How sickly is Obamacare?

September 24, 2014

The Republican establishment continues to hammer away at Obamacare, questioning the effectiveness of the law and the accuracy of the administration’s data about it. Yesterday, reality television star and professional troll Donald Trump tweeted that “ObamaCare is not working and has missed all targets.”

But do the data support this? Even the administration’s revised enrollment numbers for those who have paid their premiums beat the White House goal, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services expects a 25 percent bump in the number of insurers offering coverage next year, which could help keep premiums affordable.

Electioneering aside, the Affordable Care Act aims to expand coverage, and as this Reuters graphic shows, the rate of people without insurance recently dipped to 13.4 percent. That’s lower than the 14.5 percent poverty rate—a first for U.S. numbers, according to Reuters data. Certainly doesn’t sound like a negative trend.

10 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

“….the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services expects a 25 percent bump in the number of insurers offering coverage next year, which could help keep premiums affordable.” So it seems that the insurance companies seem to be doing well following the mandate and subsidies. What are the the newly insured getting for all that money? Health insurance does not equal adequate healthcare. It seems that the whole point of this was to provide adequate health care coverage for Americans. Where are those stats please?

Posted by ochun005 | Report as abusive

“That’s lower than the 14.5 percent poverty rate”
Would that be because the poverty rate is too high thanks to Barry’s incompetence?
Can you publish historic data rather than just two decades?

Posted by JustProduce | Report as abusive

Republicans don’t need no stinkin’ data….

Posted by majkmushrm | Report as abusive

You all KNOW this is a very dishonest story! MOST of the people who signed up for Obamacare HAD insurance and only signed up for Obamacare after it was CANCELLED because of OBAMACARE! Plus, many are middle class families, retired elderly couples, or singles with good careers who were driven and even felt FORCED to sign up because they could no longer keep their plan or their doctor as the administration repeatedly implied and as the President promised the American people. Something, along with promising to “end the war in Iraq (read, middle East)that truly helped get him elected for both terms! Fortunately for Reuters, you have some professional-grade reporters who have firsthand reporting or are first to cover some things not found elsewhere, wait least for a time, or I would never read or retweet you!

Posted by embeesweb | Report as abusive

What a FARSE!!!
The comparison of the “poverty rate” in the USA with the rate of uninsured is like the ever-present statement “comparing apples and oranges.”

The Obama Administration has raised the welfare payouts by 37% which is approximately equal to the prior 40 years increase which in turn was equivalent to the POPULATION increase of the USA. It is because of Obama’s “Socialist Agenda.”

First, Obama RAISED the defined level of “poverty” in order to gather more “low-incomers” on the books who almost invariably vote DEMOCRATIC. He then INCREASED the number of WELFARE programs from 43 (under GW Bush) to 126 (REPEAT… ONE HUNDRED TWENTY SIX, as reported by Reuters), over a 200% increase. Again, to recruit VOTERS for the Democratic party.

Second, Obama forced through, with considerable intimidation to a dominant Democratic House and Senate, the Affordable Care Act (a TERRIBLE misnomer, rampant with absolute lies) that also included 17 new “buried” taxes and a promise of a $2,500 REDUCTION in health care costs for the average family (still ANOTHER LIE as the CBO predicts a $2.7 TRILLION increase over 10 years). The ACA FORBIDS any hospital from questioning the citizenship of any patient, and BANNED the inclusion of E-Verify (per a four part directive directly from Obama).

Third, the ACA radically INCREASED the numbers of MEDICAID allowances which accounts for the reduction of “people without health insurance.” NOTE: Medicaid is FREE to low-incomers, and PAID FOR by the remaining populace.

So, OF COURSE, the crossing of the curves presented establishes a “FIRST for U.S. numbers” as stated in the article.

Posted by Mikon | Report as abusive

I’m signed in and have tried to post a comment TWICE over 1 hour apart… yet no comments appear available on this article (by anyone).
What’s going on????

Posted by Mikon | Report as abusive

Where’s the rest of the op-ed? Haha…that’s it? Talk about the numbers, talk about what this means for millions of Americans. Dipping below the poverty rate for the first time is good news, but will mean nothing to about 99% of Americans, including those who have benefited from the ACA. All this is is a negative headline, How Sick Is Obamacare?. Come on, Reuters. You can do better.

Posted by carnivalchaos | Report as abusive

Republicans haven’t actually bothered to try to govern for the last 6 years, and have made themselves a one-trick-pony by being for nothing, but against Obama. The ACA is just one of the many things they’ve ranted and railed against, but because of their single focus on being negative, they’re stuck with nothing but more of the same, regardless of how far from reality their rhetoric takes them.

Ultimately it won’t matter to their “true believer” core that is as divorced from reality as their political platform… but it may matter to those independents who live in the real world. Eventually these people will get tired of the constant barrage of lies that the GOP puts out, and that will be the death knell for the current GOP. The (originally) far more radical conservative tea party pulled the current crop of GOP so far to the right that there most likely is no coming back for the party. This country has never been so radically far right, ever… only the fringe thinks it has been.

Ultimately, that’s all the GOP has… lies, more lies, and the hope that there’s enough people who are not educated enough to see through all those lies.

Posted by taggert | Report as abusive

Does the graphic not even show the period when the ACA went into effect? The lines stop before it officially rolled out, doesn’t it?

Posted by 3B-0L4 | Report as abusive

Why aren’t Republicans taking credit for this?! The ACA was based on the blueprint developed by the Heritage Foundation back in 1989, long championed by the GOP, and successfully implemented by Mitt Romney in MA. As a matter of fact, Romney advised Obama to take it National, calling the uninsured “freeriders”, touting the value of mandate,s and proudly calling the fine a tax. I’m sorry, but it is a lost opportunity for the GOP.

Posted by LucieLu | Report as abusive