SCOTUS ruling makes Obamacare $84 billion cheaper

[Greenbeard]

The CBO has now updated its ACA projections around health insurance coverage and federal spending in the wake of last month's Supreme Court ruling. Not unexpected: giving states the option of expanding their Medicaid programs means 1) more people in private health insurance plans bought through the exchanges, 2) fewer people enrolled in Medicaid, and 3) modestly lower federal spending. All relative to what was expected to be the case with the ACA entirely intact.

From The Hill:

The Supreme Court ruled in June that the government cannot withhold all Medicaid funding from states that do not agree to expand Medicaid coverage to more adults. It is unknown how many states may opt out of providing expanded Medicaid, but CBO assumes that some will opt out in its projections.

CBO said the ruling added uncertainty to its estimates but it has put forward a number that comes down in the middle of possible outcomes. It estimates that the ruling will save the government $84 billion because fewer people would be covered by Medicaid. CBO estimates 3 million more people will be uninsured as a result of the ruling.

Those cost reductions are not outweighed by increased costs from subsidies in the health insurance exchanges, CBO said.

Meanwhile, the GOP repeal bill still increases the deficit.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, it's always wise to underestimate what a new federal program will cost what with so much history to draw from

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The CBO has now updated its ACA projections around health insurance coverage and federal spending in the wake of last month's Supreme Court ruling. Not unexpected: giving states the option of expanding their Medicaid programs means 1) more people in private health insurance plans bought through the exchanges, 2) fewer people enrolled in Medicaid, and 3) modestly lower federal spending. All relative to what was expected to be the case with the ACA entirely intact.

From The Hill:

The Supreme Court ruled in June that the government cannot withhold all Medicaid funding from states that do not agree to expand Medicaid coverage to more adults. It is unknown how many states may opt out of providing expanded Medicaid, but CBO assumes that some will opt out in its projections.

CBO said the ruling added uncertainty to its estimates but it has put forward a number that comes down in the middle of possible outcomes. It estimates that the ruling will save the government $84 billion because fewer people would be covered by Medicaid. CBO estimates 3 million more people will be uninsured as a result of the ruling.

Those cost reductions are not outweighed by increased costs from subsidies in the health insurance exchanges, CBO said.

Meanwhile, the GOP repeal bill still increases the deficit.

It makes it cheaper if they guessed right about how many states won't implement it. Essentially, they are saying that the fewer states that implement Obamacare, the less it will cost. I could of told you that without you posting the obvious.

Gotta admit, you are consistent in your posting stupid things and spinning them in favor of your position.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes, it's always wise to underestimate what a new federal program will cost what with so much history to draw from

You are misreading this, the CBO came out and said that it will cost less if fewer states implement the Medicaid expansion. Instead of bolstering Democrats in their argument that this will cut the deficit, it actually makes the Republican argument that it will increase the deficit if we do not repeal it. There are some really good tidbits buried in the story.

CBO had said that just striking down the individual mandate would have reduced the deficit by $282 billion.

“The Congressional Budget Office reported today that the Affordable Care Act imposes a $1 trillion tax increase and continues to raid Medicare by over $700 billion to fuel a new $1.7 trillion open-ended entitlement, while doing nothing to reduce the backbreaking health care costs for families and businesses," House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said in a statement.

Don't let the Democrats win the spin war here, the CBO is making the case for a repeal of Obamacare despite the spin Greenbeard is trying to put on it.

 

[DontBeStupid]

CBO says healthcare ruling could save $84 billion | Reuters

(Reuters) - Last month's Supreme Court ruling that upheld President Barack Obama's 2010 healthcare law could save the U.S. government some $84 billion over 11 years, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday.

The savings would come primarily from a portion of the ruling giving the states an escape hatch from the law's expanded program of healthcare coverage for the poor. That expansion of the Medicaid program would be funded mostly by the federal government, but eventually states would have to pick up a portion of that cost.

The CBO also estimated that 3 million uninsured people who would have received Medicaid coverage under the law before the ruling now will remain with no insurance

"Conservatives" should be happy about this, right? It won't raise the debt or any deficits and millions of people will still not have coverage, so their "freedom" is intact.

So who's happy about this?

 

[Greenbeard]

Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act

July 24, 2012

Honorable John Boehner
Speaker of the House
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Speaker:

As you requested, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have estimated the direct spending and revenue effects of H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act, as passed by the House of Representatives on July 11, 2012. This estimate reflects the spending and revenue projections in CBO’s March 2012 baseline as adjusted to take into account the effects of the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the Affordable Care Act (ACA). H.R. 6079 would repeal the ACA, with the exception of one subsection that has no budgetary effect.

Assuming that H.R. 6079 is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period (see Table 1).

 

[ladyliberal]

I don't think anyone is happy about this CBO report.

Conservative governors and their adherents will have to explain to their constituents why they are withholding health care from their state's poorest residents in order to save funds that are mostly federal.

Liberals will have to admit that after the Supreme Court ruling ACA leaves millions of poor people uninsured.

The elected branches of federal government will have to admit that they can't stop the Supreme Court from altering their legislation.

And the Supreme Court will have to admit that they are actively setting government policy.

