Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Measure would add coverage for 31 million, reduce deficit over 10 years

AP

WASHINGTON - The political stakes enormous, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid launched long-awaited health care legislation Wednesday estimated to extend coverage to 94 percent of eligible Americans at a cost of $849 billion.

Initial maneuvering on the Senate floor was expected later in the week on the measure, bitterly opposed by Republicans eager to deny President Barack Obama a victory on his top domestic priority.

Officials have said the measure would require most Americans to carry health insurance and would require large companies to provide coverage to their workers, as well as ban insurance company practices such as denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions. As rank-and-file Democrats gathered to learn details of the measure, the Congressional Budget Office estimated it would spread coverage to 31 million Americans who currently lack it while still reducing federal deficits by a total of $127 billion over 10 years.

An aide said the CBO also estimated that the bill would achieve cuts of $1 trillion over a decade in projected health care costs. The estimate of 94 percent coverage was less than the 96 percent estimated for legislation the House passed earlier this month, but no precise comparisons were possible without as-yet-unreleased CBO documentation.

Aides have said previously much of the bill would be financed by cuts in projected Medicare payments. Reid has also had under consideration higher payroll taxes for upper wage earners, but there was no word on whether he had decided to incorporate that provision into the measure he crafted.

the Congressional Budget Office estimated it would spread coverage to 31 million Americans who currently lack it while still reducing federal deficits by a total of $127 billion over 10 years.

An aide said the CBO also estimated that the bill would achieve cuts of $1 trillion over a decade in projected health care costs.

Appaholic wrote:So this new plan will cost the taxpayers $849bil (likely to be more as the programs usually are), but we'll have 94% of the people covered? So instead of 12% without coverage (some voluntarily), we'll spend close to a trillion dollars to insure another 6%....

danefan wrote:

Appaholic wrote:So this new plan will cost the taxpayers $849bil (likely to be more as the programs usually are), but we'll have 94% of the people covered? So instead of 12% without coverage (some voluntarily), we'll spend close to a trillion dollars to insure another 6%....

From what I understand we are going to spend the money anyway. They are saying this plan will actually reduce the deficit by $127 billion, meaning we'll be saving money by implementing this plan.

That doesn't include the cost savings for us in our health care costs when we can stop subsidizing the millions of uninsured by paying higher rates.

Saving money and insuring more people.

maybe I'm missing something.

Appaholic wrote:

danefan wrote:
From what I understand we are going to spend the money anyway. They are saying this plan will actually reduce the deficit by $127 billion, meaning we'll be saving money by implementing this plan.

That doesn't include the cost savings for us in our health care costs when we can stop subsidizing the millions of uninsured by paying higher rates.

Saving money and insuring more people.

maybe I'm missing something.

If that is in fact, what it is saying, then sign me up. But forgive my skepticism, I do not believe they can deliver on this claim...maybe I'm too much of a cynic...

hank scorpio wrote:The free market will fix it?

FYI, the marketplace is not meeting our needs, thus a $849,000,000,000 bill.

bobbythekidd wrote:I'd love to agree with you Col. but the truth is Medicare and Medicaid alone will outstrip the Federal Budget by 2030. If something is not changed we will have nothing left. Tort reform and insurance companies are such a small percentage of the real problem they hardly even show up on the radar in 15 years.

Col Hogan wrote:

bobbythekidd wrote:I'd love to agree with you Col. but the truth is Medicare and Medicaid alone will outstrip the Federal Budget by 2030. If something is not changed we will have nothing left. Tort reform and insurance companies are such a small percentage of the real problem they hardly even show up on the radar in 15 years.

But if you don't fix these things now, you are throwing an artificial amount of money at a problem you haven't even scoped properly...and that will make that train wreck in 15 years harder to fix...

Do it right the first time...

danefan wrote:

Appaholic wrote:So this new plan will cost the taxpayers $849bil (likely to be more as the programs usually are), but we'll have 94% of the people covered? So instead of 12% without coverage (some voluntarily), we'll spend close to a trillion dollars to insure another 6%....

From what I understand we are going to spend the money anyway. They are saying this plan will actually reduce the deficit by $127 billion, meaning we'll be saving money by implementing this plan.

That doesn't include the cost savings for us in our health care costs when we can stop subsidizing the millions of uninsured by paying higher rates.

Saving money and insuring more people.

maybe I'm missing something.

AZGrizFan wrote:

danefan wrote:
From what I understand we are going to spend the money anyway. They are saying this plan will actually reduce the deficit by $127 billion, meaning we'll be saving money by implementing this plan.

That doesn't include the cost savings for us in our health care costs when we can stop subsidizing the millions of uninsured by paying higher rates.

Saving money and insuring more people.

maybe I'm missing something.

Yeah. You're missing the fact that it's the UNITED STATES FUCKING GOVERNMENT claiming this. If you actually believe the numbers will come in anywhere CLOSE to these projections, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona I'd love to sell you. The government hasn't create a program YET that didn't cost twice as much as planned and do half as much as advertised.

Why is that so hard for people to understand?

Appaholic wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Yeah. You're missing the fact that it's the UNITED STATES FUCKING GOVERNMENT claiming this. If you actually believe the numbers will come in anywhere CLOSE to these projections, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona I'd love to sell you. The government hasn't create a program YET that didn't cost twice as much as planned and do half as much as advertised.

Why is that so hard for people to understand?

"I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It's the post office that's always having problems." - Obama