Our conversation touched on how she gets her news, and Patel had strong opinions about that. Lately, she has been trying to keep up on the news by going to CNN.com, the BBC, Yahoo headlines or Google News—“something,” she says, “that’s vocabulary friendly and not too long.” What about The New York Times—-a paper that certainly has covered health care. “It’s too long,” she said. “It’s dreadful to read; why are all those big words there? They should make an article short and sweet and get to the point,” adding that she did not like the way the paper criticizes people. “Everyone has a right to express their feelings and emotions.”
As our chat ended, Patel said she was “happy people are getting health care.” Are they getting it now, I asked? “I don’t know,” she said.
When I asked twenty-eight-year-old Rebecca Krauss what she knew about the health law, she quickly replied “nothing . I’m a pretty healthy person, so health care issues don’t tend to affect me.” She did, however, know that she had two kinds of coverage—the NYU student plan and an individual policy from Blue Cross that her parents were paying for. Krauss, who is a grad student in urban planning, said she switched back and forth between the policies depending on what she had to pay for her medicines. NYU has a “very low maximum” for drug expenses, she explained. She said the number that sticks in her head is $2000. “I’m over it in two months.” I asked if anyone had told her that the health law said insurance could no longer have annual caps on coverage, a provision that took effect last September. “Nobody told me the cap had been lifted,” Krauss said. “I tried to get the NYU drug coverage in November. They were rejecting my claims.”
Like others I interviewed, Krauss said she “tended to be more of a headline reader than look[ing] for any depth.” The exception was stories about sustainability and urban planning. “Health care is not a topic of interest. It probably should be. But I’m not paying for it yet,” she said.
Nineteen-year-old Nikki Mokrzycki, a sophomore from Medina, Ohio, did know that she could stay on her parents’ health insurance until she turned twenty-six. Her parents knew that and told her over Christmas break. “I wish I knew more about this,” she told me. “I sound like some dumb kid who doesn’t know anything.” She said she would be interested in reading more about health care if she had the time, but now confines her reading to issues about food and the environment, her major interests. “If I read a health care article, there would be lots of terms I don’t understand so I would need some background on it,” she said.
Sarah Schneider, age twenty-two, was eating a bowl of noodle soup when I met her at a Japanese food store on Third Avenue. Her father is a cardiologist and her mother a psychologist. “I come from a medical family and know surprisingly little,” she explained. Schneider knew she could remain covered on her parents’ health plans until she was twenty-six. I asked her how she knew that. “My friends have talked about it,” she said.
She thought about what she knew about the health care law. “I heard something about health care remaining private and everyone has to have it. But is that universal,” she asked. She then asked me a question. “Do you want to tell me more about the law in case someone asks me?” Schneider did say she read the Times science section and the articles there about health. It was just health policy stuff that turned her off.

Well, yeah, journalism has been awful. But I don't think you ought to let these dumbass ignoramuses off the hook. I mean, these are prospective professionals at NYU, a premier American university as you pointed out, and can't/won't read "big words" in a decent newspaper? These people have had all the very, very best of schooling, both public and private, and they are too stupid and too lazy to read the damned newspaper. Sheesh.
I'm willing to bet if you go over to my local community college, where low income students get their first two years of college credits, coming from arguably one of the worst school districts in the nations -- LAUSD -- they'd know more about ACA and their own health care coverage than these vapid goofballs.
#1 Posted by James, CJR on Thu 24 Mar 2011 at 01:47 PM
Government mandated coverage is a "best" provision of the new law?
No telling where you stand on this contentious issue, is there, Trudy?
You need to be working on Capitol Hill instead of for a "neutral" watchdog publication...
The reason these kids don't understand Obamacare isn't because the propagandists haven't tried hard enough...... It's because these kids are normal, healthy kids.. They're not supposed to give a crap about health insurance.
For most of them, their mommies and daddies are going to make sure they're covered no matter what.. The bulk of them don't give a crap because in general THEY DON"T NEED HEALTH INSURANCE.
It isn't a priority for a 20 year old health kid who has no assets to lose.
Getting laid?... Definitely a priority.. Getting married.. Probably... Getting a job? Sure..
Worrying about the deductible on a mammogram?
No way.
#2 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 25 Mar 2011 at 11:54 AM
You haven't failed the public, it's the American public that's failed in its civic responsibilities. As you note, the Brazilian guy knew about the health law, and he'd gotten his information from US media. US media is inferior to, say, British, but the basic facts are usually there for those willing to look.
The failure is American education, that creates a culture of cluelessness. What you're seeing is no different from Jay Leno's walkabouts, or the Canadian comedy interview segment "what Americans think". I remember Leno interviewing the Stanford football team. They couldn't name, among other things, the country on America's nothern border.
According to Natl Geographic surveys, only 13% of Americans could locate Iraq on a map of the Middle East in 2003, when 79% of Americans were baying to invade the place.
Given that the problem can only be fixed in school and from a young age, it would take at least 50 years to get to a truly educated populace. That's if Americans started now. But they seem more interested in taking money from teachers to give tax cuts to millionaires.
#3 Posted by Kevin Robb, CJR on Fri 25 Mar 2011 at 04:31 PM