Conservative group spends $2.5 million in new ad campaign
Updated at 12:24 p.m. ET, 1/2/2014
(CNN) - A conservative group is kicking off the midterm election year with a multimillion-dollar ad campaign that targets three Democratic Senators facing tough re-election battles in November.
Americans for Prosperity, which spent $16 million on television ads in the fall, will unleash another round of commercials that hammer the trio of lawmakers for supporting Obamacare.
[twitter-follow screen_name='politicalticker'] [twitter-follow screen_name='KilloughCNN']
The ads zero in on Sens. Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, according to a statement released Thursday.
AFP said the commercials will run in major media markets for the next three weeks, and a spokesman said the ads will cost more than $2.5 million.
The 30-second spots focus on what's been dubbed by PolitiFact as the "Lie of the Year": President Barack Obama's broken pledge that people who liked their health insurance plans could keep them under the Affordable Care Act.
Republicans, and some Democrats, criticized the Obama administration after millions began getting policy cancellation notices last fall. Landrieu and Hagan were among those who wanted to find a legislative fix for the problem.
The ads go after the Senators for repeating the President's promise as they tried to sell Obamacare to the public before and after the law passed in 2010 with only Democratic support.
"Tell Senator Shaheen, it's time to be honest," a narrator says in one clip. "Obamacare doesn't work. New Hampshire families deserve better."
Landrieu's campaign said the ad against her takes her comments out of context and "grossly" misleads.
"The fact is Sen. Landrieu has always supported measures to fix and improve the Affordable Care Act," campaign manager Adam Sullivan said in a statement. "She introduced legislation to keep the president's promise, publically pressured the administration until a fix was made and is continuing her work on behalf of Louisianians to fix and improve the law."
The ad buy follows a $600,000 ad campaign in late December that targeted House Democrats over the same issue.
The Obama administration plans to combat negative ads with positive ones that feature stories about those who are benefiting from the new health care law.
Its allies will also join the effort. Organizing for Action, the advocacy group that originated from the President's reelection campaign, released a new web video Wednesday touting some success stories.
- CNN's Dan Merica and Martina Stewart contributed to this report.
From CNN Politics
- Pressure builds on Biden to act on guns in wake of Colorado mass shooting March 23, 2021 01:03 pm
- Sidney Powell argues in new court filing that no reasonable people would believe her election fraud claims March 23, 2021 12:15 pm
- Postmaster General set to announce 10-year plan including longer mail delivery times and cuts to post office hours March 23, 2021 12:02 pm
- Progressive group launches $3.2 million advertising buy to push federal voting law March 23, 2021 11:01 am
- US and allies announce sanctions against Chinese officials for 'serious human rights abuses' against Uyghurs March 23, 2021 10:32 am
- Analysis: Trump's army takes aim at 2022 touting his election lies March 23, 2021 05:01 am
Fair is Fair wrote:
Ahhhh. the demonization of the very few who fall into that category. So tell us all, Rudy... how many individuals fall into that category and then compare it to the overall sum? Let me save you the trouble. The amount is TRIVIAL. Don't let facts get in your way. Why not talk about all of the far larger number who would be displaced under a single-payer system? What about them? And I dare say those would be a far larger populace.
-------------------------------
I only scratched the surface. The pattern works its' way up and down the entire ladder. The percentage amount of money that health insurers have paid themselves out of the premiums that they collect is NOT TRIVIAL. Some companies have run at 40%, or higher, profit margins on an annual basis for decades. It has been so bad that the ACA puts a cap off 20% on the insurers.
geggyg
@ Fair is Fair
Can you say where you got that figure of 16% According to the OECD health care in the Netherlands in 2012 was 11.1%, and according the CIA Fact Book in 2011 it was 12%. Per capita costs in 2011 for the Netherlands was $4737, for the US per capita cost was $8175 and as a percentage of GDP it was 17% . The Dutch have a higher life expectancy than the US , maternal and infant mortality rates are lower for the Dutch , the Dutch also have more doctors , nurses , hospital beds than the US . Yes the Dutch have an advantage in that their landmass is much
That 11.1% is from all levels of govt , individuals , business and not for profits .
