WND Lies About Tennessee Couple’s Divorce

The Worldnetdaily every day puts up stories that are really just links to other news sites, where they put in the first few paragraphs then link to the original, but they often do this while changing the headline to spin it the way they want. This “article” is a perfect example. Headline: “Obamacare forces couple to split to keep insurance.” Now let’s look at what the original article actually says:

Six months into the full implementation of the Affordable Care Act, the Drains are among 162,000 Tennesseans who got caught in a coverage gap. Their household income is too little to qualify for a government subsidy to buy health insurance, and they live in a state not expanding Medicaid…

She cannot do without insurance. So she has either lived with her mother in Alcoa or stayed in a homeless shelter in Knoxville since the separation to avoid hitting the household income limit.

Meanwhile, Larry Drain lives alone in the small apartment in Maryville they once shared, making do without insurance and hoping the hernia he can’t afford surgery for won’t cause a bowel obstruction.

They got caught in the health-care cracks created by the U.S. government and the state of Tennessee. Had the federal government’s income guidelines been different, she would not have lost her SSI or they might have qualified for subsidies to help them buy insurance on healthcare.gov. Had Tennessee expanded its Medicaid program, they both would have been eligible for coverage.

Every day, Larry Drain writes a letter to Gov. Bill Haslam asking him to expand Medicaid and posts it on a blog…

Behind the scenes, officials within the Haslam administration have been talking with federal officials about how Tennessee might qualify for Affordable Care Act federal funds to cover poor, uninsured people. But the governor ruled out expanding Medicaid in March 2013 and said he favored a plan to leverage federal funds to, instead, help the poor buy private health insurance…

The Affordable Care Act allows the federal government to pick up the full cost of insuring new people who qualify for Medicaid under the expanded guidelines through 2016. It will then phase down to a permanent 90 percent matching rate in 2020.

But members of Tennessee’s Republican-controlled legislature are wary of the federal promises and worry that Tennessee can’t afford the 10 percent match the state would have to start providing.

So it wasn’t the Affordable Care Act that caused this problem, it was the Republicans in the state legislature and the governor who refuse to implement the ACA provision that would have provided free health insurance to this couple and avoid all of this. But the Worldnetdaily put their own dishonest headline on a story that said the exact opposite of what they pretend it says.

"You say pajamas, I say pyjamas. Let's call the whole thing off."

Sessions: I’ll Quit if Rosenstein is ..."
"Zombie is a backwards term. Nowadays we use metabolically challenged."

Sessions: I’ll Quit if Rosenstein is ..."
"Sometimes one wonders if some of these leaks are occasionally deliberate and strategic.In Washington, leaks ..."

Sessions: I’ll Quit if Rosenstein is ..."
"Why not both? ;-)(That's what Trump said.)"

Giuliani Joins Trump Legal Team, Immediately ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • dugglebogey

    There are also hospitals in Tennessee that are being sold or closing because without the medicare expansion they cannot make as much money here as they can by building or expanding hospitals in other states that have taken the medicare expansion.

    Thanks Tennessee!

  • raven

    According to a new report from the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association, hospitals in the state are saving money by providing less uncompensated care.

    Uncompensated care is driven by low-income and uninsured people who can’t pay their hospital bills.


    However, a starkly different story is unfolding in the areas of the country that have rejected Obamacare’s optional Medicaid expansion. Millions of low-income people are being locked out of health reform because their lawmakers continue to resist accepting federal funds to expand the Medicaid rolls. Rural hospitals in states like Tennessee, Georgia, Virginia, and North Carolina have been forced to close because they can’t afford to remain operating without the Medicaid reimbursements from the low-income people who would have been eligible for the expansion.

    The ACA is supposed to save the feds and states money. Which it is doing.

    One of the groups getting hit hard are rural hospitals in Red states. Without Medicaid and private insurance payments, they end up with poor patients who can’t pay their bills and people who just avoid medical care because they can’t afford it. This isn’t because of the ACA. It is because of the lack of the ACA due to willful obstruction by the GOP.

    Hospitals have high fixed costs. They need the cash flow or they go under.

  • culuriel

    In other words, in Red states, any life endangerment to poor people is okay because helping them might inconvenience the wealthy.

  • gshelley

    I can’t tell from the article, what would have happened without the ACA?

    If it hadn’t passed, would they somehow have been covered? Otherwise I can’t see any logical reason to blame Obama or the ACA, only to say they want it improved and expanded

  • D. C. Sessions

    I suppose in a way it’s good to know that there really are eternal verities. Like right-wing malice and WND dishonesty.

  • Tennessee is its own reward.

  • grumpyoldfart

    WND readers will believe every word in the headline.

    Only a few will read the full story.

    Mission accomplished as far as the WND editors are concerned,

  • howardhershey

    And you can bet that the Republican legislators that represent areas where the local hospital closes will blame it on Obamacare rather than on the refusal to expand Medicaid.

  • Obama at fault for uninsured people falling between cracks of one program Republicans refused to expand and another program Repubicans ran a presidential election on repealing

  • eric

    I can’t tell from the article, what would have happened without the ACA?

    If it hadn’t passed, would they somehow have been covered?

    She could still get COBRA coverage (basically, her ex’s employer must allow her to remain on their policy for a year after the divorce, but at the full price). However, it has the same problem as ACA, which is that for most people it is too expensive without some form of assistance.