Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Politics

UPDATED! "Yes, You Can Keep Your Health Plan" or, What Part of *Screw You* Don't You Understand?

Nick Gillespie | 10.28.2013 7:28 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Note: This post was updated at 8am ET on October 30. Scroll down for latest.

Via the Twitter feed of Matt Cover (and National Review's Jim Geraghty) comes a link to this 2010 blog post by then-Obama special assistant and now CNN Crossfire host Stephane Cutter:

Yes, You Can Keep Your Health Plan

…A key point to remember is that while the Act makes many changes to the individual market, it specifically allows those who want to keep their current insurance to do so.  Most of the Act's protections apply only to new policies, allowing people to stick with their current plan if they prefer.  It is true that a few protections apply to all plans, both new and old, but these protections—like limiting the share of premiums that insurers can devote to administrative costs—are designed to help consumers and cut health care costs.

The bottom line is that the Act allows people to keep the insurance they have, while also providing more and better options for all.

How important was it to the passage of Obamacare that you could keep your coverage if you liked it? Pretty damn important, I'd wager, since it offered comfort to vast majority of folks who were happy with their insurance and rightly feared that the president's transformative, sweeping reform would wipe out a lot of stuff.

Which is exactly what's happening. Check it out, via CBS News:

People across the country are finding out they're losing their existing insurance plans under Obamacare because requirements in the law, such as prenatal and prescription drug coverage, mean their old plans aren't comprehensive enough.

In California, Kaiser Permanente terminated policies for 160,000 people. In Florida, at least 300,000 people are losing coverage.

That includes 56-year-old Dianne Barrette. Last month, she received a letter from Blue Cross Blue Shield informing her as of January 2014, she would lose her current plan. Barrette pays $54 a month. The new plan she's being offered would run $591 a month -- 10 times more than what she currently pays.

Barrette said, "What I have right now is what I am happy with and I just want to know why I can't keep what I have. Why do I have to be forced into something else?"

But hey, Obama won the election. Get over it. What part of screw you don't you understand?

[Update: Mediaite reports on further reporitng by Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren and The Washington Post's Erik Wemple that complicates Dianne Barrette's story above. Barrette's insurance plan has in fact been dropped because it doesn't meet the minimum requirements for individual coverage under Obamacare. While it cost very little, it also covered virtually nothing as well and, in an interview on Susteren's Fox show, Barrette displayed effectively zero knowledge of her plan and what it covered. After factoring subsidies in, her premium costs would be around $200 a month. All of that was left out of the original CBS News report, which is not so much wrong as lacking in meaningful context.

For clearer, more-informed cases of how Obamacare has stripped people of existing plans in the individual market, read David Frum's "The Obamacare Ripoff" and the story of Sue Klinkhamer, an Obamacare supporter and former staffer to a Democratic congressman who has been forced to buy more expensive coverage for next year. End update]

And here is an NBC News report that argues

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, "40 to 67 percent" of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, "the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range."  

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them. 

Nancy Pelosi be damned! It sure seems as if the O-Team knew what it was doing all along. And it had nothing to do with keeping your health plan if you liked it.

Time to bring in, you know, The A-Team to fix it all (watch this 15 second vid):

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Conrad Murray Released From Prison

Nick Gillespie is an editor at large at Reason and host of The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie.

PoliticsNanny StateScience & TechnologyEconomicsPolicyObamacareBarack ObamaKathleen SebeliusHealth Care
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (181)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. MJGreen   12 years ago

    It is true that a few protections apply to all plans, both new and old, but these protections?like limiting the share of premiums that insurers can devote to administrative costs?are designed to help consumers and cut health care costs.

    Well that's all that matters. They intended it to cut health care costs. Don't blame them!

  2. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   12 years ago

    From a Huffington Post Information Commissar Community Pundit:

    DESPITE THE "BEST EFFORTS" OF THOSE OPPOSED TO ACA IT'S GOING TO WORK.......HERE IS WHY..............................
    1) It's working in the states where the state has chosen to run its own exchange....even in Red States.

    Gov Bashear of Kentucky whose state had a very successful launch of the marketplaces Kentucky has 620,000 uninsured. 26,000 have now enrolled (about half in private insurance and half in the medicaid expansion). 50,000 more have applicatins started and there the numbers are 60/40 medicaid/private insurance. Another 300,000 have registered on the site.400 businesses have accessed the ACA Shop to find group insurance for their employees. The story is the same in every state that has done what Kentucky has done.

    2) The insurance companies are coming on board.

    You have probably heard the horror stories about those who have their policies dropped. Let's look a bit closer. Florida Blue (Blue Cross Blue Shield) has let it me be know that 300,000 Floridians will find that their policies are being dropped. Bad news, right? Won't new policies cost more or even be unavailable? CEO and Chairman of the Board of Florida Blue Pat Geraghty has offered the following explanation.
    First, the policies that WILL NO LONGER BE OFFERED do not meet the more comprehensive benefit requirements of the Affordable Care. He noted that Florida Blue fully endorses this enhanced coverage.

    1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   12 years ago

      Second, 300,000 will have their policies phased out across the year but this will be an incremental change with 15,000 to 30,000 policy holders informed of the change and offered comparable and often better policies.
      Third, Mr Geraghty pointed out that his company is solidly behind these changes. He is holding 3000 education seminars, doing a massive mail out and phone campaign and a serious of e mail blast to assist Floridians in a transition from outdated to better insurance. Florida Blue is featuring ACA expansion on its website and is a member of several private marketing sites like e-health.

      Fourth, Geraghty has made it clear that most Floridians are going to find that the new insurance is much better and of the same price or less than their old policies thanks to the subsidy system. A small minority will not because they were underinsured and/or were unwilling to invest reasonable in their own health care insurance.