How about a comparison with Australia we have a landmass slightly smaller than the lower 48 US States, a population of 23million less than 10% of the US pop, however our population is dispersed not just in a small area , we have extra costs providing access to health to many small and remote communities , yet our health care costs in 2010 was 8.5% compared to the US in 2010 of 17%, and per capita it was $3600, and in the US it was $7923. Australia also outranks the US in those categories I mentioned , we also have better survival rates for many cancers ( people here in Aust go the do a bit more often so many cancers are detected early reducing treatment costs)
--------
Remote areas, you say? So explain, please? WHY is healthcare so much more expensive in densely populated areas in the lower 48 than in the remote areas? Your example is comapring apples to oranges.
geggyg
@ Fair is Fair
Can you say where you got that figure of 16%?
-------------------------------–
I assume that it is at least in the ballpark. The financial sector has grown to a disproportionate percentage of GDP. It has grown from 16% in the mid 1970's to close to 60% at the time of the Wall Street financial meltdown. That 60% figure is really what "too big to fail" actually means... ... and nothing much has changed, except that they've grown even bigger.
A True Conservative
Ah yes – the usual suspects and excuses for Obamacare.....the Republicans were shut out of the negotiations regarding Oamacare – NONE of their ideas were included (remember the school yard taunt "WE won"?). The old "Republicans want to push Granny over the cliff"....that's a good one......progressives, ie liberals, are too full of themselves to admit this is a disaster....either that or they are so dependent on the government....and contriute next to nothing to fund it....that it really isn't a problem for them….
______________
Wow True, 100%! Completely fact free. You must be proud.
"That would include YOU, since on numerous occasions have stated that you're a "medical professional in medical coding / billing".
What medical coding / billing jobs? Most have already been outsourced to India.
Meanwhile, it's great to see so-called Republican values at play: convince the very people who needed the ACA most, that they are better off foregoing health insurance. Really guys? Spending millions of dollars to wreck a duly passed law designed to help people for your political benefit. You are little better than shills for the corporations of America, spewing anti-government lies, radical nonsense and working against the people who elected you.
"And you think that's going to cover $2.72 Trillion? Really? OK, I'll play. Take 50% (HALF) of the defense budget and you get $350 billion."
Hey, Fair... since when did the United States start spending more on Healthcare than on Defense? By your numbers, we spend almost 5 times more!
Change the channel, man... change the channel.
@Rick McDaniel
Dems overall, have destroyed this country, in just 5 yrs. The people are going to realize that, now, as the bills for what they have been allowed to do, start coming in, to every working family in America. (Those who still have a job, in any case.)
==========
Rick , Where were you in 2007 ? Where have you been ? Two War's at what cost , Recession , housing market collapse , market crash .
Why do you hate Obama , he has done ten times a better job than his predecessor.
Rudy NYC
Fair is Fair wrote:
Ahhhh. the demonization of the very few who fall into that category. So tell us all, Rudy... how many individuals fall into that category and then compare it to the overall sum? Let me save you the trouble. The amount is TRIVIAL. Don't let facts get in your way. Why not talk about all of the far larger number who would be displaced under a single-payer system? What about them? And I dare say those would be a far larger populace.
-----------
I only scratched the surface. The pattern works its' way up and down the entire ladder. The percentage amount of money that health insurers have paid themselves out of the premiums that they collect is NOT TRIVIAL. Some companies have run at 40%, or higher, profit margins on an annual basis for decades. It has been so bad that the ACA puts a cap off 20% on the insurers.
--------
Scratched the surface you say?
You've still not addressed the hundreds of thousands of those who would be displaced under a single-payer system. Would you opine on those? What would be the net effect on the economy when you take them out of the equation?
