Where's your $25 billion?
According to the Congressional Budget Office, even the weak public option would have saved $25 billion over 10 years. As part of the compromise, shouldn't the moderates who wanted that removed from the bill have to come up with the revenue to replace it? If not, why not? I've been hearing this gripe from liberal offices lately, and Russ Feingold makes the point publicly today, and it seems pretty spot-on.
By
Ezra Klein
|
December 9, 2009; 4:56 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: The virtues of inconsistency
Next: The costs of saying 'no'
Posted by: redwards95 | December 9, 2009 6:16 PM | Report abuse
The comments to this entry are closed.
Don't even ask them because the answer will almost certainly be reducing the subsidies by $25 billion.