Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Are You Concerned that the CBO Says the Trump Bill Will Cause 11.8 Million to Lose Health Care?

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gator_jo, Jun 29, 2025 at 10:25 PM.

Are You Concerned that the CBO Says the Trump Bill Will Cause 11.8 Million to Lose Health Care?

  1. No

    7 vote(s)
    21.2%
  2. No, it is the price we must pay for such an awesome bill

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Yes

    7 vote(s)
    21.2%
  4. Yes, it is shockingly counterproductive and inhumane

    19 vote(s)
    57.6%
  1. gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    4,732
    468
    273
    Aug 9, 2024
    CBO might not know what you do. They're obviously looking past next year though.


    Nearly 12 million Americans to lose health coverage under Trump’s budget bill, CBO warns - The Economic Times

    Nearly 12 million Americans to lose health coverage under Trump’s budget bill, CBO warns - The Economic Times


    The legislation would push 11.8 million Americans off insurance by 2034, according to the report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

    Over the same period, federal spending on Medicaid, Medicare and Obamacare would be cut by $1.1 trillion. More than $1 trillion of the cuts would be made to Medicaid.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. coleg

    coleg GC Hall of Fame

    2,486
    860
    1,928
    Sep 5, 2011
    OMG Did you really believe a single word of his? Next start believing Rick Scott??? Remember these clowns are inventing a "new math" (current budget) scheme so while the massive 10% addition still hits the National debt but they get to say they didn't do it. Seriously look into what they will now NOT be giving the states as they always did, so it will be the "state's decision" to starve the children or not care for the needy. Clever.
     
    Last edited: Jun 30, 2025 at 7:20 PM
  3. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,820
    1,873
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    That’s not how it works.

    1. Health care costs have generally exceeded the rate of inflation. They don’t save the money by cutting reimbursement rates (or having them grow more slowly) they do it by reducing the numbers enrolled

    2. I suspect that the core recipients - elderly and disabled, probably receive greater than average amounts. So to save money you have to cut proportionately more younger recipients who don’t tend to consume as much health care.

    At the end of the day throwing people off the insurance rolls doesn’t save money. It is either offset through other government programs, higher costs for everybody else to to free and more costly ER care.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. oragator1

    oragator1 Hurricane Hunter Premium Member

    24,622
    6,898
    3,513
    Apr 3, 2007
    They can’t receive the same dollars because the bill calls for the share of payments to many of the states to go down, so states have to make up the difference. They will be forced to either take money from other parts of the budget, costing jobs, or cutting their participation. Additionally, the bill limits the state’s ability to raise funds through taxes, which further cuts their ability to pay their share.

    Allocating CBO’s Estimates of Federal Medicaid Spending Reductions and Enrollment Loss Across the States | KFF
    But whether you choose to agree with this or not, those who support this are whistling past the obvious. Just about every single person affiliated with the healthcare industry says this is a disaster, including nonpartisan group like the Kaiser Family Foundation in that link. Almost exclusively, the only people supporting it are partisans with no healthcare knowledge. It’s going to be an unmitigated disaster for republicans if it passes. Just listen to Thom Tillis’s speech if you want a view from a retiring Republican on what it means.
    Part of me hopes it passes, it might be the only thing that ends his cult like grip on a staggeringly depressing number of people. I have a lot of skin in the game financially, but if I have to take a short term loss to see the country get back to some semblance of sanity, so be it.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. GatorFanCF

    GatorFanCF Premium Member

    5,522
    1,103
    1,968
    Apr 14, 2007
    Per Oklahoma’s research actual spending in dollars increased 3%. So, in your view a 3% increase is taking a “wrecking ball” to the system.
    3% increase is a wrecking ball.
    Men can have babies.
    Women remain undefined. No wonder dialog is difficult.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  6. gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    4,732
    468
    273
    Aug 9, 2024
    :)

    (Interesting and relevant comment about the man babies though.)

    Screenshot_20250629_192402_NYTimes.jpg
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. OklahomaGator

    OklahomaGator Jedi Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    126,906
    165,141
    116,973
    Apr 3, 2007
    A big font does not make it true......lol

    As usual you fall for the typical Washington speak where if the budget was projected to go up 5.8% and only goes up 3% it is a cut in funding. Even though there is more money than the previous year.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    4,732
    468
    273
    Aug 9, 2024
    The font is just from pasting a screenshot. :)

    But I'll consider that. I'm going to thoroughly consider whether I should believe the non-partisan CBO forecast on this, or whether I should believe ....... you. :)


    (So weird that they're either making this forecast up, or just so wrong on it. Particularly when it was so easy for you to figure out, and you don't even have any of their resources or experience in that field. :))
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. g8orbill

    g8orbill Old Gator Moderator VIP Member

    131,167
    61,622
    114,663
    Apr 3, 2007
    Clermont, Fl
    this is part of what dems do- because the increase in the budget for this item is lowered- it is still an increase just not as much the left puts it put as a cut- they have done this for years when it comes to SS to try and scare people
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. FutureGatorMom

    FutureGatorMom Premium Member

    11,492
    1,351
    808
    Apr 3, 2007
    Florida
    I'm trying to point out the hypocrisy of your post. Are there individuals that fraudulently collect medicaid? Of course. But I didn't hear one word about them going after the doctors and clinics etc., that are the majority of the fraud.

    So I'm saying that there is irony in all of this on your side when you compare it to your stance on gun control. Don't hurt the people who don't break the law
     
  11. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    9,984
    1,054
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007
    If health care inflation is 5.8% and budget increase only allocates 3%, then it actually is a cut. This is especially true for something like healthcare where the costs will be there either way, it’s just a matter of whether they are “met” and in what way (options including bad debts/medical bankruptcies or increased deaths). If we were talking some obscure bureaucratic budget or something you’d have a point.

    Aside from these semantics you are attempting to play with the “cut is not really cut” stuff, why does the CBO predict 7 digits (over 10 million) losing healthcare coverage? If it were not a cut, the number of uninsured should not increase. That’s the number that tells me it’s a cut.
     
  12. mikemcd810

    mikemcd810 Premium Member

    2,381
    505
    403
    Apr 3, 2007
    You're very likely right about the numbers, but the CBO process is more complex than a basic comparison. I believe it's been noted already here but healthcare increases will easily outpace that 3%, so yes cutting the amount of increase is going to have negative ramifications to the care people receive.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. coleg

    coleg GC Hall of Fame

    2,486
    860
    1,928
    Sep 5, 2011
    It is intellectually discouraging that Maga will cultishly listen to the followers over the CBO, WSJ, Forbes and most nonpartisan economists and ignore the gimmick math and bait and switch in this bill.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. gator_jo

    gator_jo GC Hall of Fame

    4,732
    468
    273
    Aug 9, 2024
    You mean : this is what the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office does. They're probably the best in the country at scoring and forecasting legislation.

    But hey, you're part of MAGA - you don't have to listen to any of those pesky ole ..... facts! MAGA people can make up their own facts.

    The truth is whatever Donald J. Trump says!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. antny1

    antny1 GC Hall of Fame

    5,679
    2,961
    2,698
    Dec 3, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1