Good News/Bad News: CBO on Baucus Bill
The much-anticipated CBO score is here. I've just begun to read it. The good news/bad news seems to be that it reduces the deficit by $81 billion over 10 years, but leaves 25 million uninsured (one-third of them illegal immigrants). Will post more soon.
UPDATE: Jonathan Cohn gives us the comparisons to the House bill:
That's significantly lower than the projections from the House bill, which would result in 97 percent of legal residents and 94 percent of people living here. In raw numbers, it's the difference between 25 million people remaining uninsured (Senate Finance bill) and 17 million (House bills) ten years hence.
Of course, those numbers involve a lot of uncertainty. Their significance is that they correspond to a particular level of benefits and financial assistance, at least in the calculations of the CBO. And this is something we've known for a while: The Senate Finance bill isn't as generous or as protective as it ought to be.
But the fact that the measure would actually save money means, or should mean, there's a bit more money to throw at the program--ideally, by raising a little more money in taxes and/or offsetting savings. The difference between covering people at the level of the Senate Finance bill and covering nearly all legal residents* is maybe $150 billion over ten years. That's not a lot of money in the grand scheme of things.
UPDATE2: Wonkroom compares latest version to the original Baucus bill.
-
1
Unacceptable. Seriously. In 10 years, there will still be 25 million without coverage? All for the sake of protecting the interests of those who give Baucus money, and hire his staffers as lobbyists? DOA.
-
2
"but leaves 25 million uninsured (one-third of them illegal immigrants)."
Can't be Joe Wilson was harangued because he called Obama a liar when he said illegals would not be covered.
Who is calling out the President on this for spreading falsehoods about the HC bill.
And can't wait for squeezing fraud out of Medicare.
-
2.1
"Who is calling out the President on this for spreading falsehoods about the HC bill".
.
Come on freeinpa. Call Obama a LIAR.
.
He lied then, and he continues to spread lies about this folly A.K.A. Health Care Reform! -
2.2
rustyreturns
I know he is a liar and you know he is a liar, it's just the liberals who think only Fox News and Rush lie.
-
2.3
freeinpa,
Why is it so important that "illegals" not be covered? It is because the Republicans want to cut off their noses inspite of their faces?
Let's see, for Republicans is makes for sense to have to pay for an illegal getting care in the emergency department (which happens now) than for an illegal to pay his or her own insurance and to see a primary care physician. Yea, these guys are bright!
Somehow, Republicans think, if illegals aren't covered, they won't get medical care, or it will be provided for free. Boy, talk about genius! Every time, an illegal goes to the hospital and receives care, it is pay for, either directly with our tax dollars, or indirectly through our insurance premiums.
I would like the illegal to at least cover some of his or her costs, or at least see a primary care physician so it costs you and me, directly or indirectly less money. But clearly you would rather he or she go directly to the emergency room and then you and me pick up all of the costs, directly or indirectly.
-
2.4
fhmadvocat:
Here is a wild concept I know liberals don't like. Note the IL in front of LEGALS. They are breaking the law. Enforce the law and medical expenses go to zero.
That's the problem with liberalism- moral relativism.
-
2.5
What a relief we won't be covering people who are "illegal."
Too bad that won't stop them from contracting communicable diseases, and since they won't be "covered" will be more likely to pass those viruses and diseases on to those of us who are not "illegal".
And too bad that some of those people will end up getting care in more expensive emergency rooms when they delay getting care when they get sick because they are not covered for primary care.
And too bad that will drive up healthcare costs for everyone.
Yes, it's more important that we adhere to rightwing fundamentalism and deny health coverage to people because they are "illegal" -- even though that is inhumane, foolish from a health policy standpoint, and increases overall healthcare costs.
-
-
3
How come deficit reduction has to be the centerpiece of this bill when there was nothing but crickets when Bush trashed the surplus he inherited and created the basis for this huge deficit?
As to the coverage, no one begins to answer the real question as noted in today's Daily Howler ...
SUAREZ: Even with universal coverage, the Netherlands spends less than half what the United States spends per person on health care. While spending half the money, the Netherlands gets better results. The Dutch have longer life expectancy and lower infant mortality. The average Dutch citizen spends about 7 percent of income on health care, and they seem satisfied with the system. The annual Euro Health Consumer Index puts the Netherlands in first place in a survey of patient satisfaction across Europe.
