Just a little more proof that the Democrats snookered us on ObamaCare.
Politico: Congressional Budget Office estimates released Tuesday predict the health care overhaul will likely cost about $115 billion more in discretionary spending over ten years than the original cost projections.
The additional spending — if approved over the years by Congress — would bring the total estimated cost of the overhaul to over $1 trillion. […]
The Congressional Budget Office expects the federal agencies to spend $10 billion to $20 billion over 10 years on administrative costs to implement the overhaul. The CBO expects Congress to spend an additional $105 billion over 10 years to fund discretionary programs in the overhaul.
The CBO released the estimates in response to a request from California Rep. Jerry Lewis, ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Committee. A spokeswoman for Lewis said the inquiry was filed before the House voted on the bill.
“[L]arge sums of discretionary spending in both the House and Senate versions of the health care reform bills have not yet been included in estimates by the CBO, rendering it impossible to make informed decisions regarding the outcome of this legislation,” Lewis wrote in a February letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, asking her to postpone votes until the discretionary spending analysis was complete.The CBO estimated in March that the gross cost of the overhaul would be $940 billion over 10 years. The net cost was estimated at $788 billion over 10 years. But the group cautioned that it couldn’t make an estimate of the discretionary costs without more time and information.
The CBO estimated in March that the gross cost of the overhaul would be $940 billion over 10 years. The net cost was estimated at $788 billion over 10 years. But the group cautioned that it couldn’t make an estimate of the discretionary costs without more time and information.Think back to the big rush job with having to passing ObamaCare on a Sunday. Considering that ObamaCare doesn’t really kick in until 2014, why couldn’t we have waited for these figures? The reason is that the Dems knew over time, the real cost of ObamaCare would have been revealed by the CBO and Medicare’s actuaries. The whole rush, rush, rush crap was just so the Dems could get away with their lies.
I wonder if in addition to suing over the individual mandate, we could sue for false representation?
Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico
Posts
3 comments:
ObamaCare will prove to be problematic and create (most likely, like technological advances also) just as many problems as it may intend to address. It's the nature of problems for which we have no pragmatic solutions, and in the eyes of many means that we really do not have a health care issue / problem.
However, to the extent that either side of the aisle has a theoretical interest in improving the health of its citizens and the health care provided, it is necessary to recognize two very fundamental issues:
1) The politicalization of the issue, or utilization of an ideological approach, will not result in an effective solution, because most human beings are not sufficiently self-motivated to pursue optimal health. It's just not going to happen, and an ideological approach does not advance the health agenda.
2) Because of our (minimum of) two party governmental system, ANY approach formulated will be ineffective because it is a moderate, piecemeal, compromised approach to solving the problem. Imagine giving kids a vaccine which has been diluted, watered down, or adulterated with all sorts of ingredients not essential to attacking the disease.
Why do ANYTHING if it is not going to be effective? Why waste the time and the money pursuing goals through ineffective means?
This issue will NEVER be resolved by either side as long as people have freedom of choice. It's the nature of human beings.
As Dirty Harry once said, "A man (or humankind) has to know his (or its) limitations.
Doesn't that just surprise you right out of your socks?
Thirteen states filing suits against the Federal government and counting..........I really don't care whether it's smart politics or actual disgust.
Inspector Clouseau:
Wouldn't that then be evidence that government should, flat out, not get involved in a decision that could have been resolved by the consumer market?
Imagine if the government never required specific coverages for any insurance company. People would then have the option to seek out those that did offer those coverages and not be forced to pay for that "generic" specific coverage for someone else.
Now that government is forcing insurance companies to accept pre-existing conditions, the outcome will be increased costs and result in less people being able to afford coverage so that government can step in and play hero of the day.
Exactly what costs so much money anyways? Is it to pay for hundred + bureaucracies that will be created?
We all knew better, but the media was complicit in covering for the administration by not unravelling the mess that was that bill. I just hope that this can be over-turned soon while the people are still hot over this issue.
Post a Comment