United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Take CBO Report With a Grain of Salt: Obamacare Repeal Would Not Increase Deficits
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://conservativemeanderings.word ... l-would-not-increase-deficits/
Published: Jan 18, 2011
Author: conservativemeanderings
Post Date: 2011-01-18 12:05:27 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 678
Comments: 15
Next week, the House of Representatives will vote on H.R. 2, a measure to repeal Obamacare in its entirety. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) today released a report stating that repealing the health care law would increase the deficit by $145 billion between 2012 and 2019. This report is based on the findings of the CBO’s March 2010 report that predicted that Obamacare would reduce the deficit. CBO does respectable work, but their analysts have their hands tied by assumptions they are required to make. The reality is that, in spite of the March report, Obamacare will not reduce the deficit, so repealing it would not add to the deficit, in spite of today’s report. The CBO report should be taken with a grain of salt for a few reasons. First, CBO is required to assume that current law will be enacted as written, even in cases where reality couldn’t be further from what is on the books. CBO Director Doug Elmendorf himself makes this clear in the report: Current law now includes a number of policies that might be difficult to sustain over a long period of time. … If those provisions would have subsequently been modified or implemented incompletely, then the budgetary effects of repealing [the law] and the relevant provisions of the Reconciliation Act could be quite different—but CBO cannot forecast future changes in law or assume such changes in its estimates. Second, CBO must ignore the many budget gimmicks written into legislation. The health law does not include the “doc fix” to prevent an automatic cut to physicians’ reimbursement rates under Medicare. Congress recently passed a one-year fix and will continue to prevent the cuts in the future, but this will still not solve the ongoing problem. Nevertheless, pretending it will not happen won’t reduce the deficit. Obamacare also includes billions in double-counted savings. Over the next decade, Obamacare includes $529 billion in cuts to Medicare and $70 billion in revenue from the new CLASS program. CBO assumes that these savings and revenues will offset the cost of new programs in the legislation. But Medicare savings are also pledged to extend the program’s solvency. Revenue from CLASS, a new long-term care insurance program, is the result of premiums collected to pay out benefits in outlying years and will not pay for new programs, either. Claiming that these dollars will pay for Obamacare is akin to trying to make a mortgage payment and buy a Macbook with the same paycheck: In the real world, you can spend money only once. Then, Obamacare creates a new subsidy program for the middle class to purchase insurance. CBO predicts that 19 million Americans will benefit from this generous new entitlement program. But this doesn’t take into account Obamacare’s huge incentives for employers to drop their insurance programs and allow employees to instead purchase taxpayer-subsidized coverage. Former CBO director Doug Holtz-Eakin points out that both businesses and their employees stand to seriously benefit by dropping employer coverage and instead relying on taxpayer-subsidized health care. These incentives, combined with the various new insurance rules that will increase premiums on employer plans, will cause the cost of the subsidy program to greatly exceed expectations. Since, in reality, Obamacare will not reduce the deficit, repealing the law does not need to be offset under pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rules. Repeal is in fact in keeping with the spirit of PAYGO, which exists for the purpose of long-term deficit reduction. Moreover, PAYGO only requires deficit neutrality over a 10-year budget window, so a program could create savings in one decade but run trillions in deficits the next and still meet PAYGO requirements. The loopholes of 10-year scoring were not lost on the 111th Congress—the costliest provisions of Obamacare do not go into effect until 2014, so the CBO score actually includes only six years of spending. If Congress is really serious about reducing long-term deficits, the best path forward is to accept the CBO report for what it is and also set aside PAYGO in favor of real budget process reform. In the meantime, repealing Obamacare is the right step toward reducing the federal deficit and getting health care reform right.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
(Edited)
The Doc fix is enacted every year, it's a wash and has no bearing on the cost of the ACA. This is applying the same false logic Krugman cited in the "war on logic" article I posted yesterday - the GOP is counting spending toward the cost of ACA, despite the fact that the spending will occur even if ACA is repealed. It would sure be nice if we had an alternative proposal from the Republicans that we could compare to the ACA, but the GOP seems incapable of coming up with anything.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
It's a fact that nobody argues that Obamacare will increase spending by almost 600 billion dollars. It's said to cut the deficit because it will supposedly raise taxes by over 700 billion dollars, which really isn't a saving at all even if it were true. Krugman is a moron.
