House to Obama: Where did the additional $111 billion in ObamaCare costs come from?

posted at 1:20 pm on March 2, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

ObamaCare hasn’t even been implemented yet, and its subsidy costs have already risen 30% with no explanation.  In the latest budget from the White House, the estimated cost for assistance to middle-class families in the insurance exchanges between 2014 and 2021 was $478 billion — an increase from last year’s budget of $367 billion.  House Republicans want an explanation:

Cost estimates for a key part of President Obama’s health care overhaul law have ballooned by $111 billion from last year’s budget, and a senior Republican lawmaker on Friday demanded an explanation.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., wants to know by Monday why the estimated ten-year cost of helping millions of middle-class Americans buy health insurance has jumped by about 30 percent. …

At issue are subsidies that will be provided under the health care law to help middle class people buy private coverage in new state insurance markets that will open for business in 2014.

Last year’s budget estimated the cost of the aid to be $367 billion from 2014-2011. This year’s budget puts it at $478 billion over the same time period.

“This staggering increase … cannot be explained by legislative changes or new economic assumptions, and therefore must reflect substantial changes in underlying assumptions regarding the program’s … costs,” Camp wrote Friday in a letter to Sebelius and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

The White House says there’s nothing to worry about:

Administration officials say the big increase from last year’s estimates is no cause for alarm and that the administration is not forecasting an erosion of employer coverage or higher insurance costs.

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall. The rest is due to technical changes in Treasury assumptions about such matters as the distribution of income in America.

What?  So we’re going to save money by … spending a lot more of it?  Well, that sounds a lot like the underlying basis for ObamaCare in the first place, but this is doubletalk.  It’s reminiscent of the argument from the White House that contraception should be free because insurers (and therefore employers) save money in the long term, while ignoring the fact that up-front costs have to be covered on a year-by-year basis.

As far as “assumptions” go, it was those very assumptions that ObamaCare opponents challenged in 2009 and 2010.  The Obama administration and Democrats in Congress projected lower costs in order to argue that the bill was revenue neutral in its first ten years, and collected taxes for three years ahead of these outlays in order to get the CBO to score it that way.  Now we find out that the subsidies are 30% higher than those projections given to the CBO, and the White House tried to sneak it through Congress without admitting they got it wrong before the exchange subsidies even begin to roll out.  Don’t bet that this $478 billion figure will be the final upward revision, either.

Update: Avik Roy reported on this for Forbes on Tuesday:

I’ve written extensively about how the most fiscally dangerous aspect of Obamacare is its creation of a new entitlement for subsidized private insurance, through the law’s state-based exchanges. If employers dump many of their workers onto the exchanges, as numerous independent analyses suggest is likely, taxpayers may need to spend as much as $200 billion a year extra on these exchange subsidies. Well, it turns out that the Obama Administration agrees that initial spending estimates are too low. The White House’s fiscal year 2013 budget adds $111 billion in exchange spending between 2014 and 2021, with even more spending to come in future years.

Nice work, so be sure to read it.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

0bama’s stash!

CurtZHP on March 2, 2012 at 1:20 PM

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall.

Does that sentence make sense to anyone who speaks English?

Doughboy on March 2, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Fraud…

PatriotRider on March 2, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Whoops!

Good Lt on March 2, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Unicorns?

dmann on March 2, 2012 at 1:23 PM

$111 billion? Pocket change to these people.

That was one of the reasons for the trillion in stimulus. To make anything less than a trillion seem like not that much money.

Missy on March 2, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Hey Ben…speed up the printing presses a little…

PatriotRider on March 2, 2012 at 1:23 PM

What a shocker!

How about some jail time for the people who perpetrated this largest crime in the history of America? Maybe ship them all off to Indonesia to live out the rest of their miserably destructive lies? That’s where they belong, with their Prime Minister – the liar who has the mathetical sophistication of a slow 8th grader.

They are all just like that miserable waste of flesh, Bart Stupid. Dems are the lowest form of life on Earth. They are worse than the pond scum they aree trying to now sell as their new oil alternative. I hate these people with the heat of a thousand suns.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2012 at 1:24 PM

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why you need a media that DOES IT’S JOB ALL THE TIME! (not bashing conservative newsites mind you)

nobar on March 2, 2012 at 1:25 PM

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall. The rest is due to technical changes in Treasury assumptions about such matters as the distribution of income in America.

