Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

CBO Says Senate Health Bill Would Expand Coverage, Reduce Deficit

Updated 5:06 p.m.
By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
A health-care reform bill drafted by the Senate Finance Committee would expand health coverage to nearly 30 million Americans who currently lack insurance and would meet President Obama's goal of reducing the federal budget deficit by 2019, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

The bill would cost $829 billion over the next decade, but would more than offset that cost by slicing hundreds of billions from government health programs such as Medicare and by imposing a 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance policies starting in 2013.

All told, the package would slice $81 billion from projected budget deficits over the next 10 years, the CBO said, and continue to reduce deficits well into the future.

It would also expand coverage to 94 percent of Americans by 2019, the CBO said, up from the current 83 percent.

The assessment by Congress's nonpartisan auditors has been awaited by committee members as they prepare to vote on the bill, perhaps as soon as Thursday. And the CBO report lends a huge political boost to the Finance Committee's work: distinguishing it as the only one of five bills drafted by various congressional committees that meets every important test established by President Obama and key Democratic leaders.

-- It would cost less than $900 billion over the next decade;

-- It would vastly expand coverage; and

-- It would keep Obama's pledge that health reform will not increase budget deficits by "one dime" now or in the future.

"This is transformative. This is game-changing," Finance committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said. "For two years now, that's exactly what we have been doing in the Finance Committee -- working to get this result."

The committee's vote is expected to be close, and passage could hinge on a handful of senators who have indicated that the CBO's report may sway them.

In a letter to Baucus and Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the committee's ranking Republican, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf cautioned that the analysis is preliminary in large part because the committee has not yet drawn up the bill in legislative language.

By Lori Montgomery  |  October 7, 2009; 4:33 PM ET
Categories:  Health Reform  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Opposition to Taxing Health Benefits Builds in the House
Next: School Lunch Funds Get a Boost

Comments

This is awesome news! I am 100% FOR health care reform now. Now, Senator Reid just needs to put this bill together with the HELP bill and before Thanksgiving, we will have health care reform. This is completely great news!

Posted by: Prosperity2008 | October 7, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

PUT BACK IN THE PUBLIC OPTION AND THEN WE WILL FINALLY HAVE A REAL HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR AMERICA

Posted by: resq3vhl | October 7, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

CBO Says Senate Health Bill Would Reduce Federal Deficit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! That was a good one!

Posted by: forgetthis | October 7, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Well, if that kind of funny math works, let's get the other 6% and reduce the federal deficit even more! The very notion that this kind of expanded coverage and rules that increase costs will amount to only $83 billion a year is sheer fantasy. That it will decrease the deficit is fool's gold thinking.

Posted by: RBCrook | October 7, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Right, spending a trillion dollars will lower the deficit. If I use my American Express, I will lower my credit card payments. Great going.

Posted by: wcc118 | October 7, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Maybe this will be just the thing to move the ball forward another inch and we can pass health care reform for the 43 million without any coverage. Hurray!

Posted by: laundrylist | October 7, 2009 4:56 PM | Report abuse

The majority of the country wants the Public Option. We ALL need this. Still, it is just an OPTION. NO ONE is being forced to use it. It is the most common-sense approach to a crisis in health care that one could hope for. The only problem is that NO ONE IS STANDING UP AGAINST THE RIGHT-WING TERROR MACHINE. I am very quickly becoming dis-illusioned with our mission of "change" since right now, it seems as though all anyone truly wants is to NOT rock the boat. I say we not only rock the boat, but we should be riding a Tsunami of change against the Xtreme Right-Wing Terror Machine. Election day is fast approaching.

Posted by: xtremebob | October 7, 2009 4:59 PM | Report abuse

ONLY IN AMERICA...

can more spending actually REDUCE the federal budget!

All we have to do is change the numbers, and the bill costs less! If one assumes that we will find savings in medicare, and that we will find these savings only if we spend it on universal health care, the illusion is complete.

The funny thing about the congressional budget is that you can make the numbers say anything you want, since it's all based on assumptions anyway.

Posted by: postfan1 | October 7, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Let's see what the CBO says when the bill is in it's final legislative language.

It is interesting though that the one bill that is actually projected to not explode the deficit comes without a public option.

Posted by: conservativemaverick | October 7, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

The silence is deafening, Top republicans come out for health care reform, the CBO says it works to reduce deficit.

Obama up in polls 6%!

Schadenfreude

Posted by: ORNOT | October 7, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

I suppose that Joe Wilson will now call the CBO a liar. Oh, well, we got what we paid for here in SC.

Bob in Beaufort

Posted by: cincdeuce | October 7, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Whose fantasy? Yours? Do you still believe the world is flat too? Sheesh, what a nagging nabob of negativity. You're a giant speed bump of negativity on the way to change for the better. If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Get out of the way of the rest of us who choose to live in the reality-based community!

@ RBCrook
The very notion that this kind of expanded coverage and rules that increase costs will amount to only $83 billion a year is sheer fantasy. That it will decrease the deficit is fool's gold thinking.

Posted by: maiapapaya | October 7, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Hey postfan1, do you spend money on changing the oil in your car? Why? Apparently you are too short-sighted to appreciate the concept of paying less now instead of more later.

Posted by: frantaylor | October 7, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans just lost the narrow perch upon which their blind resistance to healthcare change was based.

The Finance Committee version will gain steam and the Dem leadership will roll the Republicans once more into the ditch of irrelevancy. When will the Reps learn that you cannot fool all the people all the time -- they are in a death spiral.

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | October 7, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

in response to xtremebob the majority of the country does not want a public option. Where do you get your info from? Let's see what the language of the bill says but how more spending will reduce the deficit is really a strech even for liberals.

Posted by: justsal123 | October 7, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf cautioned that the analysis is preliminary in large part because the committee has not yet drawn up the bill in legislative language.

Lots can change between step 1 and step 2. This will also assume that everyone takes time to read the bill before they vote. It's amazing how something so seemingly important continues to be fast tracked. Good Post postfan1

Posted by: collinrb | October 7, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Republicans cited CBO reports all through August, after the CBO announced the healthcare bills would add to the deficit. Now that Baucus bill has passed the CBO test, the hypocritical, lying, disingenuous Republicans will question the CBO estimates. Let's get passed the stall tactics and bad faith negotiations- pass health care reform this year!!

Posted by: mm14 | October 7, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Reducing a trillion dollar deficit by $81 billion isn't as great as it sounds and besides, if you read the fine print, this is all HYPOTHETICAL, because the details have not been included.This sounds like one of those craigslist scams.

Posted by: gouZgounis | October 7, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

@xtremebob: a majority of Americans want the public health option? Not according to any of the polls I've seen. Public option was the very thing poisoning the various plans for many people. Don't project your own interests onto that of everyone else.

Remember, according to official polls, the vast majority of people in the US are 'satisfied' or 'happy' with their current health care coverage. They want the final product of health care reform to cover the minority that don't have it, but NOT at the cost of their current quality of health care, which is pretty much guaranteed if you threw public option into a system in a country that's 300-million+ strong.

Posted by: Comunista | October 7, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Didn't the CBO just a few weeks or couple of months ago say that Obamacare would cost TRILLIONS? and NOT reduce spending and would not be budget neutral? I wonder how "nonpartisan" the CBO really is then after Obama "talked" to them a couple of weeks or so ago. Was pressure brought to bear? We will never know, but my gut says pressure of some sort was brought to bear. As my son says...money talks and BS walks.

And is the penalty going to be included along with the public option? You know, the tax that is not a tax? Fining you if you do not buy insurance. If you cannot afford the insurance, you sure as heck can't afford the fine. And jail time to boot.

Put some real teeth in the bill and work on TORT REFORM. Eliminate the John Edwards's and Sam Bernsteins, the Jeffrey Fieger's and the other ambulance chasers around the country. That is one of the reasons health insurance is so high. Because of malpractice insurance. The docs are trying to cover their backsides from some shyster in a sharkskin suite and greasy hair waiting for him to make a mistake and sue the bejeebers out of him. So the docs pass the cost along to the patient.

Then let people buy insurance across state lines. If MN has cheaper insurance that AZ, then hey, lets buy our insurance from MN.

The system is broken, but not all of it needs fixing. Fix what is broken and let the rest go.

Posted by: queenofkeyboards | October 7, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

People are happy b/c it reduces the deficit and expands coverage, but it does not control cost. I thought controlling costs is the issue. This is a gift to Health insurers as it provides them with billions of dollars in customers. As stated, the bill needs to include a mechanism to ensure no denials for pre-existing conditions, it also needs to prevent insurers from jacking up out of pocket costs. Threatening insurers with tax increases might work...... lol, yeah right as they would pass these fees onto customers. This is a terrible bill. In addition, poor and the middle class will be fined for not being covered. I do not have quams with that portion but the fine is too steep.

Posted by: Sincear202 | October 7, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

That's an interesting comment since about two 1/2 months ago they said as quoted in this very same liberal rag, it would increase it.


By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, July 17, 2009

Under questioning by members of the Senate Budget Committee, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, said bills crafted by House leaders and the Senate health committee do not propose "the sort of fundamental changes" necessary to rein in the skyrocketing cost of government health programs, particularly Medicare. On the contrary, Elmendorf said, the measures would pile on an expensive new program to cover the uninsured.

Maybe this is the type of "change" Obozzo referred to.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | October 7, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

It reduces the deficit because it cuts Medicare by $400 billion and raises taxes. This is a joke and the "journalist" who reported this nonsense has no integrity.

Posted by: HarroldtheCat | October 7, 2009 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Interested in the cost/feature cuts for Medicare; have anything to do with complete patient diagnoses and requesting a 2nd opinion when the doctor doesn't want to deal with Medicare and sloughs you off ?

What about the illegal immigrants and others that don't qualify for or have any health insurances. Are we taxpayers going to continue to foot their bills ?

Posted by: mredhp | October 7, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Government estimates are always low; usually it costs 5 times what they say.
That means our taxes will increase!
And, do you really think they can reduce Medicare by $400 billion over next 10 years? Medicare is under-funded right now!
--Not!

