• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Let's talk about that uninsured number

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Historically, census figures are significantly higher than the "uninsured" count in other government surveys, such as the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).3 The inaccuracy of the census count of the uninsured may be due, in part, to its undercount of Medicaid enrollments. In 2003, 53 million persons were enrolled in Medicaid but the census reported only 35.6 million enrollees. Medicaid enrollments have expanded dramatically in recent years but the census figures have failed to reflect this increase.

921398BFEC342A80678EBB7EAFCC536E.gif


http://www.heritage.org/Research/Re...-and-Economic-Inequality-in-the-United-States

In 2003 I see a difference of roughly 20,000 thousand. That looks like 20,000,000 to me, unless my math is wrong.
 
Ok? Have people been using Census Medicaid stats for things?
 
They have when they get their number about 45,000,000 people uninsured or whatever they're using these days.
 
They have when they get their number about 45,000,000 people uninsured or whatever they're using these days.

Poked around some of the stats and yeah, they do often cite the Census. You'd think people whose sole job it was to count things would be better at it!
 
Back
Top Bottom