Obamacare's Biggest Failure So Far: Just 18% Of Uninsured Have Expressed An Interest In Enrolling

Tyler Durden's picture

When one steps back from all the frustration, all the confusion,  all the failures both in the rollout and the mass behavioral experimentation, and the fact that the math just doesn't work, the primary stated purpose behind Obamacare was simple: to provide uniform, affordable (the A in ACA) healthcare for all Americans. But especially to those who are currently uninsured. At least such was the utopian, egalitarian vision behind its conception. Which is also why, stripping away the political posturing, the html coding errors, the funding issues, the biggest failing of Obamacare would be if it opened, and none of America's uninsured came. Sadly, this last nail in Obamacare's coffin, has just been confirmed with a just released Gallup poll which found that a tiny 18% of uninsured Americans - the primary target population for the exchanges - have so far attempted to even visit an exchange website.

Additionally, Gallup previously found that less than half of uninsured Americans (44%) who plan to get insurance say they will do so through an exchange, and about one in four say they are more likely to pay a fine instead of getting insurance. "These findings help explain the low percentage of the uninsured who have attempted to access the exchange websites."

Actually, Gallup's last sentence is not factually correct: a satisfactory number Americans have visited the exchange websites, whether due to morbid curiosity or for another reason. It is how few of them have gone through the hassle of signing up (such as just one person in the case of North Carolina) that is the most disturbing, and puts the outright failure of Obamacare's primary goal in question.

Gallup adds:

Still, the fact that less than a quarter of uninsured Americans who say they plan to get insurance through an exchange have visited one so far suggests that other factors are at work. It may be that many uninsured Americans are waiting to try out the health exchange websites until their highly publicized problems are fixed, or they may simply be putting off decisions about getting insurance until later.

Elsewhere, CBS reports that while the survey doesn't say why uninsured Americans aren't visiting the marketplaces, the ongoing technical problems on HealthCare.gov and some state-based sites have likely been a factor. The Obama administration has said that HealthCare.gov should be running smoothly for the "vast majority" of Americans by the end of November. It won't be. And even when fixed it is unlikely that ultimately enrollment numbers, especially among young people, will surge to the threshold level that would be considered sustainable for this ponzi scheme to survive.

Once the site is fixed, the administration is planning a more aggressive media campaign to encourage more people to sign up for plans on the marketplaces. Administration officials also say they expect many people to put off enrollment until the last minute.

The administration has yet to release figures on just how many people have enrolled in insurance on the new marketplaces so far. However, the incremental reports that have been released so far aren't encouraging. Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, on Friday released enrollment data from the four insurance companies in the Washington, D.C. marketplace showing that just five people in the District have enrolled so far.


"With numbers like these, it's no wonder the Obama Administration hasn't wanted to release how many people have signed up for ObamaCare," Hatch said in a statement. "Whether it's significant problems with the website, people being forced off the coverage they had or skyrocketing costs, these numbers are even more proof of what a disaster ObamaCare is and why it should be delayed."


The senators said the new mandate requiring people to obtain insurance starting in 2014 should be delayed as Obamacare problems are addressed. At least one Democrat agrees -- Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., on Thursday joined Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., to introduce a bill that would delay the mandate until 2015.


The administration has said that people have plenty of time -- another five months -- to sign up. However, the administration is working with state insurance commissioners, CBS News chief White House correspondent Major Garrett reports, to try to help at least some people who have been dropped from insurance plans that don't meet new Obamacare coverage standards. The administration is attempting to tweak regulations, Garrett reports, to help people who were dropped from their plans but now only qualify for plans they can't afford.


At an event in Atlanta Friday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius reportedly said on the issue, "We're looking at a number of options where there may be an opportunity for that number of people to look at plans that they have right now. But there isn't any specific proposal at the table immediately."

A fully functional rollout of healthcare.gov by the November 30 deadline will not happen, that much is clear. But what is most ironic about the whole situation is that it was the delay of Obamacare that was the primary impetus behind the Tea Party's shutdown of the government. Paradoxically, if Obama had yielded or even negotiated, the ongoing rollout debacle would not exist, as much more time would have been implemented to fix all the glitches, while letting the conservatives foot the blame. Instead, with every passing day that Obamacare is nothing but a (not so fat) pipe dream, the president's rating keeps dropping.