 

[Greenbeard]

Conservative governors and their adherents will have to explain to their constituents why they are withholding health care from their state's poorest residents in order to save funds that are mostly federal.

They might actually rather face their constituents than the wrath of their state's hospital associations.

 

[Trajan]

I see some folks are still holding on to the smoke and mirrors that said the bill was budget neutral to start with......and still is after say, CLASS collapsed even before the scotus decision.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I don't think anyone is happy about this CBO report.

Conservative governors and their adherents will have to explain to their constituents why they are withholding health care from their state's poorest residents in order to save funds that are mostly federal.

Liberals will have to admit that after the Supreme Court ruling ACA leaves millions of poor people uninsured.

The elected branches of federal government will have to admit that they can't stop the Supreme Court from altering their legislation.

And the Supreme Court will have to admit that they are actively setting government policy.

I don't think anyone was under the impression this would cover everyone. There would always be uninsured. The Mandate allows for that.

I agree with the take on the conservative governors though. They'll have to explain why they are choosing not to help cover millions, when the money comes from the federal government, and we are currently saving money to boot.

 

[Trajan]

I don't think anyone is happy about this CBO report.

Conservative governors and their adherents will have to explain to their constituents why they are withholding health care from their state's poorest residents in order to save funds that are mostly federal.

Liberals will have to admit that after the Supreme Court ruling ACA leaves millions of poor people uninsured.

The elected branches of federal government will have to admit that they can't stop the Supreme Court from altering their legislation.

And the Supreme Court will have to admit that they are actively setting government policy.

I don't think anyone was under the impression this would cover everyone. There would always be uninsured. The Mandate allows for that.

I agree with the take on the conservative governors though. They'll have to explain why they are choosing not to help cover millions, when the money comes from the federal government, and we are currently saving money to boot.

MAYBE, becasue they know the money going into the left hand pocket is just coming from the right hand pocket..........

 

[Trajan]

merged

 

[salem.hills]

But how much would it really cost? :lol besides a sixth of the economy gone to the government (worse possible scenario in the history for drug testing) and doctors retiring. How much? 2.5 trillion a year I'd guess remember all government programs are 4 times to 30 times (Social security) there projected costs.

 

[Zander]

Obamacare is saving motherfuckers money all over the country!! I got my refund check from Anthem just yesterday!! Thank you Obamacare!! My premium increased by a measly $700 per year thanks to the Obamacare requirements, but they send me a rebate for a whopping $1.71. That's money bitches!!!



Liberal math......to understand it you have to go "full retard".

 

[Dot Com]

Looks like Roberts was right

 

[Quantum Windbag]

CBO says healthcare ruling could save $84 billion | Reuters

(Reuters) - Last month's Supreme Court ruling that upheld President Barack Obama's 2010 healthcare law could save the U.S. government some $84 billion over 11 years, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday.

The savings would come primarily from a portion of the ruling giving the states an escape hatch from the law's expanded program of healthcare coverage for the poor. That expansion of the Medicaid program would be funded mostly by the federal government, but eventually states would have to pick up a portion of that cost.

The CBO also estimated that 3 million uninsured people who would have received Medicaid coverage under the law before the ruling now will remain with no insurance

"Conservatives" should be happy about this, right? It won't raise the debt or any deficits and millions of people will still not have coverage, so their "freedom" is intact.

So who's happy about this?

It will save $84 billion off the previous estimate, and will still cost over a trillion bucks.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't think anyone is happy about this CBO report.

Conservative governors and their adherents will have to explain to their constituents why they are withholding health care from their state's poorest residents in order to save funds that are mostly federal.

Liberals will have to admit that after the Supreme Court ruling ACA leaves millions of poor people uninsured.

The elected branches of federal government will have to admit that they can't stop the Supreme Court from altering their legislation.

And the Supreme Court will have to admit that they are actively setting government policy.

SCOTUS set government policy? When? Where? How?

 

[Dot Com]

It'll take more than this for Roberts to be "ok" in my book after Citizens United.

 

[mudwhistle]

The CBO has now updated its ACA projections around health insurance coverage and federal spending in the wake of last month's Supreme Court ruling. Not unexpected: giving states the option of expanding their Medicaid programs means 1) more people in private health insurance plans bought through the exchanges, 2) fewer people enrolled in Medicaid, and 3) modestly lower federal spending. All relative to what was expected to be the case with the ACA entirely intact.

From The Hill:

The Supreme Court ruled in June that the government cannot withhold all Medicaid funding from states that do not agree to expand Medicaid coverage to more adults. It is unknown how many states may opt out of providing expanded Medicaid, but CBO assumes that some will opt out in its projections.

CBO said the ruling added uncertainty to its estimates but it has put forward a number that comes down in the middle of possible outcomes. It estimates that the ruling will save the government $84 billion because fewer people would be covered by Medicaid. CBO estimates 3 million more people will be uninsured as a result of the ruling.

Those cost reductions are not outweighed by increased costs from subsidies in the health insurance exchanges, CBO said.

Meanwhile, the GOP repeal bill still increases the deficit.

$84 billion is saved, but the costs of the program keep rising.

It's like buying $60 in goods to save $1.50.

The only cost savings is the fact that the federal government cannot force states to go with the program by withholding medicaid funds.