Posted by: ohioan | October 7, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the arm twisting worked!

Posted by: BenLaGuer | October 7, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

The only thing Daddy Gubment is capable of reducing is your life span. Wake up suckers..

Posted by: SMWE357 | October 7, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Apparently some of you have never but together a budget. There are two ways to meet budget targets - raise revenue and cut spending. The legislation, while spending money also raises revenue and cuts existing spending to meet the deficit requirement. Revenue increase plus spending cuts is greater than the new spending guys. Geez, no wonder the Republicans destroyed the economy.

Posted by: NCpolitics1 | October 7, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

If anyone believes Obama and the Democrats are serious about reducing the deficit, have I got a bridge to sell YOU! No President has any power to affect the budget outside of their term in office and you can't reduce the deficit, while you are still expanding or introducing new Federal programs while at the same time spending like drunken sailors. Not to mention that we still need to fix Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, the Post Office and Amtrak and continue fighting two wars.

Get Real!

Posted by: morningglory51 | October 7, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Only in America do people not finish reading the math problem before trying to solve the problem. Would you like help with the simple equation?

$910 - $829 = $81

Maybe this article should have spelled out the $910 for those of you who do not understand that $81 is in addition to $829.

One more time to make sure we're clear. $910 is saved. $829 is spent. $81 is the savings. (Add billions after every dollar amount, I didn't want to type it that many times.)

Posted by: MissRed | October 7, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Democrat Smoke and Mirrors along with increased TAXES and costs across the board for all.

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't trust Obama to park my car..

Posted by: SMWE357 | October 7, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Are you people going to be happy when grandma is thrown out into the streets because of the new budget cuts?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091004/ap_on_re_us/us_meltdown_nursing_home_cuts

Posted by: morningglory51 | October 7, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Amazing in less than 3 months the CBO went from saying that the bill would bankrupt the government to now it would cut the multi-trillion dollar deficit. Now why would anyone believe this? Give me a break. The CBO's bosses (Congress) ran by Democrats went to the CBO and basically told them to change their findings. I am sure they did a complete study in less than 3 months. You would have to be total fool to believe this bull hockey. And besides, anyone that believes our current government could find all these efficiencies in existing government is smoking dope! WaPo is printing total fiction. This absolutely is fantasy.

Posted by: staterighter | October 7, 2009 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Amazing in less than 3 months the CBO went from saying that the bill would bankrupt the government to now it would cut the multi-trillion dollar deficit. Now why would anyone believe this? Give me a break. The CBO's bosses (Congress) ran by Democrats went to the CBO and basically told them to change their findings. I am sure they did a complete study in less than 3 months. You would have to be total fool to believe this bull hockey. And besides, anyone that believes our current government could find all these efficiencies in existing government is smoking dope! WaPo is printing total fiction. This absolutely is fantasy.

Posted by: staterighter | October 7, 2009 5:29 PM | Report abuse

democrats are just flat out throwing old folks under the bus..unbelievable.

Posted by: SMWE357 | October 7, 2009 5:30 PM | Report abuse

ORNOT-Gallup has Obama at 51% today.
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

Posted by: morningglory51 | October 7, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

"The bill would cost $829 billion over the next decade, but would more than offset that cost by slicing hundreds of billions from government health programs such as Medicare and by imposing a 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance policies starting in 2013."
=======================

in other words is actually ADDING to the deficit.

and obviously obama will be making excuses for why IT didnt quite pan out the way he envisioned?

BULL! if this bill is to be paid for through spending cuts and tax increases why havent they focused on those specifics and reduce the overspending. AND STAY OUT OF THE HEALTHCARE BUSINESS?

Posted by: ChooseBestCandidate | October 7, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

The public option is a NOGO unless we remove insurance from employement. Create insurance pools for people to shop and buy their own insurance, and then let those who cannot afford insurance be covered by a public option.


PUT BACK IN THE PUBLIC OPTION AND THEN WE WILL FINALLY HAVE A REAL HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR AMERICA

Posted by: resq3vhl |

Posted by: peter1469 | October 7, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Here is the paragraph that still concerns me, "The bill would cost $829 billion over the next decade, but would more than offset that cost by slicing hundreds of billions from government health programs such as Medicare and by imposing a 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance policies starting in 2013."

I feel there are a lot of unanswered questions in these areas.

So where EXACTLY are they reducing funds for other healthcare programs? And is it NOT going to come through "process and technology improvements".

What about the 40% excise tax on high-cost insurance policies. Who pays that? What is considered a high-cost insurance policy. Will what is being considered "high-cost" adjust over time?

Dont get me wrong, I am for healthcare reform. I just dont want to go from the frying pan into the fryer!

Posted by: sanmateo1850 | October 7, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

HA!HA!HA! I COULD COVER 100% AND REDUCE THE DEFICT BY 200 BILLION!
JUST RAISE TAXES EVEN MORE THAN PLANNED AND CUT MORE FROM MEDICARE! PLUS THE SHILLS, SORRY REPORTERS, FORGOT TO MENTION THE CUTS AND TAXES LAST TEN YEARS AND THE PROGRAM ONLY STARTS IN 2013! YOU PAY TEN YEARS FOR 7 1/2 OF THE PROGRAM. SMOKE AND MIRRORS!
THAT WAPO WOULD HAVE THIS BREATHLESS LEAD AND LEAVE OUT SOME OF THE CRUCIAL INFO SHOWS HOW FAR YOU ARE IN THE POCKET OF THE DEMS AND THE ONE.
OH, THE TINGLING, THE TINGLING OH OH OBAMA!

Posted by: beecheery | October 7, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Staterighter, you're comparing apples and oranges;,get the facts straight before you type. The previous CBO estimates referred to DIFFERENT bills. Baucus introduced this version several WEEKS ago in September. There are too many illiterates on these boards.

Posted by: mm14 | October 7, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse

ONLY IN AMERICA...

can more spending actually REDUCE the federal budget!
Posted by: postfan1
==========================
EXCELLENT!
kinda like, SPEND, SPEND, SPEND. result? almost 10% UNEMPLOYMENT.
WHO'S FOOLING WHO?

Posted by: ChooseBestCandidate | October 7, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Has the CBO taken into account that a health-care system in which a doctor's visit becomes cheap(not affordable, i mean cheap!)actually saves a lot of money by detecting serious diseases in their earliest stage. Not only that, but the prime reason why small businesses go bancrupt is health problems. An accessible health care system's goal should be to turn people into productive taxpayers again asap, and as effectively as possible, and that means: good prevention and early detection, so: cheap doctor's visits.This is largely payed for by the people who stay in business, instead of being written off. In belgium, the patient pays about 5€, while the doctor gets another 20€ from the health care system. That's how it should be.

Posted by: karlbelgium | October 7, 2009 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"Right wing terror machine"??!! Oh, Lord, give me a break. How ignorant can one be. Let's put back in the government option? Don't you understand that leaving it out is what makes the Finance Committee bill "deficit neutral." Let's not forget, the CBO estimate is provisional; it depends on the outcome of the bill. And it's not 43 million uninsured; it's FAR less than that number, but the hype machine doesn't want you to know that.

Posted by: sojournertruth | October 7, 2009 5:39 PM | Report abuse

That's nice. But does anyone think the baucus bill as it is now will be what's actually passed in the Senate or House? How many amendments will be added and at what cost? I'm thinking that deficit reduction will end up more than spent.

Posted by: stixx23 | October 7, 2009 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I personally view every one of these bills as a start that will have to be adjusted over time, but we have to start somewhere. The Republicans in Congress overwhelmingly will not support anything even though they know that something has to be done. The liberals want a public option that will basically be Medicare for the rest of us, but the whole health care system can't force providers to provide care to all for less than it costs to provide that care. Insurance companies want the additional business from requiring all to have insurance, but still want to be able to increase their profits by finding ways to deny care. What most of us want is good health care, but we want someone else to pay the true cost.
One of the ways that this bill cuts the deficit is to force people who can afford, but don't have, health insurance to get it or pay the tax man. What the reform will do is to force them to be responsible (which may be un-American). When implemented this will lower the cost of for the rest of us and remove part of the burden that the government has had to cover the free riders. Another way that the reform increases coverage is to force my fellow small business people who don't provide some form of health insurance to compete on a more level playing field with those of us who do.
Another way that the reform lowers the cost for government is to eliminate the subsidies for insurance companies for their Medicare Advantage. I don't have a problem with private industry trying to compete with Medicare, the problem that I have is when we the taxpayer have to pay them extra to do it. If people under Medicare what these plans let them pay the extra costs themselves. I understand it's horribly unfair, but it gets back to that responsibility thing from before.
The last big thing in the plan is to tax high cost health care benefits. I feel sorry for those workers who have bargained away pay raises to keep these benefits, but these plans may be pushing up the cost of care for all of us.
The good news for Republicans is that there is no perfect solution so they will be able to blame the Democrats for what a horrible plan is eventually passed. The good news for Democrats is that win or lose in the next election cycle they will have done something to make life better for pretty much everyone in America. The good news for the rest of us is that finally the government is doing something to tame a monster that is threatening our entire economy.

Posted by: ThomasFiore | October 7, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse


There are crooks and liars at work in Washington, note. beware.

.

Posted by: Billw3 | October 7, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I see all the lying Republicants are out today. They truly believe the crap they spout. That's why the party keeps shrinking.

Posted by: COLEBRACKETT | October 7, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Wait until Nancy Pelosi's mob get their hands on it.

Costs will balloon. Bend over.

Posted by: Tupac_Goldstein | October 7, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse


"democrats are just flat out throwing old folks under the bus..unbelievable."

No, it's change you can believe in from the charasmatic man.

.

Posted by: Billw3 | October 7, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Since when was the CBO nonpartisan? :-)

Posted by: jeffkatytyler | October 7, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

''
The bill would cost $829 billion over the next decade, but would more than offset that cost by slicing hundreds of billions from government health programs such as Medicare and by imposing a 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance policies starting in 2013.

