On Tuesday’s World News, for the second day in a row, ABC delivered a "fact check" on the health care bill, offering up perspectives sympathetic to the sweeping legislation. Confusing opinions for facts, David Wright spun that it was "true" that "95 percent of the people" would be able to keep their current plan. However, Politifact has labeled this claim a half truth.
An August 11 posting conceded, "[Obama’s] plan seeks to build on the system we have now, where most people get health insurance through their employers." However, it goes on to add, "But the plans also introduce new ways of regulating health insurance companies that will surely change the current health care system. That could prompt employers to change their health plans..."
The political debunking site concluded, "It's not realistic for Obama to make blanket statements that ‘you’ will be able to ‘keep you health care plan.’" [Emphasis added] So, why is Wright using blanket statements for his fact check?
Later in the piece, the ABC correspondent featured an unidentified man at a town hall meeting asking this reasonable query: "My question is, how are you going to keep my employer from stopping offering insurance and forcing me onto the public option if that's cheaper for their bottom line?"
Wright breezily dismissed the point by proclaiming, "That’s a common concern. The facts are, the bill includes tax breaks and mandates designed to prevent a mass exodus from the current employer-based system." He then condescendingly concluded with a quip about the volatile town hall protests that have been occurring across the country: "But finding the facts in the midst of the noise can be difficult."
Wright did point out that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, "...An estimated nine million people who currently have insurance through their jobs would change their insurance plans, but not necessarily changing their doctors."
However, the conservative Heritage Foundation, along with a Lewin study found, "Approximately 103 million people would be covered under the new public plan and as a consequence about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance. This would represent a 48.4 percent reduction in the number of people with private coverage." Of course, this perspective wasn’t featured in Wright’s segment.
On the August 10 World News, ABC’s Kate Snow contributed a fact check into conservative concerns about end-of-life care in the health care. Anchor Charles Gibson announced, "So, tonight, we begin an occasional series to fact check what's really in the bills."
Thus far, this fact check series has gone after two health care-related issues that would be friendly to the liberal, pro-universal health care agenda. Politifact dismissed another Obama claim that health insurance companies are making record profits. The website concluded:
We reviewed the income statements of the other largest publicly traded health insurance companies — WellPoint, Aetna, Cigna, Humana and Coventry Health Care — and found similar trends. Generally speaking, profits were higher during 2007 and 2006, before the economy began its slide. So Obama's modifier "record" does not appear to be correct.
...
Still, UnitedHealth did make healthy profits, and we asked Steve Shubitz, a health care financial analyst with the investment firm Edward Jones, about it.
"The profits are still significant, there's no question about that. But the reality is they're losing a lot of customers in this economy," Shubitz said.
This is an example of a liberal health care assertion that ABC could look into fact checking. Will they do it? Or is this segment to be reserved exclusively for debunking conservatives?
A transcript of the August 11 segment, which aired at 6:33pm EDT, follows:
CHARLES GIBSON: And one of the President's selling points is a phrase he repeats often. He says, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Well, we're fact-checking the key aspects of health care reform. Tonight, ABC's David Wright on whether you would indeed be able to keep your current coverage.
CHANTING CROWD: No Obamacare! No Obamacare!
DAVID WRIGHT: Opponents of health care reform insist the proposed changes would put private insurance companies out of business. That's false.
DREW ALTMAN (The Kaiser Family Foundation): So, if anything, this expands private health options insurance for people.
WRIGHT: But at contentious town hall meetings across the country, the issue keeps coming up.
SENATOR BEN CARDIN (D-MD): We want people to stay in their private insurance. That's our goal.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Bull! That's not true at all!
WRIGHT: This is really a crucial question, because polls show that most Americans are perfectly happy with their own doctor, and they're wary that any reform might force them to make a change. The President has been unequivocal.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: If you've got health insurance, you keep your plan. You keep your doctor. I don't want to take it over.