Right, and repeal both the spending hikes and the tax increases and you are left with an addition $200 billion or so added to the deficit. At least you finally agree that repealing the ACA will increase the deficit. Now what's the alternative?
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
No, I don't because the so called additional tax revenue is also smoke and mirrors. But I agre, it will cut federal spending by hundreds of billions of dollars. And so does even the CBO in their estimates.
Because the republicans say so, absent any evidence or independent analysis. So again, what's the alternative? Just let the # of uninsured keep rising while medicare costs keep rising?
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
So the answer is stealing from a system people have paid into all their lives to support an even more costly system? Anybody can walk into any emergency room and they have to receive treatment, whether they can pay or not, as it is.
If you really want to fry the noodles of the socialists, point out that the entire system is already broke, and that the accounts have essentially worthless IOUs...
In the end, the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. ... The heresy of heresies was common sense. ME: Thanks for admitting that you ARE trying to spin this (AZ shooting, and terrorism) onto Palin, and conservatives in general. ME: THERE IS NO MORE MONEY. Inescapable conclusion? Socialists are unable to accept reality. I.e., they're INSANE.
So what in your opinion is the answer then? And I'll remind you that repealing the ACA means 50+ million uninsured and rising rates for the rest of us, while Medicare spending will bankrupt the country (with an addition $200 or so billion added to the deficit). So what's "your" answer?
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
so what? Nobody has a right to health insurance. Do you see people dropping dead in the streets around you because of this. and rising rates for the rest of us, It is a fact that rates will be higher under Obamacare, and anybody who says different is lying.
It is a fact that rates will be higher under Obamacare, and anybody who says different is lying. And rates will be even higher without the ACA, especially for small businesses. So given you've had 3 opportunities now to present your own ideas for health care reform, and you haven't produced anything, I can only assume you have no ideas of your own. BTW, when you get a minute maybe you can answer "why are the Republicans citing the CBO in their claims that the ACA kills jobs when they argue that the CBO isn't to believed"? Good luck!
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Yet you just posted this on another thread. "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government." Make up your "mind", Eric.
“Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!" Pls see my Facebook page.” - Sarah Palin
He's just following the Limbaugh/GOP lead. Other than "NO!" they don't have any ideas either. Even Bill Frist has now said the GOP should build on the current law instead of trying to destroy it. Fat chance of that happening with the cranks running the GOP now.
“Commonsense Conservatives & lovers of America: "Don't Retreat, Instead - RELOAD!" Pls see my Facebook page.” - Sarah Palin
What can you say about folks who argue that abortion should be illegal, but have no problem with a mom and child dying during delivery because they can't afford health care. And that gets us back to what I've said a while ago, most of the "faux outrage" over the ACA is just that, outrage against things Conservatives formerly supported but now oppose in the name of obstructing Obama. ----------- And then there's this Heritage Foundation report from 2003: Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Since President Obama and the Democrat-run Congress celebrated passing their massive health care law over the objections of a majority of Americans, news reports have come on an almost weekly basis demonstrating how their legislation has not and will not live up to the promises made about it during the initial sales pitch. President Obama and Democrats said many times that their health care bill would “reduce the costs of health care” and that “[f]amilies will save on their premiums.” Just a month ago, Obama reiterated, “All this is going to lower premiums. It’s going to make healthcare more affordable.” But last night the AP reported, “Aerospace giant Boeing is joining the list of companies that say the new health care law could have a potential downside for their workers. In a letter mailed to employees late last week, the company cited the overhaul as part of the reason it is asking some 90,000 nonunion workers to pay significantly more for their health plan next year. A copy of the letter was obtained Monday by The Associated Press. “‘The newly enacted health care reform legislation, while intended to expand access to care for millions of uninsured Americans, is also adding cost pressure as requirements of the new law are phased in over the next several years,’ wrote Rick Stephens, Boeing's senior vice president for human resources.” Many alternatives have been presented, but I start start with the notion of why any reform is needed.
The Seattle PI noted that AP got the story wrong: http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/225319.asp And you left out a big part: Our group insurance went up 6% this year, last year it went up 29%, the year before, 26%.
Since January 3, 2011, Republicans have controlled the power of the purse.
