Earlier this week, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner made a prediction. The Republican health care plan, he said, "will cover millions more Americans" than the Democrats' plan. Bold. But here's what the experts say:
"By 2019, CBO and JCT estimate, the number of nonelderly people without health insurance would be reduced by about 3 million relative to current law, leaving about 52 million nonelderly residents uninsured. The share of legal nonelderly residents with insurance coverage in 2019 would be about 83 percent, roughly in line with the current share."
Oops. You can read the entire analysis here (PDF).
Andrew Sullivan weighs in on The Daily Dish.
Does it actually tackle the question of covering the 40 million or so people without access to insurance? No, it does not. It could insure an extra 3 million tops. Vast numbers of people would be shut out of access to insurance because they just cannot afford it. The GOP's response to this is: we cannot afford to help right now. Which is honest enough. But it doesn't exactly counter the fact that, according to the same CBO, the Democrats bill would save $104 billion off the deficit in the same time period. So, if affordability is what's at stake, why not back the Dems? The honest answer to that would be: those CBO numbers won't reflect the final cost and the risks of such an ambitious scheme are too great for this moment of fiscal crisis.
Sullivan thinks health care reform is still worthwhile with an important condition.
But that means that the flipside to this new endeavor must be a serious and persistent attempt to tackle the fiscal crisis after health insurance passes. If Obama wants to reassure independents that he is not another borrow-and-spend president, he will have to pivot off health insurance to steep entitlement and defense budget reform.
--Ballard Burgher
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment