gloomy assessment of the impact of ObamaCare

[justashooter 430]

The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama’s health care “reform” law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius’s staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”

According to their source, Sebelius wasn’t alone in keeping the information secret:

“We know a copy was sent to the White House via their legislative affairs staff,” says the HHS staffer, “and there were a number of meetings here almost right after the analysis was submitted to the secretary’s office. Everyone went into lockdown, and people here were too scared to go public with the report.”

The report in question got published late last week, a month after the vote in Congress and Barack Obama’s signing of the bill into law. It offered a particularly gloomy assessment of the impact of ObamaCare, as we noted when it finally saw the light of day:

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15% of hospitals into the red and “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors. …

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/27/did-white-house-cover-up-bad-report-on-obamacare/

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”

Like Nancy said: we won't know what's in it until we pass it."

Oh yeah, we are in the best of hands.

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

exactly why i'm glad sebelius isn't governor of our state anymore.

[Pooky 3,786]

The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama’s health care “reform” law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius’s staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”

According to their source, Sebelius wasn’t alone in keeping the information secret:

“We know a copy was sent to the White House via their legislative affairs staff,” says the HHS staffer, “and there were a number of meetings here almost right after the analysis was submitted to the secretary’s office. Everyone went into lockdown, and people here were too scared to go public with the report.”

The report in question got published late last week, a month after the vote in Congress and Barack Obama’s signing of the bill into law. It offered a particularly gloomy assessment of the impact of ObamaCare, as we noted when it finally saw the light of day:

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15% of hospitals into the red and “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors. …

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/27/did-white-house-cover-up-bad-report-on-obamacare/

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”

Like Nancy said: we won't know what's in it until we pass it."

Oh yeah, we are in the best of hands.

So the White House and leaders of Congress knew they were peddling a lie, and yet went on peddling it so they could get the sham of a healthcare "reform" Bill passed. And the Democrats wonder why the country isn't showing them any love for following through on the President's signature policy promise.

That's because it smells bad and is followed soon after by a heap of sh*t. Same as the other follow-through really.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Pooky

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

http://hotair.com/ar...t-on-obamacare/

yeah, exactly.

[Pooky 3,786]

yeah, exactly.

You can't argue the facts, so you try and belittle the source, then. Brilliant. Not.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You can't argue the facts, so you try and belittle the source, then. Brilliant. Not.

Read the full report, then. I thought it made a point that the cost curve will be bent but any of those savings would largely be absorbed by the expansion of coverage during the first decade. Savings are still projected in the following decade. Of course, hotair won't look at that.

Look, the cost saving measures fell painfully short. We should have fared a lot better. We all know that. But the alternative (NOTHING AT ALL) would have had worse effects than the passage of the reform package that we ended up with. I'm not happy with it because it didn't go nearly far enough. But it went as far as it could have gone given the political environment.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Read the full report, then. I thought it made a point that the cost curve will be bent but any of those savings would largely be absorbed by the expansion of coverage during the first decade. Savings are still projected in the following decade. Of course, hotair won't look at that.

Look, the cost saving measures fell painfully short. We should have fared a lot better. We all know that. But the alternative (NOTHING AT ALL) would have had worse effects than the passage of the reform package that we ended up with. I'm not happy with it because it didn't go nearly far enough. But it went as far as it could have gone given the political environment.

You mistakenly presume that doing nothing was the ONLY alternative. How about doing it RIGHT? Isn't that the point the Repub's were trying to make when they kept repeating "Start Over!"?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You mistakenly presume that doing nothing was the ONLY alternative. How about doing it RIGHT? Isn't that the point the Repub's were trying to make when they kept repeating "Start Over!"?

Short memory? Shouting "KILL THE BILL" and then saying that you want to do it right while not offering any actual alternatives is something you actually bought into? Congratulations on that. Really. Congratulations.

[Danno 1,228]

Short memory? Shouting "KILL THE BILL" and then saying that you want to do it right while not offering any actual alternatives is something you actually bought into? Congratulations on that. Really. Congratulations.

If you think there were no alternatives... you need a lot of updating.

[Pooky 3,786]

Read the full report, then. I thought it made a point that the cost curve will be bent but any of those savings would largely be absorbed by the expansion of coverage during the first decade. Savings are still projected in the following decade. Of course, hotair won't look at that.

Look, the cost saving measures fell painfully short. We should have fared a lot better. We all know that. But the alternative (NOTHING AT ALL) would have had worse effects than the passage of the reform package that we ended up with. I'm not happy with it because it didn't go nearly far enough. But it went as far as it could have gone given the political environment.

Even the CBO poured cold water on expectations for the following decade. The variables out there are too great to forecast with any degree of accuracy and they knew it.

For instance, if Congress passes an immigration "reform" Bill this year, you can kiss all of the projections goodbye and start looking at increased deficits even before the main benefits are supposed to come into effect, in 2014.

The whole thing is a joke, bought by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries and paid for by you and me. Welcome to healthcare "reform". It makes me sick.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Pooky

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If you think there were no alternatives... you need a lot of updating.

Oh come on, Danno. Amuse me. TORT reform to cure the ills of the health care system? Yes?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Even the CBO poured cold water on expectations for the following decade. The variables out there are too great to forecast with any degree of accuracy and they knew it.

For instance, if Congress passes an immigration "reform" Bill this year, you can kiss all of the projections goodbye and start looking at increased deficits even before the main benefits are supposed to come into effect, in 2014.

The whole thing is a joke, bought by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries and paid for by you and me. Welcome to healthcare "reform". It makes me sick.

Look, I said time and again that I am less than happy with what passed. I am and have been an advocate of a single payer system but that wasn't to be had. We gotta crawl out of them caves first. That said, I do think that the total inaction desired by the other side of the aisle would have been by far the greater of two evils.