President Obama's national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.
Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO's standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama's pledge that the legislation would cost "around $900 billion over 10 years." When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.
Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law's core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion......
that amount represents a gross cost to the federal government of $1,762 billion, offset in part by $510 billion in receipts and other budgetary effects
CBO and JCT have not estimated the budgetary effects in 2022 of the other provisions of the ACA; over the 2012–2021 period, those other provisions were previously estimated to reduce budget deficits.
....that is almost double what we were told as the dang thing was being passed.
Everyone who was foolish enough to buy the line of BS about how "Obamacare will lower the deficit"..... Here's your sign.
and again. as cpwill keeps saying. Obamacare will never be fully implemented. not because of politics, or the supreme court, or anything else, but just plain because we can't. we do not have the fiscal capacity to add this putrid oozing monstrosity to the pile of entitlements we are already sinking under.
900 billion off? No wonder no one wants to give more money to this administration, their math seems a little fuzzy.
900 billion off? No wonder no one wants to give more money to this administration, their math seems a little fuzzy.
Beltway Confidential continues to be the most dishonest political site around.
So it is 1.762 T before you figure in offset cost reductions.
Oh wait, so they also do not include all the cost savings.
Never, ever trust the Beltway Confidential. They never use the truth when a lie will suffice.
Beltway Confidential continues to be the most dishonest political site around.
So it is 1.762 T before you figure in offset cost reductions.
Oh wait, so they also do not include all the cost savings.
Never, ever trust the Beltway Confidential. They never use the truth when a lie will suffice.
CBO Report said:This report also presents estimates through fiscal year 2022, because the baseline projection period now extends through that additional year. The ACA’s provisions related to insurance coverage are now projected to have a net cost of $1,252 billion over the 2012–2022 period (see Table 2, following the text); that amount represents a gross cost to the federal government of $1,762 billion, offset in part by $510 billion in receipts and other budgetary effects (primarily revenues from penalties and other sources).
Let's use the CBO words then:
So the gross cost to the federal government is accurate: 1,762 billion. Add in your (-510 billion) offset, and it's still higher than the 960 billion.
Will you at least acknowledge that the estimates are seeming to increase even with the offset from prior CBO estimates?
I did use the CBO's words. You also failed to read far enough in the CBO report, since the number does not contain the savings projections for 2022. I also point out that even your numbers disagree with how the story presented them.
Again, you didn't answer the question.
Here it is again:
Will you at least acknowledge that the estimates are seeming to increase even with the offset from prior CBO estimates?
Sorry, I missed that. Yes, the estimates are up. How much is up in the air. Will you likewise admit that the article this thread is based on misrepresented the numbers?
Redress, why are you seemingly so confident that the cost savings will actually appear when the person who signed the bill into law lacks the political will to follow through with implementing them (ie ending the doc fix)?
Thank you. And I'm trying to find the CBO report that identified the original 960 billion to see if that estimate included the offsets or if it was a gross estimate. Reason being, the article compares the 960 billion to the 1.7 T and claims it's doubled. It would be misrepresented if the 960 billion was adjusted and the 1.7T is gross or vice versa. I'm not having luck however finding that CBO report.
....that is almost double what we were told as the dang thing was being passed.
Everyone who was foolish enough to buy the line of BS about how "Obamacare will lower the deficit"..... Here's your sign.
and again. as cpwill keeps saying. Obamacare will never be fully implemented. not because of politics, or the supreme court, or anything else, but just plain because we can't. we do not have the fiscal capacity to add this putrid oozing monstrosity to the pile of entitlements we are already sinking under.
So help us get a universal-payer system implemented instead.
We are talking about projections. Projections work by assuming a set of circumstances.
And I am talking about the real world. The doc fix has been passed by Congress for the past two years. Thats $50 billion in mythological costs savings down the drain. So, what make you think any other costs savings will actually materialize?
I did use the CBO's words. You also failed to read far enough in the CBO report, since the number does not contain the savings projections for 2022. I also point out that even your numbers disagree with how the story presented them.
...and of course the the savings "projections" are SO much more reliable than the original "cost" projections, too funny.
Ummmm...no one claimed that. Nice try though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?