Look What The CBO Found, An Extra Trillion Of Obama Debt

It must be the Friday night bad news dump.

National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says

The 10-year outlook released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is somewhat gloomier than White House projections, which found that Obama’s budget request would produce deficits that would add about $8.5 trillion to the national debt by 2020.

The CBO and the White House are in relative agreement about the short-term budget picture, with both predicting a deficit of about $1.5 trillion this year — a post-World War II record at 10.3 percent of the overall economy — and $1.3 trillion in 2011. But the CBO is considerably less optimistic about future years, predicting that deficits would never fall below 4 percent of the economy under Obama’s policies and would begin to grow rapidly after 2015.

Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period.

See also:
CBO Says White House Underestimates Deficits
CBO: $10 trillion jump in debt under Obama budget
Congressional estimates show grim deficit picture
US deficit tops Obama forecast by 1.2 trillion dollars: CBO
US deficit expected higher than White House claims
CBO projects $1.5 trillion deficit for 2010 in Obama budget
CBO projects $1.5 trillion deficit for 2010 in Obama budget
CBO Releases Preliminary Analysis of the President’s Budget
CBO: Obama underestimated deficit by $1.2 trillion

When the evil Bush left office after eight years the budget deficit was less than $500 billion and the national debt was well under $10 trillion. One year later . . .

/add on the cost of Obamacare an Cap and Trade and it’s a regular national bankruptcy party

Speaking Truth To Democrat Bull[Expletive Deleted]

Paul Ryan is the man!

See also:
Rep. Paul Ryan on health inflation at White House health summit
Paul Ryan: Obamacare Will Raise Medical Costs
Ryan on Democratic Health Care Budget Gimmicks
Health care summit: Ryan makes good point on deficit reduction
Ryan on the Attack
Healthcare summit: Medicare and the deficit
Rep. Paul Ryan makes remarks on insurance regulation at White House health summit
Ryan talks decentralization at health summit
Ryan, Obama get into “difference in philosophy”
Transcript of Thursday’s bipartisan health care meeting
A Real Man With A Real Plan

What’d I say? I told you Paul Ryan gets it, and he’s more than an intellectual match for Obama.

/now pay close attention, because there’s going to be a very important quiz in November

Obama Says You’re Gonna Get A Trillion Dollar Health Care Bill Whether You Like It Or Not

Is Obama deaf? 61% of Americans want Congress to scrap their current health care bills and start over. So what’s Obama’s plan? To cram a variation of the current legislation down your collective throats, I’m the Great Obama, suck on it bitches!

The President’s Proposal

/Michael Ramirez

Patient Is Showing No Improvement

The president has unveiled a reform plan of his own ahead of Thursday’s bipartisan summit. But it’s no better than the lousy Democratic proposals that Americans have already dismissed.

The Obama plan appears to be based on the bills that were passed last year in the House and in the pre-Scott Brown Senate. While it leaves out the public option that was included in the House legislation, it adds a wrinkle that’s just as harmful: price controls on insurance premiums.

Americans aren’t going to want this rancid stew of legislative arrogance any more than they wanted the bills that were rammed through Congress. Our own polling shows that 34% strongly oppose Congress’ overhaul plans while only 24% strongly support.

When the “strongly oppose” and “somewhat oppose” responses are combined, the poll shows 45% are against the Democrats’ proposals. Independents oppose the plans 51% to 34%.

While the administration’s proposal might get some initial support because it regulates insurance costs, the public will recognize the rest of the plan as something it’s seen and rejected.

It seems the White House is cynically using the new wrinkle to take advantage of the anger toward insurance companies. The good news is that wrinkle should smooth out once opponents explain why restrictions on premium increases will leave the public with less coverage, as insurers will have no choice but to ration benefits.

The opponents — hopefully every Republican holding elected office — could start by repeatedly pointing out that Larry Summers, President Obama’s chief economic adviser, not a GOP operative, said: “Price and exchange controls inevitably create harmful economic distortions. Both the distortions and the economic damage get worse with time.”

The opposition should also ceaselessly tell the public that the ultimate consequence of premium caps on health insurance — if not the ultimate goal of the Democrats — is the collapse of the industry.

