Political Hotsheet
November 5, 2009 11:10 AM

Budget Office: GOP Bill Leaves Millions Uninsured

(AP Photo/Harry Hamburg)
The House Republicans' health care bill would cost significantly less than the Democrats' plans and possibly lower the average cost of premiums, but it would leave millions uninsured, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The 230-page GOP bill would reduce the number of uninsured in the United States by 3 million by 2019, according the CBO analysis (PDF). That would leave about 52 million nonelderly residents uninsured. The share of residents with insurance coverage would be about 83 percent, roughly what it is now.

The GOP bill insures about 33 million fewer people than the Democrats' bill.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

House Republican Leader John Boehner (pictured above) has said the his party is more interested in reducing costs than insuring all Americans. The GOP bill does come to a price tag of around $61 billion, according to the CBO -- nearly $1 trillion less than the Democrats' bill. The legislation could also result in lower average premiums for Americans in private plans; however, it adds that its estimates are "subject to an unusually high degree of uncertainty."

"Some provisions of the legislation would tend to decrease the premiums paid by all insurance enrollees, while other provisions would tend to increase the premiums paid by less healthy enrollees or would tend to increase the premiums paid by enrollees in some states relative to enrollees in other states," the CBO wrote. "As a result, some individuals and families within each market would see reductions in premiums that would be larger or smaller than the estimated average reductions, and some people would see increases."

The bill has no chance of passage in the Democrat-led Congress, so it could be perceived as more of a protest against the majority party's larger, more costly legislative package.

The GOP bill focuses on medical malpractice reform, allowing insurance to be sold across state lines, encouraging consumers to use health savings accounts and giving states incentives to drive down premium costs. It leaves out a number of major Democratic plans, such as blocking insurers from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. It also leaves out the individual mandate and the employer mandate.

House Steams Toward Health Reform Vote
Can Dems Really Help the "Uninsurables"?
Tags:
House Republicans ,
John Boehner
Topics:
Health Care
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 58 Comments
by hungry1968-17 November 5, 2009 4:31 PM EST
"The 230-page GOP bill would reduce the number of uninsured in the United States by 3 million by 2019, according the CBO analysis (PDF). That would leave about 52 million nonelderly residents uninsured. The share of residents with insurance coverage would be about 83 percent, roughly what it is now."







So the republicans bill won't change anything, kicks back BILLIONS to the insurance companies, and will cost the taxpayers dearly for no net gain?

They've GOT to be kidding!!!
Reply to this comment
by chonder2 November 5, 2009 4:25 PM EST
John Boner-"We are and always will keep watch on the values of the people that we work for,the Healthcare Industry.As you can see the Republican Bill does absolutely nothing to deal with the problems that face average Americans...the so called "kitchen table" issues.We feel that it is incumbent on us as Conservative Republicans to keep you and your family held down over the "kitchen table" untill our masters have had their way with you.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-17 November 5, 2009 4:01 PM EST
by USA_is_back November 5, 2009 3:45 PM EST
Joe Wilson? Oh yea, he's the one that complained about too much money being spent on the Flu vaccine. That is until his wife caught the flu. Now he's complaining that there isn't enough of the vaccine to go around.







In his defense, at least he's concerned with his wife and not his Argentinian mistress or his staffers wife.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-17 November 5, 2009 3:49 PM EST
by apachekid November 5, 2009 2:55 PM EST
Though Republicans oppose the so-called "public option," Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., is proposing the requirement to draw attention to the plan's alleged flaws.

Republican Rep. Joe Wilson proposed an amendment Wednesday that would force all members of Congress to receive health insurance coverage through the government-run plan proposed in the House's reform bill.

Again John, We The People have wondered why all members of Congress are exempt from this extraordinary ObamaCare Bill. Joe has made it easy for you all. When do you want to start?







One of the leading tenets of the public option, is that you DO NOT have to give up your own private insurance if you're happy with it.

If you aren't willing to give up yours, why should they give up theirs?
Reply to this comment
by apachekid November 5, 2009 2:55 PM EST
Though Republicans oppose the so-called "public option," Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., is proposing the requirement to draw attention to the plan's alleged flaws.

Republican Rep. Joe Wilson proposed an amendment Wednesday that would force all members of Congress to receive health insurance coverage through the government-run plan proposed in the House's reform bill.