What a complete non-explanation.

Anyone have any idea what legislation this is supposed to reference? Or what “technical changes in Treasury assumptions” even means?

I sure hope the House doesn’t just accept this and drop the issue.

toby11 on March 2, 2012 at 1:27 PM

The first estimate was a lie. There’s your explanation.

The latest number is too low too. So we have that to look forward to.

forest on March 2, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER is a government cost estimate correct for publicly funded projects etc. They always quote the low end of the cost range spectrum and act like it is a done deal. The costs always exceed the estimate. This is just the first of many of these overrun announcements. This is why Obamacare will bankrupt the country.

Mallard T. Drake on March 2, 2012 at 1:28 PM

legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall.

This must refer to the birth control mandate. Spending money on birth control – babies == BIG money savings.

WashJeff on March 2, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Because “Shut Up”, that’s why.

And I plan on personally raising the cost, just to spite people like Sandra Fluke:

http://wp.me/p1ipEz-1kp

You want to be able to have consequence-free sex, and you want ME to pay for it with higher insurance rates? OK, fine – I’ll make you a deal:

I’ll pay for your drunken weekends with whichever guy straps on the beer goggles at last call, but in return I expect you to keep your piehole shut when you have to pay higher insurance rates for MY lifestyle choices.

And boy, howdy, am I going to stick it to you BUT GOOD.

You just THINK you’ve been screwed by all of those Frat Boys, but it is nothing compared to the rogering you are going to get from me.

I am going to start living a life of indulgent luxury – I’m going to plop my fat ass on my couch and watch television all day long – no exercise for me. I’m going to eat the fattiest, greasiest foods that I can find – there isn’t going to be a vegetable in sight. I don’t drink, smoke, or use drugs, but I am thinking about taking them up – just so I can run up your insurance premiums.

You see Ms. Fluke, you have as much as admitted that no one has to take personal responsibility for their actions. No, you sat in front of a national audience and said that each of us has to pay for whatever other people in the rest of the country decide they want to do.

And if you don’t want them telling you what you can or cannot do with YOUR body, then you sure as heck don’t get to tell them what they can or cannot do with theirs.

Ms. Fluke and her cohorts had better plan on having AT LEAST 3 kids apiece to pay for all of this – I’m retiring in 20 years, so they’d better hop to it…..

TeresainFortWorth on March 2, 2012 at 1:30 PM

“The way to meet demand is to stifle supply.” – Economics Professor Obama

“The Hidden Law of Secretly Lining a Business’ Pockets by Buying the Stuff They Produce” – Economics Professor Obama’s doctoral thesis

“Only when all your money is spent and you are broke and can no longer purchase anything can you truly save money…since you no longer have any money to spend.” – Economics Professor Obama after a well rested and sober tirade

NotCoach on March 2, 2012 at 1:30 PM

ObamaCare hasn’t even been implemented yet, and its subsidy costs have already risen 30% with no explanation.

Neither Obamuh, nor the State, will be accountable, pursuant to the “healthcare” mandate.

That’s by design … and that’s what you get with the unrestrained power of the State.

America will see the days of dictatorship.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 2, 2012 at 1:31 PM

The smoke has cleared and the mirrors are covered…

SouthernGent on March 2, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Revise, revise, revise

cmsinaz on March 2, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Or what “technical changes in Treasury assumptions” even means?

It means, “We didn’t believe those evil Republicans when they told us that if we raised tax rates that tax revenue would go down. We were counting on collecting a lot more in taxes when we raised the rates.”

And now revenues are down….

“What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.” – Lord Melbourne

TeresainFortWorth on March 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM

When a government goes rogue, and causes the people harm, the people are in no way obligated to continue supporting that government…

PatriotRider on March 2, 2012 at 1:34 PM

The most ingenous strategery used by the left has been to take over the educational system and render an entire generation unable to comprehend basic economics. What a shame.

Rohall1215 on March 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Ed, have you added the “Doc Fix” spending back into to the (still fake) but revised numbers?

kunegetikos on March 2, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Does that sentence make sense to anyone who speaks English?