But worse than Obama's approval (and disapproval) rating, will be what will happen if, in the 11th hour as usual, all of the young, uninsured potential Obamacare users simply do not show up.

That would indeed be the ultimate fiasco from which no matter how many sophomorically-written, teleprompted daily speeches of lilting grandure Obama gives, there would simply be no walking away from.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LetThemEatRand's picture

I beg to differ.  The biggest failure so far is expansion of NSA, followed by indiscriminate droning, expansion of DHS, the police state, the debt ceiling raising, continuation of the war on Eurasia, etc.  Obamacare is a dismal failure but it pales.

knukles's picture

You forgot the Federal Reserve, printer of faux money extraordinaire, funder of all things unfundable, maker of all bubbles, enabler of all evil.

johnQpublic's picture

we are going to bring affordable healthcare to millions of people who never had or wanted healthcare before

yes we can

yes we can

Richard Chesler's picture

about one in four say they are more likely to pay a fine instead of getting insurance.

so, 25% have any common sense. Got it.

goldenbuddha454's picture

That 1 in 4 person is the college student who, at POTUS' recommendation, went to college, graduated and then had to sit in the unemployment line because there were no shovel-ready jobs and no hope and the change was for the worse!

Xibalba's picture

So, only those in the workforce want to sign up then?

macholatte's picture

I beg to differ.  The biggest failure so far is expansion of NSA, followed by indiscriminate droning, expansion of DHS, the police state, the debt ceiling raising, continuation of the war on Eurasia, etc.  Obamacare is a dismal failure but it pales.


I beg to differ.... the list you recite are extreme successes of the totalitarian/police/fascist state. You're looking through the wrong pair of glasses.

Obamacare is a failure. The website mess is shining light onto the scam and the sheeple are awakening. The media, probably not.


LetThemEatRand's picture

The epic Obamacare failure as manifested by the website failure itself is by design as explained by an author here a day or two ago.  The rest of it is under the radar of most of the Red Team and will be continued by the next regime who will be voted in in part due to the Obamacare failure.   

g'kar's picture

Don't underestimate the power of the FSA grasshopper, which is why the blue team created more of them.

LetThemEatRand's picture

I don't underestimate it at all.  And don't mistake my point about the Red Team as an indication that the Blue Team is any better.  They work for the same owners.

James-Morrison's picture

While all of this is true, the reason these symptoms don't jell with the people is because they don't hit us where it counts.

Obamacare does the following:
1. Smacks us in our wallets
2. Exposes America's kleptocracy
3. Removes all doubt about the corrupt "two-headed" political system.

Will the Citizens/Sheeple respond?

Stay tuned until 2014, 2015 when everyone(individuals and businesses) are exposed to this heinous law?

"if you like your insurance, you can keep it".

Are we really that dumb?

nmewn's picture

Why is it that the "Red Team" opposed this...in your opinion?

I'll tell you my TP opposition...its fundamentally unfair to craft a law, which forces someone to buy anything, from anyone, when they don't want it or need it.

The "Blue Team" thinks the exact opposite for some reason.

They're going to shit their fucking pants when (after becoming dictator) I force them to buy 32oz Big Gulps & AR15's.

LetThemEatRand's picture

The Red Team thinks the health care system isn't broken until they get in it (unless they are extremely wealthy in which case it's great).  And they have Fox and Rush to remind them daily that Obamacare is "socialist" (it is fascist, not socialist).  Obamacare was sold to the Blue Team as a solution (those w/o insurance already know the system is broken), and the Blue Team is too idiotic to know that the solution was written by the insurance companies that broke the system.

nmewn's picture

I'm not wealthy, by any stretch. I went through "the system"...twice, it didn't seem broke to me.

I will agree the Blue Team is idiotic and the system they're trying to graft onto it now is fascist.

LetThemEatRand's picture

Did you have cancer or some other disease that required major care?  Up until a couple of years ago, there was a one million dollar cap on many policies.  People with seemingly good insurance went broke treating major disease.  A stay in the hospital for a few weeks plus care would eat up the entire policy, which is absurd.   I'm curious -- when you say you were in the system, what for?

nmewn's picture

One was rather personal but a common malady, the other was L1-L2.

I've got a sister-in-law that went through chemo (bone) she didn't go broke and neither did the insurance company or the company she works for.