      Praise be to Obama for He is great! He liberated people from the chains of health insurance plans He, in his infinite wisdom, deemed unacceptable and rescued the 'underinsured' from their own ignorance.

      1. PapayaSF   12 years ago

        He noted that Florida Blue fully endorses this enhanced coverage.

        So an insurance company is OK with selling more expensive policies? Shocka.

        300,000 will have their policies phased out across the year but [...] holders informed of the change and offered comparable and often better policies.

        You are all being evicted, but you will be offered comparable and often better accommodations elsewhere, so don't complain.

        1. Generic Stranger   12 years ago

          You are all being evicted, but you will be offered comparable and often better accommodations elsewhere, for a much greater price, so don't complain.

          FTFY.

      2. Ayn Random Variation   12 years ago

        Wow that is some mendacious shit.

        "You have probably heard the horror stories about those who have their policies dropped. Let's look a bit closer. Florida Blue (Blue Cross Blue Shield) has let it me be know that 300,000 Floridians will find that their policies are being dropped."

        This is true, but it's incremental! And if you end up paying more it's because the policy you had before was substandard!

        I'm gonna fuck you up the ass, but I'll do it gently and slowly!
        And if you don't like it, that's because you've never been fucked up the ass properly!

        1. Finrod   12 years ago

          Don't forget "And it's your own fault if you don't like it!"

          1. Carolynp   12 years ago

            And, it's already been decided, so when are you going to quit complaining?

        2. Brett L   12 years ago

          "Just the tip"

      3. NotAnotherSkippy   12 years ago

        So the Kentucky statement is a flat out lie. Suderman's earlier story linked directly to this:

        http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-50.....structure/

        Hardly half-and-half.

      4. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

        I didn't actually absorb any of the content there, all I could see was "applicatins" (no red squiggly huffpo?) and "invest reasonable in".

      5. Red Rocks Rockin   12 years ago

        I see they're going with the "if you're losing your insurance plan, you really didn't have insurance" bullshit that sociopath Ezekiel Emmanuel was running with this weekend.

        1. Finrod   12 years ago

          That and I saw one leftist troll still trying to claim that everyone will save money eventually from the better coverage, though of course they were completely lacking on any details.

          Trust us! We're the government. We know better.

        2. Juice   12 years ago

          If I didn't really have insurance then why are the plans being offered worse? I guess these Obamacare plans aren't really insurance.

    2. Episiarch   12 years ago

      You see, we're still at the stage where denial works for these people. But as time goes on, it's going to get harder and harder for them. Like certain cheeses or wines, denial only gets better with age. This is going to be delicious in a few months.

      1. PapayaSF   12 years ago

        I'm actually surprised at how much of a clusterfuck this has been already. I knew the law and the exchanges would never work as intended, but I didn't expect the disaster to be too big to be ignored by the major media, this soon.

        And it's hard to see how it'll get better anytime soon. The end of November deadline for "fixing" healthcare.gov seems overly-optimistic, to say the least. The rate shock stories aren't anywhere near over. The "successes" of the state exchanges seem over-trumpeted. And lots of people don't follow the news: they'll just discover the IRS has docked their refund next year for not having insurance.

        One thing I look forward to: Congresscritters campaigning in 2014, having to explain how they and their staffs got special subsidies to be able to "afford" Obamacare, which the average voter did not get.

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          Unless the administration suddenly gets vastly more competent than they have been so far, this clusterfuck should just get better, especially if you look at how quickly it already went into super-fucked territory. Anyone competent enough to fix this would have been competent enough to not have this happen in the first place.

          It's not boding well for the administration or ACA supporters, but man it's boding well for my entertainment prospects as this continues to unravel.

          1. Finrod   12 years ago

            Invest in popcorn stocks.

        2. General Butt Naked   12 years ago

          I'm actually surprised at how much of a clusterfuck this has been already.

          I knew from the beginning it would be, but figured they'd at least cover their asses by delaying the inevitable shit storm. Then I got my letter from the insurance company letting me know that I was being dropped (which through my class unconsciousness I actually liked) unless I upgraded to a plan that I didn't want.

          My plan wasn't some homedepot-buttplug bullshit plan, it was a good catastrophic plan for a young healthy person with little money. I knew that they were probably sending out many of those letters and that people would be pissed. I also figured that the geniuses in the administration wouldn't be able to hide the custerfuck they created.

          Then the exchanges went online.

          I'm really enjoying the piled up failure drowning this administration and its lackeys.

          1. PapayaSF   12 years ago

            I am having some schadenfreude because I know freelance writers and adjunct professors who are total D partisans, and I suspect they will be suffering a bit from Obamacare. You voted for this, fools.

            1. John Thacker   12 years ago

              You want schadenfraude, you want this former Dem staffer who lost her job when her boss lost his seat over Obamacare (he regained his seat two years later but didn't rehire her), and she had defended Obamacare a ton-- only now is not so happy with what it's doing to her premiums.

              She liked her coverage, the new coverage is unaffordable. She says it should be the "Available Care Act," since it isn't affordable.

              1. Jordan   12 years ago

                "Available Care Act". Hmm, not bad. But it doesn't quite fit, since Obamacare does nothing to improve availability of health care. How about the "Obama Pretends to Care Act"?

              2. SweatingGin   12 years ago

                wah-wah

              3. Suthenboy   12 years ago

                ...and she is still getting it wrong. Affordable = Available. Not affordable? Not available.

                1. John Thacker   12 years ago

                  "I spent two years defending Obamacare. I had constituents scream at me, spit at me and call me names that I can't put in print. The congressman was not re-elected in 2010 mainly because of the anti-Obamacare anger. When the congressman was not re-elected, I also (along with the rest of our staff) lost my job. I was upset that because of the health care issue, I didn't have a job anymore but still defended Obamacare because it would make health care available to everyone at, what I assumed, would be an affordable price. I have now learned that I was wrong. Very wrong."

