The Obama campaign’s “Life of Julia” slide show depicts a fictional woman whose life from age 3 to 67 is better under the president’s policies than under those of Republican Mitt Romney. But the facts do not support statements in the slide show.
1. Romney would leave Julia with “nothing but a voucher” to buy health insurance at age 65. Wrong. The plan Romney has endorsed would let her choose between traditional Medicare fee-for-service coverage, or a variety of private plans with premiums partially paid by the government.
2. As a senior citizen under Romney, Julia would have to pay “$6,350 extra per year” for a health care plan similar to Medicare. Wrong. This cost estimate is based on old and invalid cost estimates.
3. At age 67, Julia could “retire comfortably” under Obama but, “Under Mitt Romney: Julia’s benefits could be cut by 40%.” Wrong. Social Security is rapidly going broke. The trustees predict that all Social Security beneficiaries will be hit with a 25% cut by 2033 unless changes are made. Obama has proposed no plan to avoid this.
4. As a 22-year-old college student, Julia needs surgery that is covered “due to a provision in health care reform” keeping her on her parents’ insurance. Fair enough. But she’d probably be covered anyway: Thirty-seven states already have similar mandates on the books.
5. As a 31-year-old expectant mother, Julia “benefits from maternal checkups” required under Obamacare. But she would probably get that care anyway, since 85 percent of full-time workers have health insurance now, and a 1978 federal law already requires that employer-provided insurance generally must “cover expenses for pregnancy-related conditions.”
For details on each point made above, go to