Private firms will leave the market when government restrictions make it unreasonably hard to make a profit. That will happen when the caps are combined with the inevitable federal mandates outlining the wide array of conditions that insurers must pay for and the rules that govern how coverage is sold.

New York has bitter experience with coverage rules. Since the early 1990s the state has forced insurers to provide insurance to people who are already sick and required them to set premiums at the same rate for all customers despite differences in age and health.

New York’s market hasn’t yet crumbled, but only because insurers have been able to increase premiums. New York now has, at roughly $9,000 a year on average, the highest rates in the country.

Soaring premiums can’t happen in a regime in which they are capped. When caps are added to mandates, insurers have nowhere to go but out of the health insurance business.

“We are sort of a case study of what not do,” says Mark Scherzer, identified in Sunday’s Los Angeles Times as “a consumer attorney who helped lead the fight for New York’s changes in the early 1990s.”

We see nothing in the Obama proposal that makes it more acceptable than what the Democrats have already put up.

• It won’t cut costs. Its $950 billion price tag for 10 years is even higher than the federal estimates, which were insanely optimistic, for the bills that have already been passed.

• It won’t insure all the uninsured. The White House says it will cover 31 million Americans who are without coverage. That still leaves as many as 15 million or 16 million without medical insurance.

• It won’t increase Americans’ control of their health care. It will require people to buy insurance and force businesses that don’t insure their employees to provide coverage. That’s more government.

• It’s not what the people want. By more than a 2-1 margin, our IBD/TIPP poll found, Americans want Congress to start fresh with a new blueprint, not rehash what they’ve clearly rejected.

No amount of we-know-what’s-best, force-it-on-an-unwilling-public arrogance can change these facts. Yet the Democrat machine, confident its ideas are so strong that they can repeal the laws of economics, refuses to end its offensive against the people.

We are far beyond the point at which we can admire their tenacity while disagreeing with their solutions.

What we need is a clean, quick kill of a plan — an Obama course that would drive our health care system into an abyss from which it would never escape.

See also:
Obama stays on offense with health-care proposal
Obama offers new health-care reform proposal
Obama posts health blueprint
Facing headwinds, Obama offers health deal
Obama Renews Health Push
ObamaCare at Ramming Speed
Obama Rejects Advice to Shrink Health Proposal
Obama may be key part of this health care plan
Obama’s health care bill revision seeks compromise
CBO says Obama’s health plan not detailed enough to score
CBO Blog: No Cost Estimate of Obama Health Plan This Week
Plan sweetened for GOP baffles CBO
Obama’s healthcare plan gets chilly GOP reception
Can Obama Bypass Republicans on Health?
White House Sets the Table to Use ‘Reconciliation’ Rules to Finish Health Care Reform
Will Obama Health Care Plan Pass Via Reconciliation?
Charting a Course Around Filibusters
Health care has one last chance
Are the Dems really that clueless about health care?

What happened to Obama’s promise to focus on American’s top priority, jobs? Apparently, that lasted all of about a week and now it’s back to socialized health care reform, a plan already soundly rejected by the vast majority of the American public.

/Obama and the Democrats must have an insatiable political death wish, they’re going to get absolutely creamed in the 2010 midterm elections

A Real Man With A Real Plan

Rep. Ryan proposes radical solution to budget problem

I spent the first part of the week thinking about President Obama’s proposal for next year’s budget. It’s a modest document meant to take current policy and nudge it forward and leftward while beginning the hard work of pushing the deficit downward. It makes its changes at the edge of the state, freezing growth here and expanding programs there.

But I spent the latter part of the week thinking about the proposal from Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) for what our budget should look like 60 years from now. Ryan’s budget is a radical document that takes current policy and rolls a live grenade underneath it. Social Security? Ryan’s adds private accounts. Medicaid? Ryan privatizes it. Medicare? Same thing. Health care? Ryan repeals the subsidy for employer-provided insurance, replacing it with a tax credit.

The boyish Ryan is a conservative darling and the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, but there’s nothing conservative about this document. It does not respect, much less preserve, the status quo. But then, that’s a point in Ryan’s favor. The status quo does not deserve our respect. It is unsustainable. Left unchecked, it will bankrupt our country. On that, Ryan’s radicalism is welcome, and all too rare. The size of his proposal is shocking, but it is proportionate to the size of our problem: According to the Congressional Budget Office, which examined a simplified version of his proposal, it would wipe out our projected long-term deficits.