Again John, We The People have wondered why all members of Congress are exempt from this extraordinary ObamaCare Bill. Joe has made it easy for you all. When do you want to start?
Reply to this comment
by USA_is_back November 5, 2009 3:45 PM EST
Joe Wilson? Oh yea, he's the one that complained about too much money being spent on the Flu vaccine. That is until his wife caught the flu. Now he's complaining that there isn't enough of the vaccine to go around.
by culturechang November 5, 2009 2:45 PM EST
Why do we need a bill that does this?. We already have this problem.
Reply to this comment
by culturechang November 5, 2009 2:45 PM EST
Leaving millions uninsured is the GOP's goal....probably because lobbyists have figured that the medical community will make more money that way.
Reply to this comment
by ABM_21 November 5, 2009 2:30 PM EST
One questino: why wasn't this tidbit of information available before these last elections? Granted, I doubt it would have helped COrzine since he was so unpopular. Having said that, this is the smoke and mirrors the G(ang) O(f) P(irates) has to offer. No real change. Rather than insure all Americans, they want to leave some out in the cold---more likely than not, the poor and their children---all under the guise of 'saving money'. If you wanted to 'save money', here's an idea: how about restructuring the way CEO's get paid, so their pay is tied in with how the company performs. How about ending subsidies to companies making hundreds of millions of dollars in profit? How about not bailing out Wall St.? While you're at it, how about not blaming Obama for Bush's screw-ups? How about giving tax increases to the wealthy? Finally, how about voting the Retardicans out of office?
Reply to this comment
by lightningF November 5, 2009 2:18 PM EST
Never was a right under the bill of rights or the constitution to have provided health care by the governemnt.Who actually are the Tax Payers,some people forget who the government is and think what ever the government gives away is free,except for the Tax Payers that is...When a 4 year old can qualify for home credit to buy a house,along with 3000 illegals and 53 IRS workers who are not qualified,get approvals.How can anyone want the government to ruin Health care. when they can not even run a tax credit for 1st time home buyers.
Reply to this comment
by umpireone November 5, 2009 2:13 PM EST
Does all 52 million of the elderly uninsured go to the Republican Party "death panel" that is headed by Mrs. Sarah Palin? Do you think
this is a good idea? Would not this be considered "Un-American" to send 52 million Republicans to the "death panel"? Can they trust Mrs. Palin not to pull the switch? Can you imagine sending all 52 million Republicans to the death panel just to save a "buck"? We all know what Mrs. Palin will do to earn a "buck"?
Reply to this comment
by mollydtt November 5, 2009 1:57 PM EST
Republicans just don't get it. Let the uninsured stay uninsured. At least the budget will be better. Yay! 52 million uninsured is a big step forward for republicans.
Reply to this comment
by a9stokes November 5, 2009 1:56 PM EST
Who ever Reads this Message==All comments-Today-of Last Week-Last month--No one Is using any common sense==The Ndc-Is socialist==The So called President is taking orders from the Crooked Federal Reserve Bank==All in the White house are Puppets Having their strings Pulled By the Puppetiers The Millionares of USA& Mexico--While the Citizens of This USa-is fastly loosing all our rights-We will have to Re write Our Constatution-It has been Dirtied by Mr Obama& the ndc!!
Reply to this comment
by ToolMangler1 November 5, 2009 2:12 PM EST
by a9stokes November 5, 2009 1:56 PM EST



You are a perfect example of why they shouldn't legalize 'Pot!!
One 'toke' over the line!!
by pubsrtoast November 5, 2009 1:41 PM EST
"Some provisions of the legislation would tend to decrease the premiums paid by all insurance enrollees, while other provisions would tend to increase the premiums paid by less healthy enrollees or would tend to increase the premiums paid by enrollees in some states relative to enrollees in other states," the CBO wrote."

In other words, the more populace blue states subsidize the losers in the red states, just like they do with taxes.
Reply to this comment
by ObamaYoMama November 5, 2009 1:36 PM EST
Sounds to me like Bone Head just wants to save the insurance companies some money.... Big surpirse there!!!
Reply to this comment
by poorsoldier November 5, 2009 1:32 PM EST
The Republican view of the right to life: You have the right to life before you're born, but not afterwards.
Reply to this comment
by troutfishyman November 5, 2009 1:31 PM EST
The GOP thought it was just dandy (and patriotic) to spend a $trillion in Iraq .... but not the same for a health care plan.

Go figure.
Reply to this comment
by skyk-2009 November 5, 2009 1:35 PM EST
troutfishyman, well now that money was going into the pockets of Contractors and big time Contributors to their cause.
by dennisall77 November 5, 2009 1:30 PM EST
"..would cost significantly less than the Democrats' plans and possibly lower the average cost of premiums"

"The GOP bill insures about 33 million fewer people than the Democrats' bill"

Typical GOP... let's save money... who cares if a few million people die? They probably deserve it anyway... for being poor!
Reply to this comment
by kevjustice November 5, 2009 1:15 PM EST
Neocons give a extended hand for donations from the insurance industry. The people need to give neocons an extended middle finger.
Reply to this comment
by Lawyers-Guns-n-Money-01 November 5, 2009 1:05 PM EST
House Republican Leader John Boehner (pictured above) has said the his party is more interested in reducing costs than insuring all Americans.
===============================================================

Geez, maybe we could settle for insuring a significant amount of 52M. Heck, even half would be a negotiable starting point but a paltry 6%?

(Anybody remember that song 'Heartless' by the sisters Wilson and their band?)
Reply to this comment
by davebogo November 5, 2009 1:15 PM EST
Unlike the liberals, I think at least some in the GOP realize that it's not THEIR money they're spending....it's the taxpayers. The liberals view themselves as compassionate for spending other people's money. And the problem is that they've already overspent "other people's" money by 1.4 trillion.

