CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit

[Truthmatters]

“CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase the budget deficit,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote in his analysis.

The analysis also finds that, under repeal, with the ACA’s subsidies abolished, fewer Americans would have health insurance and those who purchased it in the individual market would pay more for insurance.



Read more: CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So..not enacting an entitlement now costs us money?

Sorry, there is more to this picture than meets the eye.

"Enacting an entitlement" is not all that the Health Care Bill did, obviously. There were cost-saving measures in the bill. Read the CBO reports. They're the guys paid to figure these things out, albeit not with 100% accuracy of course but it at least speaks to your sentence #1 above being a faulty premise.

I'm certain you have read the entire bill, run all it's numberse through models and have determined that all promised was spot on.

 

[G.T.]

So..not enacting an entitlement now costs us money?

Sorry, there is more to this picture than meets the eye.

"Enacting an entitlement" is not all that the Health Care Bill did, obviously. There were cost-saving measures in the bill. Read the CBO reports. They're the guys paid to figure these things out, albeit not with 100% accuracy of course but it at least speaks to your sentence #1 above being a faulty premise.

I'm certain you have read the entire bill, run all it's numberse through models and have determined that all promised was spot on.

Why?

 

[Jarhead]

“CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase the budget deficit,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote in his analysis.

The analysis also finds that, under repeal, with the ACA’s subsidies abolished, fewer Americans would have health insurance and those who purchased it in the individual market would pay more for insurance.



Read more: CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THEM.

You really need to understand how the CBO works before you quote them.

The CBO does not have the responsibility NOR the right to determine the credibilpity of the data given to them. They are to apply the data to expected market conditions and give the outcome.

The issue is not the outcome projected by the CBO. The issue is exactly how did the congress leadership and the administration come up with the data.

 

[saveliberty]

I guess it would add to the deficit, because the CBO is still using the Pelosi/Reid?Obama hocus-pocus formula for determining the effects of Obamacare. Increased jobs, eliminating a whole new level of government employees and a runaway social program would clearly demonstrate to a more rational person the folly shown in that hearing.

 

[Revere]

I guess it would add to the deficit, because the CBO is still using the Pelosi/Reid?Obama hocus-pocus formula for determining the effects of Obamacare. Increased jobs, eliminating a whole new level of government employees and a runaway social program would clearly demonstrate to a more rational person the folly shown in that hearing.

Brought to you by the same people who counted the "shovel ready jobs."

 

[Revere]

None of the other government run health care schemes came in at or under budget, but Obamacare will!

 

[kiwiman127]

I personally don't like the mandates, that said I find the GOP approach equally distasteful.
Our healthcare system in this country is broken. The costs are causing more and more people and companies to either drop insurance completely or to use plans with such high deductibles that people can't afford.
The GOP solution is to get rid of frivolous lawsuits which would reduce costs anywhere from 1 to 2%. Their other solution is to allow people to buy insurance across state lines. For this to work each state would have to change their state laws, in other words, it will take quite a long time. One of the draw backs of this is that people with high risks could see their premiums shoot through the roof as noted here Selling Health Insurance Across State Lines Won't Work - Newsweek.
Healthcare insurance had increased by 131% in a decade while wages only increased 38% as noted here; Family Health Premiums Reach $13,375 Annually in 2009 Up 5 Percent as Inflation Fell Nearly 1 Percent - Kaiser Family Foundation
Even our own Department of Defense is seeing it's budget being strangled by the cost of healthcare as noted in this article:

DOD Struggles With Health Care Costs, VA Faces Challenges In Providing Care
DOD Struggles With Health Care Costs, VA Faces Challenges In Providing Care - Kaiser Health News

The GOP really has no approach that benefits working Americans and the companies that employ them. Their approach does nothing but keep the status quo. The GOP has completely sided with the healthcare industry and have done so since the mid 1990's thusly hurting Americans and the companies that employ them.

How about an approach for "We the People" instead of mandating everyone or just plain siding with the industry that is raping America?

 

[Revere]

So, all the government solutions to healthcare are broke, that's why we need one more, bigger than ever government solution to healthcare?

Is a 3%-4% profit margin "rape?"

 

[Truthmatters]

“CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase the budget deficit,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote in his analysis.

The analysis also finds that, under repeal, with the ACA’s subsidies abolished, fewer Americans would have health insurance and those who purchased it in the individual market would pay more for insurance.



Read more: CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THEM.

You really need to understand how the CBO works before you quote them.

The CBO does not have the responsibility NOR the right to determine the credibilpity of the data given to them. They are to apply the data to expected market conditions and give the outcome.

The issue is not the outcome projected by the CBO. The issue is exactly how did the congress leadership and the administration come up with the data.

Based on the law you fool.

They read the law and estimate its effects , that is their job.

 

[Revere]

“CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase the budget deficit,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote in his analysis.

The analysis also finds that, under repeal, with the ACA’s subsidies abolished, fewer Americans would have health insurance and those who purchased it in the individual market would pay more for insurance.



Read more: CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THEM.

You really need to understand how the CBO works before you quote them.