GOP Rep. Paul Ryan tackles Obama’s path to deficit disaster

The new era of Democratic bipartisanship, like cut flowers in a vase, wilted in less than a week.

During his question time at the House Republican retreat, President Obama elevated congressman and budget expert Paul Ryan as a “sincere guy” whose budget blueprint — which, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), eventually achieves a balanced budget — has “some ideas in there that I would agree with.” Days later, Democratic legislators held a conference call to lambaste Ryan’s plan as a vicious, voucherizing, privatizing assault on Social Security, Medicare and every non-millionaire American. Progressive advocacy groups and liberal bloggers joined the jeering in practiced harmony.

The attack “came out of the Democratic National Committee, and that is the White House,” Ryan told me recently, sounding both disappointed and unsurprised. On the deficit, Obama’s outreach to Republicans has been a ploy, which is to say, a deception. Once again, a president so impressed by his own idealism has become the nation’s main manufacturer of public cynicism.

To Ryan, the motivations of Democratic leaders are transparent. “They had an ugly week of budget news. They are precipitating a debt crisis, with deficits that get up to 85 percent of GDP and never get to a sustainable level. They are flirting with economic disaster.” So they are attempting some “misdirection,” calling attention to Ryan’s recently updated budget road map — first unveiled two years ago — which proposes difficult entitlement reforms. When all else fails, change the subject to Republican heartlessness.

Read the report:

A ROADMAP FOR
AMERICA’S FUTURE
Version 2.0

See also:
The Roadmap Plan
A GOP Road Map for America’s Future
Roadmap to Solvency
Ryan’s fiscal plan draws attention
Paul Ryan’s Long (Deficit) Goodbye
Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan Stands Alone on Economic Solution
Rep. Paul Ryan says his budget plan doesn’t represent GOP
Political Punch Podcast: Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc
Paul Ryan and his critics
The Savaging of Paul Ryan
Ryan Gets Serious

Paul Ryan is my favorite Republican, he gets it. He understands, like anyone with even half an ounce of honesty, that the current path of America’s fiscal future is bleak, unsustainable, and will inevitably lead to collapse and default. Sure, Ryan’s plan is radical, full of hard, painful choices, a big solution for a big problem. But, unlike the current “keep kicking the can down the road” policy, RYAN’S PLAN WILL ACTUALLY GET US OUT OF THE GIGANTIC MESS WE’RE IN AND IT’S ALREADY LONG PAST TIME THAT SOMEONE DID SOMETHING!

/although he says he won’t, I wish Ryan would run for President, he’s exactly the kind of leader this country needs right now

Read It And Weep For America’s Future

Obama gets bad numbers from Congressional Budget Office

Jobs and the deficits are going to be big themes of President Obama’s big speech tomorrow — and he got some bad numbers on both topics today from the Congressional Budget Office.

Oval colleague Richard Wolf breaks it down for us:

Here’s more bad news on the budget front for President Obama: A new report by the Congressional Budget Office says the nation’s $1.4 trillion deficit is likely to stay in that range for the next two years.

The 2010 deficit should be about $1.35 trillion, and if Obama keeps President Bush’s tax cuts in place and extends other expiring tax breaks, the 2011 deficit would be about the same, the report says. Over the next decade, the nation would rack up another $12 trillion in deficits, thereby doubling the size of the $12 trillion national debt.

“Daunting” and “bleak” were just some of the adjectives used by CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf on Tuesday to describe the 10-year budget picture. Spending is projected to outpace revenue, and the debt would soon be two-thirds the size of the overall economy. By 2020, interest payments on that debt would be more than $700 billion, about four times the size of the current amount.

The report shows the unemployment rate rising slightly above 10% before declining slowly. Not until 2014 would the rate drop back to 5%.

“In sum, the outlook for the federal budget is bleak,” Elmendorf said. “U.S. fiscal policy is on an unsustainable path to an extent that cannot be solved by minor tinkering.”

But don’t worry, it’s Obama to the rescue.