-
3.1
Simple answer GO live in the NETHERLANDS
-
3.2
Perhaps if we could somehow round up all the illegals in the US, and pay for people like IvyB to migrate to the Netherlands, then perhaps we could afford to offer health care for all that remain.
-
3.3
I have a better idea, Freeper: Why don't you go live in Somalia?
-
3.4
How come deficit reduction has to be the centerpiece of this bill when there was nothing but crickets when Bush trashed the surplus he inherited and created the basis for this huge deficit?
.
Because GWB's trashing the budget doesn't make it right (It just makes republicans dishonest)
.
Two things are true. First, whatever bill emerges can be modified if 6 years from now we realize that it's not performing as advertised. Secondly, unless it's revenue neutral over the long haul, it will be guaranteed to fail over the long haul. It would be better if seventy years from now, we weren't still debating how we're going to pay for our health care system. -
3.5
arbitrarystrin
Sounds like somebody needs a nap (and his meds)
-
3.6
…what's with rusty's unprovoked ad hominem against Ivy?
-
-
4
That's a dealbreaker, sorry (not you, KT). The point of this HC crap is get access for all. Baucus still doesn't get it; Schumer and Rockefeller do (with their PO versions). Actually, KT, I had wondered if you were taking today off …to get back to work on that book perhaps?
-
5
"The good news/bad news seems to be that it reduces the deficit by $81 billion over 10 years, but leaves 25 million uninsured (one-third of them illegal immigrants)".
.
Karen, please tell me that you are not so ignorant, un-informed not to know that there is no way in hell that Congress will pass a bill with over 500 BILLION in Medicare CUTS?
.
I am truly not trying to be disrespectful here, but this is a fact, and you have to know it.
.
Lindsay Graham just said on Tee Vee that "hell will freeze over first before those in Congress will vote to cut that much from Medicare. He cited case after case when various bills have been proposed in Congress to cut Medicare, that it was voted down.
.
Now for the illegals. A precedent has already been set by the Supreme Court that "all persons" must be included in any bill which provides for some type of service. Example, when Texas attempted to cut off funding for schools and the education of illegal's children. The constitution clearly states that "all persons are equal in the eyes of the law when it comes down to things like education or other services that are to be used for the people of this country".
.
So, Congress is saying they will exclude over 12 million people, but they can't do it. We will be funding health care for illegals and their children, period. No matter how much Obama wants to say they will not be able to apply for health care benefits, ILLEGALS WILL BE ABLE TO APPLY.
.
Take out of the CBO projection's 500 billion in Medicare cuts, and ADD over 12 million illegals into the mix and you have a bill that will exceed in my estimations over 2 TRILLION dollars.
.
How on earth can we create the largest entitlement program in mankinds history?-
5.1
500 BILLION in Medicare CUTS
.
Do mean cuts in benefits to seniors, or cuts in over-payments to mediocre providers/inefficient private insurers?
.
Actually, I'd like to look it up myself...
.
...where in the CBO report does it mention this, Rustydog?
.
What page number? -
5.2
rusty,
You seem to be missing the point about illegals. YOU AND I ALREADY PAY FOR MEDICAL CARE FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY. Therefore, whether they are covered under this bill is irrelevant. Republicans don't care, either, they simply want a "us vs. them" argument to rally Conservative hatred of immigrants.
-
5.3
Maybe this will explain it for you stuart.
.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/13/news/economy/Obama_health_Care.reut/index.htm -
5.4
I think people are entitled to timely, effective, efficient health care.
-
-
6
KT:
The much-anticipated CBO score is here.
O Huzzah!
.
The CBO score is here!
.
I can't wait for you to read it, and report the most key, important finding of all:
.
By how much and when does the CBO say that the cost of health care per year to America will be reduced from its 2007 level of $2.2 trillion, if we pass into law the Baucus bill?
.
By how much and when does the CBO say that the astronomical price tag of $7,421 per person (according to US Dept of Health & Human Services http://tinyurl.com/rcru3c ) will come down to what the rest of the world pays, if the Baucus plan is implemented?
.
By how much and when does the CBO say that the insane, nation-bankrupting 16.2 percent of our country's wealth (GDP) being thrown away on mediocre health care will come more into line with France or Japan or Italy or England or Germany's 10 percent or lower, once the Baucus bill's prescriptions are fully realized?
