Skip to comments.
Bush Budget Raises Cost of Medicare
AP ^
| Jan 29
| ALAN FRAM
Posted on 01/29/2004 10:42:40 AM PST by RWR8189
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush's new budget will project that the just-enacted prescription drug program and Medicare overhaul will cost one-third more than previously estimated and will predict a deficit exceeding $500 billion for this year, congressional aides said Thursday.
Instead of a $400 billion 10-year price tag, Bush's 2005 budget will estimate the Medicare bill's cost at about $540 billion, said aides who spoke on condition of anonymity. Bush will submit on Monday a federal budget for the fiscal year 2005, which starts next Oct. 1.
Bush just signed the Medicare measure into law last month. While it was moving through Congress, Bush, White House officials and congressional Republican leaders had assured doubting conservatives that the bill's costs would stay within the $400 billion estimate.
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: biggovernment; medicare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
To: RWR8189
I support the changes in Medicare. Most don't realize that they will not pay for a health checkup. You can't get health care until you are ill. By paying for checkups serious problems that require hospitalization can be detected early. Illness such as diabetes, etc.
In the long run preventive care will save billions.....
61
posted on
01/29/2004 1:02:28 PM PST
by
OldFriend
(Always understand, even if you remain among the few)
To: familyofman
"They were only off by a little bit - cut them some slack."
Hah. 140 Billion, With a B, is now 'a little bit'.
Nice.
62
posted on
01/29/2004 1:05:45 PM PST
by
flashbunny
(A corrupt society has many laws.)
To: Reagan Man
"The cost for Bush`s original proposal for Medicare reform and prescription drug coverage for the elderly poor, was set at $158 billion over ten years. The legislation that Bush signed into law was for $400+ billion. As expected, the costs have sky rocketed to $540 billion over ten years. Before its all over, this largest increase in federal spending in 40 years, will probably cost in excess of one trillion dollars. That is fiscally irresponsible and both the GOP Congress and PresBush are to blame.
OTOH, just imagine what a Democrat president like John Kerry would have proposed. Can you say, national healthcare?"
OTOH, do you think national healthcare would have stood a snowball's chance in hell with a republican controlled house and senate??? No, it wouldn't. But because Bush is president, his big spender programs just slide right through. Using the bully pulpit to expand government and tinkle on the constitution instead of doing the oppposit.
I guess this is all about the election. Just wait until 2004 when bush can REALLY push through the unconstitional pork that will leave future generations paying for it. Yay for the 'Not Democrat' party!
63
posted on
01/29/2004 1:11:53 PM PST
by
flashbunny
(A corrupt society has many laws.)
To: flashbunny
"Hah. 140 Billion, With a B, is now 'a little bit'."
You missed the sarcasm (invisible) note.
Given the past track record of estimates of spending and budgets - yes. They've done worse.
Don't forget - deficits don't matter - they will be reduced by half over the next 5 years (bridges for sale in Brooklyn too).
To: yonif
Onward to socialism! It is the Democratic People's Republic of America no?Ole Bubba must move aside. The true "Schleikmeister" is now in D.C. Watch what's in the new budget. Check the increase for the Nat Endowment for the Arts. See the top story on WND today: "Illegals rise 15% since Bush plan". FReepers, this president is a sellout to any real conservative. Short of 9-11 any credible pres should defend us & if not should be considered a treasonist. So the cartel lowers the standard to one that will defend vs one not to defend, then gets slack for ruining the nation in almost every other way. See why we Americans deserve/can do better than (2) elites - GW & Kerry.
65
posted on
01/29/2004 1:12:25 PM PST
by
Digger
To: Pubbie
2008 is when Conservatives will have to move the party back to it's conservative roots - sitting out 2004 is not an option.In 2008 we're going to have to nominate a real conservative like Mark Sanford or Bill Owens to clean up the mess Bush will leave us with.
I'm afraid the GOP doesn't want a "real conservative". They have discovered the taste of winning elections by giving the people what they want. The RNC is getting everything in place for Condi Rice to run against Hillary Clinton in 2008.
66
posted on
01/29/2004 1:18:20 PM PST
by
jgrubbs
To: RWR8189
Sigh
To: RWR8189
Who cares? What's a few hundred billion among friends, right? The salient point is that we've out-triangulated the Dims. [sarcasm off]
68
posted on
01/29/2004 1:20:18 PM PST
by
reelfoot
To: jgrubbs
She is Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Affirmative Action, Pro-Abortion, and Pro-Illegal Immigrant.
