Of course Jerry is wrong about the CBO numbers. Given that he gets
them from Republican press releases, quell surprise!

Here is the actual CBO piece:
http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-13-Coverage%20Estimates.pdf

What Republicans said: They claimed that the original 10 year cost
estimate provided by Democrats was $940 billion. Now the 10 year cost
is estimated at $1.76 trillion.

How Republicans are (predictably) trying to distort reality: In 2010
the estimate for ten years out was $940 billion. That would be the
cost through 2020. However, most provisions in the law don't take
effect until 2014, so most of the costs (and savings) were in the last
6 years of that prediction range. It is now 2012. The 10 year forecast
now stretches through 2022. The provisions still mostly kick in in
2014 meaning that most of the costs (and savings) occur during 8 years
of the 10 year forecast cycle.

Anyone who is surprised that 8 years of costs is going to be a bigger
number than 6 years of costs, raise their hands!

Now, the actual question that should be asked (and which Republicans
don't want to find out) is: what about the savings?

This report was requested by House Republicans so it tends to be
tailored to what they want, so of course it is mostly about the costs.
Yet, even within that framework, you only have to read the first god
damn page of the report to realize that it says:

"CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of
the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the
2012–2021 period—about $50 billion less than the agencies’ March 2011
estimate for that 10-year period"

Huh...$50 billion dollars lower than previously estimated. That sounds
like savings!

Or what about page 2, where it says:

"CBO and JCT have previously estimated that the ACA will, on net,
reduce budget deficits over
the 2012–2021 period; that estimate of the overall budgetary impact of
the ACA has not been updated."

Huh, sounds like it might still reduce budget deficits. House
Republicans, however, weren't interested in finding out about deficit
reductions.

So, to summarize: 8 years costs more than 6 years. Estimates have
actually gone down, not up. The overall financial impact on deficits
hasn't been recalculated.

Now, to be fair, it very well might be that previous deficit reduction
estimates aren't born up with the new numbers. I don't know. The CBO
has said that the non-insurance provisions of the ACA (this report
only dealt with the insurance portion of the law, per House request)
can be difficult to wrangle. Obviously they've done it before and I'd
love to see an updated view. If it is found that the overall law isn't
going to perform as expected then it might be worth seeing what we can
tweak. I doubt that it will really be that worthwhile, however, until
we actually get into the time period where the main provisions of the
law actually kick in, ie, 2014 and later.

None the less, this is a case of Republicans commissioning a study
that selectively looks at only part of the ACA and then they cherry
pick and distort numbers even from that. I'm not surprised, mind you,
but still...it would just be nice, for once, to see numbers approached
with a bit of intellectual honesty. I'm dreaming, I know. Just the
mathematician in me. Ah well.

Judah



On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "My argument is perfectly reasoned, and your comment below proves my point
> exactly.  "
>
> If you say so.
>
>
> "You called the president a liar based on the headline of an opinion piece
> about numbers purportedly released by the CBO"
>
> He is a liar based on the numbers released by the CBO.
>
>
> "None of those sources: the headline, the opinion, or the CBO numbers are
> proof of anything, regardless of who is using them."
>
> Doesn't change the nature of truth.  You can tell me 2 + 2 = 5 all day
> long, yet it still equals 4.
>
> He

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:348810
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to