Let's talk about the "shareholders" you mention? First, not all health insurers are stock companies... many are mutual companies whose "owners" are policyholders who benefit from any profits by reflection in their premium rates. Many other are non-profits.
And let's look at this so-called 40% profits you speak of. Care to examplify who these insurers are? You do know that anyone who has holding in these companies via mutual funds and 401(k) holdings benefit from these profits? That's a lot of people you're talking about...
Rudy NYC
Fair is Fair wrote:
Ahhhh. the demonization of the very few who fall into that category. So tell us all, Rudy... how many individuals fall into that category and then compare it to the overall sum? Let me save you the trouble. The amount is TRIVIAL. Don't let facts get in your way. Why not talk about all of the far larger number who would be displaced under a single-payer system? What about them? And I dare say those would be a far larger populace.
-----------
I only scratched the surface. The pattern works its' way up and down the entire ladder. The percentage amount of money that health insurers have paid themselves out of the premiums that they collect is NOT TRIVIAL. Some companies have run at 40%, or higher, profit margins on an annual basis for decades. It has been so bad that the ACA puts a cap off 20% on the insurers.
____________
Fair- for someone who would crucify a welfare mom for the extra $20 she might scam on "food stamps", its funny to hear you defend health insurance companies (many located on retirement states) that rake in hundreds of millions of dollars in unnecessary or flat-out fictitious medical claims. Rudy, is right that is why a 20% profit cap was placed in the ACA. Duh, private companies place profits over patients- the biggest problem in health care today- and the reason costs go up annually. Meanwhile go see how Medicare is funded- payroll taxes. You and Tom are making false claims that this system is funded by the feds- We pay for it already!
The Affordable Care Act certainly was a personal catastrophe. As much as I revile these grassroots lunatics, in this particular instance they have my full support...GO FOR IT!
Ol' Yeller
"And you think that's going to cover $2.72 Trillion? Really? OK, I'll play. Take 50% (HALF) of the defense budget and you get $350 billion."
Hey, Fair... since when did the United States start spending more on Healthcare than on Defense? By your numbers, we spend almost 5 times more!
Change the channel, man... change the channel.
-------–
What the hell are you talking about? The defense budget is around $700 Billion. Healthcare in this country is 16% of GDP, or about $2.72 trillion.
Thomas
@Rick McDaniel
Dems overall, have destroyed this country, in just 5 yrs. The people are going to realize that, now, as the bills for what they have been allowed to do, start coming in, to every working family in America. (Those who still have a job, in any case.)
==========
Rick , Where were you in 2007 ? Where have you been ? Two War's at what cost , Recession , housing market collapse , market crash .
Why do you hate Obama , he has done ten times a better job than his predecessor.
________________
Rick and the boys have no reality- The GOP has no reality. They simply spin their endless tales of woe, completely fact-free. It is all some great game to keep their much-desired plutocracy alive.
@BlackSaint
Any pathological liar can get up and promise insurance for all, while saving each family an average 2500.00, and if you like your policy and your Doctor you can keep your policy and Doctor. Period!
Meantime, Dear Leader will be cooling the earth and stopping the rise of the oceans as he plays golf!
What we have elected is a President who loves to give speeches, lies and promises but is otherwise too incompetent, lazy, inexperienced and dumb to even hold a job in non-government positions.
In real life (where Obama has zero experience), objectives are to be met and promises are to be keep or there is a price to be paid for failure.
Obama is all show and No go and supported by lies and a lapdog press! He should be impeached for all of his lies on Obamacare which are only a few of many lies told to citizens by this fool...
==
Do you walk around the house wearing a masked crusader suit ?
Jack Nicholson as The Joker in 1989's Batman.
"The percentage amount of money that health insurers have paid themselves out of the premiums that they collect is NOT TRIVIAL. "
This is an understatement... the Insurance companies have made a killing off of Americans for some time now. Despite this, most insurance companies have seen the writing on the wall and are trying to get themselves into a position to remain profitable using free market tactics. However, it appears the koch brothers and many of the righties on here do not believe in the free market system nearly as much as they claim. If they spent 1/2 the time and money trying to make this law work as they have trting to destroy it, it would have already been a major success.
Profits before people.
Ought to be the RNC campaign slogan.
@true conservative "Republicans were shut out of the negotiations regarding Oamacare "
-----–
I don't know about Oamacare but ObamaCare was a compromise. Extreme conservatives wanted consumers to be at the mercy of the free market, and extreme progressives want socialized medicine. Obamacare is in between.
Democrats won WWII, gave us Social Security, Civil Rights, Voting Rights, and now Health Care. What have Republicans given us? The Great Depression, Watergate, Iran Contra, 9/11, Iraq. Pretty clear which Party has done the most good for the country.
Fair is Fair wrote:
Scratched the surface you say?
You've still not addressed the hundreds of thousands of those who would be displaced under a single-payer system. Would you opine on those? What would be the net effect on the economy when you take them out of the equation?
Let's talk about the "shareholders" you mention? First, not all health insurers are stock companies... many are mutual companies whose "owners" are policyholders who benefit from any profits by reflection in their premium rates. Many other are non-profits.
And let's look at this so-called 40% profits you speak of. Care to examplify who these insurers are? You do know that anyone who has holding in these companies via mutual funds and 401(k) holdings benefit from these profits? That's a lot of people you're talking about...
----------------------
You haven't defined the "hundreds of thousands of those who would be displaced" under a single payer system. Would you care to opine as to what it is that you're talking about?
If you want to split hairs about public and private shareholders, you take that discussion up with little tom. He likes chasing wild geese.
Thanks to the ACA, there are no more insurance companies running at 40% profit margins, but that used to be typical for the industry. Let me remind you, again, that the ACA caps those margins at 20%. Why do you think that they created caps? Just to be mean to the "hard working people"?
rs
Rudy NYC
Fair is Fair wrote:
Ahhhh. the demonization of the very few who fall into that category. So tell us all, Rudy... how many individuals fall into that category and then compare it to the overall sum? Let me save you the trouble. The amount is TRIVIAL. Don't let facts get in your way. Why not talk about all of the far larger number who would be displaced under a single-payer system? What about them? And I dare say those would be a far larger populace.
---–
I only scratched the surface. The pattern works its' way up and down the entire ladder. The percentage amount of money that health insurers have paid themselves out of the premiums that they collect is NOT TRIVIAL. Some companies have run at 40%, or higher, profit margins on an annual basis for decades. It has been so bad that the ACA puts a cap off 20% on the insurers.
____________
Fair- for someone who would crucify a welfare mom for the extra $20 she might scam on "food stamps", its funny to hear you defend health insurance companies (many located on retirement states) that rake in hundreds of millions of dollars in unnecessary or flat-out fictitious medical claims. Rudy, is right that is why a 20% profit cap was placed in the ACA. Duh, private companies place profits over patients- the biggest problem in health care today- and the reason costs go up annually. Meanwhile go see how Medicare is funded- payroll taxes. You and Tom are making false claims that this system is funded by the feds- We pay for it already!
-------
Insurance companies rake in millions on ficticious medical claims??? Are you serious???? HOW do insurance companies profit on ficticious claims when it is claims that come directly out of their bottom line????? Insurance companies spend a lot of money detecting such fraud. For someone who generally has decent comments, you're completely clueless on this one.
@The Author
The Author used the word "conservative" in place of "republican" by mistake. Because since WHEN has a republican EVER been a conservative!!!
-----------
"I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member." – Groucho Marx
Seriously, go off with this little club of arch conservatives that are TOO conservative for the GOP and even the TeaParty I suppose and watch old 1950's new reels about Joe McCarthy. (before he was censured)
Rudy NYC
Fair is Fair wrote:
Scratched the surface you say?