.
The deficit-reduction numbers are grand, sure, but that's a drop in the bucket compared to the $2.2 trillion a year the United States spends on unexceptional health care.
.
Let's even say that the bill, if passed, will be deficit-neutral over the next decade. So what?
.
Even if health care reform as currently envisioned will truthfully not contribute a dime to the deficit, who ever said that the goal of this was to come out spending the same idiotic amount on health care that we do now, KT?
.
So I eagerly await the fruit of your diligent reporting labors, KT:
.
If the Baucus bill becomes the law of the land, what does the CBO say about what will become of the crazy $7,421 per person price tag of American health care?
.
In 2013, will the price of health care in the US be less, the same or even more money than it is now...and what will happen to base insurance premiums and Medicare & Medicaid as a result?
.
Thanks so much in advance for this awesome reporting, KT (I'll read the report, too)... -
7
Rusty keeps his own set of facts in his back pocket, in caae the real ones aren't to his liking.
"all persons are equal in the eyes of the law when it comes down to things like education or other services that are to be used for the people of this country"
.
Since you used quote marks, that would indicate that the phrase appears elsewhere and you're quoting it. Care to cite your source?
.
hint (It's near your back pocket......)-
7.1
There you go Dirks, happy reading.
.
http://willnevergiveup.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/illegal-healthcare/ -
7.2
Judge Napolitano, I believe
-
7.3
Thanks.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0202_ZO.html
It is indeed interesting reading. Do you now care to state that your in favor of illiteracy. It would appear that way to me...... -
7.4
No, I am in favor of passing legislation that requires ICE to deport anyone in this country who resides here illegally, PERIOD.
.
I am in favor of securing our borders and preventing the illegal passage of those into this country illegally.
.
Once we take these steps, then we can provide for those within our borders who are legally here, and provide them with all the necessary basics of life.
-
-
8
but leaves 25 million uninsured (one-third of them illegal immigrants).
.
Let's for the moment leave aside any debate over whether or not illegals should be included. If the plan on the table specifically intends to exclude them, doesn't it muddy the waters to include illegals in the number of people the plan will miss? If we're trying to gauge how effective the bill will be, we need to compare it against its intended goal.-
8.1
because we are still paying for their treatment, when they show up at emergency rooms.
-
8.2
My constant complaint is that the media coverage of the entire effort to reform health care and the effort not to reform health care has been a complete muddy mess.
-
8.3
Those who HAVE health care insurance are paying for "when they show up at emergency rooms". People who do not have insurance do not pay anything towards the cost.
.
Please be more specific, KT.
.
Now, every tax payer will pay, most notably those of us with "cadillac" plans, and seniors giving up over 500 BILLION in Medicare CUTS -
8.4
Fair enough. I just personally think that we should consider that separately from the matter of how effectively the bills cover the people they intend to cover.
-
8.5
Thank you so very much for responding to commentary, KT.
-
-
9
"Those who HAVE health care insurance are paying for "when they show up at emergency rooms". People who do not have insurance do not pay anything towards the cost."
.
That's not entirely true Rusty. The federal government has a special program that reimburses hospitals for treating the unisured. That is taxpayer money. So even if a person does not have health insurance if they are paying taxes to the federal government they are paying something. It might not be their fair share. But so be it. You like this way because you don't want to do anything to make sure they have insurance. Correct?-
9.1
http://www.nhpf.org/library/background-papers/BP_MedicaidDSH_09-14-04.pdf
.
I assume you are talking about DSH, gysgt. You may want to read this report I cite above.
.
The estimation is that DSH covers approximately 23 Billion in un-insured and that includes illegals.
.
I am not able to find what the actual costs are overall, we assume that some of these costs or have been told that anyone who has insurance is also paying for part of these costs through pass throughs.
.
Using stuart's figures that it costs every individual approximately $7400 in the US, whereas in other countries it is only about 1/2 of that cost, or a savings of approximately 736 billion dollars.
.
One could then preclude that those of us who are insured are spending about 700 billion dollars in pass throughs or increased costs we pay for our insurance.
.
The government or tax payer is funding about 23 billion.
-
-
10
KT, first of all, the "treatment" that they receive at emergency rooms, on a macro-level, is almost certainly not as costly as the treatment that they would receive under a regime of treating all of their medical issues. Second of all, Congress could simply pass a law that deported any illegal who showed up for emergency care once that illegal was stabilized.
