An Obama Spending Spree? Hardly

And for the record, im not defending Bush he was a big spending Jackass too, but it is terribly disingenuous to try to claim Obama is some kind of fiscal conservative, it is one of the biggest fucking lies of all time. And If you hated Medicare Part D, like I did, then you should be equally outraged by Obamacare which will also add to the deficit, the only reason they ever got those numbers to work out was because they combined 10 years of paying for it with only 7 years of spending on it.....





CBO: ObamaCare Price Tag Shifts from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion

President Obama's landmark healthcare overhaul is projected to cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, reports the Congressional Budget Office, a hefty sum more than the $940 billion estimated when the healthcare legislation was signed into law. To put it mildly, ObamaCare's projected net worth is far off from its original estimate -- in fact, about $820 billion off.

Backtracking to his September 2009 remarks to a joint session of Congress on healthcare, Obama asserted the following: "Now, add it all up, and the plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years -- less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration."

When the final CBO report was released before the law's passage, critics surmised that the actual 10-year cost would far exceed the advertised projections. In other words, the numbers were seemingly obscured through a political ploy devised to jam the legislation through Congress.

"Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation," asserted Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner, "the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014." This accounting maneuver allowed analysts to cloak the true cost of ObamaCare, Klein alleged, making the law appear less expensive under the CBO's budget window.

If that doesn't tickle your fancy, maybe this will: "President Obama's healthcare reform law coverage provisions will cost less but cover fewer people than first thought," the Hill reported, considering data from the CBO's Tuesday report. Revised estimates of ObamaCare's coverage provisions indicate that 2 million fewer people will acquire coverage by 2016.

Moreover, the CBO estimates that 4 million Americans will lose their employer-sponsored health plans by 2016, a far cry from the 1-million-person figure forecasted last year. Further yet, 1 million to 2 million fewer people will be granted access to the federally-subsidized healthcare exchanges, while an additional 1 million are estimated to qualify for Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Provision.

In a second blog post published on Tuesday, Mr. Klein summed up the debacle: "It's also worth noting that we were told time and again during the health care debate that the law didn't represent a government takeover of health care. But by 2022, according to the CBO, 3 million fewer people will have health insurance through their employer, while 17 million Americans will be added to Medicaid and 22 million will be getting coverage through government-run exchanges."

 

This is again false. Obamacare doesn't add to the deficit at all, the law fully didn't go into effect until 2014 which is why there is a difference in the spending numbers as the budget window changes. Infact the recent analysis shows that it reduces deficit MORE than previously thought.

CBO - http://cbo.gov/publication/43076

"CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period-about $50 billion less than the agencies' March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period."


"Gross Costs Are Higher, but Offsetting Budgetary Effects Are Also Higher

The current estimate of the gross costs of the coverage provisions—$1,496 billion through 2021—is about $50 billion higher than last year's projection; however, the other budgetary effects of those provisions, which partially offset those gross costs, also have increased in CBO’s and JCT’s estimates—to $413 billion—leading to the small decrease in the net 10-year tally."

Also note this bit

"“CBO and JCT have previously estimated that the ACA will, on net, reduce budget deficits over the 2012–2021 period; that estimate of the overall budgetary impact of the ACA has not been updated.”"

That's the deficit reducing part which has not been updated, I have posted them seperately below.



"The increase owes almost entirely to the shift in the budget window; as you can see in the figure below, the revisions in any single year are quite small. Over the eight-year period (2012-2019) that is common to our original analysis and the most recent one, the net cost of the coverage provisions is now 2 percent higher than CBO and JCT estimated in March 2010.

According to our latest comprehensive estimate of the legislation, the net effect of changes in direct spending and revenues is a reduction in budget deficits of $210 billion over the 2012-2021 period. "

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/25155

 

K im done, No point in debating someone who is so dishonest....

 

I am quoting directly from the CBO, you are quoting higher COST numbers which doesn't mean that they increase deficits since the BUDGETARY OFFSETS have also increased. If the spending is paid for then it doesn't increase deficits unlike Medicare Part D which made absolutely no attempt to pay for the increased spending.

 

But it WILL add to the deficit.

 

Obamacare with only 8 years of spending 1.25 trillion,.... it will be a 200 billion dollar per year entitlement program by the time the dust settles.

 

It will surely increase spending, but it pays for that spending while decreasing healthcare costs for everyone while increasing coverage for those who don't have access to it. Romney did this in MA with great success.



http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-co...-cost-coverage-access-uninsured-massachusetts

 

LOL! We got us another Obama loon guys.

 

Oh he did, did he? Funny, Romneycare did such a good job of reigning in costs that Massachussets has the second highest cost of healthcare per capita in all of America(as of 2009), with only the most profligate spenders in the world(Washington D.C.), behind them, and most states paying 25-30% less....

 

Unreal isnt it? I really hope that i run into one of these people in a business transaction one day, so i can sell them some magic beans....

It takes a special kind of lunacy to think you can insure 50 million people without raising the deficit, at the same time the cost of healthcare goes down as a result..... I guess the basic laws of supply and demand do not apply to the government since they are so goddamn efficient when it comes to spending OUR money....