Affordable Care Act | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This article originally appeared in the Beaufort Observer.

    An AP article in the Jan. 20 Tampa Tribune informs us that the Affordable Care Act helps narrow the income gap between rich and poor. That information came from Economists at the (self proclaimed) non-partisan Brookings Institution. It has to be true. The Brookings Institution bills itself as one of the oldest (if not the oldest), independent, non-partisan organizations around our nation's capital.

    Wow! Hurry gang. Lets get this into our "talking points" papers. If we talk about the ACA narrowing the gap between the rich and poor enough times, we should be able to get a lot of (unthinking) people to believe it. Clearly another feather in the Anointed One's cap.

    And guess what.. There is truth in how the Brooking Institution bills itself. Well, some truth. It is clearly one of the oldest organizations around. But "independent and non-partisan?? I'm not so sure.

    A 3/3/11 U.S. News & World Report article is quoted from in Wikipedia: "As a 501(c)(3) non profit organization, Brookings describes itself as independent and non partisan. A 2011 study examining think tank employee donations from 2003 to 2010 showed that 97.6% of Brookings's employees' political donations went to Democrats and described the think tank as "liberal." The article, entitled, "Think Tank Employees Tend to Support Democrats" was written by Danielle Kurtzleben. Maybe they aren't quite as independent and non-partisan as they would have us believe.

    That being the case, perhaps we should look a little closer at their "findings and conclusions" and how they support them. One need not look very far to see that the "findings" are based on changing the definition of "income" which is exactly what the Brookings Economists did when they (according to the newspaper) added the value of insurance to their statistical calculations. It sounds as though these findings got the same "peer review" as did the global warming "findings' several years ago (which certainly helped "settle" the global warming science issue and launched Al Gore on his path to riches selling British snake oil.) Hmmm...

    So much for Obamacare. Oh wait, we are being told by the Anointed One's acolytes that we should no longer use that term to describe the Affordable Care Act. They want it to be called The Affordable Care Act. It seems to me that a more appropriate thing to call it instead of Obama Care would be Obama-Don't-Care (ODC) ...

    So... If the value of insurance provided through the ACA can really reduce the differential between the rich and poor, we probably better start treating Walmart with more respect.

    They provide their employees (all 1.1M enrolled employees) with health insurance that reportedly is better than ODC insurance.. And "all" means "all". It includes everyone from the most menial of employees to the CEO.

    According to the Washington Examiner, "Unlike Obamacare, there are no income eligibility requirements. Age and gender do not alter premium rates. The company plan is the same for all of Walmart's 1.1 million enrolled employees and their dependents, from its cashiers to its CEO."

    Independent insurance agents affiliated with the National Association of Health Underwriters and health policy experts reportedly compared the two insurances at the request of the Examiner and found that, "... Walmart's plan is more affordable and provides significantly better access to high quality medical care than Obamacare."

    To see the full Washington Examiner article, Click here.

    The article included a ruly remarkable comparison of the difference in cost between the ODC policies and the Walmart offerings. To see the graphical representation, click here. We can only wonder how much the Walmart effort contributes to closing the income gap.. From he looks of things, it could be considerably more than ODC.

    If there ever was a union whipping boy when it comes to the pay and treatment of employees, it is Walmart. The health care insurance they offer (and highly subsidize - even in the absence of a union) may not be as good as the Union Leaders treat themselves to (on the backs of working men and women whose dues they collect) but it is certainly good enough for Walmart's CEO. I would suggest that the union organizing rhetoric needs to be taken with a (very large) grain of salt....

    D'ya Think??