The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : 10-Year Time Frame Obscures Full Cost of Democratic Health Care Plan

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

10-Year Time Frame Obscures Full Cost of Democratic Health Care Plan

By Philip Klein on 7.14.09 @ 5:23PM

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the House Democratic health care bill that I summarized below would cost more than $1 trillion over ten years (subject to revision once it evaluates the entire bill). Michelle Malkin noted earlier that it's more like a five year estimate, and I thought it would be worthwhile to add some specific numbers to flesh out that argument.

It's important to keep in mind that the most costly aspects of the legislation involve providing subsidies to individuals to purchase health care ($773 billion) and to expand Medicaid ($438 billion), but it takes several years for those provisions to kick in. As you can see from the chart below, that means that the costs start out relatively modest but ramp up over time. In the first three years of the plan the cost of the subsidies and Medicaid expansion is just $8 billion; in the first five years, it's $202 billion; but in the last five years, it's $979 billion. Put another way, 17 percent of the spending comes in the first five years, while 83 percent comes in the second five years. What this means is that the American people see $1 trillion over 10 years and they think that means the bill would cost about $100 billion a year -- but the reality is more than double that. In the final year of the CBO estimates, 2019, the spending hits $230 billion.

View all comments (7) | Leave a comment

hermit| 7.14.09 @ 6:07PM

The first 5 years of a new entitlement are relatively meaningless. Take a look at what the costs are not of Medicare or Social Security.

Look not a the time period of the selling when the skeleton is put in place but look at the annual cost in the out years when they really add meat to the bones.
We stand at the edge of the abyss and they quietly coach us go ahead jump we’ll catch you… “it’s free healthcare…. “

Roy| 7.14.09 @ 6:10PM

I like the slope of that thing by the end - it ain't done rising.

Max80919| 7.14.09 @ 7:18PM

It is amazing how the Democrats, like Chris Dodd, scoff at the CBO's estimates. He doesn't understand how to management a business which is what health care is. After 2019, then what? And this is just nati0nalized health care. It doens't include the impending collapse of Social Secuity and Medicare. If this is the best gov't can do, I want a re-election for ALL elected officials. This is a horror story with an ending Steven King couldn't fathom.

MarkJ| 7.14.09 @ 7:28PM

First Question: a presumably successful ObamaCare program would mean longer America life spans, right?

Second Question: This means that there will be a lot more old white people, right?

Third Question: The Democrats think "diversity" is just swell, right?

Last Question: Given the above, what makes the Democrats think that an increasingly non-white population will be able, much less willing, to indefinitely support free ObamaCare for a rapidly skyrocketing number of old white people?

iamse7en| 7.15.09 @ 1:34AM

Let's be honest here, there's no way in Hades that such a bill will pass, and it can't hurt us THAT badly when we have a new President coming.

sdfsdf| 5.10.10 @ 5:22AM

M2TS Converter,
M2TS Video Converter

BoraMac| 9.11.09 @ 5:30AM

Very clever structure for a venture...we have seen thise before...

Early years...take in revenue on promises of big future benefits.
Middle years...start to provide some benefits to a few.
Out years...pray you can cover the escalating benefits from limited revenue.

If you're Bernard Madoff...they call that a Ponzi Scheme and throw you in Jail. If your Obama...he calls it health care reform...what fate does he deserve for running this deceptive scheme on all Americans.