                  1. PapayaSF   12 years ago

                    Atrocious Care Act.
                    Afflictive Care Act.
                    Aching Care Act.
                    Amiss Care Act.
                    Awry Care Act.
                    Abominable Care Act.

                    1. Finrod   12 years ago

                      Agonizing Careless Act.

                    2. Carolynp   12 years ago

                      That seems awfully close to just calling it Obamacare...

              4. John C. Randolph   12 years ago

                She's one of the people who actually deserves to get screwed over by the government.

                -jcr

              5. Faceless Commenter   12 years ago

                She still believes in government-administered healthcare for all. She won't get it until she's gasping her last due to strep throat while lying under a barefoot doctor who's waving the Little Red Book in one hand and a manure-smeared knife in the other.

            2. HazelMeade   12 years ago

              Yeah, seriously the people who are going to get ass-raped the worst by the ACA are self-employed middle-income young people.
              Just EXACTLY the kind of people who live in San Fran or on the East Coast who probably voted for Obama in droves.

        3. HazelMeade   12 years ago

          The end of November...

          You men like the weekend after Thanksgiving? That weekend?

          Does anyone ever finish anything at the end of November?

          The end of November is the three days after you get back from a five-day weekend when you are usually still trying to remember what your job is.

          Nevermind that literally EVERYTHING is closed on Thanksgiving, so even if they wanted to work through the weekend, they couldn't even order a pizza. They would have to park themselves in a Starbucks and code from their laptops because facilities locked the building and turned off the heat.

          1. Brian   12 years ago

            They just want to set the deadline to a time when no one will be paying attention.

        4. Brett L   12 years ago

          The have to have it fixed before Thanksgiving. Have you ever tried to get three managers into a meeting between Turkey Day and New Years Day? It is literally impossible. So their options are fix it by Thanksgiving or wait until after the first of the year.

    3. HazelMeade   12 years ago

      I love how they always excuse people having their plans terminated or being forced to buy more expensive insurance with "But the benefits will be better!"

      As if anyone wants to pay an extra $300/month for insurance just so they don't have a co-pay for a mammogram.

      What benefits does the ACA offer to people who are healthy and have few annual medical costs? Lower deductibles don't mean shit if you don't meet the deductible anyway. Free birth control pills? No lifetime maximum? Seriously, you expect people to be happy about having their insurance costs double for that bullshit?

      1. Ted S.   12 years ago

        Allowing women to choose for themselves whether they want to pay more in premiums every month so that they don't have to give any money to the radiologist, or less on their premiums and pay the radiologist at the time of service means you want to take mammograms away from women and want them to die.

        Why do you hate titties so much, Hazel? This is why there are no female libertarians!

        1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

          Sadly, many women I know are fucking retards. They consider their employer-based plans their personal property so the employer has no right to decide what it covers, and simultaneously think of them as free benefits paid for by someone else.

          It's as if when I give you a lollipop, I have no right to decide what flavor it is. I demand fucking lollipop, and I want it blueberry flavor, otherwise you are imposing your flavor-preferences upon me, you patriarchal goon!

          1. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

            Sadly, many women I know are fucking retards.

            That's a strange way to spell Americans, Hazel.

            1. Ted S.   12 years ago

              Many men are fucking retards, too. It's just that we call those retards "trophy wives".

              1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

                I have a trophy boyfriend. Er kept man. Concubine. Gigalo.

                1. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

                  Is there a waiting list for them? Or do I just have to hunt them in the wild? I end up paying for everything whenever I'm dating anyway.

                  1. Ted S.   12 years ago

                    I'm sorry, Jesse, but I don't think Hazel has gay gigolos. Unless you want to wind up with something like Robert Downey's character in Less Than Zero, giving blowjobs to pay off his drug debt.

                    1. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

                      I don't think it matters that much once you're paying for them, Ted. Your link intrigues me, but I don't think I have a way to trap someone in debt peonage to be paid off in blowjobs, though I will keep an eye out for opportunities.

          2. Ted S.   12 years ago

            Ask them "Why should I be forced to pay for your birth control?" I'd love to hear how they respond.

            Better yet, tell them to go up to a random stranger and tell the stranger that he should be forced to pay for her birth control.

            Yeah, I know. They think the money is only coming from some amorphous "the rich".

            1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

              They will insist that you aren't paying for their birth control. Their insurance coverage is part of their "total compensation" so they paid for it themselves.

              I mean, it's cool they they actually compute the cost of health insurance as part of their income, but (A) I doubt they actually have any clue how much it costs their employer, and (B) if they did, I doubt they would prefer to receive that compensation in the form of health insurance if they had a choice.

              Let's see, would I like an extra $500/month in income or some free birth control pills. HMMMMMMMMM.

              1. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

                I still can't fathom why birth control isn't OTC. Even if you kept some of the propietary blends for controlling acne or PCOS symptoms behind the counter, there's no good reason to make it a employer-provided benefit.

                1. Ted S.   12 years ago

                  there's no good reason to make it a employer-provided benefit.

                  Because it gives government control, and allows the left to stick it to those evil fundies who don't want to pay for such stuff.

                  1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

                    It's funny how progressive always accuse people on the right of being all "I got mine so screw you!", but that is exactly the attitude they promote on the part of their own constituencies.

                    "I got my free birth control and mamogramms, so screw you, men, employers, religious conservatives. "

                    They actually have arguments with eachother about how terrible it is that poor people don't "vote their self interest". As if their ideal society would involve everyone voting for as much free shit as possible for themselves.

                2. John Thacker   12 years ago

                  The annoying thing is that Obamacare took away the ability to use HSAs on OTC things. So if birth control were OTC, you couldn't buy it with HSA money.

                  For my wife, and most women I know, scheduling the doctor's appointment to get the prescription and taking time for that is way more than the cost of the pills.

