fox cities news, appleton, wi
foxpolitics.netwhats really going on in the fox cities
fox cities newsfox cities news, appleton, wi


Blogroll
Selected News Sources:
Business Jrnl of Milw
Christian Science Monitor
Daily Caller
Drudge Report
La Crosse Tribune
Milw Journal Sentinel
National Journal
New York Times
Public Policy Forum
Real Clear Politics
Stateline
The Hill
TPM
Washington Examiner
Washington Post
Washington Times
WI State Journal
Selected Blogs - from the Right:
American Mind
Blaska's Blog
Boots & Sabers
Charlie Sykes
Dad29
Freedom Eden
Heritage Foundation
Jerry Bader Blog
Life Voice
Marketplace of Ideas
Marquette Warrior
Natl Review Online
No Runny Eggs
Patrick McIlheran
Real Debate Wisconson
RedState
Rhymes with Clown
Shark and Shepherd
The Lote Tree
Vox Populi
Wall Street Jrnl, Opinions
WI State Jrnl, Opinion
Wigderson Library & Pub
Wisconsin Family Voice
WPRI
Selected Blogs - from the Left:
Big Money Blog
Blogging Blue
Brenda Konkel
Caffeinated Politics
Capital Times
FightingBob
Folkbum's rambles
Griper Blade
Huffington Post
Lost Albatross
MAL Contends
Mid coast views
Moneyed Politicians
One Wisconsin Now
Open Left
Playground Politics
Political Environment
Rock Netroots
Talk to Tony
Uppity Wisconsin
Waxing America
fox cities news, appleton, wi fox cities news, appleton, wi
Today's Blog: Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie
My husband and I and a couple hundred friends watched in Green Bay as ...(more)

Blogs
  • Time for the Guv to morph into Chris Christie (6/28/2011)
  • Time for Gov. Walker to talk more about the cake (3/4/2011)
  • Today, reality hits home (3/1/2011)
  • FoxPolitics News going on hiatus (1/28/2011)
  • Brown County Executive candidate forum Feb. 8 (1/28/2011)
  • Education done right (1/27/2011)
  • To Obama, the ‘We’ is Government (1/27/2011)
  • (more)



    3/21/2010
    Health care legislation INCREASES the deficit by $562 billion

    In a New York Times op-ed today, Douglas Holtz-Eakin summarizes clearly and succinctly the huge gimmickry in the health reform bills that resulted in a “reduction in the budget deficit” celebrated and touted by Democrats the last couple of days. Holtz-Eakin knows of what he speaks, as he was the director of the CBO from 2003 to 2005.
    ON Thursday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that, if enacted, the latest health care reform legislation would, over the next 10 years, cost about $950 billion, but because it would raise some revenues and lower some costs, it would also lower federal deficits by $138 billion. In other words, a bill that would set up two new entitlement spending programs — health insurance subsidies and long-term health care benefits — would actually improve the nation’s bottom line.

    Could this really be true? How can the budget office give a green light to a bill that commits the federal government to spending nearly $1 trillion more over the next 10 years?

    The answer, unfortunately, is that the budget office is required to take written legislation at face value and not second-guess the plausibility of what it is handed. So fantasy in, fantasy out.

    In reality, if you strip out all the gimmicks and budgetary games and rework the calculus, a wholly different picture emerges: The health care reform legislation would raise, not lower, federal deficits, by $562 billion.
    Holtz-Eakin goes on to list and clearly explain seven gimmicks - Congressional hyperbole. Lying to the American people and huge huge upcoming and unacknowledged costs – what else is new?

    Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net



    COMMENTS

    In my opinion it is impossible for anyone to really know what the cost impact of this legislation or any other complicated legislation is. Nevertheless, the CBO has said it will reduce federal deficits and this OP Ed says it will increase deficits. The legislative process got off on the wrong foot for this bill politically when it created a self imposed spending neutral test, something Medicare Part "D" didn't do nor Medicare. In short it is being held to a higher fiscal standard than Medicare part "D" or just about any of the major spending under the Bush 2 tenure. Medicare part D was pushed as a help to seniors who couldn't afford prescription drugs and was a huge giveaway to big Pharma in the process. This health care bill will allow millions of uninsured to have access to the system and (according to CBO) will reduce spending in the future. In short this is a much better bill fiscally than Medicare part "D" was and it is being criticized for it. By the way, a NYT story two weeks ago said that if this nation had adopted Richard Nixon's health care reform bill we would be about 11% of GDP today for healthcare costs compared to the over 16% today. We are already way behind in fiscal and moral reform. Time to get on with it.
    fox cities news, appleton, wi
    dave allen (Sun Mar 21 09:05:33 2010)

    Because we didn't require responsible analysis for Medicare Part D, we should excuse irresponsible chicanery that passes for the basis of responsible analysis? Poor reasoning, Dave.
    fox cities news, appleton, wi
    Jo (Sun Mar 21 09:21:21 2010)

    Jo,
    I am not looking for a perfect bill. There is no such thing as a perfect bill of any kind. I am looking to do the right thing and for 90 years this country has stubbornly and fiscally irresponsibly chosen to do the wrong thing (again the Nixon bill would have kept health care to around 11% of GDP) No, the "it will raise the deficit" is a smokescreen used by those who don't want real reform (or at least don' want the democrats to do it. Same nonsense during the Medicare votes in the 60s. When was "it will raise the deficit" used to kill Medicare part "D" or stop the invasion of Iraq? Plain and simple money isn't the issue, money is the cudgel used by the opposition to meaningful reform. My reasoning isn't faulty unless everything you support or have supported always was fiscally balanced and thoroughly debated as such.

    fox cities news, appleton, wi
    dave allen (Sun Mar 21 14:14:35 2010)

    Fear not Dave, this is not a perfect bill. Fear not, it doesn't control costs - so you won't even see 16% again, much less 11%. Dave, this bill will cost American workers (well, some of them) an incremental half a trillion dollars. Not something to be so flip and make a million excuses about.
    fox cities news, appleton, wi
    Jo (Sun 20:06:06 2010)

    Jo,
    The only way to control costs are to have large buying groups, transparency in pricing, consistent standards, eliminating fee for service and the list goes on. But the only way to achieve any of these is to get control of the "system". You start somewhere after 90 years.

    fox cities news, appleton, wi
    dave allen (Sun Mar 21 20:23:04 2010)




    fox cities news, appleton, wi

    sign up to receive fox politics news
    see todays issue


    Blog Archives
    2011
    June
    March
    January
    2010
    December
    November
    October
    September
    August
    July
    June
    May
    April
    March
    February
    January
    2009
    December
    November
    October
    September
    August
    July
    June
    May
    April
    March
    February
    January
    2008
    December
    November
    October
    September
    August
    July
    June
    May
    April
    March
    February
    January
    2007
    December
    November
    October
    September
    August
    July
    June
    May
    April
    March
    February
    January
    2006
    December
    November
    October
    September
    2000
    May

    Site Map | Privacy Policy   •   FoxPolitics ©2006 All Rights Reserved.   •   Site Updated 5/23/2013