• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Obamacare Loses Again in Deficit Reduction Debate

    Niall Ferguson poked a hornet’s nest Sunday with his Newsweek cover story, in large part for its claim that Obamacare would increase the budget deficit.

    “Anyone who actually read, or even skimmed, the CBO [Congressional Budget Office] report knows that it found that [Obamacare] would reduce, not increase, the deficit,” wrote liberal economist Paul Krugman (referencing an outdated CBO analysis), “because the insurance subsidies were fully paid for.”

    As usual, however, Krugman missed the more fundamental point underlying Ferguson’s argument: It’s Obamacare’s spending that matters.

    In government budgeting, spending comes first; it drives all other fiscal consequences. Spending is how government programs and agencies do what they do. “In a fundamental sense, the federal government is what it spends,” says longtime budget expert Allen Schick.

    So it is with Obamacare. Its core is a pair of huge new entitlements: health insurance subsidies and expansion of Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. They will add $1.683 trillion in new spending from now through 2022, according to CBO’s latest estimate (which helpfully isolates these components in a stand-alone table).

    Even after including $515 billion in associated tax hikes, the net cost increase totals nearly $1.2 trillion. The new spending is the one certainty of the President’s health care takeover; without it, Obamacare doesn’t exist.

    To hide this cost, at least on paper, Obamacare’s authors tacked on a series of extraneous offsets that give the appearance of deficit reduction under the conventions of CBO’s estimates. These “savings,” however, turn out to be unreal or unrealistic.

    For example, the package assumes more than $700 billion in Medicare cuts, most of which are unachievable. Why? Because they rely on implausible productivity gains by Medicare providers—hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies. As a result, reimbursements to these providers would fall increasingly below their costs—as much as 15 percent by 2019 and 40 percent by 2050—according to the 2012 Medicare trustees report. Providers could not sustain these negative margins, the trustees say, and “would have to withdraw from serving Medicare beneficiaries.”

    Yet even if these savings were real—indeed, especially if they were real—Congress would probably end up rescinding them. Exhibit A: the “doc fix.”

    The doc fix refers to a formula change Congress enacted in 1997 for annually updating Medicare physicians’ payments to slow the program’s cost growth. But when the new arrangement actually started reducing the doctors’ payments, Congress backed off. Since 2003, lawmakers have adopted a series of temporary delays, shielding physicians from payment cuts and wiping out growing amounts of assumed Medicare savings—more than $300 billion worth over the next 10 years, CBO estimates. Any other assumed savings in Medicare’s government-based price-fixing system will undoubtedly be subject to a similar fate.

    Unless Obamacare is repealed, it will add $1.7 trillion in new spending. That much is certain. Any offsetting reductions are dubious, at best. Budgetary analysis and historical experience point to the same conclusion: If fully implemented, Obamacare will drive up health costs for all Americans and widen the river of government spending and debt.

    Posted in Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to Obamacare Loses Again in Deficit Reduction Debate

    1. Bobbie says:

      Very clever unAmerican mannerisms. CON all along! Please stop!!!! Humanity is worth more than 3rd world leadership! Give people a chance as if it's your's to give! Insubordinate authority puts it in your hands.
      Bring America back!!!

    2. Paul says:

      As has been widely reported, people took issue with Ferguson's article, not because there are not legitimate arguments with the CBO report, but because Ferguson used the CBO report as his authority and then completely mislead his readers about the CBO's findings. If you want to make the argument made above (spending is unlikely to be offset by cost savings and tax increases), that is fine. You cannot completely misrepresent the findings of the CBO to strengthen your argument. It was sloppy, at best, and unnecessary to make the case made above.

    3. Lynne says:

      This is not the whole story of the deficit in relation to current health care costs vs. ObamaCare costs. Why omit half of the story?

      Kaiser Family Foundation estimated in 2008-09 health care costs to increase the deficit by up over $4 trillion by 2018.

      ObamaCare is predicted to increase the deficit by ~$1.6 trillion by 2022.

      Why tell half-truths?

      • Brandon says:

        Because one has nothing to do with the other. The ACA adds to that 4 trillion. Is this really so difficult to grasp? You're implying that the ACA renders the Kaiser study irrelevant. I would ask this: where did you get that assumption from? Mars?

      • Carol says:

        So your arguement is Obamacare is the best we could do? Mediocrity is the best. I'm not buying your arguement.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.