CBO Says Senate Health Bill Would Reduce Federal Deficit

[Melinda]

Source: Washington Post

A health-care reform bill drafted by the Senate Finance Committee would cost $829 billion over the next decade and would meet President Obama's goal of reducing the federal budget deficit by 2019, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

The bill would trim federal budget deficits by $81 billion, the CBO said. It would also expand coverage to 94 percent of Americans by 2019, the CBO said, up from the current 83 percent.

The assessment by Congress's nonpartisan auditors has been awaited by committee members as they prepare to vote on the bill, perhaps as soon as Thursday.

The committee completed its work on the bill last Friday, but committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) promised members that, before voting, they would have a "reasonable" amount of time to review the CBO's assessment of the price tag.



Read more: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/10/cbo_says_senate_health_bill_wo.html?hpid=topnews

[kestrel91316]

1. ZOMG, we can't have THAT!!!!!!

[robo50]

5. And don't let Republicans find out! They have to be left

in the stupid place, where no facts and figures enter their "thinking"!

[No Elephants]

13. Correct. We can't have Baucus's bill. It's a POS.

[valerief]

2. Will it provide competion for the premium payers? No. Will it make rich people richer? Sure, why

bother with the bill otherwise?

[No Elephants]

14. And by people, we mean the insurance companies. And they want people who

cannot afford their rates to go to jail. And folks with pre-existing conditions will be charged much more than everyone else. I don't care if Baucus's bill is a cash cow, let alone deficit neutral. It's a POS.

[postulater]

3. That's still 6% without insurance

6% times 300 million is about 24 million. Way too many left out.

We cannot leave anyone out. This is America.

[laconicsax]

6. You're forgetting two things:

1) 6% left out is 94% covered. :P
2) America is all about leaving people out until they stand up and demand inclusion.

[No Elephants]

15. When did America become about mandates for 94% of folks and leaving out the rest?

94% covered at what cost to them? For whose ultimate benefit?

When did America become about mandates for the benefit of private medical insurance companies?

For that matter, when did America become only about the deficit--and only when we are talking health care?

[laconicsax]

21. You sort of answered your own question.

94% will be forced to purchase coverage a cost determined by Congress to not be too expensive for the ultimate benefit of insurance company profits.

Don't like it? Neither do I.

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. Thanks. Now please get off your collective butts and score 676

[laconicsax]

7. They say it's coming.

I'm not holding my breath though.

[jgraz]

8. This deficit obsession is a great piece of misdirection

The real question is: will it lower premiums and increase coverage? The answer is: NO to both.

[No Elephants]

16. THANK YOU. Will it treat people with pre-existing conditions equitably? NO.

[dotymed]

9. Single Payer

Universal healthcare would save our country billions and cover
everyone. At one time "they"said that the CBO would
present it's figures on Single Payer to Congress. It never
happened. Why is that?

[never cry wolf]

10. +1 Weiner was promised to be able to present it on the floor

I hope the CBO has numbers on 676

[dotymed]

12. Man, I sure hope so.

I hope the MSM gives it prominent coverage. When is Rep.
Weiner supposed to do this. I sure hope it is well before the
vote on reform. If not, it won't make a damned bit of
difference.

[No Elephants]

17. Did Congress even submit single payer to the CBO?

Obama's been against it since he campaigned for the primary.

[earcandle]

11. that 81 million was a deal struck by pharma industry with obama I think, this won't work for us.

[No Elephants]

18. Baucus' s bill is defiitely not going to work for the taxpayer, only for the insurers.

[DFW]

19. Oh no!!!!

You mean all those Blue Dogs just got their legs cut off from out from under them? As in "Obama's claim
of health care reform being revenue neutral was correct?" Poor Blue Dogs. NOW what are they going to use
for an excuse for not supporting health care reform?

All those big juicy contributions from the insurance companies,
and all their ad men,
couldn't put their arguments back together again............

[Robbien]

20. This is crap. They base the savings on the idea that companies will give profits to its employees

Baucus health care plan bases its savings on the working guy getting a bigger paycheck thus having to pay more in taxes. How does that working guy get a bigger paycheck? Well, the company will pass its savings on down to the worker.

Yeah right.


Analysis done by:
http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/10/baucuscare_score.php

Going by the fairly sketchy description, virtually all of the extra benefit appears to come from estimating that employers will see their health care costs fall, mostly because they put those workers into federally subsidized programs, pass the resulting savings along to their workers in the form of higher wages and salaries, and that the Treasury will thereby gain, at a rough guess, about $12-15 billion a year in tax revenues.