According to CBS, President Obama was busy on Feb. 25 "turning a night of words into a day of action" regarding those grand promises he made in his not-quite-State of the Union speech Feb. 24.
One of the issues Obama was taking action on was health care, according to Chip Reid's "Evening News" report.
Chip Reid told viewers: "Hoping to take advantage of any momentum from last night's speech to Congress, the president, today, forged ahead with a flurry of activity on his economic plan. On health care, the White House said the president's budget, to be released Thursday, will include $634 billion to expand health coverage. To be paid for by taxing the wealthy and trimming payments to insurance companies, hospitals and doctors."
Later in the segment, Reid misled viewers as to the number of uninsured. He said the White House was calling that enormous package "a big first step in getting health insurance to America's 48 million uninsured."
The problem is, "America's 48 million uninsured" is an overstatement. The Census Bureau puts the figure at 45.6 million, but that statistic includes non-citizens and people who choose not to have insurance because of age or income.
The Census Bureau's 2007 report on the uninsured found that of the 45.6 million people who are uninsured 9.7 million of them are non-citizens, 7.9 million of them are under 24 years old, and over 9 million could afford insurance because they make at least $75,000 a year. That leaves roughly 19 million uninsured, a much smaller problem than the media and some politicians admit.
Even those numbers do not provide a complete picture, since the Census Bureau admits that "health insurance coverage is underreported" in the survey, meaning that more people have insurance than the report suggests.
In 2007, Michael Moore claimed that "you've got 47 million people in this country with no health insurance; they don't go to the doctor because they can't afford it."
Katie Couric echoed Moore's remarks on "Evening News" May 23, 2007 saying that "People who try to buy insurance on their own often find the price beyond their reach."
Dr. David Gratzer disputed the idea that the uninsured cannot afford coverage in his book "The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care." According to Gratzer, "Many Americans are uninsured by choice," as evidenced by the fact that many people lack insurance while owning homes and computers.
Yet, like the Feb. 25, "Evening News," the media have consistently repeated exaggerated claims of uninsured Americans to promote universal "health care" as the Business & Media Institute pointed out in a 2007 story: Health Care Lie: "47 Million Uninsured Americans."
The Congressional Budget Office also estimated that as many as 45 percent of the uninsured are insured within four months, according to Dr. Grace-Marie Turner, a BMI adviser and president of the Galen Institute.
—Julia A. Seymour is an assistant editor for the Business & Media Institute.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
6%
February 26, 2009 - 14:05 ET by Miket53Miket53 http://mtaricani.blogspot.com/
So the number of legitimately uninsured is 6.3% of the population. Not bad. To punish the "wealthy" because they are succesful is unreal. This will in effect punish those who worked hard and became succesful. And reward those who did not. Socialism. If this continues it will de-incentivize Americans to work hard and be creative. Since when has success and wealth been a bad thing? That is what made nthis country great.
Less Money
February 26, 2009 - 15:19 ET by BeanManIt has been shown over and over that increasing tax on the "wealthy" generates less revenue, raising capital gains taxes generates less revenue and etc.
They think they're punishing the wealthy. The percentage of tax paid by the wealthy went up in the last eight years becuase tax rates were lowered i.e. the rich paid more in taxes in the last eight years than they did in the previous eight years.
Even regular dopes like me pay capital gains tax. They get more money with lower tax rates than higher ones.
All this means is that the U.S.G. will take in less tax revenue on the rich which means they won't be able to pay for their health stuff.
I don't think they cared about that at all, they just want the political points gained from "taxing the rich". They don't care where the money comes from. They'll just print it or borrow it and gain greater and greater power over the average citizen.
Since government is coercion, politics is largely the exercise of deception regarding the intended use of coercion - George Orwell
What's one more lie?
February 26, 2009 - 14:10 ET by slickwillie2001After all the lies Obammy has told, another one will hardly be noticed.
During the 2008 campaign, I was waiting for the candidates to be asked if their feee medical care program would cover illegal aliens. No one asked!
Liberal rule #22
February 26, 2009 - 14:11 ET by c5thenNever let facts get in the way of good rhetoric.
What clause in the Constitution allows the Federal Government to get into the health insurance business?
Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!
Alan Keyes / Sarah Palin - 2012
Health care is a privilege, not a right
February 26, 2009 - 14:22 ET by Lord ErondI am very tired of the government cheating people who work an EXTREMELY DIFFICULT job, putting up with whining, vomiting, pissed off angry people on a day to day basis and making less and less for it.
"What you can not enforce, do not command" -Sophocles-
So people with chronic
February 26, 2009 - 14:31 ET by mandrakeSo people with chronic health problems who cannot afford independant insurance should simply shutup and die. No wait, I think Darwin had something to say about that.
Ever heard of CHARITY???
February 26, 2009 - 14:46 ET by UnsaneAh, my favorite Socialist.
In TX, you cannot be refused medical treatment due to inability to pay. It's the law here.
We also have something you Canadians do not believe in; CHARITY. Instead of having the government pamper, spoil, baby and coddle everyone with things grown adults really should manage to go out and pay for on their own, you could probably set up a CHARITY and pay for those who cannot afford health insurance for whatever reason quite adequately. But why do that when you can have the government legally steal from the healthy in order to pamper and baby others?
Personally, I cannot understand the Socialists' obsession with health care. There are very, very few of us who need a doctor every day. But let me tell you what I in fact need EVERY SINGLE DAY:
1) Food
2) Water
3) Clothing
4) Shelter
Now, why don't Socialists work on providing THOSE things for free? If I can't procure those four things every single day, the doctor is the LEAST of my worries.