All told, the package would slice $81 billion from projected budget deficits over the next 10 years, the CBO said, and continue to reduce deficits well into the future.
''

This is double talk to the extreme. To accept this, Congress needs to impose accountability on itself to meet its promises.

How about tying the success and promised reductions in the deficit as promised in this naive news headline to congress men and women's salaries, riches and homes: if not met, everything each of them voting affirmative loses every possession they own until there is a surplus as promised in this headline.

They really take Americans as complete dupes! Hogwash!

Posted by: Accuracy | October 7, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry, someone just said the majority of Americans want the public option? The vast majority of Americans DO NOT want the failed public mandate, oops, I mean, option. This is failed! It is just another attempt by the left to grab more power and force the American people into government dependency. Fight agaisnt this take over of our health care system! Call you congressmen and senators and tell them to defend your personal liberty!!!

Posted by: michaelellis29 | October 7, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

This bill is a disaster. It taxes the h3ll out o0f us and still leaves 30 million uninsured. Democrats need to give up onm health care reform because they don't care about doing anything that truly cuts costs. The number one indicator of this is their total lack of any TORT reform. I can't wait to vote these idiot Democrats out of office. I'll start by voting for McDonnell next month.

Posted by: MikeJ9116 | October 7, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

PLEASE PAY ATTENTION;

What the article refused to address was that all illegals will be covered under the Universal Healthcare Plan according to the CBO. Also, that by 2019, 30 million Americans will NOT have health insurance.

The blatant dishonesty of this reporter is beyond words.

Posted by: marine2211 | October 7, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Right, spending a trillion dollars will lower the deficit. If I use my American Express, I will lower my credit card payments. Great going.

Posted by: wcc118 |


--------------------------
Name one country that spends more than us for health care where it has increased their over all budget. I bet you can not find one. Our country is one of the highest in wasteful health care spending in the world. Over cost of 16% compared to say France which is about 5%. We are talking France! Not really a country that is the most efficient and organized.

Posted by: dorklord | October 7, 2009 5:54 PM | Report abuse

@BCamp55
Can't you read? It said the Senate HEALTH Committee bill would raise the deficit. This is the Senate FINANCE Committee bill! Two different plans.
---------------------------------------
Posted by: Bcamp55 | October 7, 2009 5:17 PM
That's an interesting comment since about two 1/2 months ago they said as quoted in this very same liberal rag, it would increase it.


By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, July 17, 2009

Under questioning by members of the Senate Budget Committee, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, said bills crafted by House leaders and the Senate health committee do not propose "the sort of fundamental changes" necessary to rein in the skyrocketing cost of government health programs, particularly Medicare. On the contrary, Elmendorf said, the measures would pile on an expensive new program to cover the uninsured.

Maybe this is the type of "change" Obozzo referred to.

Posted by: DelRonin | October 7, 2009 5:55 PM | Report abuse

The CBO analysis is done with general--not specific--information. The Congress will never cut Medicare by 500 billion dollars--a necessity for CBO analysis to be halfway true. Congress has never cut Medicare and old people will riot if they do. Last Bill to cut Medicare did not even get a handfull of votes. So many of you are gullible it is unbelievable. This program will be a final nail in the coffin to bankruptcy.

Posted by: Mindboggle | October 7, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

If it is true that the Senate package will reduce the deficit and extend coverage to an additional 30 million Americans, the GOP needs to kill this NOW. Can't let Obama get credit for such.

Posted by: bpai_99 | October 7, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

And how much have we spent and are continuing to spend in Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan?

How much money are we wasting there????

I would much rather spend our tax dollars in America helping us to have health care than waste our money down the rats holes of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan where we are hated and considered "infidels."

I would much rather spend our tax dollars in America keeping Americans insured than waste it on wars that we can never really win....

But, of course, the heath insurance industry doesn't care about the average American and the military industrial complex and all those contractors (like Halliburton and Blackwater) want the wasteful wars to go on and on and on.

And since the health insurance industry has given $10 million to those politicians who oppose health care reform, guess who wins that argument?

Not you or me -- the health insurance industry will win....

And the wars will go on and on and on....

Posted by: abbydelabbey | October 7, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

What terrible news for The Party Of No.

What will they "NO!" about now?

Posted by: binkynh | October 7, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Exactly what "bill" was estimated? There is no bill. The legislation has yet to be written. Once these Spendocrats are done with it what will it cost? There is no free lunch and more spending while the Country is bankrupt is not going to bring back the economy.

The idiots we have in government have bankrupted the Country. Now they want to spend more on health care and then crap on trade, I mean cap and trade.

Walk up and smell the guano. Until our government takes steps to restore the economy and jobs more spending and debt is not the answer.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | October 7, 2009 6:03 PM | Report abuse


ANNUAL COMPENSATION OF HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY EXECS (2006, 2007, or 2008 figures):

• Ronald A. Williams, Chair/ CEO, Aetna Inc., $23,045,834; $24.3 million in 2008
• H. Edward Hanway, Chair/ CEO, Cigna Corp, $30.16 million
• David B. Snow, Jr, Chair/ CEO, Medco Health, $21.76 million
• Michael B. MCallister, CEO, Humana Inc, $20.06 million
• Stephen J. Hemsley, CEO, UnitedHealth Group, $13,164,529
• Angela F. Braly, President/ CEO, Wellpoint, $9,094,771; $9.8 million in 2008
• Dale B. Wolf, CEO, Coventry Health Care, $20.86 million
• Jay M. Gellert, President/ CEO, Health Net, $16.65 million
• William C. Van Faasen, Chairman, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, $3 million plus $16.4 million in retirement benefits
• Charlie Baker, President/ CEO, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, $1.5 million
• James Roosevelt, Jr., CEO, Tufts Associated Health Plans, $1.3 million
• Raymond McCaskey, CEO, Health Care Service Corp (Blue Cross Blue Shield), $10.3 million
• Daniel P. McCartney, CEO, Healthcare Services Group, Inc, $ 1,061,513
• Daniel Loepp, CEO, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, $1,657,555
• Todd S. Farha, CEO, WellCare Health Plans, $5,270,825
• Michael F. Neidorff, CEO, Centene Corp, $8,750,751
• Daniel Loepp, CEO, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, $1,657,555
• Todd S. Farha, CEO, WellCare Health Plans, $5,270,825
• Michael F. Neidorff, CEO, Centene Corp, $8,750,751; $8.8 million in 2008
• James Carlson, AMERIGROUP, $5.3 million in 2008
==========================================================================
........♫
....♫
..♪
........♬

...♪......♪

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

So I wonder if they factored in the Billions the money changers would be skimming off the top?

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 7, 2009 6:03 PM | Report abuse

SOMEONE has to say NO.
too many of you are on the sugar-diet of the phony-balony you have been fed by the fringe media...

but stay tuned... the magic carpet is unraveling.

Posted by: ChooseBestCandidate | October 7, 2009 6:04 PM | Report abuse

RT "Right, spending a trillion dollars will lower the deficit. If I use my American Express, I will lower my credit card payments. Great going."
Yes, wc, if you use your American Express to pay off your credit cards that charge a higher interest rates than your Amex, you will lower your own deficit! Funny, how stuff like that works. I've got just one word for you..."Accounting101"

Posted by: SlaveCo | October 7, 2009 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Does sound a bit "fantastic", as in "fantasy". All this and heaven too? Must be a lot of costs being cut in the Medicare program -- I hope I can still find a physician who will see me at the rate he will likely be reimbursed and be allowed the testing that might be required as I age further. I can only wait for this "legislative language" stuff -- who's going to be the interpreter for the public?

Posted by: baltic | October 7, 2009 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Hey! I have a bridge to no where I will gladly sell. Just send me billions of dollars and I am outa here!

Posted by: PalmSpringsGirl | October 7, 2009 6:08 PM | Report abuse


TO: resq3vhl who wrote:
“Put back in the public option and then we will finally have a real health care plan for America.”
____________

Exactly!


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 7, 2009 6:10 PM | Report abuse

There seems to be massive confusion in the comments about how the CBO "changed" its actuarial analysis in the past few months.

The CBO hasn't changed anything. The analyses that the CBO did a few months ago were for four different bills that passed different congressional committees; the current analysis is for a fifth bill, one that has yet to be voted on by a committee. Regardless, all of these estimates are completely useless because these three of these bills will have to be merged into one bill in the House and two of them merged into one bill in the Senate. Then those two bills will get CBO estimates. Finally, those two bills will be merged in the joint House-Senate conference committee and the CBO estimate for that one will be the "official" estimate for the bill that reaches the president's desk. And, in a few years, THAT estimate will be proven to be completely wrong, either too cheap or too expensive, because it's impossible to accurately predict the future.

Glad to provide you with this lesson the legislative process. The next one will cost you.

Posted by: pgbsan | October 7, 2009 6:11 PM | Report abuse

and it wpould cover illegal aliens mister liar president.

Posted by: 12thgenamerican | October 7, 2009 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Right-wingers: Look up the word "nonpartisan." The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analyzed health care reform. The nonpartisan office projected savings.
We know. You think it's a trick. You get your "truth" from Rush and Glenn. You require subtle, gentle yet scrupulous de-programming.

Posted by: jimsteinberg1 | October 7, 2009 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Congratulations, President Obama. You are doing a spectacular job.

Posted by: GeorgHerbet | October 7, 2009 6:14 PM | Report abuse

I see that there may be some sort of reform in health care, but 2013 is to far way to even start. We need reform know, and not when everyone that will be paid by the insureance industry for holding this bill back for a few years while the public goes broke. Yhis could be a good bill if only the money part of it was left out? I mean Insurance companies will profit from this bill more than you'll now.

Posted by: jake4u25 | October 7, 2009 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Do they actually think there will be high cost insurance policies by 2013 to tax at 40%. That is the fatal flaw in this reasoning and why this estimate is a piece of crap. I bet this is going to wind up costing us at least 200 billion not saving 89 billion. Mark my word on this day.

