Problems With the CBO Healthcare Reform Scoring

March 18, 2010 RSS Feed Print

By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog 

There are still a few hurdles to be overcome before the Democrats can declare victory in the battle over the national healthcare bill. Most of the reliable vote counts circulating on Capitol Hill show Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a few votes short of what she needs to win--and that about 20 Democrats are still on the fence. 

The release today of a preliminary estimate of the direct spending and revenue effects of "an amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 4872, the Reconciliation Act of 2010" by the Congressional Budget Office shows the healthcare proposal will produce a net reduction in the federal deficit--which may help satisfy the concerns of the few remaining holdouts who cite the potential cost of the bill as their principal concern. But even that is sketchy.

In releasing its numbers, the CBO cautioned it had not "thoroughly examined the reconciliation proposal to verify its consistency with the previous draft" of the bill it had already scored. "The estimate is therefore preliminary, pending a review of the language of the reconciliation proposal, as well as further review and refinement of the budgetary projections." 

In other words, the figures it released aren't exactly written in stone. 

The CBO letter points out some other issues, as identified by Chris Jacobs, a health policy analyst for the Senate Republican Policy Committee, that members will have to deal with, including: 

• Spending on coverage expansions would rise by $48 billion for Medicaid expansions when compared to the recently updated score of the Senate passed bill, and $17 billion on subsidies, for $65 billion total. This new additional spending would reduce the number of uninsured by only about 1 million in 2019. 

• The Cadillac tax would be reduced by $117 billion, from $149 billion in H.R. 3590 to $32 billion under reconciliation. Note also that the bill would reduce the inflation threshold from the consumer price index (CPI) plus one percentage point to CPI, beginning in 2020. Some may also view this as either a budgetary gimmick to reduce the bill's long-term costs, or a massive tax increase on the middle class in future years—long after President Obama will leave office. 

• The bill includes additional Medicare savings proposals, including market-basket adjustments that would grow over time. The reconciliation bill itself includes $60.5 billion in additional Medicare reductions, raising the total to $523.5 billion. 

• The reconciliation bill contains a total of $155.8 in new tax increases, although a breakout of these numbers is not yet available. 

• The scoring provisions appear to provide a temporary increase in Medicaid payments for primary care physicians—however it would also appear that this increase expires in the budgetary "out years," raising additional questions about how Medicaid payments will be cut (and beneficiaries will be affected) in the years after 2014—right when Medicaid is expected to enroll an additional 16 million individuals. 

All of these pieces are substantial enough to almost force continued negotiations. Some provisions may be changed or even stripped out by the Senate when it takes up reconciliation--meaning the CBO score released today will not be the last word on the subject. It also means the promised "fixes" to the Senate-passed healthcare bill may never actually materialize--something that no doubt will be brought to the attention of wavering House members many times over the next few days. 

Tags:
Congressional Budget Office,
healthcare reform,
Medicaid,
Medicare,
healthcare,
federal taxes

Reader Comments Read all comments (32)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I am having a idfficut tmi reading www.usnews.com in EI 3.9, I just thougbht I might tell yuou aboyt it!

seo lace of AL 11:00PM May 01, 2010

"People without insurance because of pre-existing conditions will be able to tap into a temporary, high-risk pool that will be available within 90 days after a bill is signed into law and be effective until the new health insurance rules take effect on Jan. 1, 2014. Any U.S. citizen or legal immigrant who has pre-existing conditions and who has been uninsured for at least six months will be able to tap into this temporary, high-risk pool."

http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/03/17/health-care-reform-won-t-make-individual-health-insurance-better/

Bill Hedges of MO 2:07AM March 21, 2010

Either a) No insurance company will ever pick me up or b) I'll get healthcare with premiums 4x that of my peers and they won't pay a dime for anything related to my condition. MRI's cost $5,000 each without insurance, I have 4 yearly. What's tyrannical isn't Obama trying to overhaul healthcare but the fact that people lose their homes, cars, and savings because they get sick.

I'm truely sorry to hear of the condition you described. What I failed to note is your commentary of the government programs that are already in place SSI, T2 Social Security Disability, Medicaid, etc and which are specifically designed for folks who have similar circumstance.

If you have a disability that keeps you from working, then Social Security is the safety net to catch you.

I think people wrongly assume that conservative republicans are against health care for people. They are not. What they have difficulty digesting is the fact that Obama care is designed for whom? Catastrophic illnesses, traumatic events happen and Medicare, Medicaid are government programs were created, are in place, and specifically designed for those who can't possibly pay for their living expenses and health care because their disability is so debilitating they cannot work.

We understand that and, by and large, most accept and are favorable of those programs. But this deal is very different because the people who they want to insure are the capable, healthy people who ARE able to work, hold down a job, and pay for their own health insurance like everyone else. They just choose not to; for a variety of reasons.

Their minimum hourly wage isn't high enough to afford it . . . well that's a culmination of poor choices that lead them to that point. They dropped out of high school. They got involved in drugs and lost their concept of reality. They partied rather than knuckle-down and learn a trade or earn an education. They spent what money they had like drunk sailors and made poor financial decisions. They had a misguided believe that they'd never get sick or have a major medical program. They bought boats, cars, and interest only mortgage homes rather than save. They are too fat and lazy to do something.

Here's the rub: I, like most Americans, am responsible. I saved, I got the education, I stayed away from the bad stuff. I live frugally, etc. So I and every other responsible American who makes the sacrifice to leave home every day for a job and provide for our families are punished via taxation to fund the health care benefits for those uninsured Americans who are ABLE and CAN work. That's morally reprehensible and wrong on so many levels. I don't care what kind of toronado like spin progressive liberals put on it, it is and will always be wrong.

Obviously people will feel offended to learn they are deadbeats. But I learned along time ago that truth is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow and that the guilty always take the truth hard.

david of ID 2:00AM March 21, 2010

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. A former senior political writer for United Press International, he is currently a senior fellow at the Institute for Liberty and at Let Freedom Ring, a non-partisan public policy organization. His writing has also appeared on Fox News' Fox Forum.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Get God Out of the Gay Marriage Debate

The government shouldn't tell churches who they should marry, but neither should churches tell the government which marriages it can recognize.

Mary Kate Cary

Obama Attacks as Economic Cliff Looms

The president can't afford to talk about the economy, but with a 2013 fiscal time bomb approaching, the rest of us can't afford not to.

Latest Video

advertisement