Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Budget Analysts Say Health Bill to Cut Deficit
President Barack Obama, who was scheduled to leave on an overseas trip on Sunday, postponed the trip to June to help secure support in what is expected to be a nail-biter vote on his top domestic legislative priority.
US President Barack Obama speaks on healthcare insurance reform in Strongsville, Ohio. (AFP/Saul Loeb) House Democratic leaders finished work on the last changes to the overhaul, which the Congressional Budget Office estimated would expand insurance coverage at a cost of $940 billion over 10 years and cut the deficit by $138 billion in the same period.
At the White House, Obama said the healthcare bill, which has faced solid Republican opposition, represented "the most significant effort to reduce deficits since the Balanced Budget Act" of 1993.
"This is history, and this is progress," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters of the overhaul, which would represent the biggest changes to the $2.5 trillion healthcare system in the last four decades.
After weeks of wrangling over the package to make the numbers come out favorably, House leaders presented the final changes to Democrats at a morning caucus and will post them online later on Thursday.
"It took some time but we are very pleased," Pelosi said after the meeting.
Under the procedure Democrats devised to sidestep opposition and send the bill to Obama's desk, the House will vote on whether to approve the bill the Senate passed in December. The changes to that bill sought by Obama and House Democrats then would move in a second separate bill, which the Senate would take up next week.
The favorable CBO preliminary estimate could help Democrats round up the 216 votes they need to pass the overhaul in a vote that is now expected on Sunday, but Republicans said it showed the revised bill was more of the same.
"Every time a new iteration of the Democrats' healthcare bill is unveiled, the price tag goes up," Senator Jon Kyl, the No. 2 Senate Republican, said.
The overhaul would extend coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans, the CBO estimated, and ban insurance practices like refusing coverage to those with pre-existing medical conditions.
STOCKS UP
Healthcare stocks, as measured by the Morgan Stanley Healthcare Payor Index, rose 2.2 percent on Thursday and outpaced the broader market as investors bet growing delays on the vote raised prospects the bill would not pass.
"These stocks really are a speculators' paradise given the significant uncertainty as to what's going to happen with healthcare reform," said Steve Shubitz, an analyst with Edward Jones who follows big insurance companies.
The final legislative revisions are meant to ease concerns of Obama and House Democrats about the Senate's version of the bill, which had a budget savings of $118 billion over the first 10 years.
The changes include expanding subsidies to make insurance more affordable and more state aid for the Medicaid program for the poor.
They also would eliminate a controversial Senate deal exempting Nebraska from paying for Medicaid expansion costs, close a "doughnut hole" in prescription drug coverage and change the threshold on a tax on high-cost "Cadillac" insurance plans.
"I don't think I'd call it a Cadillac tax now," said Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. "I'd call it a Rolls Royce."
The bill would extend taxes for Medicare, the federal health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, to unearned income. The CBO report said the final bill would extend Medicare's solvency for nine years and reduce annual growth in Medicare expenditures.
"I think we'll see a lot of people's votes come together in the next few days," Representative Robert Andrews said.
(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, Tabassum Zakaria, Bill Berkrot and Lewis Krauskopf; Editing by David Alexander and Vicki Allen)
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
37 Comments so far
Show AllPassage should embolden President Obama and enable him and congress to get us to full employment.
If the corporations can make a mint off it, maybe he can. I here the private prison business is booming-maybe he can create more guard positions.
Take that! you "fiscal conservatives" that spent on war and cut taxes on the rich to get us where we are today. I hope this is the last defense against the people who are trying so hard to put Obama in his "place". We did that, people; we put him in the White House! Now let's lick our wounds and all go see Michael Moore's "Sicko" again! Michael might need to see it, too, from how he's been so negative lately!
Gee a real convincing post just chock full of facts, not.
This healthcare bill is a corporate giveaway and should be defeated.
Yea, right. If you believe that I have some great waterfront property in Florida, or a well maintained bridge in New York.
What fools you are for agreeing to this without having to see the detail bill. What happened to posting it for 72 hrs before voting?
How many Americans can even read that fast and understand the bill? No this socialist/facist bill will bring ruin to our economy. The bill could have been done correctly if you listened to the American people, who have spoken often and loudly about it.
But go ahead vote it in, come Nov. you will be joining the ranks of the unemployed.
As Stalin once said "useful idiots!"
"socialist/fascist"
Educate yourself, big guy. Those are opposites. You're spouting nonsense.
Perhaps he was referring to socialism for corporations and fascism for the people?
