Posted on 05/12/2010 6:50:08 AM PDT by tobyhill
The Obama administration threatened to veto parts of its own health care bill after budget scorekeepers found that the package would add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending.
President Obama's budget office charged Congress with finding $115 billion in spending cuts or tax increases to offset the price tag hike. The figure approached the amount of money the Congressional Budget Office previously estimated the law would save, and pushed the total 10-year cost of the package past $1 trillion. It comes after a separate Medicare office report found the bill would raise spending by about 1 percent over the next decade.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Why veto it when you can just “raise taxes on the wealthy” to cover the excesses?
He’s not going to veto a darn thing. This will just require him to fudge the numbers some more.
How can one veto “part” of a bill?
The proper Rx is to kill the whole damn thing.
They knew it would come out, that costs would increase. They knew. It was part of the plan. They just needed to hide it long enough to pass it.
The next part of the plan is to raise taxes, to fleece us further.
This entire law is about seizing wealth and power.
He signed the law. It’s the law. He cannot now go back and pick out pieces he doesn’t like. If he could, that would be great for the next president who could do likewise in dismantling the law by picking it apart piece by piece.
It would be delicious if Obama “defunded” his own health plan.
Of course, for consistency, Obama should take the identical approach to the “doc fix” left out of the original bill. That will cost upwards of $300B over 10 years. Because the CBO cost estimates for Obamacare excluded the doc fix, they essentially understated to total cost of reform by $300B.
To maintain his pledge of deficit neutrality, Obama should insist on Congress finding corresponding budget savings before he signs the doc fix into law later this year.
I’m sure they can just cut the defense budget or raise taxes on the rich to pay for it . . .
“... they essentially understated to total cost of reform by $300B.”
And they forgot to factor in the historical gain (in engineering terms) of approximately 3.5 for government program expense. So let’s see here, that’s about turns the $115B deficit reduction into...approximately $3T deficit increase. Whoopsie daisy...
The list, ping
I guess BO and the CBO will have to have another meeting at the WH.
Any guesses as to which path they'll go down?
Anyone? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
The only game going on in Washington is the shell game.
WTF?? The bill he already signed? What’s he going to do, say “I was King’s X?”
Yeah, they tried that in 1996 with this result: “However, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas F. Hogan ruled on February 12, 1998, that unilateral amendment or repeal of only parts of statutes violated the Presentment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.”
Of course the Constitution doesn’t mean much to the Progressives presently in power.
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.