Second, CBO must ignore the many budget gimmicks written into legislation. The health law does not include the “doc fix” to prevent an automatic cut to physicians’ reimbursement rates under Medicare. Congress recently passed a one-year fix and will continue to prevent the cuts in the future, but this will still not solve the ongoing problem. Nevertheless, pretending it will not happen won’t reduce the deficit.
#2. To: go65 (#1)
#3. To: no gnu taxes (#2)
It's a fact that nobody argues that Obamacare will increase spending by almost 600 billion dollars. It's said to cut the deficit because it will supposedly raise taxes by over 700 billion dollars, which really isn't a saving at all even if it were true.
#4. To: go65 (#3)
At least you finally agree that repealing the ACA will increase the deficit.
#5. To: no gnu taxes (#4)
No, I don't because the so called additional tax revenue is also smoke and mirrors.
#6. To: go65 (#5)
Just let the # of uninsured keep rising while medicare costs keep rising?
#7. To: no gnu taxes (#6)
So the answer is stealing from a system people have paid into all their lives to support an even more costly system?
-- George Orwell, 1984 --
Brian S(ocialist): I have never hidden that fact...
GO65: There will be no more money when the U.S. dollar has no value, until that time we can keep printing more.
#8. To: no gnu taxes (#6)
So the answer is stealing from a system people have paid into all their lives to support an even more costly system? Anybody can walk into any emergency room and they have to receive treatment, whether they can pay or not, as it is.
#9. To: go65 (#8)
And I'll remind you that repealing the ACA means 50+ million uninsured
#10. To: no gnu taxes (#9)
(Edited)
and rising rates for the rest of us,
Data from the Kaiser Family Foundation
#11. To: no gnu taxes (#9)
so what? Nobody has a right to health insurance.
#12. To: go65 (#10)
So given you've had 3 opportunities now to present your own ideas for health care reform, and you haven't produced anything, I can only assume you have no ideas of your own.
#13. To: Skip Intro, no gnu taxes, (#11)
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
– Heritage On Romney’s Individual Mandate: “Not an unreasonable position, and one that is clearly consistent with conservative values.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]
– Heritage On President Obama’s Individual Mandate: “Both unprecedented and unconstitutional.” [Heritage, 12/9/09]
– Heritage On Romney’s Insurance Exchange: An “innovative mechanism to promote real consumer choice.” [Heritage, 4/20/06]
– Heritage On President Obama’s Insurance Exchange: Creates a “de facto public option” by “grow[ing]” government control over healthcare.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]
– Heritage On Romney’s Medicaid Expansion: Reduced “the total cost to taxpayers” by taking people out of the “uncompensated care pool.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]
– Heritage On President Obama’s Medicaid Expansion: Expands a “broken entitlement program,” providing a “low-quality, poorly functioning program.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]
#14. To: go65 (#10)
AP: Boeing Employees To See Increased Premiums Thanks To Obamacare
#15. To: no gnu taxes (#14)
But last night the AP reported, “Aerospace giant Boeing is joining the list of companies that say the new health care law could have a potential downside for their workers. In a letter mailed to employees late last week, the company cited the overhaul as part of the reason it is asking some 90,000 nonunion workers to pay significantly more for their health plan next year. A copy of the letter was obtained Monday by The Associated Press.
The Associated Press reported Monday that the Boeing Co. was asking 90,000 nonunion workers to pay more for their health insurance next year because of the new health care law passed by Democrats this year.
A Boeing spokeswoman said the company would've made the changes even if the bill signed by President Barack Obama hadn't become law.
"Yes, we are making health care changes. If you would've asked me if we would've made these changes without the enactment of the law, I would've said yes," company spokeswoman Karen Forte told seattlepi.com Monday evening.
"We're just out of line with market. We've been contemplating what can we do to reduce costs," Forte said. "It came down to, we've got to pass some of these costs down to our employees."
"We want to manage our costs so this tax doesn't apply to our plan, but that's down the road," said Forte. "If this health care law hadn't passed, would we be making changes to the health care benefit? Absolutely. For competitive reasons."
In the letter to Boeing employees, Stephens said out-of-control health care inflation is hampering Boeing's ability to compete with other manufacturers. Its major civilian aviation competitor, Airbus, is based in Europe, where governments shoulder the burden of health care costs.
Stephens also cited lifestyle issues, such as people who are overweight and do not adequately exercise, as the third major reason for the cost shift. The health care law ranked second among the three, ahead of lifestyle factors.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]