Posted by: bruce22 | October 7, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

TO: xtremebob who wrote:

"The majority of the country wants the Public Option. We ALL need this. Still, it is just an OPTION. NO ONE is being forced to use it. It is the most common-sense approach to a crisis in health care that one could hope for. The only problem is that NO ONE IS STANDING UP AGAINST THE RIGHT-WING TERROR MACHINE... I say we not only rock the boat, but we should be riding a Tsunami of change against the Xtreme Right-Wing Terror Machine..."
_____________________

Great Post.

The problem is, the insurance companies are forking over millions to the Republicans in exchnage for their "no" votes, which is a no brainer for the right wing psychos because all they want is to see the President fail anyway.

I think Rahm Emanuel ought to forget about bi-partisanship and just bring all the Dems together and push this through, WITH THE PUBLIC OPTION.

Posted by: lindalovejones | October 7, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

to pgbsan who wrote:
"And, in a few years, THAT estimate will be proven to be completely wrong, either too cheap or too expensive, because it's impossible to accurately predict the future."
...and so we shouldn't do anything at all? I personally try to map out and set a course for my own future as much as I can and just because it may not turn out 100% as planned doesn't mean I'm not going to give it my best shot. Shouldn't we as a country?

Posted by: SlaveCo | October 7, 2009 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the insight pgbsan.

Posted by: bruce22 | October 7, 2009 6:20 PM | Report abuse

TO: bruce22 who wrote:
“Do they actually think there will be high cost insurance policies by 2013 to tax at 40%. That is the fatal flaw in this reasoning and why this estimate is a piece of crap. I bet this is going to wind up costing us at least 200 billion not saving 89 billion. Mark my word on this day.”
_____________

Everything that you either don’t understand or don’t want to believe is a “piece of crap” to all of the wacko right wing Republican psychos who really want to manipulate insurance coverage as a way of killing off all of the poor in this country.


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 7, 2009 6:21 PM | Report abuse

To quote the article:
All told, the package would slice $81 billion from projected budget deficits over the next 10 years, the CBO said, and continue to reduce deficits well into the future.

BUT: Congressional analysts say the federal budget deficit tripled to a record $1.4 trillion for the 2009 fiscal year that ended last week.

The unprecedented flood of red ink flows from several factors, including a big drop in tax revenues due to the recession, $245 billion in emergency spending on the Wall Street bailout and the takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then there is almost $200 billion in costs from President Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill.

Eighty one billion ove ten years is not much to crow about with a deficit this size. It's just more smoke and mirrors.

Posted by: snowy2 | October 7, 2009 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Only 2 small reasons this would never work.

* The 49 percent to the left of center will never stand for a national individual mandate, that will require the working poor to spend 40 percent, 50 percent, maybe even 60 percent of their take-home pay for medical insurance.

* The 49 percent to the right of center will never, never, never agree with anything that calls itself "reform", no matter how skewed to benefit big business, medical insurance companies, and the medical industrial complex.

But, for everybody else, I can see where this pronouncement might sound pretty good.

Posted by: seattle_wa | October 7, 2009 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Something seems fishy here.
First, who are the 94% that are supposed to be covered?
Second, how are we going to pay for this when we will be taxed to death to pay for stimulus, bailouts, cash for clunkers, etc.
We need some straight answers.

Posted by: 45upnorth | October 7, 2009 6:25 PM | Report abuse

The problem is it is not ther real bill. This is not the bill that will go on the floor. The Democrats will meet in private under Harry Reid when they merge the two bills -- it won't be done in public. ANd I doubt they will get a CBO score on it much less post it for the public to see. They want to do as much out of public scrutiny as possible.

Posted by: Lavrat2000 | October 7, 2009 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Now we know why Obama met with the CBO on Tuesday, July 29, 2009.

There is collusion going on, that needs to be investigated.

The CBO numbers started fall in Obama's favor after the aforementioned meeting. Why is that ?

Posted by: dashriprock | October 7, 2009 6:30 PM | Report abuse

If you believe this to be even close to accurate, I have a bridge I want to sell you and I don't even own it. When has a CBO estimate ever been close to accurate (always low) or any government managed program been effective or even close to budget since the Great Society. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Health reform is needed, but since when has the government gotten any entitlement right or solved any problem with an entitlement?

Posted by: rbloomer2 | October 7, 2009 6:33 PM | Report abuse

I don't doubt that this will lower the deficit, because the SPENDING IS BEING SHIFTED TO INDIVIDUALS instead of the government. Honestly I don't understand how Dems can support a bill that makes it illegal NOT to pay outrageous health care premiums to insurance companies. All that is happening here is that instead of taxing individuals to create a single payer plan, we are forcing individuals to spend that money directly with insurance companies.

For the economy, it probably nets out worse than a single payer public option. Because you now will see the lower middle class and the young taking their discretionary income and putting it toward health care instead of consumer goods.

As a progressive, I had hoped for universal health care, but I think this bill is actually the worst possible outcome for liberals and the best possible outcome for conservatives. More money channeled to insurance companies means more money for lobbying, which means that whatever protections are built into this bill will just be watered down over time, as we have seen in the Finance industry over the years.

Say goodbye to discretionary spending, America.

Posted by: evenadog | October 7, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Don't tell me the white house has got to the CBO, is nothing sacred?

Posted by: countryfirst1 | October 7, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Hurry Mildred!!! Get the sale papers and lets get to the mall..we can save 40% this weekend only!!! Be sure to call the credit card guys and get our limits increased...wow, what a sale!

Posted by: bgPhil | October 7, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

To lindalovejones,

I said the reasoning was a piece of crap, not any individual. Liberals like you always resort to calling the individual names instead of debating the issue, which in this case is the flawed estimates which were used. I am sorry you think I am some wacko right wing Republican. I am a small business owner who provides those "high cost" insurance policies to my employees and their families as a fringe benefit, and I am not happy about the government interfering with how I run my business. If that makes me a right wing wacko, then I guess there are a lot of us scary people out there.

Posted by: bruce22 | October 7, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Don't tell me the white house has gotten to the CBO. Tell me it isn't so.

Posted by: countryfirst1 | October 7, 2009 6:40 PM | Report abuse

If you believe that, I have some swampland in Florida in which you might be interested!

Posted by: jshay | October 7, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

House Version of Health Care Bill Has NO Citizenship Verification!

Posted by: njtou | October 7, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Wow all that savings from just 829 Billion. Can I do that with my finances????

Posted by: tgalysh1 | October 7, 2009 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Spend More. Costs Less.

Washington DC Math.

The Chicago Mob "got to" the CBO over the last few months.

Save Us from Obama.

Posted by: fdffjdjjf-0999--88888 | October 7, 2009 7:00 PM | Report abuse

More BS.

Posted by: JAH3 | October 7, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

I guess Obama and his thugs really worked the CBO over at the White House meeting a few weeks ago.

We will all pay more for less when it is all over.

Posted by: loudountaxrevolt | October 7, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

I wouldn't trust the jerks in the White House and on Capitol Hill (especially Pelosi and her elitist gang) to run a lemonade stand. The middle class and seniors are gonna get screwed, folks!

Posted by: JAH3 | October 7, 2009 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Middle class, the Government just called. They want you to bend over. They claim you will like it.

Posted by: primegrop | October 7, 2009 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama followed the Alinsky rules for radicals to the letter. The total media effort to help them demonize Bush and associate any opposition with the "evil" Bush was impressive. Meanwhile, Obama dutifully read his teleprompter spouting hope and change.

He is pulling the same scam with healthcare as there is no healthcare bill for the cbo to analyze. Want to test these crooks? Ask for whatever bill they write to be posted for 5 days for all to examine,,,then watch as they retreat to closed rooms and tell us the bill process is too complicated for ordinary citizens to comprehend.

Obama's main problem; he is a deer in the headlights, totally overwhelmed by the requirements of the office. The prime example of the "Peter" principle where one seeks his or her level of incompetence.

The perfection of years of inaction with every career move, affirmative action in a $2500 suit.

Alinsky failed to discern that the American people were smart enough to see the subterfuge at work..he makes light of opposition in the special way that radicals always seem to use...derision and more subterfuge.

So, Obama will be a Carter style footnote in history...known only for his blackness and his lost chance to be meaningful.

Posted by: bgPhil | October 7, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

OMG. If they reduced Medicare by $1.4 trillion immediately, they could eliminate this year's deficit. Wow! What a deal.

Posted by: HarroldtheCat | October 7, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

This CBO report is bogus. Guess Rahm got his SEIU thugs to work in him again.
1. ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS are now covered under health care "reform".
2. $500 Billion in Medicare Cuts.
3. Hefty "fees"/taxes assessed on those who opt not to sign up for insurance and those small business who opt out of the "coop".
4. Taxation of medicare equipment - mostly those equipment items used by the elderly - hmmmmm - now with a 500Billion cut in medicare and a the signing up of 12 million illegals - who do you think is going to suffer from all this?
Certainly not the illegals - but certainly the last of the greatest generation who have paid their dues for years..\
But I guess that's OK because old people and those who served this country well in war and peace are of no use these days and the illegals and minorities who will benefit will vote Democratic - so that's important.

Posted by: sandynh | October 7, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

There is only one way to reduce the cost of healthcare: cut benefits...use less of it. Expanding health insurance coverage to another 45 million people will surely increase demand for it, thus raising costs.

Supporters of the proposed legislation proudly claim that it will be paid for by slashing benefits currently needed primarily by the retired/elderly population of Americans, and by taxing those other lucky souls who have a "high-cost" policy (our elected officials will, of course, be exempt from this tax). This tax revenue from high-cost policies will NOT likely come close to the amount used in the CBO analysis. In the history of give-away programs, has it ever? Why? The creativity of the human spirit will find loopholes. For example, we may see the rise of separate policies that enhance the basic coverage, with neither policy being "high-cost" and thus taxable. We may see employers creating deferred compensation pools, and using it to pay for routine medical costs before "low-cost" insurance coverage kicks in. Even if the CBO tax estimate is accurate, politicians will quickly pass more legislation over time and cause costs to skyrocket, as they’ve done with Social Security and all other welfare programs. The end result is that ever-increasingly huge deficits will finally bankrupt our country. But, with CBO’s help, the proposed legislation (if it passes and becomes law) WILL get the Liberal foot in the health care door. The CBO "estimate" doesn't have to be accurate, and probably isn't. It just has to stroke an aroused electorate back to sleep.

