CBO Score: 10 Years, $940B — With $132B Shaved from Deficit
EmailABC News' Dean Norland and Z. Byron Wolf report:
While Democratic Congressmen were getting these numbers behind closed doors, House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., and Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., talked to cameras about them.
Clyburn said Democratic leaders are "absolutely giddy" about the numbers, preliminarily $940 billion cost over ten years, with $132 billion in deficit reduction over ten years and $1.2 trillion over 20.
The numbers, stressed Becerra, are preliminary until they are formally released by CBO.
But he said, "Today we have one health care reform plan."
It is a plan that will cover 32 million more Americans, one million more than the Senate bill.
Both men referred to 2/3 of the costs of the bill coming from cost savings, primarily in Medicare. They said the CBO estimate will show that the plan would make Medicare solvent for eight years longer than otherwise if the spending cuts are adhered to.
It is unclear exactly how the Democrats have wrung extra money from Medicare or how they deal with a controversial tax on high-cost health plans; the entire plan is not yet public.
That public release of the bill is expected early this afternoon and it will set in motion a 72-hour clock until Democrats bring the bill to a final vote in the House, likely Sunday.
Last Sunday Clyburn, who is in charge of marshalling votes for Democrats, said he did not yet have the votes to pass the bill.
But the deficit reduction in the CBO score will help matters, he said, and he will start asking wavering members for commitments on the bill starting this evening.
At that point, Clyburn said he will feel "more comfortable" about the bill.
"We are much closer today," he said.
They did not say exactly how they tweaked the President's proposal and the Senate bill.
UPDATE: The CBO this morning posted its analysis of the proposed legislation HERE.
Santorum: Money Will Not Defeat Obama, Ideas Will 
Rick Santorum's Full Speech at CPAC 2012
The so-called “savings” is really just cuts in Medicare to seniors. I don’t call that “savings”. I call that casting off people who are no longer considered important.
Pretty despicable approach to “savings”, in my view, especially after those same people paid SS taxes and medicare taxes, all their lives.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | March 18, 2010, 11:29 am 11:29 am
Its cuts to Medicare waste that flows into Insurance corp pockets and does no good.
Did you even read the article? If so how did you miss this line:
“They said the CBO estimate will show that the plan would make Medicare solvent for eight years longer than otherwise if the spending cuts are adhered to.”
What is despicable is diehard opposition that doesn’t care about the fact… they just spew Ideology that has been proven a failure.
Posted by: DewyB | March 18, 2010, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm
Rick McDaniel
Do you really think Democrats, whose Party created Medicare, are going to throw seniors under the bus?
The cuts are to a program called Medicare Advantage, which consists of subsidies to private insurance to provide exactly the same coverage as Medicare. Medicare Advantage was created to give seniors a private insurance “choice”, but it turned out to be a costly error in that private insurance companies just pocketed the subsidies and didn’t provide better coverage. Trust me, seniors will be well cared for.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | March 18, 2010, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm
***The cuts are to a program called Medicare Advantage, which consists of subsidies to private insurance to provide exactly the same coverage as Medicare. Medicare Advantage was created to give seniors a private insurance “choice”, but it turned out to be a costly error in that private insurance companies just pocketed the subsidies and didn’t provide better coverage. Trust me, seniors will be well cared for.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | Mar 18, 2010 12:57:51 PM***
Actually Amy Medicare advantage wasn’t a program to give seniors a priviate insurance that provides the same coverage as Medicare.
What Medicare Advantage does is gives seniors more options in how their benefits are set up for services. Medicare itself has only Part A(Hospital coverage) and Part B(physician services) and more recently Part D(perscriptions). The benefits are set up by the goverment for all plans and its a one size-fits-all kinda thing.
Medicare Advantage was set up to take the same $ amount of benefits for seniors and allows them to mix and match a bit to say reduce the benefits for medical equipment, but increase benefits for physician services, or reduce over all benefits to gain additional secondary benefits that aren’t even allowed in regular Medicare.
In doing away with Medicare Advantage, what the Democrats are saying is they don’t think that Seniors should be allowed to adjust their medical insurance coverage to suit their needs, but rather the government knows best how they should be treated in their elder years.
And yes the Democrats are throwing Seniors under a Bus. They have show the will to do it to the banks, states, insurance companies, small businesses, unions and various other groups, to suit their agenda. Why should this group be any different?
Posted by: bobtherepublican | March 18, 2010, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm
The sources I have read call Medicare Advantage a “taxpayer scam.”
The federal government pays %114 more for Medicare Advantage, which is run by private insurance companies, than it does to Medicare, and 86% of that extra money goes right in the pockets of the insurance companies. Granted, seniors with Advantage are more apt to get gym memberships reimbused, but really, wouldn’t they just as soon waive that “extra” to make sure their grandchildren get covered? I think seniors would.
Posted by: Amy in Maine | March 18, 2010, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm
Actually more commonly seniors reduce hospital or physician benefits to get dental benefits into their insurance coverage.
I would suggest not to look at any sources, left leaning/centrist/right leaning, and look at the bill itself and the supporting documentation for the creation of that Medicare option.
It isn’t a scam. It an option to seniors for more choice, than can be provided by the federal government, and the extra 14% premium payment that the privite companies receive is for the perceived increased cost of administrating the plans.
I say perceived cost because Medicare’s administrative costs are written into the HHS budget, and not into Medicare’s budget, so it seems like Medicare has a lower operating costs than private insurers.
Posted by: bobtherepublican | March 18, 2010, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm
So again, no one gets tossed under the bus, the seniors still get care, and you Repubs don’t like the fact that its a cost effective change.
Or do you not like it because the extra cost goes to Private business profits instead of actual better care?
Or do you not like it because you didn’t think of it first?
Oh wait, I see, the Medicare advantage program was passed in reconciliation during the 1997 Balanced Budget act… by a repub led congress, hailed as improving benefits (which it does not) while lowering the size of government (which it did not). It funnels tax payer money into the hands of private insurance.
Posted by: DewyB | March 18, 2010, 5:11 pm 5:11 pm
Several months ago, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Service predicted that the access to medical care for seniors will be worsened under the h.c. reform. A new tax will be applied to drug companies which supply drugs to seniors under agreement with their former employers. The net result will be increase in drug price charged to seniors in the plan.
Posted by: austin | March 18, 2010, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm