« | »

Obama’s Health Care Plan To Cost $1.5T

From Associated Press:

Protestors hold signs at a rally in Burlington, Vt., Tuesday, March 17, 2009.

Health care overhaul cost may reach $1.5 trillion

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – Your lungs may work just fine, but the estimated price for universal health care could take your breath away. Health policy experts say guaranteeing coverage for all Americans may cost about $1.5 trillion over the next decade. That would be more than double the $634 billion ‘down payment’ President Barack Obama set aside for health reform in his budget.

About 48 million people are uninsured, and the problem is only expected to get worse because the cost of coverage keeps rising.

Still, administration officials have pointedly avoided providing a ballpark estimate for Obama’s fix, saying it depends on details to be worked out with Congress.

"It’s impossible to put a price tag on the plan before even the basics have been finalized," said White House spokesman Reid Cherlin. "Here’s what we do know: The reserve fund in the president’s budget is fully paid for and provides a substantial down payment on the cost of the reforming our health care system." …

Some of the leading advocates of coverage for all use cost estimates around $1.5 trillion.

"Honestly … we can’t do it for the $634 billion the president put in the reserve fund," John Rother, public policy director for AARP, told an insurance industry meeting in Washington last week.

"In all likelihood, it will be over $1 trillion," he added, citing his own estimate of $1.5 trillion

White House budget director Peter Orszag told the House Budget Committee earlier this month that the president’s $634 billion fund is "likely to be the majority of the cost." Roughly half of the money would come from spending cuts, and the other half from tax increases

The overall cost matters because the expansion of health coverage is meant to be a permanent reform. That means future generations will have to bear the cost.

"We are dealing with huge numbers," said David Walker, a former U.S. comptroller general and now head of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a group that promotes fiscal responsibility. "We need to have a much better sense of what we are talking about doing, and whether or not it’s affordable and sustainable over time."

The AARP has been propagandizing furiously for health care reform for a very long time.

Indeed, it seems to have become their only issue.

So if the AARP and Associated Press are prepared to admit that Mr. Obama’s health care ‘reform’ will cost $1.5 trillion, than you can be sure it is going to cost at least five times that amount.

(Look at the original estimates made about the costs of Medicare and Medicaid, if you want to get an idea of just how far proponents will lie to get their programs through.)

Meanwhile, the AP has to trot out the long since debunked fantasy about there being ‘48 million’ uninsured.

But there is still this topper:

Roughly half of the money would come from spending cuts, and the other half from tax increases.

What a laugh. When has Congress ever made any significant spending cuts?

These ‘health care reforms’ will all come via tax increases.

And it will bring about a change in our country bigger even than the New Deal.

Which it will surely surpass in scope and cost.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, March 17th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

9 Responses to “Obama’s Health Care Plan To Cost $1.5T”

  1. U NO HOO says:

    Spending cuts…ha ha ha…

    Remember the cable tv cost reduction acts?

    First thing that happened was that cable companies HIRED a lawyer to study the law.

    Then the cable companies put their programming guys on overtime to re-program the cable rates to print legal bills, etc.

    Government, please just stay out of it. We should have learned from FDR’s meddling.

  2. proreason says:

    It’s hard to calculate which would be the bigger boondoggle, cap and trade or “Obama’s Health Care Plan”.

    Wouldn’t it be better to call it “Obama’s Health Destruction Plan”, because it will certainly limit access to health care for Senior Citizens and will result in earlier death for millions.

    Steve is being extremely conservative in saying the true cost will be at least 5 times $1.5T. Consider….medical spending is about 15% of GDP. Annual GDP is about $13T, so total spending is about $2T. Over a decade, that is $20T. Adjust for inflation and you get about $25T.

    But costs will go up dramatically!! They always do when government is involved. At it’s MOST EFFICIENT, government adds 30% to any cost.

    If this Health Destruction Plan ends up costing anything less than $20T over 10 years, it will be a miracle.

    But the cost will be more than offset by better service, won’t it?


  3. Right of the People says:

    48 million?

    This reminds me of a few years ago here in Vermont when one of the state senators tried to get “Universal Life” medical coverage for everyone in the state. Vermont has about 700,000 people give or take, of those 700K, there was determined to be about 38K that didn’t have insurance. But on further examination of the 38K who were uninsured, nearly 16K of them had it available to them through their work and had declined it. These were primarily 20 somethings that figured they were healthy and the money was better spent on beer or a new i-Pod, etc. Another nearly 4K were people over the age of 65 who were eligible for Medicare/Medicaid that just had never applied for it. This group mainly consisted of old farmers who lived deep in the sticks and for the most part were healthy, all things considered. That left about 18 thousand people out of a population of nearly 700,000 or about 2.5 percent.

    They wanted to come up with a single payer system that would cost around 2 to 2.5 billion a year so that these 18,000 people could have insurance. Plus everyone who worked in Vermont, even those that lived in other states like a lot of our agents who lived across the lake in New York but worked in Vermont would have to pay for this. No matter if your work had good coverage, you still would pay the tax. Of course those guys that lived over in NY wouldn’t be covered by this plan, only Vermont residents would qualify, but they would have to have a plan in NY for themselves and their families.

    I imagine if you checked the 48 million folks you could pare that number down quite a bit. I’d rather have a government plan just to cover those who don’t have it and truly can’t get it any other way then this foolishness. I also wonder of those 48 million, how many are here illegally.


    • proreason says:

      The 48 million is well understood.

      15-20M are illegals aliens. Another 20M are people making over $50K, who choose not to insure (probably because they are young and choose to take the risk). Another 5M or so are people between jobs. Another 5M or so already qualify for Gov-backed insurance but are too stupid or lazy to sign up for it.

      That leaves the number of genuine hardship cases at 5 to 10 million (about 1 to 3% of the population). Fully insuring 10 million people would cost less than $100B which is far less than the proposed socialist take-over of the healthcare industry.

      Yet they use the bogus 45-48M number as a club to shame the country into bankrupcy in the name of “compassion”

    • MinnesotaRush says:

      Hold on now. Better check with Pelosi. Remember .. she pointed out to us that .. what (???) .. 500 million people have lost their jobs just last month.

      Per her math, 48 mill might be low. :-)

  4. U NO HOO says:

    I suppose you’ve heard about Dr. Muney who wanted to enroll uninsured patients for a flat fee of $79 a month with “unlimited” treatment at his practice.

    Local/state government said that would be insurance, he may not do it.

    He somehow compromised and will be able to treat the uninsured without his going to jail.

  5. U NO HOO says:

    WHYY, Waiting for God, 3/20/09, Tom is in hospital, sleeping in the hall.

    Is this the health care we want?

« Front Page | To Top
« | »