Posted on 11/28/2009 11:37:03 AM PST by American Dream 246
The advocates of ObamaCare argue that the overhaul of the American health-care system will cost “only” a trillion dollars in its first decade. Michael Cannon at the libertarian think tank Cato says that Congress relies on significant budgetary gimmicks to get to that number, and that the true cost of ObamaCare in its first real decade is six times that amount:
One gimmick makes the new entitlement spending appear smaller by not opening the spigot until late in the official 10-year budget window (2010–2019). Correcting for that gimmick in the Senate version, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) estimates, “When all this new spending occurs” — i.e., from 2014 through 2023 — “this bill will cost $2.5 trillion over that ten-year period.”
Another gimmick pushes much of the legislation’s costs off the federal budget and onto the private sector by requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance. When the bills force somebody to pay $10,000 to the government, the Congressional Budget Office treats that as a tax.
When the government then hands that $10,000 to private insurers, the CBO counts that as government spending. But when the bills achieve the exact same outcome by forcing somebody to pay $10,000 directly to a private insurance company, it appears nowhere in the official CBO cost estimates — neither as federal revenues nor federal spending.
That’s a sharp departure from how the CBO treated similar mandates in the Clinton health plan. And it hides maybe 60 percent of the legislation’s total costs. When I correct for that gimmick, it brings total costs to roughly $2.5 trillion (i.e., $1 trillion/0.4). … When we correct for both gimmicks, counting both on- and off-budget costs over the first 10 years of implementation, the total cost of ObamaCare reaches — I’m so sorry about this — $6.25 trillion. That’s not a precise estimate. It’s just far closer to the truth than President Obama and congressional Democrats want the debate to be.
Consider these unfunded mandates. The states will have plenty of those under ObamaCare, with the expansion of Medicaid eligibility. Cannon is right about the unfunded mandates on employers and individuals being part of the cost of the program. Thus far, no one has really pointed out that costs in this plan are not limited to federal expenditures, but also to the extra costs everyone will pay — for a reform that purports to “bend the cost curve” downward.
Perhaps Senator Gregg can ask the CBO to study that question further in its next analysis.
Is six trillions more than six trillion?
This is six trillion:
6,000,000,000,000
This is six trillions:
1,000,000,000,000
1,000,000,000,000
1,000,000,000,000
1,000,000,000,000
1,000,000,000,000
1,000,000,000,000
I guess it works out even after all.
~snort!
Send it to Drudge.
Prima facie evidence that Obama is trying to bankrupt this Nation and hand it over to the creditors!
Industry, schools, libraries, hospitals, gas, oil, coal, and LAND!!!
A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon we’re talking big money.
Jail the usurpers!!
Pray for Obama Psalms 109:9 read it.
Oh, I can think of better than that!
I don't want to get banned by stating it however...
Yeah, I know. Had to edit my own post for same reason.
Get this guy some blackboard time on Beck!
If not more — how about 12 trillion $$
The O promised that he wouldnt raise [federal] taxes on anyone earning < 200-250K/year.
He never said he would refrain from actions that force states to raise taxes. Which is exactly what will happen if Nannycare passes.
BUMP
“Deficit Neutral.”
From the lips of Obama himself: “I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit.”
Can I get a Joe Wilson “You Lie!” call and feedback please? =.=
88% of which will be paid for by the top 10% of earners... that’d be just about 7m people being FORCED AT GUNPOINT to pay $5.28trillion each over 10 years
which works out to be $528 billion a year
for an average of $75,429 above the existing tax load
... each
He was against it before he was for it!
What's the big deal?
I have tar, anyone have some feathers?
Equal protection under the law, right?
At what percentage will those that produce have to be at to be forced by government to produce to maintain their personal freedom?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.