500 Billion New Reasons To Invalidate ObamaCare

IBD Editorials ^ | August 10, 2011 | HOWARD RICH

[Kaslin]

A few hundred billion dollars here, a few hundred billion dollars there — sooner or later we're talking about the real cost of Barack Obama's new socialized medicine monstrosity.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi once said that "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." Apparently, passing the legislation was also a prerequisite to determining its actual price tag — which as it turns out is much higher than anyone fathomed.

The latest cost overrun associated with ObamaCare? A $500 billion "error" associated with insuring the spouses and children of new entitlement recipients. That's $500 billion in additional deficit spending — although it didn't stem from an "error" so much as it was the result of a deliberate miscalculation.

As it attempted to calculate ObamaCare's true fiscal impact, the Congressional Budget Office was explicitly instructed to ignore the cost of covering family members under new eligibility requirements for low-income private sector employees.

"The Congressional Budget Office has never done a cost-estimate of this (because) they were expressly told to do their modeling on single coverage," researcher Richard Burkhauser told the Daily Caller this month.

Documents obtained from the Democratic-controlled Joint Committee on Taxation confirm Burkhauser's account — and demonstrate the lengths to which Obama supporters went in an effort to hide these costs from the taxpayers.

Obviously this isn't the first "oversight" associated with this unconstitutional abomination. In March of 2011, Obama's heath care czarina Kathleen Sebelius was forced to acknowledge under oath that the government double-counted $529 billion in "savings" associated with the implementation of the legislation.

[NonValueAdded]

"The Congressional Budget Office has never done a cost-estimate of this (because) they were expressly told to do their modeling on single coverage," researcher Richard Burkhauser told the Daily Caller this month. Documents obtained from the Democratic-controlled Joint Committee on Taxation confirm Burkhauser's account — and demonstrate the lengths to which Obama supporters went in an effort to hide these costs from the taxpayers.

If true, that is out-and-out fraud. Someone should go to jail.

[dila813]

Yet you know when Obama is running for President he is going to constantly say that he saved more money than the Republicans due this Obamacare ...... a bald face lie ..... any republican that isn’t prepared to constantly point this out to the electorate isn’t fit to be President.

[Don Corleone]

The latest cost overrun associated with ObamaCare? A $500 billion "error" associated with insuring the spouses and children of new entitlement recipients. That's $500 billion in additional deficit spending — although it didn't stem from an "error" so much as it was the result of a deliberate miscalculation.

CLOWARD-PIVEN!!!!!

[killermosquito]

If only we had some Republican leadership!

[Chode]

and America takes another one in the........

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Kaslin.

As it attempted to calculate ObamaCare's true fiscal impact, the Congressional Budget Office was explicitly instructed to ignore the cost of covering family members under new eligibility requirements for low-income private sector employees.

[Lmo56]

This is fukin’ ridiculous - Congress should be REQUIRED to have ALL appropriations bills ACCURATELY scored BEFORE voting on them AND it should be REQUIRED to read ALL bills BEFORE voting on them ...

[Brad from Tennessee]

[. . .official cost projections for ObamaCare factor in a decade's worth of tax hikes and deficit spending and only six years of programmatic “benefits.” Obviously, that discrepancy vastly understates the long-term impact of ObamaCare on federal deficits.]

This Rube Goldberg contraption will eventually collapse under its own weight after destroying Medicare, most health insurers and the private medical sector.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“CLOWARD-PIVEN!!!!! “

Works both ways. So does “Rules for Radicals”

The rights needs to adapt these practices. It is a game changer.