If the goal was REALLY insuring the uninsured, they'd take 50 billion out of the stimulus and just insure people. But that's not the goal. It's to write a tax bill disguised as insurance reform.
by skyk-2009 November 5, 2009 1:23 PM EST
davebogo, so doing NOTHING is the answer? You poor losers have been conditioned haven't you? You throw the same tired old talking points out there and think thats all that is needed. Now listen carefully and for crying out loud take off the Beck Button, it makes you less intelligent. TODAY, as you sit there, WE, the AMERICAN PEOPLE, are paying TWICE what anyone else in the ENTIRE world pays for insurance. We cover LESS PEOPLE for that money... that's as it is RIGHT NOW. The Confederate Party is doing NOTHING to help that and WILL do nothing to help that! Why? Because they are on the payroll of the Insurance Companies. Now IF you think all of us out here who want this thing fixed are "liberals" you truly do need educate yourself.
by velma179 November 5, 2009 2:15 PM EST
by davebogo November 5, 2009 1:15 PM EST
dave...

Taxes are legal. Collecting taxes is legal. Making laws on how to spend the tax money is legal.

"Spending other people's money" is and has been the job of government (federal, state and local) in this country since taxation was implemented. It is Constitutional -- don't try to play that card.

Now -- this $1.4 trillion dollars you speak of... hmmm? You actually think ALL of this money has been spent in the last ten months or even the last two, four or eight years? No. The deficit is cumulative.

The federal government uses a fiscal year that goes from Oct 1 to Sept 30 of the next year ... so even the rise in the deficit from fiscal 2008 (the last one in GW Bush's Administration) to fiscal 2009 (the first year in B Obama's administration) includes spending that actually occurred BEFORE Mr. Obama was inaugurated.
This includes TARP and the ENTIRE cost of the Irag War (which has been handily kept "off the books" by the previous administration).

And -- "taking $50 billion from the Stimulus Bill"... to insure people is absolutely ridiculous.
The health care delivery AND insurance system must be reformed! It is not a ONE TIME cost to insure people... are you thinking, at all?

Plus we need the money allocated for economic stimulus to STIMULATE the ECONOMY... not just the Private Insurance Industry.

Sheesh
by USA_is_back November 5, 2009 3:46 PM EST
by davebogo November 5, 2009 1:15 PM EST
Unlike the liberals, I think at least some in the GOP realize that it's not THEIR money they're spending....it's the taxpayers
---------------------------------------------------------------------

How much money was spent on the War in Iraq? Didn't the GOP realize that it wasn't their money?
by davebogo November 5, 2009 4:53 PM EST
I don't care what is "legal", it's about fiscal responsibility. It's legal for me to run up credit card payments and pay the minimum with cash advances, it doesn't mean that it's the responsible thing to do. It's legal for me to raid the bank account of my child because I'm on the account, but it doesn't make it right.

I never said the war was a good idea, those are unrelated. But, I'll point out, that plenty of dems voted to go to war as well. But regardless, more reckless spending isn't the solution to reckless spending. What the media usually doesn't report is that in order to make the bill "deficit nuetral", they collect taxes for 10 years and implement the program for 7. The 3 year head-start on tax collection might make it look ok on paper, but that's the only thing that makes the bill look ok on paper.

Again, watch the point as it flies over your head. The new healthcare bill will not go into effect until 2013, yet we need to rush to get it done. The point in taking money from the stimulus was saying that we have avenues for getting the uninsured, insured. If you want a short-term solution so people don't die (like some claim), we can get that done. But that's not the goal. The goal is to tax people.

Unlike you, I don't just listen to the words of politicians.
by davebogo November 5, 2009 1:01 PM EST
First off, the title of the article is an absolute riot...got much bias there? The bill accomplishes the goal of leveling off insurance premium (one of obama's goals), wouldn't add to the deficit (another goal), and the bill is 5% of the cost of the House version of the bill.

Not sure where you're getting the figure of 52 million uninsured's either. The real number is more like 10 mill after you strip out illegals and leave just ppl below the poverty line. You could probably pay the premiums for the 10M and still be below the 1.2T price tag the liberals have.

GOP bill sounds pretty good. Lower premiums going forward at 5% of the cost of the dem option.
Reply to this comment
by skyk-2009 November 5, 2009 1:28 PM EST
davebogo, again your basic lack of knowledge is stunning! Who do you think is paying for those ER visits the uninsured have to make? The figures are factual to by the way.
by davebogo November 5, 2009 1:37 PM EST
It's one thing to pay for an ER visit...it's another thing to pay for scooters for people because they now have insurance to cover them (see medicare commercials)
by davebogo November 5, 2009 2:30 PM EST
Excuse the point as it went flying over your head. The point is that when insurance deductibles are set too low, they lead to excess spending. People with $5k set aside in a health savings account make very different decisions over people that have cleared their $250 deductible and now it's all on the insurance companies dime.
See all 58 Comments

About Political Hotsheet

Stay up to the minute on the latest news and developments from Washington, from the White House to Congress and everything in-between with the best political reporters from CBS News and CBSNews.com.

E-Mail Political Hotsheet
Follow On Twitter

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
  • MOST POPULAR
HOTSHEET ON TWITTER