Obama’s federal spending freeze

The White House has been cranking out initiatives daily in an effort to regain the public’s confidence, and on Tuesday, its target was the enormous federal deficit. Aides to President Obama disclosed that his forthcoming budget will call for a three-year freeze on “non-security discretionary funding.” That’s bureaucratese for capping everything but defense, homeland security, veterans, international affairs and entitlements (for example, Medicare and welfare), with no adjustments for inflation. That would result in $250 billion less being spent over the coming decade than currently projected, said Rob Nabors, deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget. Although it’s merely a gesture, it’s a good one that sends the right signals to Congress and the public.

Skeptics were quick to note how little of the budget actually would be affected — about 17% — and how small the savings seem in comparison to the $6 trillion in total deficits expected over the coming decade. And presidential budgets are just proposals; Congress controls the purse strings. It’s hard to say how well received Obama’s latest offering will be, given how few details have been released. The official line is simply that the administration’s budget for fiscal 2010 (which runs from October 2010 through September 2011) will call for cutting some programs and increasing others.

So, in case you’re still confused, the National Debt is projected to double to over $20 trillion in the next ten years and Obama’s answer is to save $250 billion over the next decade. It’s like trying to put out a five alarm fire with a squirt gun, it’s a joke.

Oh, and remember that useless “stimulus” that we borrowed almost a trillion dollars for, the Democrat porkfest that had to be passed immediately to keep the unemployment rate below 8%? Well, four million jobs lost and a 10% unemployment rate later, guess what?

Officials Say Stimulus Bill to Cost $75B More

Last year’s $787 billion economic stimulus bill is going to be even more expensive — $75 billion more.

The new Congressional Budget Office estimate, released Tuesday, provides more ammunition for Republicans who say the stimulus has been long on spending and short on creating promised jobs. The additional cost also eats into the savings forecast from the budget freeze President Barack Obama is expected to propose Wednesday night during his State of the Union address.

Almost half of the additional cost, $34 billion, is because the food stamp program won’t be able to take advantage of lower-than-expected inflation rates and will instead have benefits set by the stimulus bill.

Higher unemployment insurance costs added $21 billion to the bill, and stimulus-subsidized bonds to pay for infrastructure projects have proven more popular than expected with state and local governments.

The $75 billion increase would erase one-third of the $250 billion in 10-year savings that would come from the partial domestic spending freeze being proposed by Obama. The boost in unemployment payments alone would more than erase the $10 billion to $15 billion in first-year savings from such a freeze.

And don’t forget that we borrowed the “stimulus” money so the debt service over time is going to make it cost more.

Read the whole depressing, frightening, and sobering CBO report:

The Budget and Economic Outlook:
Fiscal Years 2010 to 2020

See also:
Bleak Economic Projections as Obama Prepares for State of the Union Address
The CBO’s Economic Outlook Is Bleak
US Congressional Budget Office Chief Sees ‘Bleak’ Outlook
CBO Chief: “The Outlook For The Federal Budget Is Bleak”
Budget Office: The government’s finances on ‘unsustainable path’
CBO: Federal Deficit Projected at $1.35T
The Obama Fisc
Budget sanity
A ‘Bleak’ Budget but Slightly Better
Obama Seeks Partial Three-Year Spending Freeze
Broad range of programs targeted by proposed spending freeze
How much would Obama’s spending freeze trim US deficits? Not a lot.
The “spending freeze” in context
Tepid Reception for Obama Spending Freeze
Obama faces backlash on spending freeze
The Obama Spending Freeze is Simply Not Credible
Spending Freeze Won’t Melt Partisan Divide
Stimulus is now $75 billion more expensive
Stimulus Bill to Cost $75 Billion More Than Expected, CBO Says
Congressional Budget Office says stimulus bill to cost $75 billion more
CBO: Stimulus $75 Bln More Expensive Than Estimated
Stimulus price tag soars as jobless rate rises

/no matter what Obama sys tomorrow night, the State of the Union, is not strong

A Convergence Of Miracles?

Connect the dots.

Coakley Now Trailing in Internal Polls: 47-44

According to Steve Kornacki:

I’ve been told reliably that Martha Coakley’s internal poll for Thursday night showed her trailing Scott Brown by three points — 47 to 44 percent.

As I wrote yesterday, her internal poll on Wednesday night had her barely ahead, 46 to 44 percent. The appearance of continued Brown momentum meshes with the Suffolk University/WHDH poll released earlier today, which put Brown ahead 50-46 percent.

Scott Brown Win Could Kill Healthcare–Obama Must Go to Massachusetts

President Obama should hit the campaign trail for Martha Coakley this weekend. He dipped a toe in the Massachusetts special election Thursday when he cut an online ad supporting her. He went in a bit more Friday when he recorded a robocall (“I rarely make these calls and I truly apologize for intruding on your day…”) exhorting Coakley’s election. The stakes, he said in the call, include healthcare reform, because the Massachusetts seat will be the difference between Democrats having a 60 seat majority and Republicans being able to sustain filibusters.

Obama will campaign personally for Coakley as Massachusetts Senate race tightens

President Obama will travel to Massachusetts on Sunday to campaign on behalf of state Attorney General Martha Coakley, the White House said Friday — an indication of the difficulty she faces in a U.S. Senate election next week after long being considered a shoo-in.

Republican state Sen. Scott Brown is running neck-and-neck with Coakley in recent polls of the Bay State as both vie for the Senate seat long held by Edward M. Kennedy (D). The winner of Tuesday’s special election will become the first person not closely affiliated with the Kennedy family to hold the seat since 1952.

The White House had been saying for days that the president had “no plans” to go to Massachusetts, but the loss of the Senate seat would greatly complicate, if not doom, the fate of health-care reform legislation moving through Congress.

Obama’s health care run faces new obstacle: Massachusetts

Today’s White House health care bill negotiations have wrapped up — no meetings are scheduled for this holiday weekend, as lawmakers prepare to submit a revamped package to the Congressional Budget Office for new cost estimates.

“We’ve worked through the gamut of issues in great depth, but there are no final agreements and no overall package,” said a White House statement. “The next step in the process is to evaluate the costs and savings associated with the various proposals for each tenet of the legislation.”

See also:
Coakley underestimated Scott Brown in Mass. Senate race
To the wire: Brown’s surging Senate candidacy poised to deny anticipated win for Coakley
Poll shocker: Scott Brown surges ahead in Senate race
Republican Taps Into Voter Unease
New Poll Shows Brown Leading Coakley In Massachusetts Senate Race
Obama personally joins Massachusetts quake relief
New Poll Has Brown Up; Obama Will Campaign For Coakley
President Obama to stump for Coakley in Mass.
Obama Massachusetts Campaign Swing Could Backfire, Help Brown

So, let’s recap: Barack Obama has to panic travel to Massachusetts to try and save Teddy’s seat from the evil Republican, Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel Scott Brown. If Brown wins, Obamacare is dead in the water, barring shenanigans. There’s no more secret, behind closed White House doors, Democrat health care reform bill negotiations scheduled before next Tuesday’s special Senate election in Massachusetts.

Can Obama protect and deliver Coakley, the 60th Senate vote? I think not and any attempt to delay Brown’s Senate seating will be greatly frowned upon by the general American electorate. Like Democrats aren’t polling low enough already.

/pass the popcorn

And The Loser Is . . . The American People

The last Democrat Senator has literally been bribed and his vote bought and paid for. Harry Reid has the 60 votes he needs to screw the American people who, by the way, are rapidly souring on this travesty.

Nelson Accused of Selling Vote on Health Bill for Nebraska Pay-Off

What started as Sen. Ben Nelson’s personal stand against covering abortion with taxpayer money translated, somehow, into millions of dollars in federal aid for his home state.

The Nebraska Democrat, following weeks of negotiations with his caucus, finally agreed to back the Senate’s health care reform bill this weekend after Democratic leaders made a series of concessions. Nelson’s support gives Democrats the 60 votes they need to overcome a filibuster, barring any last-minute defections.

But critics by Sunday were heavily questioning Nelson’s motivations, given that the abortion restrictions he sought and won did not satisfy several major anti-abortion lawmakers and groups and that it took a major federal payoff to his state to seal the deal.

Critics were calling it the “cornhusker kickback” and the “Nebraska windfall,” lobbing accusations of political deal-making at Nelson.

“It’s pretty obvious votes have been bought,” Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said.

And if anyone tries to tell you that passing this monstrosity is budget neutral, will lower health care costs, will save money, won’t add to the national debt, or will “bend the cost curve” down, well, they’re just flat out lying.

CBO: Real 10-Year Cost of Senate Bill Still $2.5 Trillion

The Congressional Budget Office’s score is in for the final Senate health bill, and it’s amazing how little Americans would get for so much.

The Democrats are irresponsibly and disingenuously claiming that the bill would cost $871 billion over 10 years. But that’s not what the CBO says. Rather, the CBO says that $871 billion would be the costs from 2010 to 2019 for expansions in insurance coverage alone. But less than 2 percent of those “10-year costs” would kick in before the fifth year of that span. In its real first 10 years (2014 to 2023), the CBO says that the bill would cost $1.8 trillion — for insurance coverage expansions alone. Other parts of the bill would cost approximately $700 billion more, bringing the bill’s full 10-year tab to approximately $2.5 trillion — according to the CBO.

In those real first 10 years (2014 to 2023), Americans would have to pay over $1 trillion in additional taxes, over $1 trillion would be siphoned out of Medicare (over $200 billion out of Medicare Advantage alone) and spent on Obamacare, and deficits would rise by over $200 billion. They would rise, that is, unless Congress follows through on the bill’s pledge to cut doctors’ payments under Medicare by 21 percent next year and never raise them back up — which would reduce doctors’ enthusiasm for seeing Medicare patients dramatically.

And what would Americans get in return for this staggering sum? Well, the CBO says that health care premiums would rise, and the Chief Actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services says that the percentage of the Gross Domestic Product spent on health care would rise from 17 percent today to 21 percent by the end of 2019. Nationwide health care costs would be $234 billion higher than under current law. How’s that for “reform”?

See also:
H. R. 3590 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Manager’s Amendment
Nelson vote triggers firestorm
An Unholy Compromise
House Dems cool to Nelson compromise
Senate Democrats seek to seal health care overhaul
McCain: GOP can’t stop health care

So, barring a miracle, there’s not much left at this point that can stop this deficit busting citizen suppository from becoming law. Bend over American taxpayer and get ready to pay more to wait longer for less health care. Remember, for Democrats, this isn’t even about health care reform, it’s about expanding the size and scope of the Federal government and making more Americans dependent on it. Because a dependent voter is a Democrat voter.

/beginning in 2010, get ready to clean House and start to repeal the socialist bull[expletive deleted]

One Step Closer To Socialized Medicine

Health Care Bill Moves Forward

Sweeping health care legislation has cleared its first hurdle in the full Senate on a party-line vote.

The 60-39 vote clears the way for a historic debate after Thanksgiving on the legislation. The measure is designed to extend coverage to an estimated 31 million Americans who lack it and crack down on insurance industry practices that deny benefits.

The White House released a statement saying, “The President is gratified that the Senate has acted to begin consideration of health insurance reform legislation. Tonight’s historic vote brings us one step closer to ending insurance company abuses, reining in spiraling health care costs, providing stability and security to those with health insurance, and extending quality health coverage to those who lack it. The President looks forward to a thorough and productive debate.”

The rare Saturday session amounted to a first round in the fight to pass the bill in the full Senate, with the remaining Democratic holdouts announcing they would support at least the measure to open debate on the bill, avoiding an early knockout by Republicans.

Sens. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana waited until Saturday to say they would vote yes for a floor debate. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska announced Friday his support for moving the bill forward.

All three cautioned that their votes to start debate should not be construed a support for the bill in its current form.

“It is a vote to move forward to continue the good and essential and important and imperative work that is under way,” Landrieu said on the Senate floor. “I’ve decided that there’s enough significant reforms and safeguards in this bill to move forward but more work needs to be done.”

Lincoln said she still would support a filibuster if the so-called “public option,” a government-run insurance plan, remains in the health care bill.

“I along with others expect to have legitimate opportunities to influence the health care reform legislation that is voted on by the Senate later this year or early next year,” she said.

While the vote is only a procedural one, Republicans haven’t backed down.

“This is a vote about whether or not you want to fundamentally change the way health care is delivered in this country in a way which massively expands the size of government, the role of government and significantly increases the tax burden, especially for small businesses and cuts Medicare by a dramatic amount of money,” Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., told Fox News before Saturday’s session began.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called the bill “monstrous” and, citing the Congressional Budget Office, said it would not bring down costs.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, now Harry Reid’s passing out taxpayer funded bribes to jam this health care travesty through.

