Yesterday the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) announced that the Republican plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) would add $230 billion to the federal budget deficit over 10 years and $1.2 trillion in the decade after that. Since Speaker Boehner and company didn't like those numbers -- even though they usually praise what CBO has to say -- they manufactured their own. Ezra Klein of the Washington Post took apart the Republicans' fictional arithmetic in an excellent piece you can read here.
Rejecting the CBO's numbers was yet another example of the astounding double-talk and hypocrisy we've heard from the Republicans in their first few days since taking charge of the House on Wednesday. They got elected by campaigning for deficit reduction, but the first thing they did was increase the deficit.
It's clear that there is no promise the Republicans won't break, no principle they won't sacrifice and no fact they won't ignore in order to let the insurance companies off the hook and strip consumers of important protections like the ban on denying care to people with pre-existing conditions.
The Republicans are trashing the nonpartisan CBO report because it's conclusions are inconvenient. Instead they cooked up their own numbers about the ACA costing money when it really saves $230 billion in the first 10 years and $1.2 trillion in the second decade.
And the impact of repeal on the federal deficit is only part of the problem. The Republicans insist on calling the ACA "job-killing." It's exactly the opposite -- it creates jobs. A report out today by Harvard economics professor David Cutler concludes that repeal would destroy 250,000 to 400,000 jobs annually. Over the next decade, that's up to 4 million jobs killed by repeal.
The Republicans' reckless repeal bill will put insurance companies back in charge of our health care and restore the 'anything-goes' premium rate hikes that are crushing consumers and businesses. Repeal means letting the insurance companies deny care to people with pre-existing conditions and run roughshod over consumers.
The health insurance companies are certainly getting what they paid for in the 2010 elections.
And what do the Republicans want to replace the new law with? Nothing. They're referring that question to House committees that will deliberate for months and play political football with our lives and health.
When the Republicans vote for repeal on Jan. 12, they'll be telling seniors they have to pay back the $250 donut hole checks they received to help buy prescription drugs. They'll be booting young adults off their parents' health plans. They'll be taking away people's newly won freedom from fear of insurers denying their care, dropping people who get sick and imposing double-digit premium hikes with impunity. The Republican repeal plan will force nearly 900,000 American families to go bankrupt because of huge medical bills.
We've finally gotten the insurance companies off our backs, and the first thing the Republicans want to do is put them back in charge.
You can join the fight against repeal here.
Follow Ethan Rome on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@HCAN
There is more truth in this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/opinion/07brooks.html
Plus, The Spectator has leaked email from the CBO saying the repeal of HCR will save more than $500 Billion. Look it up.
Subtraction = taxation.
At least that's what my Texas-approved math book says.
Democrats should defend the health Care reform bill by highlighting the individual benefits of the Health care bill as listed below. The polls on Obama care individual features show that they are still very popular with most Americans. Democrats, progressive journalists and public should ask these questions in public debates and forums.
* Do you want to ensure that your children can never be denied health insurance by insurance companies, irrespective of their health conditions?
* Do you want to make sure that you and your family can never be denied health insurance, irrespective of the preexisting conditions?
* Do you want your children to have the option to continue on your health insurance policy till the age 26, in case they have not found a job with health care coverage?
* Currently. uninsured people crowd the emergency health care facilities, even for non critical reasons, just because they do not have insurance. The health care bill will offer affordable insurance for all, so that they can proper care at regular doctor offices for normal care which reduces the insurance cost for all.
* Do you want insurance companies to spend most of the revenue on health care and preventive care rather than siphon off profits for wall street fat cats?
* For the self employed and small businesses, this health care bill provides the option to join insurance exchanges and buy insurance at lower cost.
Where is the money going to come from to pay for all of this? Obama promised in about 500 speeches that the HCR law would cause premiums to go down. Of course, the opposite is occurring--premiums across the board are going up (and why wouldn't they with all of the expensive goodies the law requires insurance companies to pay for?) How will this make health insurance more affordable, and how are people who could not afford health insurance before Obamacare going to comply with the law's mandate? Can you answer that question?
Further, even if premiums weren't increasing, why would anyone comply with the mandate and purchase an expensive health insurance policy if they can just pay the tax penalty which is a fraction of what premiums would cost? Any thoughts?
Finally, if an individual is young and healthy why would he buy an expensive healthcare policy if the tax penalty and cost of regular check-ups combined would be a fraction of the cost? There's no incentive to purchase insurance unless and until the individual is diagnosed with a serious illness or suffers a serious injury. As you know, the insurance companies can't turn anyone down because of a preexisting condition so why pay for something before you need it?
It's going to be a trainwreck and your talking points are a joke.
This is all about political points. What does Boehner care... he's and his family (and the rest of congress) will have socialized medical care for the rest of their lives at our expense.
The GOP can campaign, but they cannot govern. They can't even tell the truth and correctly identify reality. We've seen this over and over again in the past 40 years.
I'm beyond fed up with every single Republican I listen to. Now we are stuck with this do-nothing, showboating House for the next two years. The Dems have to name every GOP theatric for exactly what it is. At least the comedy shows now have guaranteed material.
Repeal would save 540B in Spending. So how do they get to a deficit reduction of 230B?
Repeal would do away with 770B in Tax "Revenue".
Actual reading of the Report from the website? Not going to happen here. Not even a link. But here it is. Please read, only two pages.
http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=1759
Increasing the Taxes to raise 770B, while spending out 540B will Help Americans how?
I'm not rich, google what an E8 over 18 in Tampa Makes or check out a GS13 in Tampa. Progressives have to realize that the working class, those paying taxes (Net Taxes as only 53% of Americans Pay Net Taxes and the rest Receive from those taxed) aren't happy with tax increases going for those that don't work.
Redistribution of monies? You are either taken from, or take from others.
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/07/breaking-cbo-says-repealing-ob
Anyone actually read the CBO Directors Findings?
http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=1759
Heres the CBO Directors webpage. Please read the report.
"We have been asked to provide the revenue and direct spending components of that total. Extrapolating the estimated budgetary effects of the original health care legislation and accounting for the effects of subsequent legislation, CBO anticipates that enacting H.R. 2 would probably yield, for the 2012-2021 period, a reduction in revenues in the neighborhood of $770 billion and a reduction in outlays in the vicinity of $540 billion, plus or minus the effects of forthcoming technical and economic changes to CBO’s and JCT’s projections."
I'm not a Tea-bagger. But taxing Americans 770B, to pay out 540B and then calling a "Savings" is wrong, more so when the taxes will be collected in full over that time frame while outlays will not totally kick in for a few years.
Realize that 6 years of spending comes to a median costs of 90B in outlays each year. The Taxes of 770B over 10 years comes to additional taxes of 77B a year. Realize the CBO can only use the parameters the Democrats gave them.
So I'm sure tax reciepts are expecially rosy in the report.
You guys are supposed to be "Progressive", but yet these taxes are not based on Class. The "Rich" weren't taxed, only those with insurance or spending on medical care.
http://www.cepr.net/calculators/hc/hc-calculator.html
And they live longer.