. That's just stupid.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

54. No. Pointing out their agenda is also helpful. Thanks to all who do this

Because some people who detract from Obamacare are allowed to do so with great leeway.

[Autumn]

56. Nonsense. Some people will like the ACA others won't

beating them over the head with your words and tracking their posts does nothing and changes no minds . If all you can do is ignore the message and attack the messenger you are in over your head. Someone in the White House having Obama use this as a "success" story and not verifying it is the problem. And that is my opinion, I have stated it and I stand by it and thats all I have to say to you.

[SidDithers]

43. Nailed it...nt

Sid

[Laelth]

2. We don't have the votes in Congress to fix it.

Obama is doing everything he can to ameliorate the damage by executive fiat, but that's all we can do so long as the Republicans control the House.

You may be right about possible fall-out from the ACA. At this point, all I can do is hope that you're wrong, because I seriously doubt we can fix it. Under these circumstances, I turn to Truman.

No apologizing for the ACA.

I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman

-Laelth

[librechik]

3. geez, it's too bad we can't tweak the law as unforeseen problems come up

Oh, wait we can!

Sick of the caving when we just need to work harder.

[Capt. Obvious]

4. Time to scrap the ACA altogether

It's the only way we can keep our 30 seat deficit in the House.

[riqster]

14. DUzy!

[tridim]

5. We are going to destroy the Republicans in 2014 AND 2016...

Despite your constant pessimism and FUD.

[Capt. Obvious]

7. 80-20

[Orrex]

6. The ACA website caused my CHECK ENGINE light to switch on

Damn you Obama!

[JoePhilly]

9. So you mean Obama won't be re-elected just like GHW Bush wasn't, right?

But please, feel free to run in circles screaming.

Its fun to watch.

[Savannahmann]

17. No, I'm saying the following people might not be re-elected.

I'm saying that Kay Hagen might not get re-elected. Democrat Senator from North Carolina who won with 361k votes over Elizabeth Dole with 52% of the vote.

Mary Landrieu who won with 50.17% of the vote which was just over 5k people.

Mark Udall who won his first Senate Election with 53% of the vote, which isn't a huge margin.

I'm talking about Senate Races in which we are vulnerable and which could cause us to lose the Senate to the Republicans.

Look out Amigo, there is a huge brick wall right around the corner that we're going to hit full speed.

[JoePhilly]

20. Kay is doing her best to not get elected already.

I live in NC, and Kay is acting silly. She should be smacking Gov Pope (yes, I know that's not the actual Govoner's name) because he won't expand Medicaid or set up a State run exchange.

By the 2014 elections, millions of people who never had insurance coverage will have it. Their friends and neighbors will know about it because they will tell them. They will encourage their friends and neighbors to sign up.

Its sad to see Democrats panicking and accepting the GOP narrative. Particularly when they are not proposing anything more than panic.

What you should be doing is telling all your friends that the best way to fix the ACA is to add a public option to the exchanges, something like Medicare for all. That plan would be better than any of the junk plans, and cost less than most of the private plans.

That's the correct response for dems going into 2014, not panic.

[Bluenorthwest]

35. Some of us have been calling for a public option to help control costs since before Obama was

elected. Obama himself promised that any bill he signed had to have a strong public option, then he dropped it without a word as soon as the actual negotiations began.
What if that was in place right now, as so many Democrats called for? We'd be in much better shape. What stopped the Public Option, considering no Republicans voted for ACA anyway? A handful of 'Moderate Centrists' and 'Blue Doggies' who played the part of Republicans well refused to consider the Public Option. The more liberal side of the Party knew that without it, we'd be looking at what we are now looking at. Had the wiser heads prevailed we'd be well set for 2014 but as it is compromise was the name given to capitulation. Obama claimed he'd never run on a public option, no less.
Too bad it was not made a vital part of this reform from day one. Moderates demanded it be cut out. Pretending that the Public Option is some new idea that we did not know we needed is a silly affectation. Many on DU attacked those of us who wanted to seek the Public Option, now it is 'what you need to do is seek the public option'. Jaysus Cristos on Wheat Toast!

[JoePhilly]

57. It was never going to pass. Its not in place now. And it was never going to be in place now.

The votes did not exist.

And whining about why its not here NOW isn't going to get you any closer to having it NOW.

And the liberal side of the party would have gotten us NOTHING. That's what the liberal side of the party would have obtained. Nadda.

No one on DU was attacked for wanting a public option. They were attacked for wanting a public option or NOTHING.

The liberal side of the party is very good at complaining, not so good at getting things done.

Take your post ... are you trying to figure out how to add a PO to the ACA ... nope, just more whining.

[MineralMan]

10. And will CNN report when the issue with the tax credit is corrected?

I guess not. There are many individual stories out there. My wife's story is one of saving almost half of her monthly premium with the ACA policy she chose, and it will also save money through a lower maximum out of pocket and lower copays.

Everyone who goes to the exchange sites has a different story. Turning the ones where there is an issue into a condemnation of the entire program and predicting gloom and doom isn't really warranted.