My L1-L2 was the result of a lifetime of work and an accident...but it was a really cool accident ;-)

LetThemEatRand's picture

Was your lumbar spine accident work related and did you collect workers' comp (a socialist evil)?

If your sister didn't break the million dollar limit, she's okay now because those limits no longer apply.  Otherwise, she would have used up a lot of her allotment.   One of the true evils of health insurance until a couple of years ago was that if you were young and had something like cancer, you would burn through most of your limits early in life and then be fucked later.  Not a problem now.

Are you suggesting that because of your personal experience, that everyone else who blew the million dollar cap is a taker and that the system is not broken because it worked for you? 

nmewn's picture

"Was your lumbar spine accident work related and did you collect workers' comp (a socialist evil)?"

It was just as I said. A lifetime of work (and time/age) and me never slowing down resulted in...me having to have it fixed. Socialism does not come into play or workers comp. Insurance is not socialism and I've never collected a dime (or filed) for workers comp in my life, file it away for your future reference.

My sister-in-laws cancer was over a "couple years ago". But thanks for asking how she is now, anyways.

"Are you suggesting that because of your personal experience, that everyone else who blew the million dollar cap is a taker?"

No, I'm suggesting that you're veering wildly off topic (as usual) to get away from answering why someone should be forced...by law...to buy something they don't want or need. Both my sister-in-law and myself voluntarily bought policies that we wanted or felt we needed at the time.

.gov had nothing to do with it nor should it.

LetThemEatRand's picture

If your sister (in law) had blown the million dollar cap and been left penniless, how would you feel?  Or doesn't that matter to you because it didn't affect you personally?  And are you glad to know that your sister (in law) no longer needs to worry about a relapse eating up her savings?  

I'm not wildly off topic.  You are suggesting that the health insurance system was not broken because it worked for you.  You are angry at Obamacare for the wrong reasons, in my view.  The wrong reasons being that you were not personally affected by the severe limitations of the prior system.   Answer my questions above, honestly.  And also answer my question in the earlier post -- do you consider the people who blew the limit when it applied takers?  And what if your sister (in law) had not recovered as quickly as she did?  Would that affect your view of the prior system or does it not matter because things worked out by chance?

nmewn's picture

lol...my sister-in-law is a helluva lot smarter than you, so I don't worry about her (like your faux concern for her or me) and in any event, she would not have been left destitute...don't think I don't know what you're trying to do.

The family unit is social, government is not and will never be, by its very nature. It relies on force and coercion, the family does not.

I oppose ObamaCare for the reasons I have already stated, which is a universe of honesty and compassion apart from where you are.

LetThemEatRand's picture

So you won't answer my questions other than to say that your sister (in law) would be fine because she and/or other immediate family have lots of money even if her insurance limits had been exceeded.  That says it all to me, newman.  Glad it worked for you and glad to see you admit that your view of the world is newman-centric and that your answer to everyone is "have lots of money and it will be okay."  That's an honest answer and at least we can have an honest debate with that said.  If I'm getting it wrong, simply answer my questions above.

Edit:  crickets, 60 minutes in.

nmewn's picture

The Grand Socialist Inquisitor starts off with a "simple question out of curiosity"...then poses ten more questions (I did however, lose track of your false accusations, slander, hypotheticals & innuendo)...and then complain when I retire for the evening...lol...excellent.

This is rather like trying to sign up for ObamaCare isn't it?

The truth is, my sister-in-law didn't blow through her caps because of the doctors professionalism, the effectivesness of the treatment, some Divine intervention, her general attitude about it and the family support towards fighting it with her. 

Jerome Lester Horwitz's picture

How would you feel? Feelings have nothing to do with any of this. I will tell you what I think...if you are worried about not having enough insurance to cover any and all possible maladies that may befall you it is your responsibility to address that worry. You are spending money on internet access that could go towards paying for better insurance, you also paid or are paying for a computer or some other device to post here. You have a problem prioritizing your finances. What else are you foolishly spending on? If you are worried about the amount of insurance you can afford then it is up to you to adjust your budget to put aside more money for that which you think is necessary by cutting spending elsewhere, earning more or both. Personal anecdotes aside it is up to you provide for yourself. You have no legal or moral claim to the fruits of other's labor to cover your wants, needs, desires or fears.