                3. KimInGA   12 years ago

                  I've always figured it's because going OTC would mean they couldn't force you to get annual pap smears before they'll write the scrip for your pills. I wonder how many women only go annually for that one reason? I know I did.

                4. DenverJay   12 years ago

                  Duh, because of Boosh and the evil Rethuglicans!

            2. LarryA   12 years ago

              Better still, ask them if they realize that whoever pays for their birth control will get to choose what method will be funded. So if mostly-male members of Congress think sponges sound icky, women who want them (or can't use other methods) will have to get them on the regular market.

              Only since no manufacturer can compete with free government stuff that market will disappear.

        2. Carolynp   12 years ago

          I assure you, there are a few of us female libertarians. Either that, or my gyno is quite confused.

          1. JeremyR   12 years ago

            It's a running joke (mostly)

            1. KimInGA   12 years ago

              There are a good number of us. I think. We just camouflage well. That and women overall tend to be more bleeding heart liberal and it just gets to the point where you don't want to argue with your female friends/family/coworkers any more. They're so irrational. It does get annoying when they just assume you agree because you're female though. I've had more than a few "huh??" looks when I say that no, actually, I'm libertarian. "What's THAT?"

      2. SQRLSY One   12 years ago

        You healthy "young invincibles" shouldn't gloat so much; you never know when utter catastrophe will randomly strike you, and then you'll be SOOO thankful for that gold-bricked insurance policy! Like that mandate for covering space alien abduction therapy? I used to sneer at those sniveling babies whining and bitching and moaning about being abducted and anally probed in the middle of the night on a deserted highway, and then it happened to ME!!! And since I was too cheap to have bought an Obama-approved plan, I am forced to sniff and snivel about my anal probing, all by my lonesome, never professionally sniveled over by professional expertologists of sniveling? Take it from ME & my hard-learned lessons? Don't be so un-snivel to people like me, or possibly YOURSELF in the future!

        1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

          But with ObamaCare, Now you can get your annual anal probe for FREE! For the low, low, price of only $300/month extra in insurance premiums.

  3. Lord Humungus   12 years ago

    You know who else had a plan they had to lie about to get passed?

    1. Tonio   12 years ago

      Every politician ever?

    2. Ayn Random Variation   12 years ago

      Stringer Bell?

      1. General Butt Naked   12 years ago

        +1 (sell it for 2)

  4. Ayn Random Variation   12 years ago

    so "protection" is another one of those words that don't mean what they used to mean.

    1. Penis Carrot   12 years ago

      I means what it has always meant in New Jersey, by way of Rocco and Guido.

  5. Ayn Random Variation   12 years ago

    And here is an NBC News report that argues

    Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, "40 to 67 percent" of customers will not be able to keep their policy.

    Thanks for being all over this NBC!

    1. SweatingGin   12 years ago

      "Normal turnover" already makes it sound like some weasel wording. I'm sure a lot of it is about plans grandfathered or something, but it really sounds like they weaseled it even then.

    2. Red Rocks Rockin   12 years ago

      Fuck it, better late than never, I guess.

      This is turning into a dogpile now. Even the HuffPo piece above unwittingly reveals the fatal flaw in these exchanges--most of the enrollees are signing up for Medicaid, and will pay little to nothing into the system. This is going to absolutely nuke the states' Medicaid budgets, and they're going to sit around and ask themselves what the hell happened when it does blow up.

      Well, you dummies--stop trying to nurture and grow the Free Shit Army, a la Detroit, and you won't have to worry about it.

  6. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   12 years ago

    Barrette said, "What I have right now is what I am happy with and I just want to know why I can't keep what I have. Why do I have to be forced into something else?"

    Oh Dianne, the answer is quite simple: because fuck you, that's why. Obama knows what kind of coverage you need, so shut up and pay.

  7. Dweebston   12 years ago

    But hey, Obama won the election. Get over it. What part of screw you don't you understand?

    Erections have consequences, bitch. Now bend over.

    1. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

      Erections have consequences

      Lacist!

  8. Sevo   12 years ago

    For whom did Ms. Barrette vote?
    If Obo, fuck you with a shovel, lady.

  9. Suthenboy   12 years ago

    From the Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc in an earlier thread;

    "Comrade Obama's glorious new healthcare plan has liberated you from the chains of your old insurance plan and given you the freedom to choose a plan that has more 'options' than you had before."

    Earlier today I had the tv on for noise and there was a debate about obamacare. Someone was complaining about how people were getting dropped and prices skyrocketing. The smug, smirking liberal POS on the panel responded almost word for word with what RHSM, Visc said, presenting that as a serious argument. He also assured us that we are gonna love it.

    I would have paid nearly any amount of money to jump through the screen and punch that sanctimonious fucker in the mouth.

    1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   12 years ago

      It's true Newspeak: "increased access to healthcare" is Obamaspeak for "we're going to force you to buy shit you neither want nor need."

    2. Brian   12 years ago

      Pretty soon they'll just be down to "We're trying to give poor people health care, so shut the fuck up, mean people!"

      1. Suthenboy   12 years ago

        Just using the term 'mean people' pushes my buttons.
        I remember from college campuses all the 'mean people suck' bumper stickers. I used to write 'fuck you' on them every chance I got.

    3. Finrod   12 years ago

      These jackasses remind me of brain-dead versions of Loki from The Avengers, here to free us from the problems of freedom.

    4. Carolynp   12 years ago

      Oh, hey! Maybe you've come up with a serious way to pay for the ACA. I'd pony up to smack several smug liberal pols around.

  10. Austrian Anarchy   12 years ago

    That includes 56-year-old Dianne Barrette.

    Every 56 year old needs the prenatal care option, and sex should not be a determining factor.

  11. Brian   12 years ago

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it's like every fucking day is Christmas.

    I wake up, and I laugh, and I laugh, and laugh...

    Stupid progressives.

