November 4, 2013

NYT Trumpets How ‘Millions Are Eligible for Free (Obamacare) Policies,’ Reveals Out-of-Pocket Maximums in Paragraph 21

On Sunday, the editorialists at the New York Times claimed that President Barack Obama merely “misspoke” when he dishonestly promised the American people that “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” to get Obamacare passed.

Sunday evening for Monday’s print edition, reporters Reed Abelson and Katie Thomas carried heavy buckets of water on behalf of Obama and his administration. The headline: “Under Health Care Act, Millions Eligible for Free Policies.” It took the Times pair 21 paragraphs to inform readers that the “free” plans have annual out-of-pocket cost limits of $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families. They never described how the deductibles or copays work, and never noted that taxpayers are funding the subsidies. Excerpts follow the jump (bolds are mine):

Millions of people could qualify for federal subsidies that will pay the entire monthly cost of some health care plans being offered in the online marketplaces set up under President Obama’s health care law, a surprising figure that has not garnered much attention, in part because the zero-premium plans come with serious trade-offs.


Three independent estimates by Wall Street analysts and a consulting firm say up to seven million people could qualify for the plans, but federal officials and insurers are reluctant to push them too hard because they are concerned about encouraging people to sign up for something that might ultimately not fit their needs.

The bulk of these plans are so-called bronze policies, the least expensive available. They require people to pay the most in out-of-pocket costs, for doctor visits and other benefits like hospital stays.

Supporters of the Affordable Care Act say that the availability of free-premium plans — as well as inexpensive policies that cover more — shows that it is achieving its goal of making health insurance widely available. A large number of those who qualify have incomes that fall just above the threshold for Medicaid, the government program for the poor, according to an analysis by the consulting firm McKinsey and Company.

The latest analysis was conducted by McKinsey’s Center for U.S. Health System Reform, whose independent research has been cited by the federal government and others.

(Paragraph 22)

All plans, including bronze policies, limit annual out-of-pocket costs to $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families. But insurers and advocates said out-of-pocket costs — even those under that limit — can be daunting to people with low incomes.

And that’s before getting to the problems of high deductibles and lower than expected percentage co-pays.

Here’s the fundamental point: The vast majority of people who voted for politicians who supported the Affordable Care Act fully expect their plans to have very low deductibles ($500 – $1,000 or less), normal copay percentaages of roughly 80%, and virtually uninhibited access to medical providers. At best, the second one might be present in some plans; you can forget about Items 1 and 3.

There’s a point at which “blame the insurance company” isn’t going to work, because this is the government’s “marketplace,” which has been relentlessly packaged as the “signature presidential achievement” of Barack Obama.

The primary mission of Abelson’s and Thomas’s report appears to be to delay that inevitable firestorm by throwing around the magic word “free.”

Cross-posted at



  1. There may be a way out of this mess on an individual level – Gap Insurance. Think MediGap insurance. What if one were to simply pay the fine/tax and then just get a gap policy to act as a catastrophic plan to cap expenses?

    Obamacare Seen Prompting Gap Insurance Sales

    I suggest on an individual level as a way to engage in civil disobedience that Americans in a collective action could themselves do what the GOP has failed to do, kill ObamaCare. Via the insurance death spiral by refusing to accept the false dichotomy offered by ObamaCare. Think of ObamaCare as the proverbial card trick where you are asked to pick a card from a selection, the person administering the trick firmly holds on to the ones he/she doesn’t want you to take but loosely holds the one they actually want you to take.

    Liberals are counting on people’s fear of not having insurance as their means to induce the public to go along with the insurance scam they set up under ObamaCare. Yes, it is a scam since you are being tricked to do what you rationally ordinarily wouldn’t do and money is taken from you and given to another. ObamaCare is a financial fraud in the manner in which it is being foisted upon an unwilling public against their personal and financial interest. But liberals always seem to think something isn’t fraudulent when the government does it versus a sleazy person(s) taking money from a victim under false pretenses. When you have to lie about the benefits of a financial deal to get someone to take it, that by definition constitutes a fraud. Just because government officials like Obama and Sebilius won’t go to jail for the commission of the fraud doesn’t make it any less a crime. Crimes that go unpunished are still crimes, when a tree falls in the forest it does make a sound regardless if any human is around to hear it. Liberals love to engage in this kind of metaphysical BS to escape judgment of their dysfunctional self centered view of the world.

    Comment by dscott — November 4, 2013 @ 4:26 pm

  2. The guess here is he’ll make ‘em illegal, if Ocare itself didn’t make ‘em illegal.

    Comment by Tom — November 4, 2013 @ 7:35 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.