[Romulox]

13. Um, when will that be? nt

[MineralMan]

66. How would I know. I'm not in Washington.

If you watched the whole video, it appears that she's gotten a letter from the exchange, telling her that many people have had similar things happen. That sounds like a glitch to me.

OTOH, if the woman has a high enough income to not be eligible for the subsidies, she should probably be able to afford coverage. My wife falls into that category, and her ACA premium is half of her $942 per month current premium. She has health insurance. It's part of our budget. It should be part of everyone's budget who is earning enough to not be qualified for a subsidy, I think.

Even so, we don't actually have the whole story from that CNN segment, do we?

[Romulox]

68. It sounded like you were making a prediction: "when the issue with the tax credit is corrected"

It turns out you are not. You don't know if anything will be "corrected", because, as far as you know, the subsidy information is correct. Which is why you spent the largest portion of your post defending the cost of private insurance.

I think that was my point.

[MineralMan]

69. OK. In any case, someone who doesn't qualify for a subsidy

can probably afford the insurance. They'd be a fool not to have health insurance in that situation. I maintained mine for decades, despite my income falling in some years. It seemed like a necessity. In fact, when I was 45, it saved my life. I wouldn't have gotten the care I needed for my viral encephalitis that put me in a coma for two weeks. As it was, I spent about $20,000 in additional costs for co-pays, but I'm alive.

Anyone who doesn't carry health insurance who can in any way afford it is running a very large risk. I've never been willing to take that risk, even when I really couldn't afford the premium. My wife's in the same situation, and she's uninsurable, so she has had to maintain a lousy policy that was a carryover from a previous job for many, many years. Her current premium, at age 57 is $942/month. It's a decent policy but she couldn't switch until ACA. Now, she has chosen a Platinum level policy for half the premium and only a $1000 maximum out of pocket and deductible. It's a bargain, more or less. We still can't really afford it, but what the hell. She needs it.

I'm on Medicare. Before I turned 65, my monthly premium was $776. Between the two of us, our health insurance costs were crippling, but there it was.

It's a choice people make or don't make. If we had single payer, you'd still be paying premiums. They'd be lower, but they'd still be there, and lots of people would believe they couldn't afford it. Until, of course, they needed some serious healthcare.

The situation sucks, no doubt, but it's the situation. I choose not to be bankrupted by a lack of insurance if I get sick. My choice.

[fadedrose]

11. I think people fear the Republicans more than the ACA billl

Because they know a fix will be made, and it will be, just wait....there's time before the '14 elections, and he can probably do some things by executive order.

[Romulox]

12. Man. People have run out of good arguments to defend this mess. See above. nt

[geek tragedy]

19. So, you favor repeal then? nt

[Romulox]

21. I don't favor mandatory private insurance. I think it is corporatist/fascist, and can't work. nt

[geek tragedy]

22. So, the answer is yes you favor repeal. Kthanxbai. nt

[Romulox]

23. That is an exceedingly weak method of argument. nt

[geek tragedy]

24. No, what is weak is refusing to answer a question.

You think mandatory private insurance can't work, is fascist, born of Satan's loins, etc.

Since that is the core of the ACA (as it was in Massachusetts) you must favor repeal. Otherwise you don't believe what you're saying.

It's incoherent and dishonest for someone to say "this law is a fascist abomination that will never work, but of course I don't want to repeal it."

Your rhetoric is on the ACA is indistinguishable from Ted Cruz et al. Only difference is that they're honest about their desire for repeal.

[Romulox]

25. You are on the wrong track when you begin "You think..." and what follows are your words,

and your words alone.

[geek tragedy]

26. Your words:

I don't favor mandatory private insurance. I think it is corporatist/fascist, and can't work

So, the ACA is fascist and can't work, but you haven't decided whether you favor repeal?

[Romulox]

27. My words are in my posts, for everyone to see. You need to concentrate on your own line of argument.

Demanding people rebut points that only you have made doesn't work. It's not a discussion of any kind, and I won't participate in it.

[geek tragedy]

31. Yes, you're just here to try to demoralize people while acting all smug and superior. nt

[Romulox]

32. I'm here to express the opinions found in *my* posts. I take zero responsibility for your posts. nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

37. I think I found the part about "satan's loins".

It's part of the sentence where you state your secret hatred for President Obama.

Oh wait... I guess only gt can see that.

[geek tragedy]

47. Hey, that poster *blamed* Obama for killing bin Laden.

Said it was a criminal act.

So, put him in the "if President Obama walked on water he'd say 'Barry can't swim'" crowd.

Hasn't made one positive comment about the President while at DU.

[cherokeeprogressive]

50. I don't know anything about that.

What I do know is you ascribed words to him he did not use.

Personally, I believe the Individual Mandate is the root cause of the problem most people have with ACA and amounted to a huge gift to the insurance companies.

Do you see satan's loins in what I wrote?

[geek tragedy]

52. satan's loins was not a reference to anyone's opinions of the president, merely

satirizing the Teabagger-esque hyperbole of calling the mandate (part of a plan embraced by Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts) 'fascist.'

