NYT Discovers Truths Of Obamacare 4 Years After Heritage Foundation Warnings

Remember Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s famous words about having to pass the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to find out what’s in it?  Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation already knew what was in the bill before Congress passed it.  He obtained a draft copy in January 2010 and read through the entire health tome.

The Heritage Foundation began warning Americans then about what the bill would really do.  The two major things that Rector gleaned from combing through the voluminous bill was:

“1) Obamacare would encourage divorce while discouraging marriage; 2) Individuals and couples earning what most would consider to be nice but certainly not opulent incomes — especially those aged 50 and above — would pay disproportionately high premiums, while those making just a few thousand dollars less per year would, after subsidies, pay far less.”

For nearly four years the warnings of organizations like the Heritage Foundation and others have fallen on deaf ears among the mainstream media outlets.  Heaven forbid, they weren’t about to say anything about Obama’s flagship legislation. To do so would be tantamount to de-deify the savior in the White House that they so worship.

Now that Obamacare is being implemented and millions of Americans are beginning to experience firsthand the impacts of what Rector and Heritage Foundation had tried to warn them about, some of the mainstream media can no longer ignore the facts.  It took four years, but the New York Times has finally had to admit the truth about Obamacare sticker shock.

In a recent NYT article, they stated:

“The cost of premiums for people who just miss qualifying for subsidies varies widely across the country and rises rapidly for people in their 50s and 60s.”

The NYT article highlights the Chapman family of four that lives in New Hampshire.  The family income is about $100,000 and the cheapest policy they could find through the federal exchange in New Hampshire cost $1,000 per month.  $12,000 a year is 12% of their total gross income.  Had the family income been below $94,200 a year, they would have qualified for a federal subsidy, which would have cut the cost of their exchange policy by half.  They quoted Mrs. Chapman as saying:

“We are just right over that line.  That’s an insane amount of money,” she said of their new premium. “How are you supposed to pay that?”

The four year delay in admitting the truth about Obamacare is like a family who gets a baby elephant and keeps it in the livingroom.  In the beginning, they can do their best ignore it and try to work around it.  Four years later, the elephant has grown so big that it can no longer be overlooked.  The NYT has finally admitted that the elephant is a problem, but they still aren’t sure what to do with it.

I wonder if it will take another four years for them to realize the only solution is to get rid of the elephant, otherwise known as Obamacare before the floor gives way and the whole house collapses around it.