Sen. Landrieu flaunts purchased vote: “It’s not $100 million; it’s $300 million!”

Facing fallout from an apparent sale of her health care vote to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and the Democratic Caucus, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) took a shocking approach in response to the payoff allegations: she flaunted it!

To help secure her vote, Reid included a provision in the bill sought by Landrieu to provide increased Medicaid funds for states recovering from major disasters such as 2005’s Hurricane Katrina that devastated New Orleans and parts of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama. When the bill is closely examined, however, the provision provides immense financial support for only one state: Landrieu’s Louisiana.

Landrieu defended the inclusion of the provision and said Republican critics who accuse her of selling her vote for $100 million are wrong and that she has the support of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Then, in a statement sure to be repeated by Republicans endlessly over the coming weeks of Senate health care debate, the senator flaunted the inclusion of the provision. “I will correct something. It’s not $100 million, it’s $300 million, and I’m proud of it and will keep fighting for it,” Landrieu told reporters after her floor speech. “But that is not why I started this health care debate; I started this health care debate for all the reasons I just mentioned in my statement” on the floor.

The apparent purchase of the senator’s vote is already garnering significant response from Republicans as well as taxpayers footing the bill for this provision. The nickname for the provision? “The Louisiana Purchase.”

Unreal, this is just out of control. Never in U.S. legislative history have so many been screwed by so few, at such a high cost.

See also:
Historic health care bill clears Senate hurdle
Senate Health Care Reform Bill Vote, 60-39 Brings Reform Bill to the Floor
Healthcare bill advances in Senate, in 60-39 vote; it got ‘failing grade’ from healthcare experts
Biden says Senate handed Obama a big victory
Senator Corker Reacts to Senate Health Care Vote
Senate moves health care bill forward for debate
FACTBOX: Details of Senate healthcare reform bill
Landrieu votes in favor of health care debate
GOP hits Landrieu for $100 million ‘new Louisiana Purchase’
Thanks to100 million dollar bribe, Healthcare reform cloture passes Senate!

/trillions of taxpayer dollars, added to the national debt, so we can all pay more, to wait longer, for less health care, whee!

And In The Senate Corner . . . Weighing In At 2074 Pages . . . The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

From behind the closed doors of Harry Reid’s office, submitted for your perusal . . .

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Put on your hip waders, this jabberwocky assault on American health care is longer than the first four Harry Potter books combined, only without the magic or entertainment value.

Senate Health Bill Is Outlined by Reid

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid outlined for Democrats Wednesday a ten-year $849 billion bill that would overhaul the nation’s health-care system and extend insurance to 31 million Americans without coverage.

The legislation represents the Nevada Democrat’s first attempt to build consensus among Senate Democratic liberals and centrists, as well as the two independents allied with the party.

A senior Senate Democratic leadership aide said the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill, after it is implemented, would ensure that 94% of those living in the U.S., not counting unauthorized immigrants, have insurance coverage. CBO has previously estimated that about 83% of Americans now have insurance.

The aide said the CBO estimated that the Senate measure would reduce the federal budget deficit by $127 billion over the next decade, and by $650 billion over the second ten years of the program. In part, the bill achieves that reduction through new taxes on Medicare and high-value insurance plans.

The 10-year price tag comes in below the $900 billion limit set by the White House and below the $1.055 trillion cost of the health-overhaul passed by the House earlier this month.

The $849 billion figure and the prospect of deficit reduction cheered Democrats. But the figures aren’t likely to win over Republicans, who say the bill adds costly new benefits for some Americans when the federal budget deficit is reaching new heights.

“We’re going to do everything we can to defeat this monstrosity,” said Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.).

Among other things, the Senate legislation would create a new government-run health insurance plan to compete with private insurers, while allowing states the option not to participate. That is a nod to centrists worried about the federal government’s growing footprint in the private sector.

The bill would also create government subsidies to help individuals and families comply with a mandate to buy insurance, and would sharply expand Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for the poor.

Mr. Reid’s decision to unveil a bill sets the stage for a pivotal vote, perhaps Friday or Saturday, that will determine whether the Senate can formally open debate on the bill. Mr. Reid, who met Wednesday with Vice President Joseph Biden, has voiced optimism that he can secure the votes needed to overcome Republican opposition and move to the debate. But with the outcome uncertain, the coming vote looms large as the first of several over the next month that will test Mr. Reid’s ability to hold together liberals and centrists.