She will never win the primary if an actual Conservative runs against this impostur - and Owens is running no matter what the RNC wants.
69
posted on
01/29/2004 1:21:44 PM PST
by
Pubbie
(We would have the WMDs if Powell and Rice hadn't made a 6 month UN detour)
To: Pubbie
The RNC will do the same thing to Bill Owens that they did to Alan Keyes. I honestly believe they are getting Condi Rice ready for 2008, I wouldn't be shocked if we got an annoucement that Cheney's health won't let him server as VP for four more years and Bush named Rice his new running mate.
70
posted on
01/29/2004 1:30:43 PM PST
by
jgrubbs
To: RWR8189
Bush doesn't spend the money. Congress does.
We need to go after our Congress-RINOs and make them afraid of us. We need to remind them what happened to the Democrat House majority of '94.
We need to put the fear of the voters back into this GOP Congress.
Make your congressman more afraid of you than he is of Karl Rove. Besides, Bush is lame duck in less than a year anyway and they all know it. They're pretty sure he'll get re-elected. But they may not be so confident in their own chances.
Stop complaining about Bush's spending proposals. Go after your congress-RINO instead!
To: Pubbie
2008 is when Conservatives will have to move the party back to it's conservative roots - sitting out 2004 is not an option
In 2008, you'll be saying that 2012 is the year to move the party back to smaller government and fiscal conservativism.
To: George W. Bush
"In 2008, you'll be saying that 2012"
Uh no - I plan to donating to President Owens or President Sanford's Re-election campaign in 2012.
73
posted on
01/29/2004 2:26:29 PM PST
by
Pubbie
(We would have the WMDs if Powell and Rice hadn't made a 6 month UN detour)
74
posted on
01/29/2004 2:28:44 PM PST
by
The_Eaglet
(Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
To: George W. Bush
Bush got nearly everything he wanted with 2004 budget
BUSH VS. CONGRESS
How President Bush's proposals for 13 spending bills for 2004 compared with the bills approved by lawmakers:
Agriculture: Bush $17.1 billion, final bill $16.8 billion.
Commerce, Justice, State: Bush $37.7 billion, final $37.6 billion.
Defense: Bush $371.8 billion, final $368.2 billion.
Energy and water: Bush $26.9 billion, final $27.3 billion.
Foreign aid: Bush $18.9 billion, final $17.5 billion.
Homeland Security: Bush $28.4 billion, final $29.2 billion.
Interior: Bush $19.6 billion, final $19.5 billion.
Labor, Health and Human Services, Education: Bush $138 billion, final $139 billion.
Legislative branch: Bush $3.7 billion, final $3.5 billion.
Military construction: Bush $9.1 billion, final $9.3 billion.
Transportation, Treasury: Bush $27.8 billion, final $28.1 billion.
Veterans, Housing and Urban Development: Bush $89.4 billion, final $90.8 billion.
Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan: Bush $87 billion, final $87.5 billion.
Totals: Bush $876 billion, final $873 billion.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1067657/posts
75
posted on
01/29/2004 2:29:04 PM PST
by
jgrubbs
To: Pubbie
Your choice will probably be either Frist (annointed) or Guiliani (hopeful and testing the waters).
To: RWR8189
yeah no biggie!
Rush spoke at length on this on his show today review the third hour.
What he said would have created frenzy of "Zot Him" freep mail.
Why are so many freepers afraid of conservatism and or pushing W back to the right?
77
posted on
01/29/2004 2:34:41 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
(If Ted kennedy's 100B dollar health care plan passes both houses will "W" veto it?)
To: KantianBurke
Accurate post.
I am going to miss you.
78
posted on
01/29/2004 2:38:51 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
(If Ted kennedy's 100B dollar health care plan passes both houses will "W" veto it?)
To: Kay Soze
Where you going?
79
posted on
01/29/2004 3:36:55 PM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Principles, not blind loyalty)
To: RWR8189
A government program that costs more than projected? Stop the presses.
80
posted on
01/29/2004 4:09:11 PM PST
by
Imal
(Heed the need to read my screed. imal.blogspot.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson