Health care law and tax increase projections are inaccurate CBO admits
February 23, 2012 at 8:00 pm in Accountability, GAN, House, John B.T. Campbell III, News by Greyson Peltier 10 Comments
Many projections on the fiscal impact of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act were based upon inaccurate estimates. These estimates helped Congress come to a conclusion that the law would not add to the deficit. It was discovered that some of these projections were manipulated by having costs loaded out 11 years.
Now, Rep. John Campbell has questioned other projections used in the tabulation of the law’s costs. For example, the Congressional Budget Office projected that unemployment would be 4.9% in 2014, the year when many of the free insurance provisions of PPACA would take effect. A higher unemployment rate would lead to a marked increase in the already underestimated costs. In a meeting of the House Budget Committee, CBO chairman Douglas Elmendorf admitted that the rate would be 8.7%, almost double what was projected at the time of the law’s passage. “That piece alone would raise the costs of the Affordable Care Act; we don’t know how much. We were not able for this outlook to update those estimates, that is a particularly involved process,” said Elmendorf. He also said that detailed projections would be out in March. These projections may also need to reflect the repeal of the CLASS act, a portion of PPACA designed to offer affordable long term care coverage, which has passed the House.
“One of the major revenue components of ObamaCare, the CLASS Act, has been shown to be completely unworkable and even the Administration now agrees that it has to be scrapped,” said Campbell, “As more and more is revealed about this law, the fallacy of it will become more and more apparent.”
In the meeting, Campbell also asked Elmendorf whether or not repealing the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000 per year would make a significant dent in the deficit. “I think of the effects of the top tax rates as being about a fifth, based upon the latest estimates I have seen from the Joint Committee on Taxation, of the set of things often described as the Bush tax cuts,” said Elmendorf, “the piece which is just raising just the top tax rates only makes a small difference in moving the fiscal scenario back to the law baseline.” In response Campbell further asserted that the deficit problem could not be solved with just tax increases on the wealthy, unless the increases were very large or also affected other groups.
To contact Rep. Campbell, call 949.756.2244 or visit http://campbell.house.gov
Reporter Greyson Peltier may be reached at 206.424.5190 or by emailing Greyson.Peltier@TPPJournalism.org
These government accountants are just in the toilet and need to be flushed!!!
I am not surprised since the Medicare and Social Security Programs are severely damaged by politics over the years. Hospitals located in low income areas are paid extra from the Medicare Program because it was determined long ago that people in poor areas are sicker and require extra medical resources. This Disproportionate Share Payment or “DSP” runs into the hundreds of Millions of Dollars. It was a political gift to these hospitals and was full of bad statistics in the early years. This is only one tiny part of extra payments going to hospitals and Doctors. GDPITZER, americanhighroad@gmail.com.
These are two videos of HR-3200; comments are appreciated!
http://youtu.be/HcBaSP31Be8
http://youtu.be/pyjNaGEcBPw
Lots of views to the video’s you have listed and watching it reminds me that I will have to get a rock to squeeze in cases of pain!!
Assuming we have the capacity to do what other advanced countries have done, how do we make affordable health care available to all americans. Isn;t that the constructive issue here? Answer that question, and all these other considerations go away.
In my personal opinion, the best way is to first get rid of regulations that impede innovation in health care, then create absolute competitiveness by putting cost reduction ultimatums on health insurance companies servicing the federal government (ie. in the new Medicare exchanges and for federal employees), then all those that were coming up with “solutions” that involve more government should get to work on citizen controlled systems with greater flexibility than government to serve those who cannot afford health care.
so people who live in poor areas are not any sicker then people who live in nice middle class areas? Do you have the statistics on that please. I am writing about this issue and having trouble finding the actual statistics. Also is it fair to give more Medicare money to people just because they are sicker. what if their illnesses are a result of lifestyle. If these same people could have afforded a lifestyle which put them in better neighbor hoods, would they have made any different choices? Should medicare pay better to people who make healthier choices like smoking, drinking, drugs, fitness? Or any Insurance company for that matter?
Here is an award winning video on what Obama is doing to this great nation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6hvmWDYiCY&feature=player_embedded
Please share with your friends if you enjoy.
It sounds to me like the Washington experts must have had Bernie Madoff teaching them economics.