-
11
Standard Republican logic. Deny any and all benefits to any and all Americans on the off chance that someone else might inadvertantly benefit as well. Better to have people die in the streets, except for the inconvenience of having to dispose of the corpses or step over them.....
-
11.1
We could move all the uninsured to Chicago and they could die of natural causes (Chicago style)
-
-
12
I have FOUND the Death Panels. Or not. Please read the post above this one.
-
13
This entire debate is ignoring the fact that study, after study has found that people who do NOT pay for their health insurance take VASTLY more resources from the healthcare system than those that do.
-
14
Nothing short of great news for the president. The bill generally hits the mark as far as bottom line goals and paints the GOP into a dangerous corner in opposing a bill that would significantly reduce the deficit.
-
14.1
The goal on the deficit is precarious at best. Trusting 500+ politicians (of either party) to eliminate fraud and abuse out of Medicare and reduce senior citizen coverage in rural areas will be a stretch. Dealing with the unions who will lose gold-platted plans won't be easy either. And let's face they can't truly predict 10 months out let alone 10 years.
-
-
15
Okay, spob and Rusty, you win. Feel free to elect only Republican nominees who are willing to deport any and all illegals.
.
The problem is that too many businesses, including those owned by Republicans, depend on illegal immigrants to work for them. Your politicians say they are for deporting every illegal immigrant they can find, but they don't actually do anything about it.
.
Stop complaining to us. Pick up the phone and talk with Cornyn and McCain. They are your enemy. They are the ones who are weak on immigration. There is a 5th column of people in the GOP who aren't doing everything they can to deport every illegal they can find. -
16
Rusty and Free:
Just wondering, do you two get paid to post comments here? It seems to me, with your harsh tone and views that are generally incompatible with most of the readers here, you are trying to accomplish either of two things: one, honestly trying to persuade and alter people's opinion; two, you are being paid and continue your work even though it makes no progress - in fact, might even calcify your opponents even more.
The first option doesn't make sense to me. You're smart - not intellectual and able to grasp the collective human environment, but quick and sharp - nevertheless, smart. Yet, you're clearly out of place here, you would feel much more at home posting on other sites, so you get combative - understandable, but that tone never works to persuade. So if you are honestly trying to sophisticate us, you haven't yet noticed it's not working, but you've been doing it for quite some time and people as smart as you don't not often notice things like this. Which means you've most likely noticed it, but continued your efforts undeterred expecting a different result. Thus, you might be insane.
I don't think you're insane - could be, but not likely. That leaves us with option two. You're quick and sharp; have quick access to what most people would consider obscure reports; and you have significant amount of time on your hands. This sounds like to me a mid-level clerk with some talent and a hard-working attitude, willing to do anything to get ahead. I think you're being paid.
Either that or you just like harsh, political conversation - stirring people's feelings, people who have an intuition about something, but don't quite have the sophistic ability to defend their ideas quite you. It might even make you feel good to show your perceived intellectual superiority - I guess this then would be option three.
So what is it? Are you insane, being paid, or just a plain dick?
-
16.1
"sophistic ability to defend their ideas quite you." There should be a "like" in between "quite" and "you". Oops.
-
16.2
I won't speak for Rusty, but nearly every topic or comment I post is met with name calling, derision and an arrogant condenscening attitude. And your response perfectly reflects that attitude.
You seem to think what liberals on this site write passes for some civil, sophisticated intellectual exchange. With a few exceptions,stuartzechman and Paul Dirks, to name two, are in large part gaseous windbags who throw temper tantrums because the world doesn't agree with them and give them everything they want. Typical liberal fare.
I don't get paid to write (here), nor insane, although trying to reason with liberals could be described as insanity and my name is not dick. I am an independent who works when I need to or have to, read non-stop and stand by my principles.
So, here, as most parts of your life its no runs, no hits only errors. Don't worry Mommy will be home soon.
-
16.3
Well, there you go with the name calling card.
-
-
17
johnnie1984...........so, it's not possible they merely have a different opinion and enjoy engaging in debate? You have perfected the Democrats art of denegrating the opposition so you don't have to engage their thoughts. Good job. *sarcasm fully intended*
-
17.1
Not to worry: I have been called worst things by better people.