The CBO does not have the responsibility NOR the right to determine the credibilpity of the data given to them. They are to apply the data to expected market conditions and give the outcome.

The issue is not the outcome projected by the CBO. The issue is exactly how did the congress leadership and the administration come up with the data.

Based on the law you fool.

They read the law and estimate its effects , that is their job.

They regurgitate made up numbers.

 

[WillowTree]

So..not enacting an entitlement now costs us money?

Sorry, there is more to this picture than meets the eye.

"Enacting an entitlement" is not all that the Health Care Bill did, obviously. There were cost-saving measures in the bill. Read the CBO reports. They're the guys paid to figure these things out, albeit not with 100% accuracy of course but it at least speaks to your sentence #1 above being a faulty premise.

yes, obie wan calls em "shovel ready"

 

[ba1614]

I guess it would add to the deficit, because the CBO is still using the Pelosi/Reid?Obama hocus-pocus formula for determining the effects of Obamacare. Increased jobs, eliminating a whole new level of government employees and a runaway social program would clearly demonstrate to a more rational person the folly shown in that hearing.

We'll see what tune these same clowns are singing when the CBO runs the numbers this congress gives them. lol

 

[saveliberty]

“CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase the budget deficit,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote in his analysis.

The analysis also finds that, under repeal, with the ACA’s subsidies abolished, fewer Americans would have health insurance and those who purchased it in the individual market would pay more for insurance.



Read more: CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THEM.

You really need to understand how the CBO works before you quote them.

The CBO does not have the responsibility NOR the right to determine the credibilpity of the data given to them. They are to apply the data to expected market conditions and give the outcome.

The issue is not the outcome projected by the CBO. The issue is exactly how did the congress leadership and the administration come up with the data.

Based on the law you fool.

They read the law and estimate its effects , that is their job.

Projections are models based on assumptions which often have several conclusions which politicans can pick and choose between. Seriously, you stand a better chance of winning the lottery than having Obamacare save money or lower the deficit.

 

[Stephanie]

CBO and ObamaCare Repeal
By Philip Klein on 1.6.11 @ 10:44AM

Liberals are touting a new report by the Congressional Budget Office estimating that repealing the national health care law would add $145 billion to the deficit from 2012 to 2019, and $230 billion through 2021. These estimates should come as no surprise, because, aside from a few technical changes and updates, they are based on CBO projections from when the health care care law passed last March. These projections reflected the Democrats' use of a number of accounting gimmicks, without which, the CBO separately acknowledged the law would actually run up deficits. As Paul Ryan notes, the reality is that the national health care law is a "fiscal train wreck." The CBO deficit reduction number does not factor in double counting of Medicare savings and other revenue sources, and it doesn't include $115 billion in costs needed to implement the law. Also, even if you take the CBO numbers at face value, what it boils down to is that over the next several decades, the federal government is raising taxes and cutting Medicare to pay for trillions in new spending. Increasing federal obligations is not an effective tool for long-term fiscal health, because any savings (or revenues) claimed by the new law would no longer be available for shoring up entitlements.

And another point that will probably get less attention today -- today's CBO estimate also finds that repealing the law would lower premiums for those who would not qualify for government subsidies.


from
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : CBO and ObamaCare Repeal

 

[rdean]

"CBO can only provide a score based on the assumptions that are given to them," he said. "If you you go back to look at the healthcare bill and the assumptions that were given to them, you see all of the double counting that went on."

Screaming isn't "evidence". It's well, it's just LOUD!

 

[Jarhead]

“CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010-2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase the budget deficit,” CBO Director Doug Elmendorf wrote in his analysis.

The analysis also finds that, under repeal, with the ACA’s subsidies abolished, fewer Americans would have health insurance and those who purchased it in the individual market would pay more for insurance.



Read more: CBO: Health law repeal adds $230 billion to deficit - Sarah Kliff - POLITICO.com

BASED ON THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THEM.

You really need to understand how the CBO works before you quote them.

The CBO does not have the responsibility NOR the right to determine the credibilpity of the data given to them. They are to apply the data to expected market conditions and give the outcome.

The issue is not the outcome projected by the CBO. The issue is exactly how did the congress leadership and the administration come up with the data.

Based on the law you fool.

They read the law and estimate its effects , that is their job.

Nope. Wrong. And I am not a fool. But if it makes you feel better calling me a fool, please, feel free.

They read the law, are given data to work with and then they determine the affects.
They are not allowed to determine starting costs. They are given those costs.

You really should learn about how things work before commenting on them TM.

 

[Revere]

Obama piled up $3T in new debt and never asked anyone to pay for it, until Republicans were in charge of Congress.

 

[saveliberty]

You want to dim that reality Stephanie? You could blind some of these liberals around here. Oops! I see truthmatters already got caught in the harsh light of day.

 

[saveliberty]

"CBO can only provide a score based on the assumptions that are given to them," he said. "If you you go back to look at the healthcare bill and the assumptions that were given to them, you see all of the double counting that went on."

Screaming isn't "evidence". It's well, it's just LOUD!

Go back to counting your jobs created/saved rdean.