There are three alternatives:

1) Pre 2010 system status quo;
2) Single payer/government takeover of healthcare;
3) Mandated private coverage

People who say that mandated private coverage is the end of the universe ought to explain how (2) was politically possible and administratively feasible, or how (1) was preferable to what we got in the ACA.

[Autumn]

63. Silly, satan's loins, right there in your post

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10024057502#post50 I searched it and there it was But only the one post

[cherokeeprogressive]

64. Caught!

Never fails...

[Orsino]

38. The millions who already are and will be helped by ACA...

...are millions of good defenses. We're not likely to run out of them anytime soon.

They don't erase the people who will be left behind, but let's not start pretending ACA is all bad.

[uponit7771]

53. People who expect perfection upfront on this effort have lost all credibility see your post

[quinnox]

15. It will probably be substantially tweaked or delayed until after the election

The closer we get to election 2014, the more likely some delays or changes will happen to the law. I was encouraged by Clinton speaking out and then Obama responded by delaying one part already. So I am feeling more optimistic about it.

[riqster]

16. You left this out:

[URL=http://www.sherv.net/emoticons.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

You're welcome.

[JaneyVee]

34. There's always this success story CNN can report on:

From my Facebook timeline:

[LittleBlue]

40. How embarrassing

This is not going as planned. I did not think that so many problems would crop up before 2014. And I'm not sure what we can do to fix the law as it's written. Some of it is good, like Medicaid and prohibiting discrimination for pre-existing conditions. The exchanges and people losing their healthcare seem pretty bad, though.

The midterms are looking ominous if this gets any worse.

[zipplewrath]

42. Two way street

I understand your concerns, I really do. And I agree that there are some really big pot holes up ahead. The alternative of course is that there are probably an equal, if not greater, number of people who will now have insurance. The question of course is which population is more politically influential.

The weakness of ACA was also its original strength, it only affects about 7-12% of the population. With the states not implimenting the medicaid portion, it will probably be closer to the 7 than the 12. So the reality is that the vast majority of what the population thinks and feels about it will be based upon anecdotal evidence. That will include news stories, and it will include what peoples employers tell them about their own employment based insurance. It will also include though what people hear from friends and families about finally affording/getting/having health insurance.

This can be big. The public opinion on homosexual issues moved rapidly as more gays and gay couples became "open". Once people knew the guy down the street, the girl at work, the person that helped them at the social service agency were gay, the more they agreed with the LGBT issues. The war in Iraq started to turn a bit against George when more and more soldiers were writing home, and came home and started talking to friends and family.

Word of mouth can be powerful. It just matters which mouths they hear more. I do wish that all those people that could be covered by medicaid, except their state refused to participate, could be told about it, somewhere around Oct/Nov of 2014.

[CJCRANE]

48. What's with all the "our" and "we"? It seems like an attempt to ingratiate yourself

with DUers and comes across as insincere IMO.

I noticed in a previous post you referred to DUers as "Gang", kind of like the Scooby Doo Gang or something.

It just sets off alarm bells especially when all of your posts seem to be concern posts.

[Capt. Obvious]

51. And he would have gotten away with it too

if it wasn't for you meddling kids!

[CJCRANE]

55. Zoinks!

[fadedrose]

58. Who knows?

The fat lady hasn't sung, and she isn't even in town yet.

[ProSense]

65. She is eligible for the credit based on her income, but

that's not going to stop the media from salivating.

<...>

Sanford, an Obama supporter who voted for the president twice, is careful to say she blames the state of Washington's online marketplace for the mixed signals and not the White House.

She is sorry Obama mentioned her during the October 21 speech.

"I feel awful about it. I support (the Affordable Care Act)," Sanford said.

<...>

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/19/woman-cited-by-president-as-obamacare-success-story-frustrated-by-sign-up-process/

<...>
“It was a huge disappointment, and especially since my story had been shared by the president,” Sanford said in an interview that aired Tuesday on CNN’s “New Day.” “I just felt really embarrassed.”

Sanford also told CNN that she is “not getting insurance.”

“That’s where it stands right now unless they fix it,” Sanford said.

However, Sanford said she blames the state for her problems, not the White House, adding that she still supports the law.

<...>

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/jessica-sanford-obamacare-100046.html

Clearly she knows she's eligible, and that this is a system error.

Jessica Sanford A broker can't help when the problem is with the website itself. Please read the comments. There are no choices for me unless I want to pay an amount of money that does not fit in my budget. Fix the website so that I receive the tax credit my income for a family if two deserves.

https://www.facebook.com/WAHealthplanfinder/posts/463103177135386?comment_id=2645646&offset=0&total_comments=20

Everyone knew the media would milk the website problems. This is a problem with the Washington state site, and like the federal site, the problems will be resolved.

Reports: Obamacare Enrollment On The Rise
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024057644

Obamacare enrollments surging, HealthCare.gov working better
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/19/1256749/-Obamacare-enrollments-surging-HealthCare-gov-working-better