Doughboy on March 2, 2012 at 1:22 PM

It’s Austrian, use babelfish to decipher it.

Bishop on March 2, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Campaign contributions were a little light so, ya know, we had to make up the difference.

Lost in Jersey on March 2, 2012 at 1:37 PM

The time of reckoning is a coming.

celtic warrior on March 2, 2012 at 1:38 PM

It was in there all along but we kept falling asleep every time we started reading it and just didn’t get to that page yet in the behemoth known as Obamascare.

stukinIL4now on March 2, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Isn’t that the Moose’s vacation fund? Or at least her wardrobe fund.

search4truth on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

They seem pretty good at sending letters and being “outraged” but not so good at actually doing anything about anything.

joey24007 on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

The first estimate was a lie. There’s your explanation.
The latest number is too low too. So we have that to look forward to.
forest on March 2, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Don’t forget the CBO readjustments cranked costs up over $100B about a month after ObamaCare passed. So with this, ObamaCare is officially a net drag on the economy before the vast majority of it has even been implemented. And believe me, this is going to get alot worse.

Chuck Schick on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Is it a wonder that around 80% of Americans objected to this?This is a one party deal that is in the hands of 9 people.

docflash on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

IIRC, since Obamacare was passed through reconciliation, it can be “sunsetted” after 5/10 years if it has a negative impact on the budget that is outside of what was projected. I remember reading about this issue back in early 2009. I need to go look into it again.

Resist We Much on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

So … are health insurance premiums still going to be reduced by 3000%? I mean, when the main salesman for a jerky, un-American, un-Constitutional program is talking about “reducing premiums by 3000%”, how can anyone be surprised when the numbers all start to fall apart?

It’s so pathetic it’s funny. America has become nothing but a sick joke.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Democrat math. Just like the high speed train in California. We won’t know how much it costs until we finish it.

multiuseless on March 2, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Relax, everyone. The WH says there’s no cause for alarm.

No cause for alarm? #!@&!?*$!

cheeflo on March 2, 2012 at 1:43 PM

One of the most common red flags for securities fraud is the unannounced, sudden change in “assumptions” usually buried in a footnote deep inside the quarterly financial disclosures. Dems are playing an old game and the electorate eats it up every time.

tommyboy on March 2, 2012 at 1:44 PM

It’s so pathetic it’s funny. America has become nothing but a sick joke.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2012 at 1:42 PM

yep.

joey24007 on March 2, 2012 at 1:45 PM

The most ingenous strategery used by the left has been to take over the educational system and render an entire generation unable to comprehend basic economics. What a shame.

Rohall1215 on March 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM

Exactly. Less than 1% of people in government or the media understand these basics, so bad decisions are made and never questioned.

talkingpoints on March 2, 2012 at 1:47 PM

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why you need a media that DOES IT’S JOB ALL THE TIME!

Exactly! I blame the media 100% for the fact that this anti-American clown got elected. A clown whose entire life has been dedicated to the pursuit of class warfare elected as President – it gives new meaning to the phrase “you can’t make this sh*t up.”

DanaLynn on March 2, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Let’s focus on arpaio and rush instead of this
-lsm

cmsinaz on March 2, 2012 at 1:48 PM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 2, 2012 at 1:24 PM

LOL – stop sugar coating it and tell us how you really feel!!

NJ Red on March 2, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Slightly OT:

Gallup’s Unadjusted Unemployment Data Suggest Increase in BLS Adjusted Figure
http://behavioraleconomy.gallup.com/2012/03/gallups-unadjusted-unemployment-data.html

Gallup finds U.S. unemployment, as measured without seasonal adjustment, to be 9.1% in February, based on almost 30,000 interviews with a random sample of Americans. When Gallup applies the 0.5-percentage-point seasonal adjustment that the government applied to its unadjusted data for February last year, it produces an adjusted unemployment rate for February 2012 of 8.6% — a substantial increase from the 8.3% adjusted rate the government reported for January.

Chip on March 2, 2012 at 1:50 PM

IIRC, since Obamacare was passed through reconciliation, it can be “sunsetted” after 5/10 years if it has a negative impact on the budget that is outside of what was projected. I remember reading about this issue back in early 2009. I need to go look into it again.

