Spokane7
50°
March 18, 2010 in Nation/World
Health care plan cuts deficit, CBO concludes
WASHINGTON — Democratic health care efforts got an important boost Thursday as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported that the $940 billion health care package could reduce federal deficits $130 billion over the next 10 years.
The preliminary CBO analysis had been stalled for nearly a week, as Democrats scrambled to change their health care plan so that its cost remained under $1 trillion and deficits could be cut.
The legislation is expected to be formally unveiled later today. A vote is expected no sooner than Sunday, the day President Barack Obama is scheduled to leave on an overseas trip.
While all the details aren’t yet out, the Democratic plan makes at least three major changes from the versions that the House of Representatives and Senate passed last year.
It would end the Medicare prescription-drug coverage gap, in which Medicare now stops paying for prescriptions each year once the government and the consumer have spent $2,830 on them. The benefit then resumes once annual out-of-pocket spending reaches $4,550.The bill would close that so-called “doughnut hole.”
It would provide help for lower- and middle-income families, and expand coverage to about 32 million uninsured, meaning that about 95 percent of all Americans would be covered. It also would help states pay the cost of Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance program for lower-income people.
The bill will contain many provisions that have broad support. Among them: Insurers couldn’t deny coverage to anyone because of pre-existing conditions, and there could be no lifetime limits on coverage. It’s also expected to extend Medicare’s solvency by nine years; Medicare’s fund that pays hospital benefits is expected to be exhausted by 2017.
The bill aims to reduce Medicare spending by 1.4 percentage points a year.
The sketchy details were no surprise, and are unlikely to trigger a new wave of instant support for the bill.
House leaders are still seriously discussing a two-step process for consideration. First, the House would vote on the rules governing debate, rules that deem the Senate legislation, which many House Democrats dislike, as having passed.
If that plan is approved, the House then would consider the changes in a second bill, called reconciliation. Both bills would need 216 votes to pass. Democrats control 253 House seats, and in the last major House health care vote, in November, 39 Democrats voted no. So far, only Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, has announced that he’ll switch.
Stocks plummet as outlook in Europe dims 
liarsinnews on March 18 at 10:42 a.m.
LIARS? Common sense dictates the health care plan will cost those of us who pay federal income tax more money. Just remember the huge numbers who pay nothing in federal income tax. Its almost an unbelievable percentage of Americans who do not pay a penny in federal income tax.
soccermomsusie on March 18 at 10:51 a.m.
Dick Adams, You are right! Obviously they are liars. The CBO must have used socialistic math (no wonder the public schools are always trying to ram math down our kids’ throats). For sure, they used Arabic numerals. What would you expect but the use of Arabic numerals from Barrack HUSSEIN Obama!!!
HEAR OUR VOICE!
Megan_B on March 18 at 11:42 a.m.
Haha. So when someone states a fact that you don’t like, they must be liars?? So it’s either you agree with me, or you’re wrong? Must be a frustrating way to reason…
Dazzeetrader11 on March 18 at 12:01 p.m.
NO Megan…only so much money in an already broken system. Fewer services and government dictate who gets what and when. It’s impossible to offer more services for a cheaper price. When the CBO numbers are released, you will see the plan is geared to ofer more coverage to younger, productive people. When 59% of the population is saying NO to the plan but Obama says he’s pushing it through anyway, it’s time for this brand of socialist to stop.
CBO numbers are pure manipulations by borrowing from projected citizen money in the future and applied to the present., It’s a simple manipulation. It’s a huge “hustle”….what’s confounding is that the beaurocracy to manage health care isn’t even in the CBO budget. That easily will push the numpers up a 1/3rd….and well over 1.3 trillion dollars. Government and the unions get more control and the citizenry pays for it.
If you’re sophistocated enough to really ready those number, you’ll conclude it’s a huge bill to remake an entire industry….and to cover less that 10% of the population who cannot or will not pay their own way. Seriously….would anyone in his/her right mind junk a working system most like….. to cover less that 10% of the population and spend trillions doing it? Better plan would cover the uninsured without breaking the bank. Even more importantly though, having some form of insurance does NOT make people live longer…this is what the fallacy is. Nobody dies because Barack doesn’t spend trillions.
