Does Reed Intend To Mislead On Obamacare? Or Does He Not Know The Facts?

In last week’s email to constituents, our congressman, Rep. Tom Reed, had this to say about Obamacare:

“The recent report from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found Obamacare will reduce employment by as many as 2.5 million full-time jobs in the next decade and insure one million fewer individuals this year than previously estimated.”

This blog has already examined the claim about the CBO report and Obamacare. To review, the CBO estimated that the availability of insurance under the Affordable Care Act will reduce the size of the workforce by the equivalent of 2.5 million full time positions because some workers will choose to reduce their hours. They are not going to be fired. Instead, since they  have a way of purchasing insurance as individuals on the state exchanges, they are no longer beholden to employers for their insurance. This is particularly important for workers with pre-existing conditions, who cannot be denied private insurance under Obamacare, or charged higher rates than others, and for those who are hanging on to jobs they don’t really like because of the health insurance those jobs provide.

Obamacare will be extremely helpful to many of Rep. Reed’s constituents because of the new freedom it provides them.  But Rep. Reed chooses to ignore this and to claim inaccurately that Obamacare is going to reduce employment. The media have amply covered this issue and made the facts clear. CBO has issued a FAQ explaining at length that it did not say that the Affordable Care Act was going to cause 2.5 million people to lose their jobs.

Reed continues with a vague statement about one million fewer people being insured than expected, suggesting that many are being hurt by Obamacare. He doesn’t mention that 3.3 million people have signed up for insurance under the Affordable Care Act in the last four months, including 1.1 million who enrolled in January. Obamacare is now at 75% of its enrollment target, and the pace of enrollment is increasing. This is a marvelous development. Millions of Americans now have affordable health insurance, yet Rep. Reed portrays this achievement as some sort of failure.

All of this raises a question. Does Rep. Reed not understand the facts with respect to Obamacare? If he does understand the facts but intentionally misrepresents them, constituents can only draw the obvious conclusion.

Rep. Reed ended his comments on Obamacare with a derogatory remark: “it’s clear this law was never ready for prime time.” Voters in New York’s 23rd have reason to ask whether a congressman who does not understand an important law, or who misrepresents it, is ready for prime time.



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Does Reed Intend To Mislead On Obamacare? Or Does He Not Know The Facts?

  1. whungerford says:

    Tom’s statements so closely follow GOP orthodoxy, it is hard to tell if he is ever honest with his constituents. There are two cases that I think reflect his real views: (1) he fears debt and (2) he believes the poor must be forced by hardship to look for work.


  2. Barbara Griffin says:

    Tom Reed appears to be goose-stepping with the Tea Party. He has the talking points memorized.


  3. solodm says:

    Alas, Tom Reed has decided to follow the Republican mantra for the next eight months. That being: “Obamacare is killing our country and hurting YOU.” All manner of variations on this theme can be expected from Tom, though since not being a creative person, Tom has already begun to sound like a broken record. My prediction is this approach will accelerate to the point of sounding like a 33 1/3 LP played on a 78 rpm setting, by August of this year.

    Although as has been proven since the 2010 election, stupid people can be elected, I don’t think Tom is stupid. I just think he’s lazy and quite greedy.


  4. whungerford says:

    At his Feb. 15th meeting in Addison Tom rattled on at length berating Obamacare.Tom repeated all the tired talking points, postulated that coverage for preexisting conditions and coverage for students to age 26 were all that might be worth saving, talked about endless complaints without mentioning any benefits, and suggested that the program would soon collapse under its own weight. He suggested a false dichotomy: government control or market control saying he favored the later. He said market competition would be enough to control costs. Addison must be predominately conservative; no one challenged his points.


  5. Deb Meeker says:

    Interesting. Reed may well know what kind of reception he will receive in certain places. I’m pretty sure that is why he has never returned to Newfield, and not to Ithaca in a very long time.


  6. CBWOOD says:

    Hmmm…lazy and greedy…the perfect Repug resume!


  7. Marcia Johnson says:

    I think he knows that facts. He just likes the tea party talking points. Interesting, he doesn’t seem to realize we are not in the south and he doesn’t have to be a crazy right wing demagogue to win here. Amo Houghton won for many years as a moderate republican.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.