LetThemEatRand's picture

I've had great insurance for the last 20+ years, never had to use it, and have no worries for myself or my family.  Funny how that didn't occur to you.  Unlike you, I see beyond myself.  And like most of your ilk, I'll bet you are living off of someone and merely repeating what you were programmed to say by the person (parent?) whose money you are spending.  Tell me I'm wrong.

MontgomeryScott's picture

I'll tell you right now that you're wrong.

You stupid person! You have paid in to a ponzi voluntarily for the past 20 years and state that 'I never had to use it'.

You actually LISTENED to the soft-porn leg-breakers that TOLD you that you HAD to 'BUY' insurance, because, well, something MIGHT happen to you!

The GUIDOS who TOLD you this bullshit went on to lobby CONgress to 'soften' the rules, and proceeded to blow up the economy of the ENTIRE MOTHERFUCKING WORLD, using the cash that YOU gave them! The whole 'banks cannot be investment firms' thingie, don't you REMEMBER this shit?

YOU helped to FUND these FUCKS, you stupid, complicit MORON!

Yeah, you saw 'beyond yourself', and BOUGHT this BULLSHIT!

How does it feel, paying year after year for a 'product' that you couldn't or wouldn't use or need, paying for it for the PAST 20 YEARS, and finding out that this money went to cause the IMPLOSION OF THE ENTIRE WORLD'S ECONOMY in favor of the SAME crooked motherfuckers that told you to GIVE THEM THE MONEY OR ELSE in the FIRST PLACE, you stupid misled sheople fuckster?

I've also had GREAT insurance, my whole life. Mostly, it was due to the fact that I don't give some asshole fuck my money to guarantee that I won't get sick or die. So far, it has worked out rather well, you monetary gnat-shit. I wager that, when the 'health insurance' you have FINALLY gets overriden, you WILL sign up (albeit reluctantly) to the 'single-payer' plan that was the WHOLE IDEA, as you wait stupidly for your SS payments to kick in, you ponzi-scheming fuck! did the WHITE-SHOE BOIZ put you up to posting here, you 'I am superior because I make more than you' MAGGOT?


Well, I've said my piece, and am at peace now.

As for 'Randy', well, he's still chasing the proletariat dream of 'socialized medicine', by BRAGGING about how much these FUCKS have STOLEN from him.

WAIT FOR IT. Here it comes, RandyEater:



YUP. You're WRONG!



LetThemEatRand's picture

It all makes sense now.  I just didn't listen to Glen Beck enough.  Fuck, it does hurt to think for oneself.  Thanks.   

EDIT:  also crickets on the guy who spends dad's money and thinks I must be a freeloader because I mention that the private insurance system is a scam.

2bit Hoarder's picture

everybody else is signing up for medicaid.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Yes, that Affordability part is a real fish, ain't it?  Young'uns to be in debt and subsidizing seniors, yes, that will end well.



ElvisDog's picture

The fundamental flaw in the way Obamacare was implemented was that it required an action on the part of the people. They had to sign up for it. A properly implemented, statist, ACA would have automatically signed up everyone over the age of 18 into Obamacare, and then if you wanted out (if you had other insurance for instance) you had to obtain a waiver. 

Seriously, Obama/Reid/Pelosi, the next time you want to implement an evil scheme send some of that $600 million my way as a consultant.

DCFusor's picture

I'm one, I might even "get religion" as I understand there's an out for a few of them that don't like doctors.  I can't afford the plan, heck, I rarely spend that much in a decade on docs, much less in a year.

It's the oldest trick in propaganda - change the meaning of the words, then use them the old way.  In this case, it was conflating insurance with access to health care.  No, that's not how it works - I've never simulateously had insurance and a need for it, always paid out of pocket.  You can even bargain sometimes, I usually do.  Docs seem not to mind - they get paid on time and probably more than the insurance cuts them back to.  Big monolithic for-profit hospitals are a problem, however.  Those I wave a lawyer in front of, and they usually back way the heck down.

DoChenRollingBearing's picture

A year or two ago I ran the idea of paying cash w/ my doctor.  He wasn't the least bit interested, tied to a hospital.  Time for a new Dr?

OneEyedJack's picture

I’ve decided to forgo health ins and just pay the fine. I asked my Dr how much if I self pay to see her, $125.00 . Then she sent me for a X-Ray . When I called for a appointment I asked how much? The young lady asked if I had insurance so I told her yes. She then stated “we will bill your ins company and if there is a balance we will contact you”. I said OK but how much?? She stated self pay was $40.00.