    1. Suthenboy   12 years ago

      I would laugh too, except I know where this road invariably leads.

      1. Brian   12 years ago

        This is my impression of the Obama administration.

        1. RG   12 years ago

          "Oh the humanity!"

        2. Suthenboy   12 years ago

          Almost, but not quite. It needs an MSNBC newscaster telling us how wonderful it all is, how obumbles the genius really planned it this way...etc etc.

          1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

            A lot of blimps don't land exactly right on their first try, you have to give them time to work the kinks out.

          2. SweatingGin   12 years ago

            Maybe get some Potempkin enrollees out. Pick some town in Indiana, say everyone got through to the exchange and had great success. Bring the reporters by to see.

            Could even have a fainter in there to bring back some of that first term magic.

            1. Jordan   12 years ago

              Didn't they already try that with Chad?

              1. SweatingGin   12 years ago

                Yea, but now we need a whole village of chads!

                1. Bobarian   12 years ago

                  Hanging Chads?

        3. SweatingGin   12 years ago

          I always forget that was during the day -- the flames were so bright, it looks like night on film.

          Somehow I bet they'll manage a few more FYTW before they hit the ground.

        4. Jordan   12 years ago

          This is more fitting.

          1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

            It does convey a more appropriate level of gravitas, i.e., none.

          2. PaulW   12 years ago

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2EOees58eQ

            This is the Obama Administration in a nutshell.

        5. PapayaSF   12 years ago

          As someone wrote about the Martha Coakley campaign: This isn't the Hindenburg or the Titanic, it's the Hindenburg crashing into the Titanic.

          1. Nobamunism   12 years ago

            With complications yet.

          2. Finrod   12 years ago

            ... crashing into the space shuttle. Both of them.

            1. Bramblyspam   12 years ago

              Meanwhile, they're fiddling with the deck chairs while the Titanic burns. Or something like that.

              1. DenverJay   12 years ago

                "We have met the enemy, and he is us"

  12. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

    Barrette said, "What I have right now is what I am happy with and I just want to know why I can't keep what I have. Why do I have to be forced into something else?"

    Because that's the entire basis of the whole scheme dearie. Did you not get the memo?

  13. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    Now is the perfect time for journalists to look into the legislation and the claims that got it sort of passed.

    1. SweatingGin   12 years ago

      Too much work. Just say the website is screwed up.

    2. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

      I guess it took the obstructionist teathuglicans at CBS longer than planned to stage their coup.

      1. Faceless Commenter   12 years ago

        It does seem as though journalism is breaking out in some of the unlikeliest places -- like CNN, CBS, NBC, and the Washington Post.

        1. DenverJay   12 years ago

          Of course. They have almost used up their "serious journalist" credits, so now that they have secured a second term for Obama, they can report all the stories that would have cost him reelection, his first election, or hell, his nomination in the first place.

  14. OldMexican   12 years ago

    Barrette said, "What I have right now is what I am happy with and I just want to know why I can't keep what I have. Why do I have to be forced into something else?"

    Because in Our Eyes(*) you're no better than an imbecile, a moron, someone that was lobotomized by nature itself, which means you can't know what you like or don't like so We, The (*)Government, decide for you.

    That is what I gathered from all those liberal pundits that have been invited to those 2-minute "fair and balanced" debates in Fox News, after the host and the other side pointed out the obvious: that the president lied about being able to keep the plan one likes. The liberal pundits bloviate about those plans being so bad and terrible and gouging us and we should be so lucky to have new and better plans under the ACA, blah blah blah. Ergo, we're too stupid to have free choice.

    1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

      There was an asterisk whenever that claim was made, it was just silent.

    2. SweatingGin   12 years ago

      "Ergo, we're too stupid to have free choice."

      Seems to be a theme of early 21st century progressivism.

      1. Redmanfms   12 years ago

        Seems to be a theme of early 21st century progressivism.

        When has progressivism ever been about choice?

    3. Ayn Random Variation   12 years ago

      I was watching Imus the other morning and Alan Colmes stated that Obama would be remembered as one of our best presidents. When prompted to list Obama's accomplishments, he mentioned killing al qaeda, lowering the deficit to $900 billion and "healthcare".
      Everybody on the show mocked him, and I was left to wonder if he actually believed what he was saying.

  15. John Thacker   12 years ago

    This one is the best.

    "I spent two years defending Obamacare. I had constituents scream at me, spit at me and call me names that I can't put in print. The congressman was not re-elected in 2010 mainly because of the anti-Obamacare anger. When the congressman was not re-elected, I also (along with the rest of our staff) lost my job. I was upset that because of the health care issue, I didn't have a job anymore but still defended Obamacare because it would make health care available to everyone at, what I assumed, would be an affordable price. I have now learned that I was wrong. Very wrong."

    ...

    "And I was excited that previously uninsured people could now get insurance on the open market. But this is not affordable to me."

    Klinkhamer suggests renaming the Affordable Care Act.

    "Just call it," she said dryly, "the Available Care Act."

    1. Ayn Random Variation   12 years ago

      no sympathy from me

    2. SweatingGin   12 years ago

      It's her fault! She's the one that didn't believe hard enough!

      She lost her faith when they cancelled her plan! If she had kept her faith through it all, Obama would have rewarded her and the entire country!

    3. Suthenboy   12 years ago

      I think all of the previously uninsured people could get insurance, mostly they just chose not to.

      And, as I pointed out above, unaffordable means unavailable.

      I hope this bitch has not reproduced. Perhaps she should do the gene pool a favor......

      1. John Thacker   12 years ago

        She's 60 years old, so she's probably not reproducing any more. Though she does get maternity coverage now and birth control pills, thanks to Obamacare!

    4. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

      That is outstanding.

      Except for the "Available" part, which seems like a big goddam assumption. Still, it does little to water down the concentrated schadenfreude.