This plan indentures the US working, productive population so they cannot grow. They have rights too you know. We should be entitled to our own money and not forced to spend trillions on people who can’t/won’t get thir own insurance. CBO numbers are “selected” and simply untrue. It’s just another form of what came up last year. DO you want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage too? Well…Barack did just that for you. Information is precious….read and learn how corrupt this plan is. (not proofread)
WillyPeter on March 18 at 12:13 p.m.
Here is the challenge. Getting the half of American workers who pay over 90 % (+/-) of income taxes now, to believe that their taxes and affiliated costs won’t go up when they are ordered, by federal law, to pay for providing 30 million more people with government regulated health care. They have enough common sense to know that that reasoning just doesn’t make sense.
Theanticscontinue on March 18 at 1:04 p.m.
Megan, the numbers “calculated” by the CBO are based on the information provided to them by the Majority party. What they cannot do is read into their calculations items the party left out, we can. On numerous ocassions this majority party did not sharpen their pencils well enough to get the “appropriate” CBO estimate. This time they leftout enough information so as to get the result the majority party wants. It only took them 3 or so times to be able to assemble this for the CBO, which tells me they do not know what is/is not in the bill. Others such as Daisy, Dick Adams and members of the minority party that are outside the CBO office can comment on all of what has been left out but cannot in fact be ignored. This bill is flawed, corrupted by all the back room deals it has taken to contnue to push it forward. Scrap the bill and go back to the start line. No “benefits” are even realized for years to come while they collect money now to begin the offset the costs yet to come. Use the US Post Office as an example for what government run healthcare will be. The Post Office is broke. FedEx and UPS (private alternatives to the Post Office) are thriving. They adapt to customers, they change, they are not tied politically to any bureaucrat in Washington.
Scrap the bill!!!
Albert on March 18 at 1:25 p.m.
Oh Mr. Adams,…when the proverbial bottom falls out and the U.S. implodes, “they” will not be called “Liars”, but persons who “mis-speak”. Is there any difference? Good call up front Mr. Adams!!
rshroll on March 18 at 1:25 p.m.
Socialistic math. Trying to ram math down our kid’s throats. Arabic numerals. That’s a good one! Maybe without math the Californian’s wouldn’t have even noticed the recent 29% increase the health insurance companies were going to raise rates after the large year after year increases they already endured. The current system is unsustainable.
Dazzeetrader11 on March 18 at 1:34 p.m.
I cannot emphasize enough what Antics says about how the CBO calculates. All they have to work with are the data fed to them by these liberal Dems. Conservatives ( on both sides) haven’t been in the process or allowed to see the data given to CBO. Thus, the Obama group is free to say whatever they want and given whatever data they want to CBO. And add that not only the Post Office broke, each and every agency managed by the government is too….ie Medicare. It’s the same old thing….Dems throw money at problems and mismanage the money they confiscate from us. How clear can it be? Obama gives a nice speech from the teleprompters…but he cannot think for himself. And if you cannot suspect the pending senitlity of Pelosi, well…you’re watching the wrong channels. Reid won’tbe re-elected and the imcompetence is simply spectacular as the mismanagement blossoms.
When a party has to resort to florrid trickery and manipulation of the rule to get something passed, it’s clear they know what they won’t say: America doesn’t want Obamacare. He says he had a mandate just because he was elected. People voted against Bush but not FOR Obama. They people elected incompetence and misogyny from a rookie who had done nothing except live off the system his entire life. He was ill prepared to manage America’s checkbook because he hadn’t managed his own. A face who gathered power..not by achievement but by his charm and guile. And his Nobel is just a glaring example…..
Diana on March 18 at 2:25 p.m.
Thanks for the Fox News recap, Daisy. If it comforts you to believe all that, I hope you enjoy paying your higher and higher premiums and won’t mind when you’re dropped from your policy should you contract an expensive disease. Hope you don’t have any pre-existing conditions because you might have to go bankrupt getting treatment.
I’m sure you’ll refuse your socialistic social security, right?