My understanding is this is the same bill the senate passed in december which has been posted since then.
Hey, Bigguy, socialist/facist, oxymoron! Just like military intelligence the words don't go together.
$940 billion over 10 years, or $94 billion per year, for giveaways to the health insurance corporations.
Meanwhile, Obama's 2011 "National Security" Budget (for the whole Empire, including the Pentagon, nukes in the Energy Dept., Homeland Security Dept., NASA's military budget, 16 Intelligences services, our global network of bases and fleets, our many "COM's" for "full-spectrum dominance" - NorthCom [in the U.S. itself!], CentCom, AfriCom, and all the other "Com's", the "Black Budget", arms for our "allies" such as Israel, corporate welfare for war profiteers, and all the fraud and "cooked books") comes to more than ONE TRILLION DOLLARS! That's for ONE YEAR!
This is a portrait of insanity and sociopathology on a gigantic scale.
"cut the U.S. deficit over 10 years"
What does that mean? It means that the US deficit, borrowed money, will increase slightly slower than it would otherwise. 13 billion a year. How much is that? The CBO estimated that nine billion bought you one month of ruling Iraq.
"dramatically expand health coverage."
What does that mean? It means that 30 million Americans, less than ten percent of the population, will be obligated to buy the least expensive private health insurance they can afford. They will pay part of the cost and nine billion a year will go from tax revenue directly to the private insurance companies, to pay the rest. The price doesn't include co-pays and deductables, the price of which will still keep rising.
None of this will matter to the tens of thousands of Americans who die before this takes effect in four years.
If Obama was interested in the deficit, why not implement a medicare for all plan? Instead of letting the private companies skim off the most profitable clients leaving the government to subsidize the rest, why not have one big efficient risk pool? The health care industry is one sixth of the US economy. Cutting the price of healthcare in half, down to the price other countries pay, would make real savings. Allowing the government to negotiate drug prices would mean real savings. All Obama is doing is tinkering. the per-capita cost of healthcare in the US is expected to go from 7000 to 12000 in six years. The Democratic plan doesn't change that in any meaningful degree.
Any of our hard earned tax dollars that are not spent on bombs, prisons, and given to the richest and their corporations is considered socialism.
I was reading an article the other day that talked about tourism in the poorest nations as a booming business. That is tourist simply visiting the slums viewing how the poorest people live.
Then I thought, this is the republican dream for America. Just think of it since 1980 many throughout the world hate Americans thinking all are rude brutal idiotic republicans that have no morals, values or ethics. So the real republicans could make a killing attracting tourist to the American slums which have grown faster than private prisons (although not by much).
The republicans could schedule tour-busses through ghettos and slums throughout the US They could see the big city ghettos and more importantly the quaint small town and rural slums that have been totally decimated by the latest Wall Street derivative scam.
These rural areas would be particularly profitable since they would be in beautiful areas spread throughout the nation in the South, Midwest, east and west (however not so much on the coasts). Not only the scenery would be beautiful but the real selling point for foreign tourist would be that those that live in the squalor vote for republicans. They could talk to and meet these morons in person. For a few extra bucks the republicans that benefit from the republican agenda (probably about 1,000,000 people that own and control everything in this country) could make the tours so the foreigners could spit and piss on the small town hicks.
If any of these hapless idiots complained the corporate owners would simply say they will take the “good” tourist (minimum wage no benefits) jobs to a different town where the morons will be thankful for the jobs and be happy to get spit and pissed on. I’m ready to invest… God bless Jesus and God bless America.
Actually, being one of those morons from the midwestern states you talk about, there are plenty of leftys out here. Those are the kind of statements we save for people who are afraid of living with some unpleasant weather but don't care about culture, quality of life, or just want to live in a state to avoid state taxes. In case it's not obvious, I'm not being totally serious.
You brought back some memories -- I still remember articles, during the 60s, talking about opening up Haight-Ashbury, in San Francisco, to tourists on April 7, 1967 -- Gray Line Bus Tours -- to show tourists what a real hippie looked like.
Here in NYC, the tour buses bring tourists into Harlem, but I have no idea if the tourists ever get off the bus. A friend of mine in Lincoln, NE, on his first trip to NYC, bought a tour bus ticket, and he was insulted that some black kids, as the bus made its way through Harlem, threw eggs at the bus. I got it, but he didn't.
In truth, these examples are NO different than the "freak shows" of the past, although the word tour offers a more sophisticated nuance of the reality.
Are they wrong when they say something like "Medicare, Social Security and other government benefits began with baby steps and were improved through the years"?
-'Are they wrong when they say something like "Medicare, Social Security and other government benefits began with baby steps and were improved through the years"?"
First, the article isn't about medicare or social security...it is about the Democratic health bill. Why confuse the two? Unless it is to ride on the coat-tails of popular laws of the past?
second, you are implying that this bill is baby steps, steps towards what? Are you under the impression that this bill is only the first step in the Democrats' healthcare legislation? When did you hear this?
third you are implying that this bill can be improved. But of course it can be made worse, as well, or completely taken off the books, or not signed into law in the first place. What is your point? Of course any law could theoretically be replaced by another law. So you support this bill, because, in the future, it might be re-written as another completely different law? Does that make any sense?
If you are interested in an honest debate, what I don't hear from you is legitimate reasons why this bill is better than nothing, and not substantially a step in the wrong direction, as it seems to be.
jlocke123
"If you are interested in an honest debate, what I don't hear from you is legitimate reasons why this bill is better than nothing, and not substantially a step in the wrong direction, as it seems to be"
The reason that you don't hear it is because there are none. Reading this bill and I know things have been added since I did, its quite apparent it won't work anyway.
The states will nullify the mandates, then what? Thats just the starter. What if you can't force states (two opted out already) to raise taxes to add people to the medicaid roles? Where is the coverage you promised these people then?
I don't understand how anyone could believe a ten projection. All these numbers are just guesses, and the CBO does not have that great of a track record.
Just maybe:
The bill really will save a little on the deficit, the 30 million newly insured will be happy, small businesses and individuals really will get subsidies or tax breaks when deserved, no more pre-existing condition/recission BS...and best of all it might take some of the hot air out of the Fox News/Republican noise and lies machine.
Stranger things have happened.
And then....
I woke up.
This is just another Orwellian newspeak bs article telling us that bailing out another corporate sector will reduce the deficits. What about reducing all that war spending and repealing tax cuts for the wealthy and corporate elites? Nah, it ain't good for the "economy" ! And whoopdee doo ! Taking America to the next level of laughing stock hell is forcing people to buy insurance virtually guaranteeing profits for those insurance goons while other nations continue to offer real universal health care in various forms. Who needs the gdmf-ing "conservative" GOP when you have this pile of stooges doing their dirty work for them? Obama and his party can burn all the taxpayer funded fuel all they want to but we're gonna burn them out at the polls !
Everyone knows that if this bill is defeated, there will be nothing, possibly for decades except higher premiums, higher deductibles, less coverage, less people covered, etc. The only true answer is to make the health insurance ponzi scheme illegal, and have a single payer system in place. Most of my life I have been paying for someone else's health care. I was seldom ill, and I was insured for the whole 22 years at my last job, and most every job I had previously. Anyone who thinks that they aren't paying for someone else when they pay their premiums is deluded. Also, while shopping for insurance for my wife recently(I have VA health care), I finally realized that with the deductibles offered, and my wife's reasonable health, she will be giving money to the insurance company and never reach the deductible limit, so it is ALL profit for the Company. The only answer is single payer. Even public option is bullshit since the insurance companies are still in business. Now if the congress is willing to go out on the limb for this bill, maybe in the future they will go further out for Single Payer. The odds are against it due to the ignorant population of the U.S. who can't seem to get past right wing talking points, and fear of Socialism and other things.
Deficit reducing, corporate profit increasing, fairy dust sniffing, ambrosia scented farts.
This MUST be heaven!
Or it could be hell.
This bill is and was a disaster as soon as Stupak did his thing in the House and Baucus/Grassley did theirs in the Senate, not to mention that paragon of virtue Sebelius stating that the Public Option was not necessary for health care reform two days after being sworn in. This bill should be killed and killed NOW!
And did any of you catch the taxing of unearned income for Medicare costs? For those who are not familiar with this grouping of funds, it is not just capital gains, but also unemployment and social security benefits. So the unemployed and the elderly and the disabled will get to pay an additional tax in addition to the federal income tax deducted on unemployment and the premiums the elderly and disabled already pay for their Medicare coverage. Talk about taking it out on the defenseless!
This Congress as a whole should be voted out in November and one filled with Independents and real Progressives or Socialists like Bernie Sanders should be voted in. And if you think this is bad, consider it is being followed by the Dodd bill for financial regulation that will probably expect us to do mandatory loans or savings in order to shore up these organizations while they find new ways to scam us if they follow the same pattern as the jobs bill and this gift of health reform to the insurance industry.