Resist We Much on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Correct, the provisions passed through reconciliation are only authorized for five years and have to be reauthorized to continue after that. If Congress refuses to fund this nonsense for the next 3 years they can run out the clock on the whole thing.

Of course, this entire POS reeks now because those bogus “savings” numbers were the only reason the bill was able to go through reconciliation in the first place. If the more accurate costs had been described, Congress would have had to come up with more revenues or cuts in other programs to pay for it, and that would have probably killed the thing.

rockmom on March 2, 2012 at 1:50 PM

“You lie” is the truest thing ever said about Obama.

Schadenfreude on March 2, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Obama: “Next week, I will introduce the mandate for all pharmacies and health insurance companies to give out lubricants for free. So you see, there is no reason to be alarmed. Now, would you please bend over slightly?”

Archivarix on March 2, 2012 at 1:51 PM

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall. The rest is due to technical changes in Treasury assumptions about such matters as the distribution of income in America.

This ranks up there with “If you like your health insurance you can keep your health insurance” in the Obamacare chapter of forthcoming book Obama’s Greatest Lies.

Happy Nomad on March 2, 2012 at 1:52 PM

The whole political system in America has broken down beyond repair. Politicians are ignorant of even basic economics. The so-called “leaders” of political movements are nothing more than tv personalities who put self-promotion and money making over principles.

It’s all over.

joey24007 on March 2, 2012 at 1:54 PM

And this is just ONE of the “miscalculations”….

Yakko77 on March 2, 2012 at 1:55 PM

Obama: “Next week, I will introduce the mandate for all pharmacies and health insurance companies to give out lubricants for free. So you see, there is no reason to be alarmed. Now, would you please bend over slightly?”

Archivarix on March 2, 2012 at 1:51 PM

LOL…..BOHICA!!!!! Courtesy of your friendly neighborhood Marxist liberal.

search4truth on March 2, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Rockmom-

The Bush tax cuts were done through reconciliation and sunsetted after 10 years. Why do you think ObamaCare will be 5?

No way will they reauthorize it. They won’t have both houses by then

Chuck Schick on March 2, 2012 at 1:58 PM

What? So we’re going to save money by … spending a lot more of it?

Why is this so hard for you conservatives to undertand? Sure we may be losing now, but we’ll make it up in volume.

Tim_CA on March 2, 2012 at 1:59 PM

The fact that a subsidy exists tells you that policies purchased through state exchanges will be cheaper than those purchased from insurance companies, the “fine” be damned. Every single company that can will therefore drop insurance coverage and force employees to the exchanges. We will do that in our company (already decided) and I cannot imagine why every business won’t do the same. This subsidy will balloon beyond dreams.

MTF on March 2, 2012 at 1:59 PM

“I won, so shut your pie hole” — BHO

missouriyankee on March 2, 2012 at 2:00 PM

MTF on March 2, 2012 at 1:59 PM

1000% right. They just took the guilt and competitive disadvantages off every employer with 50 or more employees. Bet your ass theyre going into the exchange in droves

And companies less than 50 people will hire that 51st employee only with a gun to their head.

Chuck Schick on March 2, 2012 at 2:03 PM

The most costly health care in the world is FREEEEEEEEEEE.

0bama HellCare will go up 35-40% per year from now until the end of time. We will look back at those 7-8% annual insurance premiums with great fondness.

jukin3 on March 2, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Hey, at least we have John Boehner and the GOP in the House!

/sarc

joey24007 on March 2, 2012 at 2:04 PM

I’m going to use that word again, like it or not.

I H A T E liberals, liberal progressives, and liberal progressive socialists, and communists.

As to the ‘why’, it should be glaringly obvious to even the left wingers by now. I think that secretly there are a lot of democrats that are cringing at what this freaking corrupt bozo and his commie buddies are doing to this country.

Lets see if they have the balls to help correct the situation this fall. I’m hoping so, but my hopes can’t get that high when the lefties and dems remain silent and/or continue bashing America and the very ideas of individual freedom and personal responsibility.

This situation WILL be corrected lefties, and when it is, you ain’t gonna like it.

