Health Care BS

Despite implausible claims by Barack Obama and his cadre of policy advisors, it’s pretty obvious that Obamacare will be VERY expensive. Here’s what the NYT says about the combination of tax credits and subsidies that Obama’s plan envisions:

The subsidies are expensive, estimated at well over $100 billion. Other components of the Obama plan also bear up-front costs, like a pledge to spend $50 billion over five years to speed the computerization of health records, $6 billion a year on tax credits to small businesses that provide coverage to workers, and an unspecified amount to buffer businesses from high-cost insurance claims.

And the author of the NYT piece, Kenneth Sack, is understandably skeptical about Obama’s plan for paying the bills:

The source Mr. Obama has identified to pay for them — the repeal of President Bush’s tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 — would cover only about half. That means additional health care savings would be needed, not only to keep premiums under control but also to help pay for the subsidies.

Now that this reality is beginning to sink in, Obama’s advisors have performed another of their trademark pirouettes:

This month, Mr. Obama’s health advisers tried to recast the debate so that the questioning of any one number would not undermine the plan’s broader credibility. They enlisted eight health policy experts to sign a letter that, without endorsing the math behind any single initiative, proclaimed it was “not only possible, but likely” that Mr. Obama could save $200 billion annually.

This is, of course, a textbook example of the appeal to authority. Obama’s claims aren’t supported by the numbers, so he trots out ”experts” who tell us not to worry our pretty little heads with pesky data.

Matthew Holt, with whom I usually disagree on just about everything, provides the perfect response to this disingenuous and patronizing tactic by the Obama campaign:

I thought this guy was going to treat us like grown-ups.

It would appear not.