      If only we could contain the impacts of their idiocy to those who labored so tirelessly to thrust it upon us.

    5. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

      From the comments on that:

      Sherry Brockett2 hours ago

      This is all bull. The only ones that will benefit from obamacare are the poor. My employer informed all employees that it will not offer qualified insurance as of Dec. 31st. We must find our own. Even with the tax credit that I would qualify for the insurance is 678.00 a month with a 6000.00 deductible. There is no way I can afford this. I have a disabled husband at home and he is covered by medicare so I don't have to worry about him. But because I have to add his disability as income it puts me in a higher income bracket so I have to pay more for insurance. I for one at this time will opt to pay the fine. I can go to my doctor and pay 50.00 for a visit when paying cash. A lot cheaper than 678.00. I honestly considered divorcing my husband so that we could afford this.

      This really does have the potential for some ugly media coverage.

      1. John Thacker   12 years ago

        The people who are going to end up paying for this are people who already had individual plans, who are mostly middle-income. ($46k/year for singles.)

        I'm expecting that the liberal Dem response will be to increase the subsidies, and fund it through taxes (supposedly on "the rich.") I can't see another D path other than that. Going single-payer is only a variant of that path.

        There's always price controls, but considering that the "doc fix" didn't take in Medicare, I'm not sure that would work.

        Smart Republicans, should any exist, should try to outreach to at least these people.

        1. Ted S.   12 years ago

          Single-payer legal care.

          Every single regulation these people want to put on doctors ought first be tried on lawyers (since they make up a disproportionate percentage of legislators). Fuck them all.

          1. John Thacker   12 years ago

            Public defenders for all?

            1. Ted S.   12 years ago

              There's not one single lawyer out there who's worth anything more than minimum wage.

              Hillary would be drawing up wills for little old ladies in Watertown, NY.

      2. Suthenboy   12 years ago

        The potential for ugly media coverage existed all along but the media chose, and is mostly still choosing, to cover for them.

        Had the media chosen to they could have sunk this administration with Fast and Furious. That they got away with that is unfathomable to me.

        1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

          True of course, but the number of people directly affected by F&F was virtually zero. I'm wondering if maybe the number of people screwed *right now* by Obamacare, in extremely quantifiable terms, might make this too hard to just sweep under the covers as run of the mill partisan political nuance.

          1. John Thacker   12 years ago

            Right now, journalists are having an easier time finding people who are pissed about canceled policies and higher premiums than people who are getting insurance through the exchange.

            If the exchanges get fixed, the Administration will look to feed reporters with success stories. But right now, even the "success stories" behind Obama last week hadn't even gotten the site working, they were just "planning to use it."

      3. Faceless Commenter   12 years ago

        I get a little queasy thinking about our marchers meeting their marchers.

    6. Brian   12 years ago

      Sue: "I lost my insurance! And how I have to buy really expensive insurance"
      Progtard: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
      Sue: "But, more people are losing insurance than signing up for Obamacare!"
      Progtard: "The needs of the poor outweigh the needs of the rich."
      Sue: "Rich? I'm a fucking secretary! And the people who are signing up are going into medicaid! Couldn't you find a way to expand medicaid for the truly poor without screwing up my insurance?"
      Protard: "Obama works in mysterious ways."

      1. Libertarius   12 years ago

        "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

        Ahh, Spock's classic encapsulation of utilitarianism. I wish the libertarians would understand the impossibility of this philosophy, and that it is much more consistently applied to statism and leftoidism than to *anything* close to liberty. It is no accident that Bentham ended his life as a socialist.

  16. HazelMeade   12 years ago

    It's amazing how little negotiating power people have when they are forced to pay for things. Who could have predicted this?

  17. Rich   12 years ago

    it specifically allows those who want to keep their current insurance to do so.

    "To do so" meaning, of course, "to want to keep their current insurance".

    1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

      That is some fine parsin', Rich. You may be qualified for a career in politics.

      1. Rich   12 years ago

        I've been studying Obamaese for quite some time now, so I'm probably *overqualified*.

  18. SweatingGin   12 years ago

    A couple weeks ago, as the first enrollment numbers were trickling out, I saw something indicating that insurers could withdraw from the exchanges up until October 31. I'm not sure if that is true or not.

    Has anyone else seen anything on that? I haven't been able to find anything, or even remember the original source. I figured last Friday would have some withdraws if many were going to.

    1. John Thacker   12 years ago

      I think that's correct, which is why the White House wasn't going to announce a delay of the individual mandate before then-- the insurers would scream, because it would mess up their pricing.

      1. SweatingGin   12 years ago

        So we get another present Thursday? A few of the states are at 2 or 3 providers already.

        1. John Thacker   12 years ago

          Probably not; the White House invited all the insurance co CEOs over for a big chat last week, probably to tell them that they'd be bailed out if necessary and not to leave the exchanges.

          1. SweatingGin   12 years ago

            Not sure how much they can expect a bailout, though. That's just more embarrassment, and it needs to go through a Republican house and a senate filibuster.

            I'd imagine a bit of strong arming, though.

            The insurance companies know how many signed up, and how many more have to for them to make a profit. I'd imagine they all went in there with that number right in the front of their minds -- "are you going to get me 400k customers by January 1?" (Or whatever the number is).

            1. John Thacker   12 years ago

              Until 2016, there's a lookback provision that allows the insurance companies to be reimbursed if claims come in too high (and they have to pay in if claims come in too low.) It's not full reimbursement, but it covers a good 80% of it.

              CBO priced it as budget neutral, assuming that insurers would on average hit the right target (since it's not a full reimbursement.) But with a mandate delay, could end up being a huge insurer bailout.

              1. SweatingGin   12 years ago

                Gotcha, thanks. I only caught a little of that provision. So not an immediate death spiral.

                1. John Thacker   12 years ago

                  Right, it probably greatly lessens a death spiral, at the cost of indirect subsidies.

