Given the lively debate the previous thread engendered, after the last couple of days can _anyone_ still have an credence in the idea that somehow there's magic in DC to add folks to the roles of the insured and yet not add tremendous costs? Did anybody hear anything that had any semblance of explaining how these massive cost-savings that were promised are actually to be achieved? Or was I simply asleep already when that happened????
From NY Times today...
"... an initial financial analysis by the Congressional Budget Office showing that a main proposal for overhauling health care would cost $1 trillion over 10 years but would leave 36 million Americans uninsured.
The preliminary analysis by the budget office...showed Democrats falling far short of their goal, which is to provide insurance to all Americans and offset the expense of doing so with new taxes or cost savings. ...
In trying to answer ... basic questions about the cost analysis, the Democrats exposed deep internal disagreements over how to pay for revamping the health care system, with some pushing to tax employer-provided health benefits above a pre-set limit, and others preferring tax increases outside the health arena.
...
The cost-analysis also revealed some other potential consequences of the Health committee bill, including the possibility that some children could end up shifted off of Medicaid and the Children?s Health Insurance Program, which provide comprehensive health coverage, and instead be required to obtain new insurance with less extensive benefits. ...
But expanding coverage without adding to the deficit is looking like a steeper challenge than even many of the leading proponents of a health care overhaul had imagined."
As my last comment previously noted, "Be careful what you wish for; you might just get it."
--