Posted on 10/31/2009 7:06:25 AM PDT by La Lydia
Republicans on Capitol Hill are challenging an assertion by House leaders that their new health-care package comes in under President Obama's spending limit of $900 billion over the next decade. The true cost of the measure, the GOP argues, is more than $1 trillion. A House leadership aide dismissed the charge as "GOP spin." But, in this case, the spin is essentially true.
According to a preliminary estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, expanding coverage to an additional 36 million Americans would cost $1.055 trillion over the next decade under the House plan, counting tax breaks for small businesses, subsidies for low- and moderate-income families, and the largest expansion of Medicaid since its inception more than 40 years ago.
House leaders prefer to emphasize a different number: the net cost of expanding coverage. That's $1.055 trillion minus money that would be raised from penalties on people who failed to buy insurance and employers that failed to offer it. Those adjustments would bring the cost down to $894 billion over 10 years, just under Obama's limit...
Still, Democrats have a bit of a consistency problem: Democratic leaders in the Senate use the gross cost of expanding coverage. If they switched to House math, the price tag of a bill passed by the Senate Finance Committee this month would be $518 billion -- nearly $400 billion less than the House bill.
In a letter Friday to key lawmakers about the House bill, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf did not mention the $894 billion figure...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
They should challenge it on more than just the cost, but also on the loss of freedom. Of the harm this could do to citizens with waiting lists, rationing, etc. Of how this could destroy the health care system.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
That's $2,777 a year (if my calculations are right) to cover each of these alleged 36 million. I doubt the real cost will be anywhere near this amount. It will be much higher imo.
Who are these 36 million? There are state programs for uninsured, childrens’ programs too. IN CA there is MediCal, a prog I think titled SCHIF, Medicaid free for those needing assistance. The county hospitals also provide free care if needed. Is this the unemployed whose benefits run out? Why not let them have Medicare while they need it, and get off this healthcare gambit.
Not everyone values freedom the way we do. Especially if they vote Democrat.
The goal of Orahma’s health care campaign is domination of the private lives of United States citizens. Orahma is not concerned with our health. He is concerned with our freedoms, which limit his power. Communists and Muslims cannot allow citizens to have power.
They need to point out that this is being done because the democrats want control, and power, and are driven by ideology, not by compassion. They need to paint the democrats as ego driven, greedy for power, cold, and calculating. Nice won't work.
They need to point out that this is being done because the democrats want control, and power, and are driven by ideology, not by compassion. They need to paint the democrats as ego driven, greedy for power, cold, and calculating. Nice won't work.
If adopted, the “government option” health coverage will easily cost three or four times more than the original estimate, and the coverage will never reach the last 10% or so of the US residents that were supposed to be covered. Reason? Individuals who are now covered by employer-based or individual coverages through affiliations, will find themselves without coverage, as more and more employers find it to be cheaper to pay the fines, and simply drop the employment-linked health plans they now carry. The aged who once depended on Medicare will be thrown into the “government-option” pool, and the states will be trying to shed their load under Medicaid by shifting THOSE patients to the “government-option”. The “single-payer” will become the ONLY game in town, as the other private plans are regulated or taxed out of existence.
It does not have to be.
And this is only the beginning of the avalanche. New doctors will not be trained in sufficient numbers to replace those who would be lost by retirement or simply quitting practice, because of the promise of diminished returns, should they choose to even go through training and internship, only to live in extended bondage. Nobody needs that sort of abuse.
Rationing is inevitable in this bureaucratic nightmare. And when care IS extended, it will be largely cursory in nature, and impersonal to boot.
Not so benign neglect. And the worst part is, there will be no alternatives for most people.
You must become your own doctor, or have access to someone with sufficient capabilities and resources to take care of the serious situations that arise. Otherwise you are doomed to go about crippled or die an early death.
Verbose won’t work, either. That needs to be reduced to a few juicy sound bites, that the Republicans stick to and repeat until they are drummed into people’s consciousness. Something like “Higher taxes but less health care.” Or something catchier.
The Health Care Reform Bill: The cure is deadlier than the disease!
“Cure deadlier than the disease” is a good, catchy slogan. Or maybe “Democrat cure deadlier than any disease”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.