The point is we’re paying for the uninsured now, though not in a very smart way. Every time an uninsured person shows up in the emergency room, we pay for it.
force_vector on March 18 at 2:41 p.m.
Of course it cuts the deficit: we pay taxes on it for years before the program actually begins. It’s like Washington State raising the sales tax rate to pay for a new road 5 years before work on the new road begins, and then continues the tax through construction and for the life of the road too. Details details. Of course the CBO number assumes knowledge of so many factors beyond reasonable certainty that the err function on this has to eclispe the final cost number. Republican or Democrat; all should see this for the game that it is.
SugarShane on March 18 at 2:52 p.m.
Funny how people actually believe the system we have in place is “working”.
force_vector on March 18 at 2:59 p.m.
Something else to think about: while everyone has been harping on those evil insurance companies they have failed to mention that the average profit margins for those companies are roughly 2% on an annual basis. So if they raise premiums by 29%, and you assume unwisely that health care costs tomorrow are the same as they are today, then they have increased the profit margin by a whole 0.58%. The real problem here is not insurance, it is the cost of care. Hospitals charge $10/asprin, $5k per night for a bed, and on and on. They charge this because someone has the ability to pay it (insurance companies) and they only have the means to pay by collecting premiums. You want to lower health care costs? You have to start withthe cost of care. If you could only get one car your entire life, and car repair companies charged you $15k to replace the timing belt, and the insurance you bought to cover it said “i’m sorry, but a 65$/month rate isn’t going to workout because we’d be bankrupt by the end of the month”, would you blame them, or the auto shop?
Scoutster on March 18 at 3:42 p.m.
Where were all these deficit hawks when the GOP borrowed on two wars and Medicare Part D (passed by Reconciliation) with NO funding?
I’m an independent, and I think political parties are shorthand for the ignorant. But it seems unfair and inaccurate to portray the Ds as the big spenders. They didn’t put us here. It’s just another one of those myths we all accept, but the evidence is opposite.
And, force vector, what is the benefit we receive from health insurance companies? Why do we need them any more than we need private fire departments or toll freeways. BTW, the health insurance cos are DELIGHTED there is no public option…they are going to make a killing.
Megan_B on March 18 at 3:57 p.m.
Great article written by Nicholas Kristof in the NY times today, please read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/opinion/18kristof.html
force_vector on March 18 at 4:11 p.m.
Scoutster- They are delighted becuase a public option would have put them out of business. How could any of them compete with unlimited gov’t subsidies borrowed off of the backs of future generations, and the tax dollars of the current one? Making a “killing” is relative. They aren’t making a killing now (2%) and this bill will do nothing to either help or hurt them near-term as it doesn’t address the inflated medical costs they have to cover as part of their business. In the end though, they will have to cut premiums so much to compete with the eventual gov’t option that they will go bankrupt and the only “option” left for Americans will be the gov’t one. So what is the benefit we receive from health insurance companies? Let’s say for argument that you pay 300$/month for 85 years in premiums. You would have given to the insurance company over the course of your life $306,000. Now lets assume you never used any medical services for which they covered, and suddenly at 50 you are diagnosed with a brain tumor and surgery will cost $750,000 dollars (not an unreasonable number by current cost standards). The insurance company has paid your bills becuase you had a policy, but they have now taken a net loss of over $440,000 dollars on you; great for you, bad for them. But that’s cool, becuase some other people won’t need brain surgery or another expensive procedure and they will have paid more than they took back. In then end, the insurance company makes about 2% profit over-all, you get to keep breathing, and there are thousands of people with jobs in the industry.
How does that work for you, Scoutster?
Scoutster on March 18 at 6:12 p.m.
Wow, force vector, that sounds good! So what you are saying, it sounds like, is that the bigger the pool of contributors to the insurance fund, the less risk for any ONE of us. Is that correct?
Well, I agree.
So, let’s just keep following your logic and spread the risk around to everyone! Wouldn’t that be the most sensible thing to do to?
force_vector on March 18 at 7:10 p.m.
Nice try scoutster. You’re right, if your an insurance company then you play the game of odds and the greater the number of people who hold a policy, then the greater the potential is to make a buck. However, you are leaving out a key part in your statement: policy holders all pay premiums. In a govt system, while adding 30 million people, remember that many many of those aren’t paying taxes or in otherwords, paying their premium. Sure, the have witholdings…only to have them all returned at the end of the year with an additional $2k or more in “earned income credit”. Now, they will still get that, plus health insurance, plus subsidies to pay for it. That is simply not viable or sustainable policy. Govt should encourage those who actually don’t get all their federal tax dollars back at the end of the year (actual tax payers) to contribute to charitable funds to help those who have conditions that cannot be covered under our current system. That encouragement would take the form of tax credits for contributions. If tax payers wouldn’t do that in place of govt bankruptcy at the hand of bleeding heart spending without money in the bank, then this health care bill is nothing more than a distraction, and we have even more dire and immediate problems to deal with; moral bankruptcy. But I believe Americans are up to the task to take care of our own, and keep our democracy.
force_vector on March 18 at 7:14 p.m.
Additionally, if your an employee or stock holder of an insurance company, you know it’s a risky business. But you choose whether to assume the risk. There should never be a risk to our country, assumed only by those who keep it financially afloat unless they have plurally agreed to do so. And all polls says clearly, we are not in this case.
Scoutster on March 18 at 8:54 p.m.
force vector, I think you are absolutely right in how you frame this discussion, and I think we are poorer as a nation in that we haven’t had this health finance debate framed as clearly.
You represent, I believe, a position that has a logical and reasonable basis: people need to be responsible for their own health care. I think I hear a sense that those without the ability to provide for themselves (the disabled, old) deserve communal care, but able bodied Americans need to do it on their own. Would that be about right?
On the other hand, I believe health care is so expensive and illness so random that the ONLY way most of us will have access to minimum standards of care is through communal purchasing of the supply. It’s not likely that I will have a $750K brain tumor, but, because of hyper-inflationary medical technology costs, it IS likely I will experience a number of crises adding up to $750K.
It would have been much better for us, as a nation, to have been more honest about the values underneath this debate.
(I do believe the cost issue, including the role, if any, insurance companies should play, is important, just secondary to the values underlying the policies.)
Dazzeetrader11 on March 18 at 11:24 p.m.
Diana…MSNBC brain…get this: Once again you’ve missed the point of my posts…I pay for myself. I just don’t like having an entire health care system destroyed to pay for the 10% that won’t or can’t pay for themselves. It would be far cheaper to put a fund in place to take care of those types. Why spend trillions we don’t have…unless there’s another design afoot.
Social Security going broke is another smart reason to NOT let the astute Obama government take things over. Perhaps you haven’t heard dear…but SS is broke too. Not much will be there by the time it’s needed. Couple the above with the POST OFFICE, Fannnie, Freddie, etc and you’ll soon see how well the government does with out money.
We don’t mind paying for impaired folks…but the point is that to generate a system like Obama wants, it’ll cost more zeros than you can count…and then comes the rationing when he runs us out of money. Now don’t you feel uninformed? You should…..you’ve missed the whole point of paying trillions we don’t have for a system most of the US doesn’t want. But if you can, tell me one..just one government managed system that works…and doesn’t lose our money we could be using for other things. Now don’t you feel smart?…
Diana on March 19 at 5:42 a.m.
Yet another Fox News recap from Daisy. Boring.
Shorter Daisy: blah blah MSNBC blah blah won’t pay for themselves blah blah Obama blah blah
Scoutster on March 19 at 6:27 a.m.
Daisy…
The post office is not a government agency. Hasn’t been for quite some time. (Regulated by Congress, but operates independently, more like a utility.)
No sarcasm or personal insults, just letting you know.
force_vector on March 19 at 7:38 a.m.
Soutster- it appears that we share the same foundational beliefs on this issue, only we disagree in some ways on how to fix it. I truly believe that if we address the actual cost of care, then access to it will become easier due to lower premiums and financial risk on the part overyone, top to bottom. Though we have a disagreement on how to fix the problem, I respect your opinion. Have a good day.