You've still not addressed the hundreds of thousands of those who would be displaced under a single-payer system. Would you opine on those? What would be the net effect on the economy when you take them out of the equation?
Let's talk about the "shareholders" you mention? First, not all health insurers are stock companies... many are mutual companies whose "owners" are policyholders who benefit from any profits by reflection in their premium rates. Many other are non-profits.
And let's look at this so-called 40% profits you speak of. Care to examplify who these insurers are? You do know that anyone who has holding in these companies via mutual funds and 401(k) holdings benefit from these profits? That's a lot of people you're talking about...
--------
You haven't defined the "hundreds of thousands of those who would be displaced" under a single payer system. Would you care to opine as to what it is that you're talking about?
If you want to split hairs about public and private shareholders, you take that discussion up with little tom. He likes chasing wild geese.
Thanks to the ACA, there are no more insurance companies running at 40% profit margins, but that used to be typical for the industry. Let me remind you, again, that the ACA caps those margins at 20%. Why do you think that they created caps? Just to be mean to the "hard working people"?
---------–
Come on, Rudy... you cannot be serious.
Hundreds of thousands of citizens, the VAST majority who are middle class, who are employees of insurance companies would be displaced under a single-payer system. Many, many more who are in supportive functions would be displaced. What would the ripple effect on the economy be should these people be displaced? I'll tell you – NO different than if the auto industry were allowed to simply disappear. So why support one and not the other? Because one is unionized and the other is not? Please.
Ol' Yeller
"The percentage amount of money that health insurers have paid themselves out of the premiums that they collect is NOT TRIVIAL. "
This is an understatement... the Insurance companies have made a killing off of Americans for some time now. Despite this, most insurance companies have seen the writing on the wall and are trying to get themselves into a position to remain profitable using free market tactics.
--------------------–
Don't you mean "remain obscenely profitable"? A 20% profit margin is still a profit, no matter how you slice it. There are people up and down the entire pay scale getting paid bonuses. From lowest of the sales people, to their managers, to the top of the heap execs.
Insurance companies rake in millions on ficticious medical claims??? Are you serious???? HOW do insurance companies profit on ficticious claims when it is claims that come directly out of their bottom line????? Insurance companies spend a lot of money detecting such fraud. For someone who generally has decent comments, you're completely clueless on this one.
_____________
Claims filed, money paid- all benefit. Sure- much of it goes to drugs, surgeons, scooters, etc. and much of it winds up at the bottom-line of Medicare. The whole medical industry is rife with profit-seeking business- hence the reasons costs climb. Unfortunately for the consumer- it might be their cancer that doesn't get treated while their neighbors' mailbox overflows with unnecessary (and hugely profitable) prescriptions and catheter/diabetes/sleep apnea supplies .
Rudy is still right- if private or corporate insurance companies did such a good job, why did profit caps need to be put in place? Why did they need to have their feet put to the fire to actually take care of patients? You think maybe that's why crap insurance policies got cancelled? They weren't going to be profitable enough under the ACA metrics?
The problem, Fair is you just want one hammer to puns away with- and the situation is much more complex than you make it out to be. Maybe- health care shouldn't even be a for-profit business.
This Ad puts the information out there. It is up to the voter to decide if it is right or wrong. So what does the ACA mean? It means that if you can't pay for your Health Care someone else will pay it. So who is that? Nothing new here, The Liberal's and Democrats want to run the country but they want the Conservative's and Republican's to pay for it So now you know the answer. And if the money isn't there the Liberal's will borrow it, hence raise the National Debt. So who pays that? Look inthe mirror. you will see the answer.
"Hundreds of thousands of citizens, the VAST majority who are middle class, who are employees of insurance companies would be displaced under a single-payer system. Many, many more who are in supportive functions would be displaced. What would the ripple effect on the economy be should these people be displaced?"
Are you the same person who wanted to shut down the government and displace hundreds of thousands of federal workers?