Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ezra Klein: CBO Estimates House Bills--95%+ Covered, Cost $905 Billion, with Strongest Public Plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 09:39 AM
Original message
Ezra Klein: CBO Estimates House Bills--95%+ Covered, Cost $905 Billion, with Strongest Public Plan
CBO Estimates The House Bills: 95%+ Covered, About $900 Billion, And Public Plans

Lori Montgomery reports that the House has gotten its new CBO scores, and they look pretty good: $905 billion for the more generous package that also includes the strongest public plan, and $859 billion for the less generous package that carries the weaker public plan. Both bills push total coverage up above 95 percent of legal residents, which is to say, above the mark hit by the Senate Finance Committee's bill.

It's a bit hard to say anything more about the bills until the new scores are actually released. In general, the stronger public plan saves money, but Montgomery reports that the plan containing it also has more generous insurance requirements, more subsidies for private health insurance, and fewer people on Medicaid, which is presumably why it's pricier. We'll know more when the details become public.

By Ezra Klein | October 16, 2009

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/10/cbo_estimates_the_house_bills.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ej510 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
1. Get rid of the subsidies for the insurance industry a save more money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. We need public option to drive down the cost of insurance, and thus, taxpayer cost of subsidies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. ...
:grr: :nuke: :grr: bribing companies to do the right fucking thing

'but Montgomery reports that the plan containing it also has more generous insurance requirements, more subsidies for private health insurance, and fewer people on Medicaid, which is presumably why it's pricier.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R....
this needs to spread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
5. This is good. Still, the CBO scored the
Edited on Fri Oct-16-09 10:31 AM by ProSense
the HELP bill at 97 percent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. How Does Either Bill Do On The Deficit Front?
The cost is not as important as whether or not the bill is deficit neutral or better. For example, single payer could be more costly in terms of federal costs, since everything becomes a governmental expense, BUT it is also cheaper, because you eliminate all the private insurance costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
7. But, but,, then Max Baucus & Kent Conrad can't pad their pockets
Edited on Fri Oct-16-09 11:36 AM by depakid
And Harry Reid would split his pants.

Sorry Barack- but these are indeed bad people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lochloosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. Medicare Part E
Fuck 'em
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
9. If we have to wait four years for it, it's usless
Just let people voluntarily buy into Medicare! All set up and everything--no waiting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC