The CBO finally gave us the price tag for the Senate Finance Committee’s health care bill, and it’s a mere $829 billion. But that’s not what you’ll hear from the “news” media. What you’ll be hearing them is that the Baucus bill is “budget neutral.” In fact, it will (guffaw) reduce the deficit:
According to CBO and JCT’s assessment, enacting the Chairman’s mark, as amended, would result in a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $81 billion over the 2010–2019 period.
Well now, where have we heard such estimates in the past? Oh that’s right, it was when our single-payer prototype was enacted. Michelle Malkin refers us to a piece by Jeff Emanuel, who points out that the estimated cost of Medicare was a drop in the bucket compared to its actual cost:
In 1990, rather than costing American taxpayers $12 billion, Medicare cost $107 billion — an increase of 800% over the government’s best guess at the program’s cost 23 years before. That cost has increased exponentially as the years have passed since 1990. This year, $484 billion will be spent on mandatory Medicare outlays.
But the Dems and the news media (but I repeat myself) will be shouting that THIS IS THE TICKET. No more worrying about that pesky cost issue. The actual costs of all federal programs versus their original estimates have no relevance here because Baucus is BUDGET NEUTRAL.
What crap.
Post a Comment