Philip Klein in the America Spectator postulated yesterday another reason for the House delay in advancing a vote on healthcare, aside from garnering 216 ayes, is a poor CBO score:
As Democrats have delayed releasing their final health care reconciliation bill, they've consistently tried to create the impression that they're essentially finished, but are merely waiting on the Congressional Budget Office....
Yet the delay in releasing the bill and CBO score (which was initially supposed to come out as early as last week) has suggested something else - that early estimates from the CBO were bad, and they're making changes to get the score that they want.
Klein spotted corroboration in a CQ Politics piece...
House Democratic leaders are still struggling to produce a final health care overhaul bill at an acceptable official cost estimate....
House leaders were to huddle late Tuesday afternoon.... There were reports they are having trouble drafting a bill that meets their budgetary targets....
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-CA, was asked by reporters about reports that preliminary CBO scores showed that the reconciliation bill does not save $2 billion over 5 years as required under budget rules, and that the costs of the total bill topped $1 trillion. "I don't know that yet," he replied. "We're waiting to hear back from CBO. When I left the meeting last night, we were sending it back to CBO."
Rep. Robert Andrews, D-NJ, who has been asked by House leaders to help promote the bill, also declined to talk about whether initial CBO estimates may have revealed problems....
Business Week today is stating the same thing:
Congressional Democrats, racing to finish work on an overhaul of the US health system, are facing delays as they strive to meet deficit-cutting targets.....
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi... yesterday... said the House would meet the budget targets, and party leaders including House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer reiterated that they expect a vote this week.
Still, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can't move forward until they have the cost estimate from the nonpartisan budget office. They have been going back and forth with CBO officials for days, Reid said.
Comments:
Why don't they just deem that the CBO score isn't needed to pass this?
Posted by: Monte at March 17, 2010 6:45 AMMonte,
Excellent point. Or maybe they should just "deem" a CBO score of their choosing.
The possibilities of "deeming" are limitless.
This is going to be a neat trick: provide health insurance to 30 million people with a net deficit reduction. And we musn't forget all the pork they needed to add to the bill (and are undoubtedly still adding in back room deals) to get it to pass, like the Cornhusker Kickback, etc.
Well at least we all know that whatever budget they come up with will be financially sound. That Budget Office is full of politicians with the highest character and integrity. They would never skew the real numbers just to ram Obamacare down the throats of the American people.
They would never lie. ^eyeroll^
Posted by: Ed at March 17, 2010 7:28 AM"musn't"?
"must not"
My English teacher would be ashamed of me right now.
Posted by: Ed at March 17, 2010 8:10 AMActually Ed, the CBO is a pretty independent arbitor of the cost of legislation. Now, they will only score what is given to them, not hypotheticals, but the CBO is independent of the politicians in Congress. Now, will Congress tweak and tweak until the CBO reaches the conclusion the Dems want? Of course.
A legitimate criticism is the 10 year window that ignores the real explosion of costs after year 10, but that too is out of CBO's purview. I'm sure the CBO will eventually produce a figure that the Dems consider appropriate, but only due to the Dems tweaking and tweaking reconciliation until it's as bad of a mish-mash as the legislation.
Posted by: Michael at March 17, 2010 8:37 AMThe premiums charged our office for employee heath insurance went up 30% this year, we really need to get a bill passed. Medicare for all might be the solution. We could pay an extra $1000 per month per employee in taxes and still save thousands.
Posted by: Hal at March 17, 2010 9:11 AMYes, but Hal, how many doctors accept new Medicare patients? It can be tough to find, though easier than those who have Medicaid.
You also forget to mention that Medicare is financially unsustainable. Now, you propose $1000/month per employee in taxes, or $12000/year. That means a husband/wife dual-income would pay $24k/year for Medicare level coverage. Very few family insurance plans cost $24k. What about people who work 2-3 part-time jobs. Do each of their employers have to pay $1000/month? A person working 3 part-time jobs would have $36k taken out for them alone? No offense, but that sounds like a recipe for unemployment. If I have to pay $1000/month for Medicare taxes per employee, I'm seriously cutting back on all part-time help. If it's based on hours work, that's still a big incentive to reduce headcount.
And Hal, I'm being serious here, too. Uncle Sam uses 2087 work hours in a year. If you divide $12k by 2087, you get ~$5.75/hour just for Medicare. That may be okay for some professional occupations, but what about service employees- your retail clerks and fast food workers? You think that their employers aren't going to go to all scan-your-own-purchase systems or invest in even more automation? Entry level jobs would become non-existent.
Posted by: Michael at March 17, 2010 9:27 AMThis is so not about healthcare! It is about a government takeover.
Kill the Bill!!
Hi Hal,
Abortion is not healthcare.
at March 17, 2010 9:36 AM"The premiums charged our office for employee heath insurance went up 30% this year, we really need to get a bill passed.."
--------------------------------
If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's "FREE".
Forget about the CBO score and pass it - and have Hatch speak for the Dems afterwards. He did a great job explaining the Medicare bill when he said back then, they didn't worry about paying for things.
Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at March 17, 2010 8:42 PMThis bill, if passed, will cost people more in bureaucracy and attorney fees then it costs in medical care. Stop government expansion and takeover of our lives as far as the eye can see. Ugh Stop
Posted by: truthseeker at March 18, 2010 2:26 AM