View Single Post
Old 08-17-2009, 12:43 PM   #524
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet View Post
Over ten years. That's about a 10% increase more than current spending.
From your link:

Quote:
Neither of the bills covers their costs. According to the Congressional Budget Office, enacting the House bill would increase the federal budget deficit by $239 billion over the next 10 years. That takes into account the spending changes and revenue increases that would save about $219 billion and bring in $583 billion in new revenue over the same period. The total cost of the bill over 10 years is estimated at $1.04 trillion, and the bill intends to pay for the provisions with spending cuts and a new tax on the wealthy.

The Senate bill approved by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee is less close to covering its costs. According to the CBO, the bill would increase the federal budget by $597 billion in the 2010-19 period, offset by a net savings of $48 billion. Details on the reform bill from the Senate Finance Committee were not available, but it may not include a public plan option and could impose taxes on employer-sponsored coverage.

While the bills make a number of financing proposals, some health experts argue they don't go far enough to rein in costs over the long term.

"There are no substantial proposals to change the system," said Victor Fuchs, Stanford University professor emeritus of economics, health research and policy. "You cannot increase coverage and reduce costs without making substantial changes to the way we finance care and organize the delivery system."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&type=politics
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote