Healthcare Reform Thread II

[DinoDoc]

When have the dems ever marched lockstep? The fact the GOP can do it in both house and senate should frighten any sane observer...

They couldn't. The Dems had Snowe until they scared even her away.

[MrFun]

They forced this road earlier last year when they made it plain as day that the GOP strategy was to block as much dem legislation as they could for their own political gain

The GOP didn't have enough votes to block anything until Scott Brown got elected, dumbass. The Dems had a huge majority in the House and sixty votes in the Senate; they have no one to blame for their failures other than themselves.

The truth hurts sometimes, but yeah, I think Drake is right here.

[DanS]

They couldn't. The Dems had Snowe until they scared even her away.

I agree and in hindsight that was a very bad mistake. The Dems could have had a much better bill containing the things that they wanted, if they had Snowe on board with them. The Dems chose a strategy that lacked any margin for error.

[Theben]

They couldn't. The Dems had Snowe until they scared even her away.

I agree the dems chased her off, but she was wavering the whole time.

[Drake Tungsten]

The CBO weighs in on the doc fix...

The Combined Budgetary Impact of Enacting the Reconciliation Proposal, H.R. 3590, and H.R. 3961

You asked about the total budgetary impact of enacting the reconciliation proposal (the amendment to H.R. 4872), the Senate-passed health bill (H.R. 3590), and the Medicare Physicians Payment Reform Act of 2009 (H.R. 3961). CBO estimates that enacting all three pieces of legislation would add $59 billion to budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period.

Under current law, Medicare’s payment rates for physicians’ services will be reduced by about 21 percent in April 2010 and by an average of about 2 percent per year for the rest of the decade.2 H.R. 3961 would increase those payment rates by 1.2 percent in 2010 and would restructure the sustainable growth rate mechanism beginning in 2011. Those changes would result in significantly higher payment rates for physicians than those that would result under current law. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3961, by itself, would cost about $208 billion over the 2010–2019 period. (That estimate reflects the enactment of two short-term extension acts, which lowered the cost in 2010 by about $2 billion compared with CBO’s estimate of November 4, 2009.)

H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as passed by the U.S. Senate on December 24, 2009, would establish a mandate for most residents of the United States to obtain health insurance, set up insurance “exchanges” through which certain individuals could receive federal subsidies to reduce the cost of purchasing that coverage, and make numerous other changes in the health insurance system, in federal health care programs, and in the federal tax code. The reconciliation proposal would modify the Senate-passed health bill in several ways (including changing federal programs involving postsecondary education). CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both the reconciliation proposal and H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce budget deficits by $138 billion over the 2010–2019 period through their effects on direct spending and revenues (including the savings achieved through the education provisions).

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3961 together with those two bills would add $59 billion to budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period. That amount is about $10 billion less than the figure that would result from summing the effects of enacting the bills separately. The $10 billion difference occurs primarily because H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal would modify how the government’s payments to Medicare Advantage plans are set. The higher payment rates for physicians that would stem from the enactment of H.R. 3961 would, under current law, result in higher payments to those plans. But the changes made by the other bills would moderate that increase.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11376/RyanLtrhr4872.pdf

edit:

A valid comparison would point out that the CBO says healthcare reform will reduce the deficit by $138 billion over the next ten years. Accepting your estimate of $200 billion over the next decade for the doc fix, the Dems' healthcare reform plans will actually add $62 billion to the federal deficit over the next ten years. This happens despite the fact that the Dems are paying for six years of benefits with ten years of revenue.

Was $3 billion off. Damn...

[DinoDoc]

The CBO weighs in on the doc fix...

Sigh. As much as it should, I don't think this is going to get through to the retards in Congress (and Poly, Hi Ramo!) claiming that this bill reduces the deficit.

Thankfully my Rep is going to vote no on this.

[Drake Tungsten]

As much as it should, I don't think this is going to get through to the retards in Congress (and Poly, Hi Ramo!) claiming that this bill reduces the deficit.

Do you really think the people in Congress believe this will reduce the deficit? They know perfectly well that it won't. They just don't care.

[DaShi]

I wish people cared this much about the deficit 7 years ago.

[Drake Tungsten]

I wish you cared about it at all.

[DaShi]

Not me. I'm trying to care less. Although the sudden concern for it by some posters here is amusing.

[Dinner]

Are you actually still in favor of this abomination, or are you just that desperate for any hint of competance in your chosen party?

I think they sold out to lobbyists but it is hardly an abomination. It still represents a significant improvement over the real abomination; our current system.

[Hauldren Collider]

If our current system is so bad, how come people from all over the world come here to get their tumors treated?

Don't be retarded. The United States has the highest quality healthcare in the world.

And they didn't sell out to lobbyists, they sold out to themselves to buy up enough votes in the Senate and the House.

[Dinner]

It is good quality if you can afford it but large numbers of people can't and that's what makes it so bad. As BS about not selling out to lobbyists. Both parties won't take a piss without asking lobbyists for permission first. Allowing a medicare buy in at cost was wildly popular with the American people but the reason Senators wouldn't support it is because insurance lobbyists told them they'd get no more money if they did. Something like 70% of the American people supported the idea of a medicare buy in at cost yet some how the Senators didn't want to do what the people wanted. Why? Simple, they're bought and paid for by special interests.

[Hauldren Collider]

People who demonize lobbyists are almost as bad as people who demonize insurance corporations. Fact is, lobbyists are more often that not just advisers to congressmen. Turns out that congressmen aren't actually all Benjamin Franklins/polymaths, so they need experts to help them out, and these experts are called lobbyists.

However politicians always seem to need bogeymen, so people who get paid to advise them are obviously first on the chopping block

Sure, there certainly are corrupt lobbyists. But don't generalize.

[DaShi]

@ lobbyists being just advisers.