The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : CBO Scores GOP Health Care Plan

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

CBO Scores GOP Health Care Plan

By Philip Klein on 11.5.09 @ 10:57AM

The Congressional Budget Office has issued an analysis of an alternative health care bill proposed by House Republicans. The bill will cost $61 billion over 10 years (as opposed to the $1.055 trillion House Democrats bill) and reduce budget deficits by $68 billion, according to the CBO. The bill would also lower average health insurance premiums by 5 percent to 8 percent for individuals, 7 to 10 percent for small groups, and zero to 3 percent for large groups. At the same time, the CBO estimates that it would have a marginal impact on insurance coverage by only reducing the number of uninsured by 3 million.

Overall, I wasn't very impressed by the GOP alternative, which you can read more about here. There are some elements of it that are good, including allowing Americans to purchase insurance across state lines, giving businesses more flexibility to offer financial incentives aimed at encouraging people to be healthier, and expanding health savings accounts. But there are also plenty of new mandates imposed by the bill, including barring insurers from having annual or lifetime spending limits and a "slacker mandate" that would make insurers allow adults to stay on their parents insurance until age 25.

But more importantly, the bill doesn't do anything to move us beyond the employer-based health care system, a system in which the tax code discriminates against individuals purchasing insurance on their own, workers are locked into whatever insurance policies their employers choose for them, and they cannot take their insurance with them when they move from job to job. The GOP proposal isn't what I would consider real reform. It's more of a document that Republicans have put out so they can say they have some sort of health care bill that reduces premiums at a fraction of the cost of the Democrats' bill.

Also disturbing to me is that the one page summary of the bill has a chart titled, "Scorecard: Speaker Pelosi's Government Takeover vs. GOP Common-Sense Solution" in which the GOP boasts that while Pelosi's bill cuts Medicare by $500 billion, the Republican alternative has $0 of Medicare cuts. This is what we've come to -- a Republican Party that talks a big game about standing up for small government while openly touting the fact that their health care proposal does not touch the health care entitlement program that is bankrupting our country.

View all comments (6) | Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 11.5.09 @ 11:41AM

Mr. Klein
Thank you for your review summary.
Maybe they wanted the FIRST bill to be short and sweet, and come back with additional bills to cover the obvious gaps at a later date once this one is digested.
Thoughts?

Pete2| 11.5.09 @ 12:40PM

Health reform is meaningless until you have tort reform included. None of these proposals are health reform anyway, they're proposals for government run healthcare. Fix the programs alreday in place before tinkering with all of it. Medicare, medicaid, and theVA are all rife with fraud and incompetence. Adding another program will not change that. If 85% of the people like their present heathcare, why screw with it? Fix the problems first, then come back with a proposal, if needed.

Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 11.5.09 @ 12:58PM

You're making too much sense here Pete!! Why bother fixing things that are broke, when you can go out, and buy something new and shiney instead?
Then it's brand new again Pete, instead of old and broke!! Don't you want something new Pete? Just don't look at the price tag Pete, just buy it!!

Webster| 11.6.09 @ 11:32AM

The Republican's offered there "fix the current system" plan and it doesn't cover anyone. The CBO destroyed it.

Bob| 11.5.09 @ 2:33PM

There are a couple of things hidden in the bill. First, it does nothing to get rid of the antitrust exemption for the insurance industry (which is needed if you really want market competition). And secondly, the selling of insurance across state lines would exempt it from any state laws restricting coverage. This would make the market non-competitive because in state insurance companies would be required to follow state law. Furthermore, it does nothing to make sure that those of us with employer based health insurance have any options beyond what our employer gives to us. I don't see this as a serious attempt at health care reform, and agree with you, Philip, that it doesn't address the big problem -- Medicare.

The reason it doesn't cost much is that it doesn't do much. We still spend almost twice as much as our competition and get worse results. Until we solve the cost issue, we will not grow our manufacturing base and thus our middle class. And if it doesn't help in employing our middle class, we will not ever have any significant economic growth.

pricila| 4.24.10 @ 9:35AM

Yeah, there will be even more lawsuits filed - even more to add to the hundreds or thousands that have already been filed - you know, the lawsuits that go unmentioned. And what, pray tell, shall we expect in that regard from our illustrious Attorney General, Eric Holder? ecommerce