What disturbs me is that the 85% of Americans who have health insurance coverage will have to pay more for it or accept less of it, just so the other 15% of the population can get it for free or next to nothing. For crying out load, if I've got to pay for their health insurance, the government should make them mow my lawn! The American way of socialism is slowly strangling our society. We are rapidly approaching the point where our government will run out of the Chinese people's money to spend. Then nobody will have health coverage...except the politicians.

Posted by: jeffreypmorton | October 7, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

and now we know why the Republican campaign of obfuscation, obstruction and lying has been so virulent...

there worst nightmare is at hand the Obama administration has pulled the rabbit out of the hat by bending the cost curve on health care downward AND insuring another 30 million currently uninsured (if the unemployment trend continues that number could easily double before all is said and done)...

Republican gains in the House in 2010 not likely...

Posted by: teoc2 | October 7, 2009 7:21 PM | Report abuse

this should start-Once upon a time there was a gang of WE will change the whole goverment, destroy the economy-have a framework of czars to take over-Thereis no health bill-there is no cost as yet-and we cant afford this-if you keep on printing money -we will run out of paper-oh wake up and smell the lies and cheating and fear of losing their cushy jobs

Posted by: KEEPMEFREE | October 7, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Sweet! It's the solution to everything! Too bad you didn't bother to add in how much it's going to cost everyone in non-taxes. Slapping huge fees on insurance companies means... our insurance rates will all go way up. "If you like what you have, you can keep it" that is, if you can afford the new improved higher price and if your employer can afford the huge jump in cost too. Oh, and if you are unemployed, say adios to your chances of getting a job--employers will be laying off workers due to the added cost. Which makes economic recovery not likely either. In fact, one must wonder if the real goal is to mess up the system so badly that people will eventually want socialized health care.

Posted by: sam38 | October 7, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

What's the point of spending almost 900 billion to save 80 billion?

I say, let the poor and the sick pay themselves or die. And I am not a Republican.

Posted by: ravitchn | October 7, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

We there will be more people on the public health care because if you put a 40% tax on my expensive healthcare policy I will not longer offer it.

Posted by: webertm | October 7, 2009 7:48 PM | Report abuse

It is good that this shows a pathway to almost universal coverage and it is better that it does not contain a public option (we need some balance here and the PO would only lead to single-payer).

BUT.... who do we think this is kidding about cost? The money has to come form somewhere -- and that somewhere is out of our private pockets. The goal of not adding to the deficit is a shell game of the cruelest kind.

I would like the CBO to estimate the actual cost to Americans -- and then let us decide if this is important enough to actually give up something else to get.

I would like to see the "savings" component realized (proven) before we plunge off the cliff on what could become the most expensive and un-fixable entitlement programin the history of mankind.

Posted by: DOps | October 7, 2009 7:48 PM | Report abuse

If I tried to explain that kind of math to the IRS...I'd be in Jail...where the CBO should be...after all, they are used to that environment having been parolled from a Federal Prison to do the CBO job...

Incredible Arrogance...Incredible BS!! Typical Chicago prison politics!

Posted by: downdraft | October 7, 2009 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Yea, I have a bridge for sale too

Posted by: bobmcd | October 7, 2009 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Public option has built-in advantages against the self-interest-driven solution. But the government normally refrains itself from doing so to maintain a balance between self-regarding and other-regarding behaviors of the society.

And this approach works most of the time. But when the self-regarding force no longer works in cost effective way, it's time to bring back the public option to supplement the private options to regain the balance.

Posted by: jimbaron | October 7, 2009 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Nothing confuses right wingers more than simple math. If your house buget is $910 and you only spend $829 then you save $81.

But people!!! This is not the bill we want. We have been against this Baucus bill from the start. Sure it is deficit neutral because it milks the money out of the existing Medicare system and taxes existing high premium plans. But it has no public option, and it still leaves 30 million people uninsured.

The final bill out of coference had better have the public option, lower premiums if coverage is mandated, and provide consumer protection.

Posted by: Single_Payer | October 7, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse

You have to SPEND money to save money. Doesn't anyone here use grocery coupons?

Like you have to blow $100 at the grocery store to save $7.49.

I hope everything is clear now.

Posted by: oracle2world | October 7, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse

How can they accurately predict how much it will cost when Obama can't say how many uninsured people will be put in the system?

Posted by: alstl | October 7, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse

How loverly for the health care industry. All those bribes, sorry campaign contributions, are paying off handsomely.

Now we will all be forced to become their customers and some but not all who can't afford it will be helped by the government. And the drug companies are also taken care off by the outlawing of negotiated prices.

Isn't it wonderful how cooperation between big corporations and our President and Congress leads to such wonderful results. Big brother is taking care of us.

Posted by: Desertstraw | October 7, 2009 8:17 PM | Report abuse

If it is indeed true that this bill would reduce projected deficits and provide coverage for an additional 29 million Americans, then the GOPers will redouble their efforts to kill it.

They can't afford to give the President that victory - it would sink them in 2010, 2012, and who knows how long after that.

Posted by: bpai_99 | October 7, 2009 8:17 PM | Report abuse

ravitchn opined...

What's the point of spending almost 900 billion to save 80 billion?

I say, let the poor and the sick pay themselves or die. And I am not a Republican.
..............

A fascinatingly loveless opinion representing the very worst of America.

Posted by: binkynh | October 7, 2009 8:21 PM | Report abuse

What about the illegal immigrants and others that don't qualify for or have any health insurances. Are we taxpayers going to continue to foot their bills ?

Posted by: mredhp | October 7, 2009 5:20 PM
**********************************************************************************

The answer is no, not the tax payers, the people that buy regular insurance will pay just like they do now.

They will just pay less because the overall cost will go down.

Read my lips! Taxpayers do not and will not pay for health care for illegals.

Wake up!

Posted by: ORNOT | October 7, 2009 8:22 PM | Report abuse

30 million more to private insurance....????

F That!

give me single payer or give me debt!

Posted by: ryan_heart | October 7, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

No health care = death

Any questions?

Posted by: topwriter | October 7, 2009 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Folks, before we can argue for a solution, I think we have to agree that there is even a problem. It seems to me by these posts that most of you who oppose Health Care Reform don't see run-away health care costs in this country as being a major problem. If you only knew how destructive it truly is for our economy, I think you would be offering more constructive criticism rather than the cynical rants that run amok these postings. On top of that, most opponents of reform won't even give the benefit of the doubt to a lot of very smart people who believe that our high health care costs is indeed contributing to a whole host of economic ills our society faces today. Some of you, I believe, do see this dangerous development, but I guess you rather see it blow up in our collective face in a few years rather than have the Democrats get credit for fixing it now? Your peskiness, foolishness, and demagoguery would be easy to dismiss except that I, for one, believe it's dangerous for a free society to allow such incendiary remarks and fear-filled spite go unacknowledged. I heard somewhere once that if you want to be truly happy, go do something for someone else, keep a light heart, and respect others who are also trying to make a difference. And yes, even if their views happen to differ from yours. Their love and devotion is just as valid as yours.

Posted by: SlaveCo | October 7, 2009 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Note any legislation won't be in effect until after the next presidential election. Of course, Obama wants to be reassured of a second term before people realize that this "urgent" health-care legislation is a boondoggle.

Will there be enough doctors to treat millions more on a regular basis? What effects of rationing care were built into the CBO estimate? What about the $37 trillion deficit that Medicare is currently running?

Without addressing questions such as the preceding, the government's massive intrusion into health care will be the death knell for many.

Posted by: judithod | October 7, 2009 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Even if Moses, Jesus and his disciples, and the three wise men endorse this bill, the Republicans will not vote for it. For them, this is all about political positioning. If they deny Obama a victory on this, they think they can doom the rest of his Presidency. However, if they also doom the bill at this point with the CBO saying it will cut the deficit, they can end up hurting their political chances now and into the future.

Posted by: ATLGuy | October 7, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

No health care = Death

So simple even a regressive party member can understand it.

No health care = Death!

Posted by: topwriter | October 7, 2009 8:35 PM | Report abuse

CBO Says Senate Health Bill Would Expand Coverage, Reduce Deficit

Only in your dreams!

Posted by: wodon1836 | October 7, 2009 8:42 PM | Report abuse

You people are seriously ignorant if you believe you believe you can add 30 million people and cut the cost 81 million dollars . "YOU LIE !"

Posted by: Imarkex | October 7, 2009 8:51 PM | Report abuse

>>>>The bill would cost $829 billion over the next decade, but would more than offset that cost by slicing hundreds of billions from government health programs such as Medicare

Very deceptive! BILLIONS will be cut from Medicare FRAUD - and Medicare Insurance supplements.
Standard Medicare will only improve - NOT be cut!

Posted by: angie12106 | October 7, 2009 8:51 PM | Report abuse

80 billion more is what...about 7 billion a year for ten years? Spend the extra 80 billion, and make sure the public option is in the bill. We spent 10 billion a month..A MONTH not year in Iraq. What's the use in this bill if we can't force Insurance companies to stop gouging Americans. And just by saying we can OFFER 30 million American's health care doesn't mean anything. I can offer you a new car for a 50 thousand dollars but if you only got 25 thousand it kinda mutes the whole plan. We need to get this right. Id rather spend the extra to make it right then the 830 and have it fail.

Posted by: kubrickstan | October 7, 2009 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Health care reform without a Public Option is NOT health care reform!
But until we get REAL campaign finance reform, Corporate lobbyi$ts will continue influencing and writing Congre$$ional bills.

Corporate lobbyists sit WITH Congress critters as the bills are written - NO CONSUMER ADVOCATES ALLOWED IN THE ROOM!

Posted by: angie12106 | October 7, 2009 8:55 PM | Report abuse

"Senate Bill Would Reduce Federal Deficit"

This will happen shortly after NASA selects me as a Shuttle Commander and Pilot. And if you are stupid enough to believe either I have a bridge in NYC that I’d like to sell you.