This is all the health care I used this year after 5000.00 in premiums paid.

So….. if I cancel the ins, pocket the money saved into a HSA (my  control not .govs) I’ll be way ahead.

Stay well


nmewn's picture

Probably the thing to do, forgo it.

And definitely don't enter any information into this .gov website thingy:

"Tony Trenkle, the Obamacare official in charge of HealthCare.gov security efforts announced his resignation Wednesday, effective next week.

CBS News has learned that Trenkle, the Chief Information Officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), was originally supposed to sign off on security for the glitch-ridden website before its Oct. 1 launch, but didn't. Instead, the authorization on September 27 was given by Trenkle's boss, CMS administrator Marilyn Tavenner.


As CBS News reported Monday, security assessments fell behind and the website never had the required top-to-bottom tests.


Trenkle and two other CMS officials, including Chief Operating Officer Michelle Snyder, signed an unusual "risk acknowledgement" saying that the agency's mitigation plan for rigorous monitoring and ongoing tests did "not reduce the (security) risk to the ... system itself going into operation on October 1, 2013."


Cuz, ya know, no one in DC could ever be accused of being incompetent, inept, lying, cronyism or thieves or anything like that ;-)

SimMaker's picture

It gets better.



US In Shock After All Obamacare Signup Info Goes To Russian Hacker

Winston Churchill's picture

If time permits, I always shop around and pay cash.Normally about 60% of the

quoted price.I blew thru' my $2.5m lifetime limit in one long stay in hospital caused

by a contaminated heart stent.

The surgeon (fla) was untouchable for recompense.

The whole old system was a govt. fuckup, now  being replaced with a much bigger govt.fuckup.

The final nail in the coffin of what was left of  the US economy.


kaiserhoff's picture

If only the Amish women were a little more attractive...

Didn't Woody Allen say that about the gypsies?  Naw, must have been sumpin else.

LFMayor's picture

He said that about his underage stepdaughters.

Things that go bump's picture

That can't be right - he found them highly attractive.

Clark Bent's picture

So much for relying upon Obama's base to save him, i.e. the low information voters. They can rouse themselves to show up for an hour on election day as long as they are provided rides and given cigarrettes, etc. but getting online and navigating what has been described as an impossibly hard sign up process is apparently beyond their attention spans. Next step will be the government hiring mor ACORN and SEIU soldiers to simply start inputting data and signing people up right from their tax returns. Obama will rid this monstrosity to total ruin as it is essential in his psychopathological commitment to being a man of destiny.  

johnQpublic's picture

to help people who were dropped from their plans but now only qualify for plans they can't afford


affordable care act


more people are losing insurance than are getting insurance

this is rich

and for what they spent on the website, they coulda just bought everyone coverage who wanted it, and actually provided free care

Clark Bent's picture

But the Medean harpy Sebelius tells us that they are "better" plans than were had before. Actually they are just more coverage, most of it unuseable to each particular user. Always amusing to see how galactically stupid socialist ideas are in practice; always sobering to realize they will simply impose them by force once the open mockery begins. These idiots understand nothing about economics, history, human nature, or reality generally, but one thing they comprehend perfectly is violence.  

HardlyZero's picture

One applicant at a time.  First-in, First-out.  Wait in line.  Should have 1Million signed up and paying by 2020.

Apostate2's picture

They are all woven into the same piece of cloth--the death of privacy

kchrisc's picture

Sorry, not Obama "sorry," but you forgot criminal violations of the "Law of the Land" and treasonous acts.


"Can I hold the basket under the guillotine? Please?!"



VD's picture

this motherfucker can hardly give away his stillborn ill-conceived "insurance". Roberts gave him the rope to hang himself with...

MontgomeryScott's picture


I didn't vote you up or down.

It was actually NIKITA KRUSCHEV who gave him the rope. He is playing the part of the 'hangman', and ROBERTS is a complicit motherfucker (I.E. a 'useful idiot') in the murder of this nation.

It helps if you look at the larger picture, V.D., and try to grasp the political machinations of the economic issues.

They want us ALL to be DEAD.

Their master has commanded them thusly.

StychoKiller's picture

Aww, give some "credit" to Sallie Mae and over $1Trillion in student loans too! :>(