-
-
18
I think you should re-read what I wrote. You only got one thing correct: I called you two dicks. Yup, guilty as charged.
"every topic or comment I post is met with name calling, derision and an arrogant condenscening attitude. And your response perfectly reflects that attitude."
-An insult, but you then return the favor. Way to be the bigger man/woman."You seem to think what liberals on this site write passes for some civil, sophisticated intellectual exchange."
-Never said this, in fact, never even hinted at it. My whole topic was you two."so, it's not possible they merely have a different opinion and enjoy engaging in debate? You have perfected the Democrats art of denegrating the opposition so you don't have to engage their thoughts. Good job. *sarcasm fully intended*"
-Two things: one, this isn't a debate; there is no conversation, no precise meaning, nothing that would constitute a civil conversation between people. In fact, you completely assumed my positions to be liberal and I never said anything about myself - NOTHING; two, I never wasted the time engaging their thoughts because, if you read my post, I don't think it will do any good. I would have to be insane, paid, or a dick."Not to worry: I have been called worst things by better people."
-I'm sure you have and I wouldn't be surprised if it happened frequently.Now, if you'll excuse me, Mommy is calling me downstairs for dinner.
-
18.1
Boy that was fun reading.
-
18.2
It was hardly worth reading the first time. But I will help you out here since you have trouble following your own post.
"You seem to think what liberals on this site write passes for some civil, sophisticated intellectual exchange."
-Never said this, in fact, never even hinted at it. My whole topic was you two." Well yeah you did. You refer to the postings o ftwo people with conservative views and how they do not hold up to the standards you seem to believe others have here."so, it's not possible they merely have a different opinion and enjoy engaging in debate? You have perfected the Democrats art of denegrating the opposition so you don't have to engage their thoughts. Good job. *sarcasm fully intended*"
Not my post!""Not to worry: I have been called worst things by better people."
-I'm sure you have and I wouldn't be surprised if it happened frequently.And I am perfectly happy with that. I do not need the approval of others to make my life work.
Now, if you'll excuse me, Mommy is calling me downstairs for dinner."
And make sure she gives you your meds. I believe you will need them.
-
-
19
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill - Swampland - TIME.com [...]
-
20
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill – Swampland ̵... [...]
-
21
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill – Swampland ̵... [...]
-
22
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill - Swampland - TIME.com [...]
-
23
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill - Swampland - TIME.com [...]
-
24
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill - Swampland - TIME.com [...]
-
25
[...] Good <b>News</b>/Bad <b>News</b>: CBO on Baucus Bill - Swampland - TIME.com [...]
- ktumulty i will be tweeting this 12/5. MT @susanpage #Gridiron Club sets rules for tweeting at 12/5 dinner speeches by Sarah #Palin & Barney Frank. - 1 hour ago
- ktumulty @LATimesrainey Could you get them to check for my earrings? I lost a pair of silver ones and have been hunting all over the house for them. - 1 day ago
- ktumulty @TeresaKopec @fishbowlDC thanks! am declaring my age to be the avg of mine and fellow bday girl jen psaki. - 1 day ago
Most Popular »
- "Personal Sins Should Not Require Press Releases"
- False Economy: Think You're Saving Money? Think Again
- The 'Alice' Interview: A Very Different Brand of Wonderland
- Congress's Tepid Reaction to Obama's Afghanistan Plan
- Tiger Speaks
- Rep. Woolsey: Majority Of Dems Will Vote Against War Funding
- State Dinner, Uh, Fashion
- Gleeks and Shrieks: Fox Unveils Midseason, Glee Gone Until April
- White House Hypocritical Attack on Politico
- The Dreaded X
- Can Attack Dogs Be Rehabilitated?
- Rachel Uchitel: Tiger Woods' Alleged Affair Connection
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Europe's Secret Nuclear Weapons: What Should NATO Do?
- Italian Town Dreams of a White (No Foreigners) Christmas
- Tiger Woods Admits 'Transgressions': Will Image Be Hurt?
- Why Fritz Henderson Resigned as GM's CEO
- Ireland: Lack of New Catholic Priests Spurs Campaign
- The End of the 2000s: Goodbye to a Decade from Hell
- Could White House Party Crashers the Salahis Go to Jail?
Quotes of the Day »
RSS