Posted by: fenoy | October 7, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse

In reading the GOP comments, I notice they are up to their old tricks of moving the argument. First it was "it costs to much and adds to the deficit". Now that this bill actually reduces the deficit, they will come up with more silly excuses. One of these idiots said, put it on the internet and let people read it before the vote. NOT on your life pal. You didn't put the bill you wrote on Rangle up on the Internet.

The GOP will never learn that Obama is too smart for them. He has this all figured out and you guys thought he wasn't working - ha ha ha. The Public Option WILL be in the final bill. WHY? because Obama has already written the bill, they have added the Public Option AND the Baucus Bill and it's lowers the deficit even more.

The GOP likes to play? Well they have the ultimate Player in Obama. He beat the stuffings out of them in the election and he is still beating them. He is laughing as they call him "inexperienced" "naive". Wait until you see this bill - it is a DREAM. Trust me - Obama has this and we have his back. Like they said during the campaign, this guy has a mean SECOND PUNCH. Well GOP duck 'cause here it comes.

Posted by: Julescator | October 7, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Well, if it's looking so great at this stage, let's add the Public Healthcare Option, and we'll save even more !!

Posted by: jacktar2001 | October 7, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

JOKE! JOKE! JOKE! What happened to government supported single payer universal coverage? CHANGE? CHANGE? CHANGE? What happened to change for 'we the People'? CHANGE so that the People do not go bankrupt, so we can afford to keep supporting our families after an illness, keep buying food instead of being forced into making a choice between child's medicine or food, or between life and giving up one's home to medical bankruptcy.

How about those Rebubs, opening up the new pool of people for blood-letting to a bunch of rapacious leeches (insurance companies), salivating over their 20 to 30%, and still they do not extend coverage to everyone.

How about those Dems, rolling right over for the Repubs and insurance companies, bending over for the soap in a shower stall in a prison for their 30 pieces of silver... once again, no representation for 'we the people'. The people in prisons get better than health care than we the People.

Is there serious consideration of the Baucus Bill? He is an insurance company pimp or wh*re, that's where most of his funding comes from. And the insurance companies' and Repub's attitude seems to be 'let them die and reduce the surplus population'. We allow people to die if they have no insurance, we force them to die even when they have it.

I am totally disgusted with our present government and insurance system. There is no representation for we the people, only for banks, insurance companies, big business, corporations and the military. We the Taxpayer's have given the banks and insurance companies approximately $24-trillion and with that money they raised their charges, their fees, sent all of their customer relation jobs to Asia.... ummm, now where will we get money to pay for single payer universal health care? Let's get it from the Banks, control insurance companies, keep the money and pay for single payer health care, get our troops back from overseas, save some money and lives... but apparently, they are also expendable for a left-over surrealistic nightmare of a past mentally defective psychotic president.

President Obama doesn't even have a mental defect to excuse his behavior, his lack of courage on behalf of the people he was elected to represent, for change he promised. Perhaps it is time for we the people in this country to change the equation, perhaps we should take the cake from the rich and powerful, take our lives back, run on the banks, withdraw from insurance companies... does anyone realize what would happen if we the people withdrew from banks and insurance pools? That act alone would destablize them... we the People have the power, do we have the courage to exercise it? We the People need to realize we do NOT NEED them, it would only be a little inconvenient.

Just a disgusted View from My Trailer Park.
MJ Richards

Posted by: mcjorich | October 7, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse


Imarkex said:
You people are seriously ignorant if you believe you believe you can add 30 million people and cut the cost 81 million dollars . "YOU LIE !"
=========================================

You don't get it because you don't know economics. BTW - what were the CBO numbers on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Despite the kicking and screaming by the GOP, The DEMS once again have done something for the American people.

Womens' Rights
Civil Rights
Social Security
Meidcare
Minimum Wage hike
Equal pay for Equal work

the GOP has given you two failed wars and two failed wars and two failed wars......

Posted by: Julescator | October 7, 2009 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Let's pass this thing and move the ball downfield for American Healthcare! If we need a more public plan, it can be added later...if needed. Folks are suffering and dying ... and we call ourselves the greatest country. Its time to live up to those words.

If the GOP and Fox News do not want Americans to have this, then they better get out of the way.

Posted by: free-donny | October 7, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

Read the bill. You may be pleasantly surprised. I was. Lot of good stuff in there, at a fair price.

Posted by: KateSaunders | October 7, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

That's an interesting comment since about two 1/2 months ago they said as quoted in this very same liberal rag, it would increase it.


By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, July 17, 2009

Under questioning by members of the Senate Budget Committee, Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, said bills crafted by House leaders and the Senate health committee do not propose "the sort of fundamental changes" necessary to rein in the skyrocketing cost of government health programs, particularly Medicare. On the contrary, Elmendorf said, the measures would pile on an expensive new program to cover the uninsured.

Maybe this is the type of "change" Obozzo referred to.
=======================================
I guess they didn't know that OBAMA is adding the PUBLIC OPTION which the CBO says does introduce competition and WILL lower the costs of health care. I guess your July NEWS is really, really old. Sorry.

Obama is too smart for you guys. He has already written the bill. This little farce is for the benefit of the stupid GOP in the Senate AND the HOUSE. They have been played because they are too stupid to keep their objections to themselves. They don't know how to hold their cards. Obama and the DEMS knew exactly how to win this and the GOP is really not that bright.

Ah - this reminds me the election and watching you guys think you had a chance. I remember all the Bradley effect talk and all the White working class people won't vote for him. Ah yes - it appears that you are about to have another smackdown.

Will you guys ever learn??????

Posted by: Julescator | October 7, 2009 9:05 PM | Report abuse

It never ceases to amaze me how patently stupid the elites in government take us all for. Talk about insulting ones intelligence!If this press release tells us anything, its that this crooked admistration is going to do WHATEVER it takes to hang this albatross around our necks! Bogus Numbers does not even begin to describe this! Come on people! WAKE UP!
We need that house up there cleaned out! TOP TO BOTTOM! SIDE TO SIDE! These destructive morons have GOT TO GO!
America is being steered off a cliff right before our very eyes!

Posted by: runester | October 7, 2009 9:07 PM | Report abuse

CBO Says Senate Health Bill Would Reduce Federal Deficit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!! That was a good one!

Posted by: forgetthis
===


Indeed. It is the same CBO that the Goobers were quoting when the costs were pegged higher in earlier candidates for bills.

face it goober, Health Care Reform is here to pass, and for once all Americans, including you Goobers would have the option to get affordable health care.

The death panel crapola tactics did not work.

The bringing guns to a health care debate did not work

The scare tactics of killing grandma did not work.

So either you buy in goober, or you are left with your tooth.


LOLOLOLOLLOLOL

Posted by: HumanSimpleton | October 7, 2009 9:09 PM | Report abuse

It never ceases to amaze me how patently stupid the elites in government take us all for. Talk about insulting ones intelligence!If this press release tells us anything, its that this crooked admistration is going to do WHATEVER it takes to hang this albatross around our necks! Bogus Numbers does not even begin to describe this! Come on people! WAKE UP!
We need that house up there cleaned out! TOP TO BOTTOM! SIDE TO SIDE! These destructive morons have GOT TO GO!
America is being steered off a cliff right before our very eyes!

Posted by: runester | October 7, 2009 9:11 PM | Report abuse

It never ceases to amaze me how patently stupid the elites in government take us all for. Talk about insulting ones intelligence!If this press release tells us anything, its that this crooked admistration is going to do WHATEVER it takes to hang this albatross around our necks! Bogus Numbers does not even begin to describe this! Come on people! WAKE UP!
We need that house up there cleaned out! TOP TO BOTTOM! SIDE TO SIDE! These destructive morons have GOT TO GO!
America is being steered off a cliff right before our very eyes!

Posted by: runester
===


Sour grapes?

Clean up the house is euphemism for get rid of Democrats.

Not get rid of Democrats *and* Republicans.

When you can fake earnestness better, Goober, please make you case.

In the mean time scurry off to your tea-bagging party and complain that the Americans rejected your ilk last November!

Posted by: HumanSimpleton | October 7, 2009 9:12 PM | Report abuse

I'm old. Why do you Dems want to kill me by cutting my health care to cover illegals?

Posted by: jnsbear | October 7, 2009 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Well, if it's looking so great at this stage, let's add the Public Healthcare Option, and we'll save even more !!

Posted by: jacktar2001
==

That remains to be seen, but it will definitely keep costs under some check.

One thing is certain, the GOP look like HUGE losers and whiners.

Watch for some of them to fall in line with the HNIC!

Suck it Goobers!!!!!

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Posted by: HumanSimpleton | October 7, 2009 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Republican'ts are seeing their distortions and lies falling by the wayside. Perhaps the insurance lobby should ask for their money back. They will need it to help compensate for the lost loopholes and looting of Medicare that will make them work for their profits, just like real people do.
McConnell and Boehner should go bird hunting with Dick Cheney.

Posted by: AffinityGW1 | October 7, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Any congressman want to sign they will resign if this is close to a real budget? UH HUH? Do not think they are that crazy or as dumb as American voters...Both sides of congress need voted out all the time. They look like an AARP meeting on steroids.

Posted by: billisnice | October 7, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

@justsal123, among others, who says, "the country does not want a public option. Where do you get your info from? Let's see what the language of the bill says but how more spending will reduce the deficit is really a strech even for liberals."

See 7th bar down from the top:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/09/25/us/politics/25pollgrx.html

Don't like the NYTimes... how about a poll out of Ohio?
http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/ohiopolitics/entries/2009/10/07/69_percent_of_ohioans_support.html

In general, a public option enjoys very wide support. These are not the first polls, nor will they be the last...