See also:
Senate Democrats introduce $849 billion healthcare reform bill
Reid Unveils Senate Healthcare Bill
Senate Democrats’ Health Care Bill Will Cost $849 Billion
Senate’s health care bill cost: $849 billion
Senate health bottom line: $849 billion overhaul
Senate healthcare bill hits Obama cost target
Reid bill would cost $849B, expand coverage to 31 million people, aide says
Senate Health Plan Seeks to Add Coverage to 31 Million
$849 billion health bill sets up historic debate
Johnson, Thune On Senate Health Care Reform
New Senate Healthcare Reform Bill Features Public Option With Opt-Out
US Senate health plan includes public option-senator
Senate Health Care Bill: $370+ Billion Tax Hike
2,074-page health bill includes surgery, payroll tax hike
Stupak Abortion Measure Stopped…for the Moment
Senate Democrats backing down on tough anti-abortion measure
Senator: Pro-Life Side Lacks Votes to Stop Abortion Funding in Health Care
Stupak: I have votes to defeat health bill
DeGette says Stupak won’t have the votes to keep his amendment
Senate, House Democratic health bills compared
In The House Corner . . . Weighing In At 1990 Pages . . . The Affordable Health Care For America Act

/here we go, pass the popcorn

You Didn’t Really Think It Was Going To Save Money, Did You?

CMS: House health bill will hike costs $289B

The House-approved healthcare overhaul would raise the costs of healthcare by $289 billion over the next 10 years, according to an analysis by the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

(READ THE FULL REPORT HERE)

The CMS report is a blow to the White House and House Democrats who have vowed that healthcare reform would curb the growth of healthcare spending. CMS’s analysis is not an apples-to-apples comparison to the cost estimate conducted by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) because CMS did not review tax provisions, which help offset the price tag of the Democrats’ measure.

However, the CMS analysis clearly states that the House bill falls short in attaining a key goal of the Democrats’ effort to reform the nation’s healthcare system: “With the exception of the proposed reduction in Medicare… the provisions of H.R. 3962 would not have a significant impact on future healthcare cost growth rates.”

Republicans immediately seized on CMS’s conclusions.

The long-awaited report should serve as a “stark warning to every Republican, Democrat and Independent worried about the future of this nation,” Ways and Means Committee ranking member Dave Camp (R-Mich.) said in a statement on Saturday.

Though House Republicans pressed to have this analysis completed before the lower chamber voted on the Democrats’ sweeping healthcare reform bill last week, it was not ready until late Friday. Chief CMS Actuary Richard Foster, who prepared the report, recently told The Hill that he and his staff had only a few days to review the bill before it was voted on.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) highlighted the report on Saturday in a written statement. “This report once again discredits Democrats’ assertions that their $1.3 trillion government takeover of health care will lower costs, and it confirms that this bill violates President Obama’s promise to ‘bend the cost curve.’ It’s now beyond dispute that their bill will raise costs, which is exactly what the American people don’t want.”

Republicans predicted that if the CMS numbers were available last Saturday when the House voted on the Democrats’ healthcare bill, the measure would not have passed.

“This report confirms what virtually every independent expert has been saying: Speaker Pelosi’s healthcare bill will increase costs, not decrease them. I hope my colleagues in the Senate heed CMS’ findings and refuse to rush ahead until any bill under consideration can be certified to actually reduce healthcare costs,” Camp said.

According to the 31-page report, the House-passed bill would increase costs, cut Medicare and expand Medicaid.

“In aggregate, we estimate that for calendar years 2010 through 2019 [national health expenditures] would increase by $289 billion,” the report notes.

See also:
Estimated Financial Effects of the “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009” (H.R. 3962), as Passed by the House on November 7, 2009
CMS: House bill increases health care costs
Study suggests costs rise under health care bill
CMS Report On House Health Bill: Many More Insured Means More, Not Less, Spending
Report: Bill would reduce senior care
House health care bill costs more than previously believed
GOP leaps on study of rising health care costs
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

/then again, the Democrats really don’t care about how much it costs, all they care about is expanding and entrenching their political power