Since its passage, in a way that is unlike any other political issue in newfangled American history, the press has come to Obamacare’s defense. From day one, there has been almost no airy between the average liberal activist and the average health care reporter.
Or the average “fact checker,” for that matter. “Fact checking” has evolved from an occasionally useful medium into an exercise in revisionism and distraction. Take a recent article by Washington Post writer Glenn Kessler titled “President Trump’s Mangled ‘Facts’ About Obamacare.” Those who read the headline might assume Trump was simply doing what Trump does most of the time. But it turns out that all of these supposedly “mangled” claims about Obamacare are, at best, questionable claims.
Kessler, for example, disapproves of Trump’s statement: “Americans were told their premiums would fall by $2,500 a year. Instead, their premiums have gone up to levels no one thought possible.” Aside from the added exaggeration (“no one thought possible”), this statement is essentially true.
The pointed debunking of the claim that “premiums are skyrocketing” is really just an acknowledgment that premiums have indeed gone up. Of course, Kessler blames the vagaries of newfangled life and demographics — because those things clearly didn’t exist when Democrats made their substantial, unrealistic promises in 2009.
More interestingly, he claims that when then-President Obama promised Americans that their insurance premiums would fall by $2,500 per year per family, he really meant that premiums would be $2,500 less than the projected boost. In other words, according to estimates, the average family now pays an alleged $3,600 less than it would have if Obamacare had not been enacted.
When Republicans defend the Obamacare repeal bills, they make it pretty clear that the Medicaid “cuts” are merely a slowdown in spending growth. Yet Obama has repeatedly said — probably hundreds of times over the past two years — that the bill would “cut” the cost of premiums by $2,500 per family. I can’t find a single instance where Obama or anyone else has sold the bill by offering nuanced context for that claim.
According to Kessler, Obama did not lie, “misrepresent the facts,” or mislead anyone. Instead, he made a “misguided… promise.” The word “misguided” suggests that Obama was not intentionally misleading anyone. Moreover, the promise of lower premiums and the lie that you could keep your insurance if you liked were the main political selling points of the Affordable Care Act for the middle class. They were the only aspects of the law that would benefit those who already had health insurance.
Trump also said, “Insurers are fleeing the market. Last week, it was announced that one of the largest insurers was pulling out of Ohio — the great state of Ohio.” Fact checker Kessler doesn’t approve. He says, “Trump decries the fact that some insurance companies have announced they are leaving the Obamacare market. But he ignores the fact that many of them say they are getting out of business because of the uncertainty created by the Trump administration, particularly whether it will continue to pay ‘cost-of-liability cuts’ to insurance companies.”
Kessler accidentally neglected to mention that the uncertainty created by the “copay reduction” subsidies, designed to encourage insurance companies to participate in Obamacare’s fictional exchanges, exists because they are unconstitutional. After all, the president cannot repeal the law. Trump has no obligation to pay these subsidies; in fact, he probably has an obligation not to pay them. Congress never appropriated any funds for such payments. A federal court ruled that the Obama administration acted unconstitutionally when it created them.
In any case, despite Kessler’s non sequitur, Trump’s central claim that insurers are “fleeing” is well within the bounds of political truth. Insurers were fleeing before he became president.
You’d think someone would write a comprehensive fact-check of the Democrats’ lie that 24 million people will “lose” their health insurance because of the repeal. Who knows? Maybe the fact-checkers will find time to point out that the Congressional Budget Office believes that 14 million of the 24 million are people who would have chosen not to buy insurance in 2018 if not for the penalty. No doubt the fact-checkers will point out that about six million or more of those 24 million are people the CBO simply assumes would have left the Obamacare markets anyway. You know, benchmarks and all.
It’s true that the Obamacare repeal bill — regardless of the details — will be unpopular. Why wouldn’t it be? There’s not a single Republican legislator who can effectively refute these misleading claims. Voters will. Republicans certainly can’t rely on fact-checkers.
