A frustrating element of healthcare debates is in the manner in which many in the media treat big insurance companies as objective sources.
The issue is again relevant in light of the Trump administration’s announcement on Tuesday that it will expand short-term health plans. The administration believes that by paring down the coverage an insurance plan must provide, more lower cost plans will be available. As the government explained, “In the fourth quarter of 2016, a short-term, limited-duration policy cost approximately $124 a month compared to $393 for an unsubsidized [Obamacare]-compliant plan.”
That’s an objective statement rendered by statistical fact.
But consider how the media pushed back against the administration’s proposal.
Enter Larry Levitt, a vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation and favored expert for the media. While the KFF is separate from insurance provider, Kaiser Health, its ideological bias towards pro-Obamacare policies is remarkably proximate to Kaiser Health’s position.
More importantly, as OpenSecrets records, Levitt is a Democratic donor, particularly a donor to former President Barack Obama.
Introducing Levitt’s position, however, most of the media fail to mention this fact. NPR describes how “Larry Levitt worries an exodus from the ACA market will hurt the people who need insurance the most: ‘Short-term insurance plans will cherry pick healthy people, leaving ACA-compliant plans to cover a sicker pool with higher premiums,’ he said on Twitter.”
Levitt’s language echoes that of the major health insurance lobbying groups which have also come out against Trump’s proposal. America’s Health Insurance Plans, for example, stated on Tuesday that it is “concerned that expanded use of short-term policies could further fragment the individual market, which would lead to higher premiums for many consumers, particularly those with preexisting conditions.”
The New York Times, Business Insider, and the Huffington Post also referenced Levitt on Tuesday, and also forgot to note his political persuasion.
Yet it would be unfair to single out Levitt.
After all, in another feat of undisclosed bias, Vox, Politico, and the Huffington Post also referenced Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms. That would be fine, but only if the media outlets referenced the fact that the center is, by its own admission, funded by an array of pro-Obamacare outlets like AARP and big insurers like Blue Cross-Blue Shield. These financiers deserved a mention.
Unfortunately, this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to extracting bias from healthcare coverage.
That said, it’s not all bad: Reuters gave a testament to honest journalism.