WRIGHT: His opponents quote chapter and verse to challenge that. President Obama says that you’ll be able to keep your doctor. Do you believe that?
SECOND UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Not from page 16. Page 16 effectively regulating out private insurance.
WRIGHT: What page 16, section 102 of the House bill actually says is that insurance companies have five years to comply with new government standards. For instance, banning discrimination based on pre-existing conditions and prohibiting caps on coverage. Today, the President hit his point hard.
OBAMA: If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.
WRIGHT: And that's true for 95 percent of people. According to the Congressional Budget Office, an estimated nine million people who currently have insurance through their jobs would change their insurance plans, but not necessarily changing their doctors.
BROOKS JACKSON (Fackcheck.org): Well, they’re going to shift it because they’ve got a very expensive policy and the federal plan would be cheaper. Or, in some cases, employers may say there's a federal plan out there, I'm not paying for yours anymore. You're on the federal plan.
THIRD UNIDENTIFIED MAN: My question is, how are you going to keep my employer from stopping offering insurance and forcing me onto the public option if that's cheaper for their bottom line?
WRIGHT: That’s a common concern. The facts are, the bill includes tax breaks and mandates designed to prevent a mass exodus from the current employer-based system. But finding the facts in the midst of the noise can be difficult. David Wright, ABC News, Towson, Maryland.
GIBSON: And we will continue, from time to time, fact checking health care reform.
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Why, David? Why?
August 12, 2009 - 14:44 ET by BondPlainBondObama, while in New Hampshire and off TOTUS, discredited himself, his administration, and his health care plan with his own words, examples, ineptitude, and inexperience.
David, you're wasting time and energy. The majority of Americans know you're pushing the half-truths, obfuscations, and lies of Obama and his Team Socialist.
I absolutely loved the slow blink Obama had when he realized he'd just likened his healthcare plan to the failing, government-run, Post Office. Too late to take back the truth and spin it, though. Caught in his own trap and had to gnaw off his own microphone-holding hand in a laughable and oh, so embarrassing failed attempted to backpeddle.
Obama needs TOTUS reform. It
August 12, 2009 - 15:21 ET by 10ksnookerObama needs TOTUS reform. It really is letting him down.
Is this any more of a
August 12, 2009 - 14:47 ET by dscottIs this any more of a blanket statement by asserting the majority of town hall participants at Portsmouth weren't selected for their support of ObamaCare? Once again, the incompetent Obama makes assertions based upon wishful thinking instead of fact: http://gatewaypundit...
Only an incompetent leader bases their goals on unachievable impractical means.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Just heard on Hannity that
August 12, 2009 - 14:53 ET by mattmJust heard on Hannity that George Soros is giving $25 million to "America Now" - a pro-Obamacare group. I wonder if part of the money is used to bribe news networks to broadcast this kind of propaganda, or if they happily do it for free.
mattm
August 12, 2009 - 15:45 ET by BondPlainBondGeorge Soros and the Open Society Institute Podcast
From their podcast information link.
Unbelievable listening.
Obama Meets Party Donors in New York, by Patrick Healy, December 5, 2006
The Democrat Party Platform’s Hidden Soros Slush Fund, by Michelle Malkin, August 20, 2008 05:03
Soros was too prophetic about the economy's collapse.
We all know what Soros deliberately did to the economy of Great Britain a few years back and why he is not allowed within that country's border for the remainder of his life.
George Soros Quotes
Obama always says if you want to know how he views the world and who it is that will help shape his policies, look at those with whom he surrounds himself.
"So, why is Wright using blanket statements for his fact check?"
August 12, 2009 - 14:53 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonThree choices on this question.
1. He's stupid and doesn't know any better.
2. He's a liar and thinks you're stupid enough to believe him.
3. He's a stpid liar that thinks he is included in the opt out clause the congress built in for themselves.
Mr wright, please stand by for your end of life counseling.
http://gjresult.com
I was thinking. If
August 12, 2009 - 14:56 ET by CooltomI was thinking. If Obamacare passes and diagnostic tests have to go through government review -- isn't Dr. House now out of business?