This Congress and this Corporate White House are going to not lead us into fascism or socialism (depending on your perspective), but rather into degradation and collapse. I suggest that we all get ready for the end of American Democracy or Revolution - these are rapidly becoming our only choices!
djnoll said "taxing of unearned income for Medicare costs? For those who are not familiar with this grouping of funds, it is not just capital gains, but also unemployment and social security benefits."
What you say might be the end result, but from my researching of the current bill, this tax only applies to those with incomes above $200,000 for a single taxpayer. I think I'm OK with that as it is the first bit of progressive taxation that I've seen in a long time.
You wrote: "This Congress as a whole should be voted out in November and one filled with Independents and real Progressives or Socialists like Bernie Sanders should be voted in."
Now there's a lovely thought and it could work... in a democracy. But, as admitted at the Hotel California, "we haven't had that spirit here since 1969". (If ever.)
The type of representatives you and I would like to see in office are niche players from relatively isolated constituencies where they are invulnerable to corporate funded media attacks. They tell the truth and their priorities align closely with the best interests of their constituents. Attacking them with the typical swift boat tactics wouldn't be cost effective but they are so few in number, their impact rarely reaches beyond their local area. Therefore, the corporate media just ignores them, ensuring that their message is lost in the carefully contrived blizzard of nonsense that passes for political reportage. It works. In the past 5 years I've met only one other person here in Tennessee who has ever heard of Bernie Sanders. (Most of them have heard of Jesus - they think he was a republican.)
You wrote: "This Congress as a whole should be voted out in November and one filled with Independents and real Progressives or Socialists like Bernie Sanders should be voted in."
Yeah, like that would happen.
Yes indeed, Healthcare stocks are up, US life expectancy is down. Now you know what is important to the Repubs and Dems.
You didn't read the article. The reason that health care stocks are up, according to the very article you're commenting on, is because investors were betting that the delay in passing the bill means it might fail.
I think it will be a wash for insurance stocks. Yes, they're getting 30 million new customers but did you forget about the part where they now have to cover people with pre-existing conditions? They will have to pay out a lot more now.
And really...a 2% increase in the stocks - even if not for the reason stated in the article - is hardly a huge gain. It does not reflect "the huge giveaway to the insurance companies" that this bill gets portrayed as by the far left.
I'm happy that 30 million more Americans will have coverage. Now, let's work towards moving congress towards an eventual public option and eventually single payer down the road.
You wrote: "Now, let's work towards moving congress towards an eventual public option and eventually single payer down the road."
Question:
Would you - or anyone you know - accept this idea if, instead of health care, it was suddenly being applied to your local fire department?
God Gave us two eyes, two ears, two nostils, a brain with two big lobes...but only one mouth. Perhaps She is suggesting we should inspect and consider very carefully before swallowing.
Tramaker
Actually, if you care to read the bill,you'll find that even if it works, there will still be that 25-35 million still uncovered and that is if you base it on a static demographic.
Also look at where they "say" they will get the money, its not the rich and do you really think people will stand still for this? This will never work, nor will it stand. The taxes commence immediately, coverage? Well it will be along...sometime.
Anybody who actually believes that this transfer of wealth to the insurance companies will cut the deficit is not too bright. The way the game is played is you give the CBO a set of circumstances favorable to you and he runs the figures through without challenging the underlying assumptions and comes up with what you want. This bill like almost everything done in washington will cost 3 to 10 times the estimated cost. So like everything else in washington this is a bipartisan scam.
Anyone that would believe this claim is the same person that would still vote for Obama or Pelosi.
The huge savings they tout are what, 15 -20 days of their current spending? WOW! I'm so grateful.
The article claims the bill would reduce the deficit but does not show how or where.
I don't believe it. This is a rabbit trick.
-30-
Why are so many people evaluating this bill only on the basis of cost? What about lives saved? If you were in need of a medical treatment to keep you alive, would you argue about the money? No - you would do it.
What a bunch of baloney! This trainwreck of a healthcare "reform" bill will do no such thing as reduce deficits, nor will it rein in healthcare costs, or save lives. The fact that abortion rights were hijacked in order to pass this atrocity of a healthcare "reform" bill is even more disgusting...and horrific.
Moreover, Kucinich's cave-in to this POS healthcare "reform" bill was the last straw for me. As of next week, I'll be switching over to the Independent party.