NY Times - Medicare and Health Care Reform Combined Result In 98 Percent Coverage

[TomCADem]

Unlike cable news, which simply allows two partisans to speak without any fact checking, here is a nice story from the NY Times, which displays the competing claims, then analyzes them:

Opposing Claims Cloud the Debate on an Overhaul

Over two days of debate on the Senate floor about the motion to move ahead with the major health care legislation, Democrats and Republicans fired volley after volley of contradictory claims about the proposed bill. Here are some examples, with analysis.

How many people are projected to gain health benefits?

***

According to the Congressional Budget Office, there will be roughly 50 million people without health insurance in the United States in 2010, with the number rising to 54 million by 2019 under current law.

The budget office says the Senate bill would reduce the number of uninsured to 24 million by 2019, effectively providing coverage to 31 million. The budget office says the Senate bill would cover 92 percent of non-elderly Americans, 94 percent if illegal immigrants were excluded.

Including Americans 65 and older, who are generally covered by Medicare, the 94 percent figure rises to 98 percent, but that increase of course is not attributable to the bill.

[fasttense]

1. I wonder who are the 6 million people who are not covered?

[salvorhardin]

2. 98% coverage still means 6 million people wouldn't have access to healthcare

That's simply unacceptable.

Link to original NY Times article: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/opposing-claims-cloud-the-debate-on-an-overhaul

[TomCADem]

4. Agree, Allowing Close To 50 Million To Remain Uninsured Is Far Worse According To That Logic

Also, killing health care reform on principle based on the 6 million figure, and putting health care reform on the backburner for a few more decades is absolutely appalling.

So, I agree with you that it is shameful that many folks insist that we drop health care reform or insist health care reforms proposals that we can't get through Congress in order to make symbolic point.

We can't waste this opportunity. We need to get the best health care reform possible. Now.

[salvorhardin]

6. Nice strawman

Please don't attribute words or arguments to me that I never ventured forth.

One can both champion the need for health care reform and be appalled that the proposed health care reform will not cover everyone.

[enlightenment]

3. Math question.

54 - 31 = 23

If it reduces the number of uninsured to 24 million (not sure where the extra million came from), how can it be covering 92% of non-elderly Americans?

92% of 54 is (roughly) 49, not 31. (Even if you use 50 million, 92% is still 46, not 31).

If it covers 92%, then the number of uninsured would be 5 million, not 23 million.

I'm not a maths person, but those numbers don't wash. Can someone clarify how they came up with those figures? Are they adding the number of people who are currently insured? Bad form then, to suggest that the Senate Bill would be responsible.

Above and beyond the fuzzy math, it doesn't address what kind of coverage those newly insured people will have. Will it be the kind of insurance that so many people have now - the kind they can't afford to use because of high deductibles and low payment rates (only writ large to 'cover' people who can't get insurance now)?

[EFerrari]

5. Robert Pear is one of the better reporters at the Times. n/t