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/ohiopolitics/entries/2009/10/07/69_percent_of_ohioans_support.html

Posted by: paul37 | October 7, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Ha ha ha ha if the deficit for this year alone without counting anything else is or any other year is going to be 34 trillion dollars give or take a few pennies then with health care it will only be about 38 trillion, but who cares lol Obama is giving our money away like a mad man to buy votes in November and his pay off are still a good deal.... Sure why not let through our our health care away too he is destroying everything else .... Our health care is soooo bad that Canadians and other country's people that have a better care that what Obama is offering are coming here and paying to save their lives... hmmmm I wonder why?? hmmm Let Obama succeed and then cry away because whatever you have now you are not getting back! If it is changed.... So pray pray pray

Posted by: amapola11 | October 7, 2009 9:20 PM | Report abuse

The U.S. spends $650 Billion a year on defense in support of the military industrial complex but can't spend $83 Billion on heath care for Americans.

End health care benefits for members of congress and their staff, let them buy their own.

Posted by: knjincvc | October 7, 2009 9:20 PM | Report abuse

Forget healthcare reform.

The tax code is a god awful mess. Why can't these idiots in congress start there? Eliminate loophole and deductions and charge a flat tax to all who earn money...individuals, business, church income properties, interest, dividends...one low income exemption...everyone else pays.

Then force Obama and the democrats to keep the promise to eliminate lobby groups and to line item veto pork. Repeal the stimulus bill and eliminate any funds to Acorn or the 361 front companies of Acorn. Sell Chrysler, GM at a bankruptcy sale which would void excessive union contracts. Collect all of the money from banks and investment firms and let them fail if they must.

Close all foreign military bases all over the globe. Bring our military home and train and equip them to be the most deadly force on earth if provoked...no more skirmishes or occupation..just total annihilation. Use them to secure our borders and send illegals and their families back to the home country. Let immigration proceed in accordance with our laws.

Fix those more important things....then healthcare will be easy. Just offer the plan congress enjoys to all legal citizens according to their ability to pay.

Posted by: bgPhil | October 7, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse

I guess Congress thinks we are stupid. This is not he final Bill, but a Trojan Horse to get through the Senate. Please see the CBO estimate of the Bill after conference. Until this caterpillar morphs into a cockroach please do not patronize us with phony estimates.

Posted by: pauldia | October 7, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Rock on Mr. President. If the RIGHT is whining and crying this much YOU ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK. KEEP GOING - we have your back!!!!! I just sent $500 to the DNC for more ADS. whoooo hooooo

Posted by: Julescator | October 7, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Ha ha ha ha if the deficit for this year alone without counting anything else is or any other year is going to be 34 trillion dollars give or take a few pennies then with health care it will only be about 38 trillion, but who cares lol Obama is giving our money away like a mad man to buy votes in November and his pay off are still a good deal.... Sure why not let through our our health care away too he is destroying everything else .... Our health care is soooo bad that Canadians and other country's people that have a better care that what Obama is offering are coming here and paying to save their lives... hmmmm I wonder why?? hmmm Let Obama succeed and then cry away because whatever you have now you are not getting back! If it is changed.... So pray pray pray
==============================
Um that DEFICIT if from BUSH. See he didn't add the costs of the iraq and afghanistan wars in the budget. Obama was honest and added them in.

BTW - what did the CBO say that the cost of the WARS would add to the deficit. When you get those figures, get back to us!


Posted by: Julescator | October 7, 2009 9:25 PM | Report abuse

OF COURSE it will reduce the budget deficit. Why wouldn't it when these elitist clowns are simply passing on the cost of health insurance to taxpayers? And what's more, they'll pay "subsidies" -- that is, pay the insurance cartel -- so that the insurance cartel can charge you whatever they wish.

This bill is unconstitutional - a travesty - and an insult to the electorate. No public option = financial windfall to insurance cartel. To all the elitist senators...shove this waste of paper up your collective bottom lines.

Posted by: pcw5150 | October 7, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Everybody's got one, and they all stink...

Posted by: treetopflyer | October 7, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

I guess Congress thinks we are stupid. This is not he final Bill, but a Trojan Horse to get through the Senate. Please see the CBO estimate of the Bill after conference. Until this caterpillar morphs into a cockroach please do not patronize us with phony estimates.

Posted by: pauldia
===

Find a tea-bagging party, Goober!

Crying over non-partisan estimates is something ... on wait, Beck can do that.


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Posted by: HumanSimpleton | October 7, 2009 9:27 PM | Report abuse

This CBO report is bogus. Guess Rahm got his SEIU thugs to work in him again.
1. ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS are now covered under health care "reform".
2. $500 Billion in Medicare Cuts.
3. Hefty "fees"/taxes assessed on those who opt not to sign up for insurance and those small business who opt out of the "coop".
4. Taxation of medicare equipment - mostly those equipment items used by the elderly - hmmmmm - now with a 500Billion cut in medicare and a the signing up of 12 million illegals - who do you think is going to suffer from all this?
Certainly not the illegals - but certainly the last of the greatest generation who have paid their dues for years..\
But I guess that's OK because old people and those who served this country well in war and peace are of no use these days and the illegals and minorities who will benefit will vote Democratic - so that's important.

Posted by: sandynh
===

Whine all you want, lie all you want.

Don't like it, leave the USA, and go to Saudi Arabia, goober!

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Hey, why not mention ACORN?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Posted by: HumanSimpleton | October 7, 2009 9:29 PM | Report abuse

You will get no health care without $ to pay for premiums. This will cost premium to rise 10%...

Any one want to bet their house on this being a correct figure? Congress has never been "on" or "under" budget in America's history...

Posted by: billisnice | October 7, 2009 9:32 PM | Report abuse

OF COURSE it will reduce the budget deficit. Why wouldn't it when these elitist clowns are simply passing on the cost of health insurance to taxpayers? And what's more, they'll pay "subsidies" -- that is, pay the insurance cartel -- so that the insurance cartel can charge you whatever they wish.

This bill is unconstitutional - a travesty - and an insult to the electorate. No public option = financial windfall to insurance cartel. To all the elitist senators...shove this waste of paper up your collective bottom lines.

Posted by: pcw5150 | October 7, 2009 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Next the GOP is going to say that the Health Care bill has WMDS in it and a huge mushroom cloud. lol lol

Here they go imploding again. Here is their biggest fear realized. They did NOT deliver to the Health Care companies and they want their money back.

Their fear is about to be realized. This young, naive, inexperience, Non-citizen, Nazi, Socialist, Black guy has sucker punched them AGAIN! I just love hearing them whine.

The biggest punch is yet to come. There is a reason the carefully crafted Baucus bill is going to get through without the Publica option. That is because Obama has already written the bill with Baucus and they will add in the Public Option in the final bill and go to reconciliation if they need to.

But what they did is give the Blue Dogs a bill they can vote for which they will. They will have 60 votes, no filabuster and WHAMO - they Public Option comes in at the end and get this, the CBO says the bill WITH the Public Option actually saves more money because it DOES create competition and drive the costs down! BINGO.

OBAMA is the MAN. And you GOP tolls thought he wasn't working!

Posted by: Julescator | October 7, 2009 9:33 PM | Report abuse

BS liar and chief and the hill crooks are getting their welfare care pushed through.welcome aboard amigos and the rest of the free loaders. time for CITIZENS to cheat wherever possible on taxes

Posted by: pofinpa | October 7, 2009 9:37 PM | Report abuse

How about we see it posted on the net for 72 hrs. Oh wait the Libs do not want the public to see it. The irresponsible Socialists without checks and balances are way out of control

2010 and 12 cannot come soon enough!!

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 9:39 PM | Report abuse

FraudObama wrote:

"The irresponsible Socialists without checks and balances are way out of control"

Guess you haven't gotten the memo. Dr. Bill Frist, most conservative of Republicans, has told you to stuff your "socialized medicine" lie. The former Senate Majority Leader says you are spouting garbage. Which we already knew, but now you do too.

Posted by: B2O2 | October 7, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

This bill is junk like the people that wrote it all you people can talk till your blue in the face I;m telling you now, we will have a health-care bill with a public option and here's the magic number 51 got it GOP 51,51,51 this will happen just like it did when Bush got his bill passed twice for tax cuts for the rich God I:m glad I;m a LIBERAL

Posted by: mernatti123 | October 7, 2009 9:50 PM | Report abuse

They keep rolling this manure in powdered sugar, but it will NEVER be a jelly donut !!!

BTW: Botox, Stretched faced San Fran Nan is STILL a LIAR !!!

Posted by: thgirbla | October 7, 2009 9:51 PM | Report abuse

The only thing Daddy Gubment is capable of reducing is your life span. Wake up suckers..

Posted by: SMWE357

-----

Gosh, you're pretty persuasive, and your use of the phrase Daddy Gubment is deeply convincing. You're way more credible than that non-partisan CBO thingie!

Posted by: ponkey | October 7, 2009 9:51 PM | Report abuse

NO public option = NO REFORM!

PERIOD!!!

Indeed, itsaBJ to the insurance monsters, and nothing less.

Posted by: postgettingworse | October 7, 2009 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: B2O2
Dr. Bill Frist, most conserative of Republicans,

--

Frist, while leader was responsible for the Republican out of controlling spending. Bad reference for you to use. And yes, redistribution , the core belief of your irresponsible party is Socialism. It is unfortunate that Conservatives actually have to educate you and your ilk on who you are. But, now you know.


Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 9:54 PM | Report abuse

If I am understanding this correctly, we're looking at the cost of $829BN over 10 years which amounts to almost $83BN annually. Considering that the extra healthcare costs for all obese people add up to an extra $147BN annually, which is $1.47TN over 10 years, how about if we make all the "obese by choice" people pay this 45% difference out of their pockets and in cash? This is no prejudice. All insurance is based on the risk level everyone must be held accountable for their bad behavior and having over $600BN extra cash from this transaction, we could have a Congressional quality healthcare reform, provide this care for 100% of Americans and legal residents, and we wouldn't have to borrow $829BN from China. Liberals, wait, we could even think about the illegals...

Posted by: jmk55 | October 7, 2009 10:00 PM | Report abuse

Talk about spin! You girls are more than cheerleaders, you're honorary team members! Do you get signed autographs? Photographs? The opportunity to host 'salons'? Obama: "I promise you that four years after the end of my second term we will begin to see a slight reduction in the deficit.. I promise. And your check is being sent via the USPS!"