Wolfmoon on March 2, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Votes, baby, Votes!!!!

rgranger on March 2, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Recent legislation reduces costs as Sebilius explained in testimony by funding contraception to Georgetown law students, there will be less children born in America and therefore less healthcare to provide. Makes sense to Obama, made sense to Hitler (though he went about it a different way)

Connecticut on March 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM

That was one of the reasons for the trillion in stimulus. To make anything less than a trillion seem like not that much money.Missy

Exactly right, Missy.
This is a sales technique called, “The Drop”.

I did this on my engagement ring.

I picked out a diamond that was 3X as expensive as the one I really wanted.

Then, last minute, I looked at the one I really wanted and said, “You know, I think I really like this one instead.

Next words out of his mouth to the jeweler, “Wrap it up, we’ll take this one, Mike.”

Works pretty much every time.

Typicalwhitewoman on March 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Deficit-neutral.

BKeyser on March 2, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Why are we subsidizing the middle class?

Charlemagne on March 2, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Typicalwhitewoman on March 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Thread winner. omg Tell it, sister!

kunegetikos on March 2, 2012 at 2:10 PM

This is a sales technique called, “The Drop”.

I did this on my engagement ring.

I picked out a diamond that was 3X as expensive as the one I really wanted.

Then, last minute, I looked at the one I really wanted and said, “You know, I think I really like this one instead.

Next words out of his mouth to the jeweler, “Wrap it up, we’ll take this one, Mike.”

Works pretty much every time.

Typicalwhitewoman on March 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Sometimes, I ask God why he even invented you people.

;O)

OhEssYouCowboys on March 2, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Forgery!

faraway on March 2, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Liberal logic:

In for a penny, in for a pound…as long as it isn’t our pennies or pounds.

BobMbx on March 2, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Works pretty much every time.

Typicalwhitewoman on March 2, 2012 at 2:06 PM

That is just dirty! And I bet it DOES work most of the time.

search4truth on March 2, 2012 at 2:25 PM

I’ll never understand how liberals can ignore the obvious fact that Obama couldn’t care less if bankrupts this country beyond any hope of a recovery. I just hope the independents see that this time around. And I hope the Ron Paul supporters see how important it is for them to get behind the Republican candidate, no matter who it is.

DanaLynn on March 2, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Relax. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have the situation totally under control.

Afterseven on March 2, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Relax. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have the situation totally under control.

Afterseven on March 2, 2012 at 2:30 PM

yes and along with all of the conservative pundits/talking heads/celebrities we can really take it to Obama

joey24007 on March 2, 2012 at 2:34 PM

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall.

Does that sentence make sense to anyone who speaks English?

Doughboy on March 2, 2012 at 1:22 PM

It doesn’t seem that complicated to me, Doughboy – if they enact legislation that cuts costs elsewhere in the government, but still increases the burden on the healthcare bill… viola!

For example: If they suddenly and quite miraculously decided to cut the much-maligned “Cadillac” benefits of certain federal employees and just dumped them into the market with the rest of us, the price of the healthcare bill might necessarily increase. However, if that were to save us, say, 222 billion dollars (or even just $111,000,000,000.99), we could still save money overall.

Heresy of Cain on March 2, 2012 at 2:35 PM

IIRC, since Obamacare was passed through reconciliation, it can be “sunsetted” after 5/10 years if it has a negative impact on the budget that is outside of what was projected. I remember reading about this issue back in early 2009. I need to go look into it again.

Resist We Much on March 2, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Correct, the provisions passed through reconciliation are only authorized for five years and have to be reauthorized to continue after that. If Congress refuses to fund this nonsense for the next 3 years they can run out the clock on the whole thing.

Of course, this entire POS reeks now because those bogus “savings” numbers were the only reason the bill was able to go through reconciliation in the first place. If the more accurate costs had been described, Congress would have had to come up with more revenues or cuts in other programs to pay for it, and that would have probably killed the thing.

rockmom on March 2, 2012 at 1:50 PM

I hadn’t heard of this, do you have any links I can look at? TIA.

toby11 on March 2, 2012 at 2:37 PM

rockmom on March 2, 2012 at 1:50 PM

Nail. Head.

Scott Brown got elected, so they had to lie their way through a reconciliation process because they didn’t have 60 votes any more.

Every bit of his has been predictable from the outset. Obama stole most of this from Edwards anyway, and when Lewin did their analysis for Edwards (at his request, recall) they showed something in the neighborhood of 50+ million people dropped from their employer-provided coverage. So “if you like your plan you can keep it” was a lie from the beginning.

