"Affordable" middleclass Obamacare cost rises by $111 billion in latest budget

[Little-Acorn]

Of course, the administration will keep telling us that Obamacare saves money and provides better coverage. Orwell's art of "doublethink" is well practiced by the present crop of liberals - as it must be.

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...-aid-rises-by/

Lawmaker wants answers after cost estimate for health insurance aid rises by $111B

Published March 02, 2012
| Associated Press

WASHINGTON – Cost estimates for a key part of President Obama's health care overhaul law have ballooned by $111 billion from last year's budget, and a senior Republican lawmaker on Friday demanded an explanation.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., wants to know by Monday why the estimated ten-year cost of helping millions of middle-class Americans buy health insurance has jumped by about 30 percent.

Administration officials say the explanation lies in budget technicalities and that there are no significant changes in the program.

The revised numbers, buried deep in the president's budget, stumped lawmakers and some administration officials for most of the week. At a congressional hearing Tuesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who is in charge of carrying out the health care law, indicated she was unaware of the changes.

At issue are subsidies that will be provided under the health care law to help middle class people buy private coverage in new state insurance markets that will open for business in 2014.

Last year's budget estimated the cost of the aid to be $367 billion from 2014-2011. This year's budget puts it at $478 billion over the same time period.

"This staggering increase ... cannot be explained by legislative changes or new economic assumptions, and therefore must reflect substantial changes in underlying assumptions regarding the program's ... costs," Camp wrote Friday in a letter to Sebelius and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

Republicans say they're concerned that either the estimated cost of the insurance has gone up, or that the administration has determined many more people will be losing employer coverage and going into the new government-subsidized markets, which will be called exchanges.

Administration officials say the big increase from last year's estimates is no cause for alarm and that the administration is not forecasting an erosion of employer coverage or higher insurance costs.

(Of course, they didn't "forecast" this increase in costs either, did they? - Ed.)

[Wind Song]

I want to see our citizens have health insurance. Period.

[fj1200]

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...-aid-rises-by/

Lawmaker wants answers after cost estimate for health insurance aid rises by $111B
...

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., wants to know by Monday why the estimated ten-year cost of helping millions of middle-class Americans buy health insurance has jumped by about 30 percent.

Why do we need to ramp up another middle-class entitlement program?

I want to see our citizens have health insurance. Period.

They are free to purchase.

[Wind Song]

Why do we need to ramp up another middle-class entitlement program?



They are free to purchase.

Most can't afford to purchase.

[jimnyc]

Most can't afford to purchase.

There are things out there called "jobs". I know you liberals who want everything free, and handed to them, wonder what that is. It's also called "personal responsibility". I shouldn't have to work harder so someone else can have something they don't.

[Little-Acorn]

Of course, one of the reasons Democrats were able to eke out the very last few votes needed to pass Obamacare on Christmas Eve, was because they endlessly assured us that it wouldn't cost any more than the original amount proposed.

If they had told us honestly, that it would cost as much as they now say it will, would it have been rejected outright by Congress, instead of barely passing?

[jimnyc]

Of course, one of the reasons Democrats were able to eke out the very last few votes needed to pass Obamacare on Christmas Eve, was because they endlessly assured us that it wouldn't cost any more than the original amount proposed.

If they had told us honestly, that it would cost as much as they now say it will, would it have been rejected outright by Congress, instead of barely passing?

It also wouldn't surprise me to learn that they once again promised earmarks in return for votes.

[MtnBiker]

I want to see our citizens have health insurance. Period.

Why stop there? People need housing, do you want to see our citizens have housing? People need clothing, do you want to see our citizens have clothing? People need transportation, do you want to see our citizens have transportation. There are costs to all of these needs and different degrees of which are available to people according to their ability to pay. At what level should entitlements be provided in contrast to personal responsibility?


By the way you left out "undocumented workers". Do you hate them? Shouldn't they have insurance also?

[fj1200]

Most can't afford to purchase.

BS. "Most" have insurance. Have you thought about how the mandates that you are for, in another thread, raise the cost for everyone so that your prophecy becomes self fulfilling? Add up all the mandates over time and you can see that government involvement begets the problem.

[Wind Song]

Why stop there? People need housing, do you want to see our citizens have housing? People need clothing, do you want to see our citizens have clothing? People need transportation, do you want to see our citizens have transportation. There are costs to all of these needs and different degrees of which are available to people according to their ability to pay. At what level should entitlements be provided in contrast to personal responsibility?


By the way you left out "undocumented workers". Do you hate them? Shouldn't they have insurance also?

Yes, let's change the world to a pure land.

[jimnyc]

Yes, let's change the world to a pure land.

For non-liberal beanheads, the retarded utopia you speak of is called "fantasy land".

[Wind Song]

For non-liberal beanheads, the retarded utopia you speak of is called "fantasy land".

I'm not going to bother to tell you what a pure land is. You know everything already, don't you?

What a bore you are.

[jimnyc]

I'm not going to bother to tell you what a pure land is. You know everything already, don't you?

What a bore you are.

I'm a bore, because I'm of the belief that those of you trying to live your lives off of others, are one of the main reasons that society sucks ass today. If people would learn to be responsible for themselves, and not dependent on what they demand from others, or can get for free, this country would be a much better place.

[fj1200]

I'm not going to bother to tell you what a pure land is. You know everything already, don't you?

What a bore you are.

What are the extent of government mandates and intervention in a pure land?

I'm a bore, because I'm of the belief that those of you trying to live your lives off of others, are one of the main reasons that society sucks ass today. If people would learn to be responsible for themselves, and not dependent on what they demand from others, or can get for free, this country would be a much better place.

That does sound like a conservative pure land.

[Wind Song]

I'm a bore, because I'm of the belief that those of you trying to live your lives off of others, are one of the main reasons that society sucks ass today. If people would learn to be responsible for themselves, and not dependent on what they demand from others, or can get for free, this country would be a much better place.

You're intolerant of difference, especially difference of opinion, which is terminal on a message board.

You're a bore because you presume to know what the term "pure land" means without asking. You have no sense of humor. It's boring.