Let’s look at these one at a time:
“It’s not a tax.” OK, that one might not have been exactly truthful, but it depends on how one defines “tax”. The penalty for violating the individual mandate was defined as a tax by the Supreme Court, as it met the criteria for a tax. However, it also meets the definition of a “penalty”, much in the same way that when you’re assessed a fee for not paying your taxes, that’s a “penalty”. Whether you call it a tax or a penalty doesn’t really make that much difference. The amount you have to pay for violating the individual mandate is still the same.
“If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” If anyone lost their doctor, that wasn’t the fault of the ACA. Perhaps Obama should have clarified that by adding, “…unless your insurance company decides to screw you over.” Insurance companies remove doctors from their networks all the time. That’s nothing new. There’s absolutely nothing in the ACA that takes away doctors from people.
“We will work to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family.” When Candidate Obama (not President Obama) said this, he was talking about his original vision of healthcare reform, which included a non-profit Public Option to compete with private insurance companies. And if the ACA had included a Public Option (which was ditched because private insurance companies didn’t want that competition), there was a good chance that insurance premiums would indeed have been lowered, and likely by the amount Obama gave, or more. Obama never promised this once the Public Option was no longer a factor.
“We have to pass it to know what is in it.” This one’s easy to debunk. Instead of giving you the whole long-winded explanation, it’s easier to just provide the complete text of Pelosi’s remarks, so you can find out exactly what she said, and in what context:
On NBC News' Meet the Press Sunday morning, host David Gregory resurrected a favorite right-wing attack on the…www.mediaite.com
“We counted on the stupidity of the American voter.” This statement comes from Jonathan Gruber. And while he really did say that, his role in the crafting of the ACA is over-inflated. He had a greater role in designing the Romneycare plan in Massachusetts, upon which the ACA is based. He was brought onto the ACA team in the beginning, that’s true. But his role was largely number-crunching, not marketing the plan to the public. Gruber’s comments mostly had to do with transparency (or the alleged lack thereof). Were there some closed-door meetings in the development of the ACA? Yes, there were some. Did it come anywhere close to the level of secrecy that the Senate AHCA did? Not even. And it’s worth pointing out that Gruber didn’t speak for the team.
So as usual, you have nothing. Except for perhaps a semantics quibble over “tax” and “penalty”. Which isn’t much of an argument.