          2. HazelMeade   12 years ago

            That was before they hired a man who would swear, on national TV, that the exchanges would work by the end of November.

            Whether he can actually acomplish that is another thing. The key point is that he's willing to swear to it. With a straight face. That's what they pay good money for.

            1. John Thacker   12 years ago

              Well, if he didn't, even Dems were starting to ask for a delay. I assume that they're hoping that everything will be too fucked up to repeal even if it doesn't work by November 30.

              1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

                I wonder how much extra they paid him to be convincing.

              2. DenverJay   12 years ago

                Exactly. By then, millions of people will no longer have their old policies, employers will have changed or dropped their plans, insurance companies will have completely re-vamped what they offer, doctors and hospitals will have changed there billing procedures, medicade and medicare will have changed their policies, the billing codes will have all changed, and the software companies that supply all of the above will have released their 2014 versions that assume an ACA.
                Way too late for the government to say "Oops, never mind"

          3. HazelMeade   12 years ago

            Also "bailout" = nationalization.

            The government will buy stock in the companies much like they did with GM.

  19. Habeas Dorkus   12 years ago

    You know why American journalism sucks? Is the worst in the world? Is populated by retards with a liberal agenda?
    It's because any actuary, or programmer, or mathematician, or practically anybody who can think beyond the next day's headlines KNEW this was a corpse covered in shit the second it was enacted.
    These fucking fucktards in the media are now chasing the shit coming out of their own asses like dogs to their tails.
    Obama is the worst president in U.S. history. The fuckhead is so beholden to his bullshit -- with the Senate and the media in tow -- that he believes his own salty dick snot should be explored as an alternative fuel.
    We need to impeach this stupid ass-clown. This country is dead.

    1. Suthenboy   12 years ago

      Look Habeas, this is H&R. We dont sugarcoat things here.

      Dont hold back, tell us what you really think.

      1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

        There's no sugarcoating it, Habeas has some concerns about this plan.

        1. darius404   12 years ago

          Mild concerns, but they're there nonetheless.

          1. Brian   12 years ago

            There's no sugarcoating it: some adjustments may be required for Habeas' health insurance compliance.

  20. Ken Shultz   12 years ago

    Has anybody seen Tony lately?

    I haven't seen him around in a long time.

    I wonder if his insurance got canceled or something.

    That would be hilarious.

    1. The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc   12 years ago

      He popped by earlier on a Bailey abortion post to call Rand Paul an associate of neo-Nazis.

      1. croaker   12 years ago

        Seems to me the real neo-Nazis are certain government employees in Wisconsin.

    2. HazelMeade   12 years ago

      I'm pretty sure that Chad Henderson is the same Chad that used to post on these boards.

      1. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

        Heh.

      2. SweatingGin   12 years ago

        He did kind of have the air of a 15 year old or so.

        1. HazelMeade   12 years ago

          I think he also mentioned that he lived in Michigan.

      3. Sevo   12 years ago

        HazelMeade|10.28.13 @ 9:55PM|#
        "I'm pretty sure that Chad Henderson is the same Chad that used to post on these boards."

        Interesting.
        'Bout the first time I posted here, I asked for cites from Chad who had made a specific claim.
        His response was 'you look it up', which seemed pretty 'adolescent'. And stupid, as I mentioned.

    3. All-Seeing Monocle   12 years ago

      Rather curious, isn't it. Seems like he disappeared right around the time that the news pivoted from shutdown-apocalypse to obamacare-apocalypse.

      Maybe he's part of the A-team?

    4. Brian   12 years ago

      Has anybody seen Tony lately?

      I haven't seen him around in a long time.

      I wonder if his insurance got canceled or something.

      That would be hilarious.

      I'm pretty sure that public middle school English teachers are covered (for now).

  21. SweatingGin   12 years ago

    More things to find out about in the paper:
    President Obama asking Eric Schmidt if "Bitcoin is anything he has to worry about?"

  22. gurlfriday247   12 years ago

    Animal Farm reloaded.

  23. lap83   12 years ago

    http://media.kansascity.com/sm......St.81.jpg

    This cartoon, which ran in the KC Star over the weekend, to me sums up the liberal position right now. Yeah, they are panicking and Obamacare is not going well....but they will keep desperately lashing out and blaming the usuals until the very end.

    1. Finrod   12 years ago

      The cartoonist forgot to draw the part where the boat was radioactive, on fire, and filled with hungry zoo animals.

  24. John   12 years ago

    I keep telling you guys everyone is going to hate this. The only people who are getting free shit are the poor and they are getting health insurance. But the poor don't want to buy discounted health insurance. They want cash. They don't give a shit about health insurance. Everyone else is getting fucked. Lobs a is such a moron he managed to create a welfare program that gives people shot they don't want. This is going t be the death of these clowns. I love it.

  25. EdWuncler   12 years ago

    So on Facebook the other day, I posted that Kathleen Sebelius should have been shit canned over this fuck up. This guy who I did my undergrad with at DePaul and got his MPA from Northwestern basically argued that despite the government shitting away a crap ton of money and having 3 to 5 years to make this website great and failing, no one needs to get fired and damn it we should appreciate the efforts of Obama and his team for giving us a chance to get insurance. He made every excuse in the book possible and even gotten angry that I dared demand that someone be held accountable for this fuck up.

    I explained to him that insurance means shit if costs for health care are still rising, why health care is so expensive, and how Obamacare is basically a system doomed to fail based on it's dependence on young healthy people and the cronyism. This dude who calls himself an intellectual centrist couldn't refute any of my points and actually said that it didn't work because it's hard for the government to do all of this, especially for millions of people. He also then went on a rant about how health care is a human right and how bad the GOP have been.

    You couldn't make this shit up,

    1. lap83   12 years ago

      It's like talking to someone in an abusive relationship.

