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

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

19 Floridians charged in largest health care fraud investigation in DOJ history | WFLA

Too many layers of insurance, attorneys,billing, administration, lobbyists etc facilitate this crap. Cockroaches. The infestation continues even after some are caught.

 

So they removed that bizarre AI provision overnight (99-1 vote, Tillis was the only supporter), but there is a large cut to rural hospitals (again, why?). Susan Collins offered an amendment up to offset the cost by taxing people earning over 25 million a year and it got shot down. So she’s probably a no vote right now. And since Murkowski’s land grab on the Medicaid piece got shot down by the parliamentarian, they are probably short votes now.
I would also wonder how seriously some of the folks are taking musk’s threat to fund opponents on the supporters of it. He could throw a billion into the senate races and it would be a rounding error for him, and he has shown he just doesn’t care about optics or spending when he decides to do something. And if he threw that amount into primaries he would swamp those races.
And then, imagine if this craziness passes the senate finally, the pressure on all the republicans in swing districts, especially after a musk’s proclamation. And they need basically every vote there. So to say it still has some hurdles might be understating it.

 

Have to wonder about Cornyn on the Musk threat. He is already facing a rough primary (against a corrupt politician that Trump likes). He can probably play Trump (he could really use his endorsement in the Texas primary) and Musk (short of a Trump endorsement, Musk's money could be quite helpful) against each other to some degree if he is smart.

 

Medicaid spending is out of control. Too many able bodied people on the government dole.

 

Medicare laid the foundation for insurance companies to take over and complicate the system to the mess it is today. Shoot. Just look at all the ridiculous “advantage” plans in Medicare alone.

 

Word is they flipped Murkowski back somehow, so it’s 50-50 with Vance as the tiebreaker. If true, it will pass in the next few hours.