Posted by: chatard | October 7, 2009 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Any Govt Option will ultimately morph into a Single Payer Govt Dictated Bloated Inefficient Controlling plan. Barry wants that, he wants the control. That is his ultimate goal. He has said it. Control. That is what the Socialist Lib Dems want. If he does not get his Govt Option, soon to be a Single Payer he will consider his administration a failure. And that would be just fine.

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 10:01 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Julescator

I just sent $500 to the DNC

--

Sure you did. But even it were true you might want to hold a little back to pay for all the taxes your head fake fraud of a Pres and inept Socialist Congress is about ready to levy on you. Thats right even libs, those that are gullible enough to give those morons anything will be taxed too. Not just those evil wealthy tax payers.

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 10:06 PM | Report abuse

Lower the deficit, sure thing...but read more...by cutting millions from Medicare and raising taxes. Yep. Don't believe the headline just because it's a headline.

Posted by: alaskachic93 | October 7, 2009 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Some of you are slow. They are spending money bringing paying customers into the market. They are increasing revenue to the government, while reducing subsidies to big business. As a result they are making more money than they are spending.

Guys this is a GOOD thing.

It would be more productive if you told your congressional representatives not to mess this up by adding amendments that will kill the surplus.

What I want to know is whether Wyden's amendment allowing individual choice would add additional savings?

Posted by: onifadee | October 7, 2009 10:16 PM | Report abuse

I think it's great to see the absolute excuse and abuse at any cost of the opponents to health insurance reform. Quote the CBO when it says what you want, COMPLETELY dismiss it when it says something else about a very different bill.
The Axiom of Confrontationalism:
Say anything in the total opposition to those you have been told to disagree with. Failure to the opposition at all costs, no matter whether all are harmed or not. Both sides are guilty of this, however most people don't think this way.

Look, I don't really like this plan, I am for the public insurance option, but I see this as some progress and am glad that even without one Republican vote for in committee, there was a middle ground taken somewhere.

Posted by: ripper368 | October 7, 2009 10:16 PM | Report abuse

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

PUBLIC OPTION - YES

SINGLE PAYER - YES

Fei Hu

Posted by: Fei_Hu | October 7, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

It Stinks and the Socialist led Congress knows it. If it were good they would post it on the internet. But they refuse to. They take the public for granted. Their arrogance is rancid.

2010 and 12 cannot come soon enough!!

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

It's better to waste $1 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan than provide all Americans with equitable health care. Corporate Welfare overshadows American's Health Care regardless of who calls the shots!

Republicans place hating President Obama over loving America, every time......

An Independent

Posted by: aeaustin | October 7, 2009 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Fei Hu

You love your Govt. You love it big and dominant.

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 10:19 PM | Report abuse

aeaustin

Do you think this bilge would be free. Is that what your looking for, a govt hand out? Sad.

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Smoke, Mirrors and Deceit coming from the most irresponsible Congress in recent memory.

Posted by: FraudObama | October 7, 2009 10:30 PM | Report abuse

I have a simple question. I am 60 yo and work for myself, how much will it cost me? Give me a number. I don't care how much the government saves, how much will it cost me? If it increases my taxes, add that in.

Posted by: Beacon2 | October 7, 2009 10:31 PM | Report abuse

Is this the bill that mandates "everyone" buy insurance, and is fined if they don't? Costs are NOT regulated? That Senate bill? Since I don't own stock in an insurance company, I don't consider this "reform". Why would this be considered the final bill? I would expect middle class taxpayers marching on D.C. with hot tar, feathers, rails, torches and pitchforks if this passes.

Posted by: shadowmagician | October 7, 2009 10:32 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry; the math is boggling. When I went to school, 1 and 1 make 2. I can't really get in to an argument concerning a Congress who are going along with the anthromorphic (whatever) global warming lie. Whether or not there is global warming, the belief that we humans can change 1 whit the climate is the height of egotism. Actually we are probably headed for an ice age like the scientists warned in the '70s. Nevertheless environmental concerns will be shoved aside in an effort to limit CO2, one of the most natural gases on this planet. It makes plants grow and turn green!
Man that makes me mad!
As far as health care goes, the poor and indigent have health care - the Free Clinic. I suppose the government pays for that. In an emergency, they go to the emergency room where they must receive care (even illegals) How is this going to change with any of these proposals? In fact how could it affect any of these groups? Welfare recipients - Homeless - Illegals - Fixed income seniors?
So all this consternation about health care reform is for who? The real effort should be to reel in costs. I can no longer go to the chiropractor since he charges over $50 a visit. The dentist wants $95. Both have just moved into bigger nicer facilities. My co-pay for the doctor is $30; I have no idea how much the HMO gives him. The fact is medical should not run more than 10% of your budget.

Posted by: jbg29 | October 7, 2009 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Since the money will be spent on a war if not on American citizens. I am all for it.
Reductions come from savings in medicare and tax on policies.
We are somehow made to believe that those who cannot afford health insurance do so by choice or are inferior beings that do not deserve it. This is a cruel and inhumane belief that denies life itself.
Just the sort of belief that caused the French Revolution. You get the health insurance executives and I'll get the guillotine.

Posted by: seemstome | October 7, 2009 11:33 PM | Report abuse

Republicans: Spending more money won’t reduce the deficit!

Uh, I guess you guys aren’t very good at math. The bill does spend more money to cover the uninsured, but it also cuts a lot of spending in Medicare (a program Republicans hated before but now defend its uncontrolled spending simply because Obama wants to limit it) and provides disincentives for luxury health plans by taxing them (a McCain proposal that Obama reluctantly backed). Those control spiraling costs. Covering the uninsured means they don’t constantly utilize the most expensive form of care, the emergency room, and that also brings down overall health care costs.

Republicans: The CBO is lying, biased, bought out!

That’s not what you were saying when the numbers hurt the Democratic health care plan. The CBO numbers were held up as prime evidence against it. But I see, facts only apply when they are good for Republicans. See, Republicans can never be in the wrong, except, oh yeah, 2001-2008. By the way, if Obama could control the CBO, don’t you think he would have done it so that there was no bad news in the first place?

Republicans: The CBO said something completely different months ago!

Yeah, about a different bill. The Democrats in this committee saw what wasn’t working right according to the CBO and they made adjustments to their version.

Republicans: If you cannot afford the insurance, you sure as heck can't afford the fine.

If you cannot afford the insurance, you’re subsidized for it, thus no fine. *sigh*

Republicans: Dems are trying to kill old people!

Yeah, because Dems purposely want to hurt the biggest voting demographic and lose elections. Right. Oh, I see, the GOP wants to scare them into voting Republican, which is where all the death panel and euthanasia and kill-grandma lies come from.

Republicans: But the bill still leaves millions uninsured despite what Obama promised!

A lot of those are illegal aliens, whom Republicans disdain and very much want to keep uninsured.

Republicans: The public overwhelmingly does not want the public option!

Wrong. 65% want it. Even more Republicans want it than don’t want it:

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_health_care_092409.pdf

Posted by: zvelf | October 7, 2009 11:56 PM | Report abuse

They are plain outright liars. There is no way they can think adding to peoples health care cost & take away Medicare peoples coverage & charge more taxes on your own coverage which will have you standing in line for services from a doctor or hospital & call this a help to reduce the deficet 85%of us like our health insurance & you are going to put a tax on them that would up our rates & give health care to people that do not have jobs & say this is going to help them. But in the other hand you are taking away our retiress health coverage or decrease their coverage & give coverage to the illegal immigrants. It is best left alone because this adminstration is trying to con us again. You have got to help to stop them before our parents, who most of us cannot help out much these days due to no jobs. Paying more our in unemployment is only going to make things worse. We got to vote these idiots our of office before we have no country to defend & no parents alive to take care of. All this is coming from people who have no families, parents, or care anything about the people that fought so couragesly in WWII & help not just America but other countries, also, & you want to kick them while they are down & have lost most of their retirement if not all to the Washington misfits that caused this or let this happen. The constitution makes no mention of health care being furnished by government so therefore it is illegal to force this down peoples throats.
You were elected to preserve & protect the Constitution of the United States not ruin it or try to twist it against us.

Posted by: egw7777 | October 8, 2009 6:39 AM | Report abuse

Yes, but these projections depend on $400 billion cut from Medicare, $201 billion in revenues from excise taxes on the cadillac plans (Unions still fighting this), and doubling Medicaid by pushing the costs of doing so down to the states, many of whom are already bankrupt (think California).

This plan also relies on collecting 10 years of taxes & fees, but only paying for actual healthcare costs for 7 1/2 years. You'll begin paying the legislated taxes next year, but you won't get any healthcare benefits until 2013 or 2014.

CPA's call this "creative accounting," or fuzzy math.

Due respect.

Posted by: auntmo9990 | October 8, 2009 9:18 AM | Report abuse

The Federal health care bill is new taxation. We are being hoodwinked.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10577

*IT* *IS* *NOT* *A* *FREE* *LUNCH!* But the supporting public believes that it IS!

Please help them understand (and vote out the bill's supporters).

Posted by: Texan7 | October 8, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Texan7 | October 8, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

"In fact, overall, the tax increases in the bill are more than double the amount of deficit reduction. This isn’t a health care efficiency bill or a cost containment bill. It is a tax and spend bill, pure and simple." - Michael Tanner

Posted by: Texan7 | October 8, 2009 11:53 AM | Report abuse


Obama would throw those on medicare out in the corn field if he could.

.

Posted by: Billw3 | October 8, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Whether the proposed bill is any good is hard to say, yet. The arithmetic, however, is totally unreal. Over 10 years, the cost estimate is $829 billion. Reductions in present health care costs (Medicare and whatever) and new taxes will reduce expenses and add revenue in the amount of $910 billion. Hence, a net savings of $81 billion. Who believes that $910 billion in savings can actually occur. Not me.

Jayemmay

Posted by: jayemmay | October 11, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company