E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

ZeroCare Savings Evaporate
No wonder he had to pass the bill in a hurry!
Not that cost was an object, really. They just said that to sell the thing, just as they told us it was our money in Social Security instead of admitting it was a passthrough instead of a savings account.
President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law is getting a mixed verdict in the first comprehensive look by the vast, right-wing conspiracy neutral experts: More Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up.

Economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department concluded in a report issued Thursday that the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance -adding 34 million to the coverage rolls.

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, since Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, the report warned.

The report from Medicare's Office of the Actuary carried a disclaimer saying it does not represent the official position of the Obama administration. White House officials have repeatedly complained that such analyses have been too pessimistic and lowball the law's potential to achieve savings.
Right. It might shield the world from comet collisions. I bet they didn't even consider that!
The report acknowledged that some of the cost-control measures in the bill - Medicare cuts, a tax on high-cost insurance and a commission to seek ongoing Medicare savings - could help reduce the rate of cost increases beyond 2020. But it held out little hope for progress in the first decade.

"During 2010-2019, however, these effects would be outweighed by the increased costs associated with the expansions of health insurance coverage," wrote Richard S. Foster, Medicare's chief actuary. "Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare ... reductions is doubtful."

In a statement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to highlight some positive findings for seniors. For example, the report concluded that Medicare monthly premiums would be lower than otherwise expected, due to the spending reductions.
Pay less to get less?

Passed by a divided Congress after a year of pointless bitter partisan debate, the law would create new health insurance markets for individuals and small businesses. Starting in 2014, most Americans would be required to carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. Tax credits would help many middle-class households pay their premiums, while Medicaid would pick up more low-income people. Insurers would be required to accept all applicants, regardless of their health.

The report's most sober assessments concerned Medicare.
Just in time for my retirement! (2016)
In addition to flagging provider cuts as potentially unsustainable, the report projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular alternative. Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent. Seniors leaving the private plans would still have health insurance under traditional Medicare, but many might face higher out-of-pocket costs.

In another flashing yellow light, the report warned that a new voluntary long-term care insurance program created under the law faces "a very serious risk" of insolvency.
At which point the decision becomes a choice of cutting benefits, raising taxes, or both. I'm betting on both.

Posted by: Bobby 2010-04-23
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=295207