Aetna's Argumentative Analysis

406 Words2 Pages
The show begins with one single newscaster John Ladarola, introducing the headline news event. He introduced the headline as bad news for Obamacare as Aetna insurance giant would be pulling out of many insurance exchanges that help fund and run Obamacare. He then moved on to question, by stating “but why exactly are they pulling out”. John Ladarola then ran through some financial numbers that Aetna claims is showing they are losing over 100 million a year. With this, Aetna is claiming that it is not financially feasible to continue operating in the same manner. The show then goes on to disclose the information that was obtained by the Huffington Post. The Huffington Post found a letter the CEO wrote to the Justice department in the prior year and tells them Aetna’s plans to reduce coverage should the merger with Humana they are seeking approval for fail.…show more content…
The letter is then read. Both newscasters agree that the letter is a threat to the justice department to not try and stop the merger. The second newscaster goes even further to suggest that if Aetna withdrawal from these exchanges that the Republican will use this as a weapon against Obamacare to show that it is not working. Cenk Uygur then makes a statement that in reality Aetna is using this fact as a bargaining chip. In addition he states that the merger with Humana would provide big payouts for the executive team more than it would provide financial stability for Aetna. And that that is the thing that they care about the
Open Document