    2. sasob   12 years ago

      Ironic how health care is supposedly a human right according to some, but the freedom to keep the fruits of one's labor or to choose how one lives one's life is not.

  26. EdWuncler   12 years ago

    One day the same guy tried to show how openminded he was by posting an article from Reason bashing the GOP. I asked him has he ever read any articles that bashed the Dems and he grew quiet. I used to think that at the very least he thought about politics in a very constructive way. As I got to know him better, he is nothing more then a full on statist. That guy defends Obama no matter what he does and loves the government.

    1. John   12 years ago

      Guys like your friend are why the are going to play hell disowning this. They won't be able to do the usual "it only failed because we had the wrong guy in charge" routine because so many progs have such a cult like devotion to Obama. They are going to have to die on this hill, no retreat.

      1. VG Zaytsev   12 years ago

        And sooner than later they'll get bitter about the people rejecting their glorious leader an his plan - which will further alienate them from the public.

        1. EdWuncler   12 years ago

          He has an MPA which is the divinity school for government. This guy already thinks that he and his ilk knows better then most Americans. The path to Progressive ideology is paved with arrogance.

      2. Suthenboy   12 years ago

        Let them die on this hill.

        My grandfather told me that the last time the proggies had power, by the time they were out people were so sick of their shit that if you announced on the street that you were a prog you would be lynched.

        I so look forward to that.

        The same for the nazis. After they were out of power they just looked like the lunatic fringe that they really always were.

        1. EdWuncler   12 years ago

          The 2016 Democratic Presidential primary will be entertaining.

  27. EdWuncler   12 years ago

    Absolutley. I pointed out to him that as a fan of single payer he should be the angriest because this proves the government's inability to implement single payer care.

    1. JeremyR   12 years ago

      Almost every other 1st world in the country (and many 3rd world) have single payer. It might not be perfect in other countries, but they also somehow manage to pay much less money than we do.

      Obamacare doesn't work because it's corporatism.

      It's forcing people to get health care from insurance companies. How on earth does getting health care from insurance companies make sense?.

      You're basically paying the salaries of all those insurance company's employees, not to mention all the profits that go to the shareholders.

      And it's rigged. If you go to the doctor, you have have to pay full price. But the insurance companies don't, they only pay a fraction of the bill. The government reimburses even less. So the hospitals and doctors jack up the prices to compensate.

      1. John Thacker   12 years ago

        No, many countries have universal health care systems, but they aren't single payer.

        France is not a single payer system. Germany is not a single payer system.

        There's a difference between a universal health care system, and a single payer system.

        Every system where the person who goes to the doctor doesn't pay the full out of pocket costs has employees that do a job similar to insurance company employees.

        What's notable about the US is that people actually pay a much smaller fraction of out of pocket costs than in other systems.

      2. Sevo   12 years ago

        "You're basically paying the salaries of all those insurance company's employees, not to mention all the profits that go to the shareholders."

        Yes, and the profit motive makes that THE most efficient method of arranging for something to get done.
        Consider that the employees are paid regardless and gov't (or 'non-profit') employees are paid 'what is fair'. Consider that profit is good if it returns 5-7%; far less than gov'ts (or 'non-profits') waste.
        Sorry; fail.

    2. DenverJay   12 years ago

      No this is where you are wrong. The progs will NOT EVER concede that they were wrong. I will bet that before Thanksgiving the story line will change to "this isn't working because of those mean old Republicans" coupled with "This proves that we need a single payer system, not one where we use those greedy insurance companies."

  28. buybuydandavis   12 years ago

    " but these protections...are designed to help consumers "

    The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. -- Ronald Reagan

  29. Rufus J. Firefly   12 years ago

    Damn scandalous liars.

  30. Gilbert Martin   12 years ago

    All the administration's mouthpieces and MSM lackeys sound like used car salesmen being confronted with the fact that they sold a lemon and are trying to spin their way out of it.

  31. burserker   12 years ago

    Joe Wilson was right

  32. Zoobs   12 years ago

    Charlie Rangel was interviewed and asked why he and other members of Congress and staff should get subsidized healthcare premiums to the tune of 70%. He responded that it was part of his total compensation so why would he not be allowed. Incomprehensible. They don't understand that companies don't reimburse their employees who opt out of insurance coverage when their spouse's employer has a better plan. Where's the reimbursement in that scenario? Isn't the healthcare part of my "total compensation". They don't live in the real world.

  33. XM   12 years ago

    Michael Hiltzik of the LAT also says don't believe the cancellation hype, because people like Diane made uninformed decision, she deserves to have her plan upgraded.

    http://www.latimes.com/busines.....z2jExSpsnm

    What happens if a minority of people buy insurance without inquiring about coverage? Why, you make everyone else abandon plans they like for a more expensive plan

  34. carminakaka   12 years ago

    my friend's aunt makes $73/hr on the computer. She has been without a job for 10 months but last month her pay was $14848 just working on the computer for a few hours. view it
    =========================

    http://www.works23.com
    =========================

  35. mckeeg1   12 years ago

    The "affordable goatfuck act".

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

A Federal Judge Says New Mexico Cops Reasonably Killed an Innocent Man at the Wrong House

Jacob Sullum | 5.21.2025 6:00 PM

Supreme Court Orders Maine Legislator Censured for Social Media Post Must Get Voting Rights Back

Emma Camp | 5.21.2025 4:30 PM

The GOP Tax Bill Will Add $2.3 Trillion to the Deficit, CBO Says

Eric Boehm | 5.21.2025 4:10 PM

A Judge Blocked Apple From Collecting These Commissions

Jack Nicastro | 5.21.2025 3:52 PM

The FTC's Probe Into 'Potentially Illegal' Content Moderation Is a Blatant Assault on the First Amendment

Jacob Sullum | 5.21.2025 3:15 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!