And by “no one” I mean only the politicians who voted for Obamacare.
Because they willingly ignored warnings that they were selling public policy based on phony numbers:
Congressional Budget Office estimates released Tuesday predict the health care overhaul will likely cost about $115 billion more in discretionary spending over ten years than the original cost projections.
The additional spending — if approved over the years by Congress — would bring the total estimated cost of the overhaul to over $1 trillion.
Republicans pounced on the news, which they called another sign that the Obama administration makes promises it cannot deliver.
After pointing out the cost estimate increase, the CBO report admits that it still doesn’t know what this monstrosity (my term) will cost:
Potential discretionary costs under PPACA arise from the effects of the legislation on a variety of federal programs and agencies. The law establishes a number of new programs and activities, as well as authorizing new funding for existing programs. By their nature, however, all such potential effects on discretionary spending are subject to future appropriation actions, which could result in greater or smaller costs than the sums authorized by the legislation. Moreover, in many cases, the law authorizes future appropriations but does not specify a particular amount.
It’s bad enough seeing how legislative sausage was made, but using rancid and putrid numerical meat should be a career ender, because they were warned:
- CBO Credibility The First Victim Of Obamacare
- The Numbers Were A Lie All Along
- The Truth Still Matters, Even The Night Before
Remember in November.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QLS-eQVKkE]
——————————————–
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
If only there was a way to enforce the last line of your post. The accountability of public officials in years past was not questioned as much because when government is small, there was only so much damage they could do (and in a devil's advocate way, people need to take risks in management and need a little room to make errors).
Now that government is big and getting bigger the results of poor policy has a larger effect. Making the president and congressmen personally responsible for their projections may make them small government fans too. But.. when someone like Charlie Rangel blames his aids for his personal financial problems, how much accountability for the governed can one expect such a mind set to accept? It seems the larger government gets, the less responsible and accountable our representatives believe they are.
1) I'm surprised this wasn't released on Friday.
2) I think the Senators knew full well what this would cost. Not sure why they passed it as if it wouldn't come back to haunt them. But if they didn't know what this would cost, then truly they are steeped so deeply in Progressive Liberalism as to be utterly hopeless.
3) I truly think that as this hits the news, and Obama is now talking about spending more in Afghanistan and we've just been put on the hook for billions of the Greek bailout and Cap and Trade is suddenly back – that this Administration is beyond any doubt trying to destroy our economy.
4) I wonder if the defeats of Bennet and the guy in WVA – both supporting Obamacare, are making any of these politicians nervous?
"Because they willingly ignored warnings that they were selling public policy based on phony numbers:…"
Growing up my Dad told me that there was a name for people who say things that they know are not true-"liars". It was true then and it is true now.
The Dems lied to us about the cost of ObamaCare. And they lied simply because they could.
That is why it is very important for conservatives to remember that in 2010, our mission is to attack incumbency in both parties. The political trend is not swinging away from the Dems and back to the Reps, it is swinging away from incumbent politicians and towards new blood.
Let's not fall back into the Republican=conservative trap. We need new representation all around.
Nice ad. The Republican Governor's are getting the methods, and countering well. Indeed, we WILL remember in November, and vote the Libs OUT. The whole meme that was spun about "V" and Guy Fawkes was laughable.
Thanks for continuing to spread the truth about these hooligans. They are trying to make the Chicago Way the US standard. Not on our watch! Vote. (….and, unlike the liberals, I do NOT say "vote early, vote often" – another difference between REAL Americans and those who want to destroy our nation).
Professor, no doubt there will be additional stories — factually based stories — that will reveal even more the extent to which the Democrat leadership, and their membership, as well as the Administration did know at the time of the vote what this was likely to cost!
That they induced the CBO to do earlier estimates, based on unrealistically limited criteria and assumptions, is the "tell". They knew very well what NOT to include in order to get a passable response! I'll bet they were asked for estimates, broken down component-by-component. And then they asked for an estimate with an adjusted component list.
Nonpartisan legislative agencies simply answer the questions that they are asked.
Uncledan, above at May 12, 2010 12:33 PM |
Well put! As for your number (3) how does the Administration (and indeed, within the legislative branch, the Chris Dodds and Barney Franks of this world) explain otherwise, given a long history of their strategic actions, and tactical inaction?
Suprise! The issue with this Administration is that the truth has never been a priority and President Obama is "threatening" to veto the discretionary spending increase of $115 Billion he never ceases to amaze me with his empty rhetoric.
pasadenaphil at May 12, 2010 1:40 PM | Unfortunately, your idea is a possible, if not likely prescription for disaster.
At this point in time — given the above information — nothing could aid the Democrats more than a general, angry feeling that the American people should suddenly throw 'em all out!
It was Obama and the Democrats who did this!
And, please be realistic . . . Democrats do NOT ever approach their politics the way you suggest they should. The Democrat congressional pols would each, therefore, more easily hold their mindless base of voter support, and the Republicans would meanwhile spend all their time, money and effort trying to defend themselves against bogus charges. Why do you think the democrats keep insisting the Tea Partiers are violent and racists — they are trying to set up their ads for the fall when the local Tea Party people begin making endorsements!
Yes, we should certainly all question our representatives closely on what they voted for, what they would support in the future, and what their political beliefs are. That's what primary processes are for.
But the simplistic idea of throwing everyone out just because they happened to be sitting members this term, is really quite pernicious.
It would likely end up being a self-defeating exercise in the extreme.
Many people who voted for Obama, now know that they voted for "change" without the media (or themselves) having asked for a clear idea of what that meant.
I know that am going to speak my mind against my Congressman (Rush Holt) because he voted for all this nonsense, and in defense of ACORN to boot!
But I would not vote against someone who rose in opposition to it all.
To what end? To level the playing field for Democrats?