C'mon, mandrake! You CARE SO MUCH MORE for the elderly and the poor, much much much more than us evil capitalistic Americans!!! Why aren't you advocating that??? HMMMMMM????
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Unsane my old friend
February 26, 2009 - 15:03 ET by mandrakeYou assume so much :) That I don't have any charity. I give a couple of examples.
1) We recently held my wife's 60th birthday party and we insisted that instead of gifts, that our children go out and do some community work..for the homeless.
2) I am currently in the proccess of giving most of my worldly possessions to various charities (including my RUSH albums) so that my family won't have to sort thru it all when I am gone.
ttfn :)
A worthy Charity
February 26, 2009 - 15:10 ET by CobraMan"I am currently in the proccess of giving most of my worldly possessions to various charities (including my RUSH albums) so that my family won't have to sort thru it all when I am gone."
I'll take those albums. My wife "lost" all of mine the last time we moved. I noticed that she managed to keep her EXTENSIVE collection of Madonna albums from getting "lost."
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Ummm, mandrake -
February 28, 2009 - 06:10 ET by UnsaneHmmm. Where did I say "mandrake does not give to charity?" I DID say Canadians. In general. And it holds. Countries that do NOT coddle, pamper, spoil and baby their citizens via government are more generous, charity wise: witness the United States.
And it is great, I guess, that you insisted that your children go out and help people who more often than not choose of their own freewill to be homeless - but you wouldn't DARE DREAM of the possibility that you can quite possibly give to charity to help the elderly and the poor, for who your heart bleeds so much, to pay for health care (and maybe have a system which is privatized with charitable contributions helping out those in need), and thus maybe, MAYBE, have a infinitely better health system in Canada than the one you currently have where everyone is forced to feel miserable.
Again, before anyone gives me a "free" doctor, I think they ought to find a way to get me "free" food, water, clothing and shelter - things I need every single day.
Me, personally, I wouldn't demand that other people give to charity on my behalf - at the very least because I suspect they don't always support my causes.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Federal Law
February 26, 2009 - 15:03 ET by CobraMan"In TX, you cannot be refused medical treatment due to inability to pay. It's the law here."
That's the law everywhere in America. That's been a federal law since 1986.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Nothing to see here.
February 26, 2009 - 14:26 ET by jazboThe geriatric media have been cheerleading for this guy for 18 months. Just more of the same.
Those who believe in nothing will believe anything.
The dinosaur media
February 26, 2009 - 15:50 ET by kgThe dinosaur media reporters sound more like poets than journalists anymore.
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
A little O/T but this is good..
February 26, 2009 - 14:38 ET by Mr Xhttp://www.youtube.c...
Thank you Mr X
February 26, 2009 - 14:44 ET by sherylsimsThat was a great link. Too bad HE isn't our first African-American president.
The money quote (literally
February 26, 2009 - 14:54 ET by motherbeltThe money quote (literally and figuratively) in this story is:
To be paid for by taxing the wealthy and trimming payments to insurance companies, hospitals and doctors."
But I'm sure they would never think of reducing care or rationing....
Right?
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
Funny, that
February 26, 2009 - 15:06 ET by CobraManSo, Obama plans to pay for heath care by reducing payments to the very business, places, and people who provide that health care. That's a winning proposition, NOT!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Moore would have people
February 26, 2009 - 14:54 ET by snaggletoothieMoore would have people believe that only people with insurance go to the doctor. But there's no reason to believe such foolishness. I was one of the uninsured for a couple of years recently. But I have serious chronic conditions that make it necessary for me to see a doctor. So I went and I paid cash. But these leftie liars are trying to spread a big lie that there is no medical treatment without insurance. Nothing new: their chronic dishonesty continues.
How to Fix American's Health Insurance Crisis?
February 26, 2009 - 15:12 ET by katainkentGet Some! (Reason.tv)
Excellent link!
February 26, 2009 - 15:17 ET by CobraManExcellent link! Thank you!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
That really doesn't
February 26, 2009 - 15:27 ET by ChauntBroChadThat really doesn't surprise me. If people bought a cheap scion instead of their chrysler 300, then maybe the fact that they're otherwise destitute wouldnt matter as far as healthcare is concerned.
Its astounding how often I've driven through crap neighborhoods where you know that they are not making a killing in the stock market, but they've got a slick new infiniti in the driveway, satellite dish on the rowhouse, but for whatever reason they can't afford insurance. Priorties make more difference than anything the government can do for you. If people would actually make the hard choices in life, boy, would America be a better place.
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.-Thomas Jefferson
Obama is an idiot.
February 26, 2009 - 18:41 ET by TIRMIf his national health plan is going to work anything like Medicare then he is only going to make a huge problem worse. Medicare patients already cost hospitals money as their reimbursement rate does not generally cover the cost of treatment. This is already going to be a problem because of an aging population, and OMoron is going to accelerate the problem by reducing reimbursement rates and increasse the number of people on the rolls.
Get ready for hospital bailouts in the near future. Solution? We'll nationalize them also and take the next step towards complete socialism.
TIRM... My family Doctor
February 26, 2009 - 18:47 ET by Clear thinkerTIRM...
My family Doctor says she is not happy about the idea of Nationalized Health Care. According to her, if it happens she is retiring. I once asked her if that's how other Doctors felt and she said that all the Docs in her group would either retire or move on to another career. The group she is in has something like 40 general practitioners in it. Pooof! Gone forever! I can't wait, can you?
Peaceful Islam - What A Joke!
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
The socialists are always
February 26, 2009 - 20:48 ET by CooltomThe socialists are always blabbing about how 1 in 7 persons don't have health insurance. The obvious solution never seems to occur to them: have the 1 in 7 do what the 6 out of 7 are doing. Problem solved.