Number 2. They think you
August 12, 2009 - 15:23 ET by 10ksnookerNumber 2.
They think you are as dumb as an illeterate Kenyan. Which if you watched some of the town hall videos, you might think your congressional clunker qualifes for that tag.
David, David, David!
August 12, 2009 - 14:58 ET by IamTinmanLike the vast divide in his comments about cap and tax, Barack Obama just a short while ago made speeches in favor of a single payer, government controlled, health system.
So, was he lying then or is he lying now? Either way he's a liar!
How about a new constitutional amendment that no bill or law can become effective unless a majority of each house of congress, the president. vice president and speaker of the house can provide substantive proof that they have read and understand it. True or False or Multiple choice tests would be fine, we shouldn't expect this congress at least, to be able to handle essay questions.
Lying is such a strong
August 12, 2009 - 15:22 ET by dscottLying is such a strong word, Obama hasn't read HR3200 and thus is ignorant of it's specifics. Only an incompetent leader advocates for legislation he hasn't read and basically took Pelosi at her word that it's best for America. Obama as Pelosi's puppet says what she told him to say.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Still counting on people
August 12, 2009 - 15:18 ET by 10ksnookerStill counting on people not reading the bill.
Their arrogance is their downfall.
I am officially against Fact Checks
August 12, 2009 - 16:18 ET by KC MulvilleThat's it. I'm done. No more fact checks for me.
The greatest philosopher in American history (IMO) was a guy named Willard Van Orman Quine. Among many achievements, Quine demolished the hazy notion of "facts." It's one of those concepts that we all take for granted, but if you actually ponder the idea for any length of time, it evaporates into thin air.
When you say that something is a "fact," what are you really saying? All you're really saying is that you agree with it, strongly. Now there's nothing wrong with agreeing with a statement, so long as you don't think your agreement makes it infallible. For you, the truth is so well-established that no one should question it further. For you, the case is closed. But if others are still disputing it, calling your opinion a "fact check" is just claiming that it has been proved beyond dispute. Naturally, however, you only throw down the "fact" label to intimidate opponents. If others disagree with you, calling it a fact carries absolutely no weight.
Fact is just rhetoric. It's a figure of speech that doesn't mean anything. So when a reporter says he has "fact-checked" something, all it means is that he's presenting his perspective as objectively proved. Now you may agree with him yourself, but that hardly means that all dispute is neurotic.
KC
August 12, 2009 - 16:34 ET by BKeyserI hate to tell you but I just ran your "Fact is just rhetoric" statement through factcheck.org and unfortunately, you are incorrect. Fact, in truth, (according to factcheck, politifact, and HuffPo/DKos kids) is whatever they say it is. To wit, all dispute (by conservatives) is neurotic. /s.o.
btw- I'm getting tired of the precurser "Analysis" as well.
Ah well
August 12, 2009 - 20:20 ET by KC MulvilleI was afraid of that ...
I'm with you on the Analysis. Of course, in my opinion, journalism works best when it presents evidence, not conclusion. In fact, that's the only time it really works.
Liberals don't like facts,
August 13, 2009 - 09:33 ET by NonArabOmarLiberals don't like facts, quantifiable data, quantifiable information, or scientific fact. They are the party that presents theories, possibilities, conjecture, and assumptions as fact.
Liberals assume that 95 percent of people may or may not keep their healthcare insurance by ignoring key measures of the bill. Through wishful thinking this idea now becomes FACT.
Throw statistics, gathered data, the scientific method, physics, mathematics at a liberal and they'll simply dismiss you if the information you present does not support their ideas.
August 13, 2009 - 13:26 ET by jessieHI could never be a liberal Democrat. I can't lie with a straight face.