I’ve been talking about the exchange subsidies’ cost here for 2 years. The initial CBO estimates had a 5-fold increase in 5 years. I think the compound annual growth rate for the first 10 years is something like 166%. Now they’re saying that even those estimates are off!

DrSteve on March 2, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Why are we subsidizing the middle class?
Charlemagne on March 2, 2012 at 2:09 PM

We’re not. The middle class and the so called “1%” are subsidizing the fourtysomeodd % who don’t pay federal taxes. In other words Obama’s legion of Moochers.

jawkneemusic on March 2, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Cloward-Piven….Full Speed Ahead!!!!!!!1

RADIOONE on March 2, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Anyone want to guess why the Senate doesn’t want to pass a budget? I’ll bet there’s not money hidden in Obamacare than we know about. I’m surprised the Republicans haven’t been taking this bill apart page by page to see what’s really in it.

bflat879 on March 2, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Geee – I guess it’s a good thing we didn’t read it before voting it in…… //
If we had done that, we just might not have voted in this wonderful piece of legislation…./////

dentarthurdent on March 2, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Cost estimates for a key part of President Obama’s health care overhaul law have ballooned by $111 billion from last year’s budget, and a senior Republican lawmaker on Friday demanded an explanation.

You want the simple, most direct answer?

THE BASTARDS LIED!

GarandFan on March 2, 2012 at 2:46 PM

About two-thirds of the increase is due to effects of newly signed legislation that raises costs for one part of the health care law, but still saves the government money overall.

Does that sentence make sense to anyone who speaks English?

Doughboy on March 2, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Poor translation.

It makes a lot more sense in the original North Korean.

MessesWithTexas on March 2, 2012 at 2:47 PM

I’m surprised the Republicans haven’t been taking this bill apart page by page to see what’s really in it.

bflat879 on March 2, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Unfortunately I’m not surprised. I just don’t think the current Repub leadership has the cojones to do that work and fight that battle.

dentarthurdent on March 2, 2012 at 2:50 PM

House to Obama: Where did the additional $111 billion in ObamaCare costs come from?

Obama’s campaign contributions are slow coming in, so…..

landlines on March 2, 2012 at 2:54 PM

The time of reckoning is a coming.

celtic warrior on March 2, 2012 at 1:38 PM

So’s the end of America.
With these ba$tards at the wheel.

Badger40 on March 2, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Retired military!

formerwm on March 2, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Where, oh where, are the Republican voices of outrage and discontent. Unless lots is going on behind closed doors, it all seems like the conservative core have lost their courage to fight this man, Obama.

I’m surprised the Republicans haven’t been taking this bill apart page by page to see what’s really in it.

bflat879 on March 2, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Unfortunately I’m not surprised. I just don’t think the current Repub leadership has the cojones to do that work and fight that battle.

dentarthurdent on March 2, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Just read these comments as well. Guess I’m not the only one furious at our Congress. spineless wimps…

chai on March 2, 2012 at 3:11 PM

If we could get a peek at President Barack Husein Obama’s school records we could find out if he had an IEP written so he could have extra time to answer his math problems. Numbers are apparently not his thing. Probably had trouble in other areas as well. Could it be he is not only the first African American US President but also the first special ed one as well?

ActinUpinTexas on March 2, 2012 at 3:18 PM

“The math is the math.” – Barack Hussein Obama

Wigglesworth on March 2, 2012 at 3:41 PM

C’mon, everybody knew those government “cost estimates” were just pie-in-the-sky, best-case-scenario guesses.

Nancy told us we’d have to pass it before we’d know what’s in it.

And the hits (to our wallets) will just keep on coming.

AZCoyote on March 2, 2012 at 3:42 PM

chances that the MSM reports on this? zero out of 111 billion

burserker on March 2, 2012 at 5:27 PM

The White House says there’s nothing to worry about:

You have to always remember the intention of Obamacare is to collapse the health care system and usher in single payer through the government. Real cost savings will happen when the government can deny people, who get sick, health care so that they will die sooner. Dead people can’t collect Social Security but still be useful as voters for the Democratic Party.

TulsAmerican on March 3, 2012 at 12:02 AM