4M Estimated to Pay Health Care Penalty in 2016

[sabra]

Source: CBS News/AP

Failure to Buy Coverage Would Result in a $1,000 Fine in New Law, Affecting Mostly the Middle Class, Reports the CBO

(AP) Nearly 4 million Americans will have to pay a penalty if they fail to get health insurance when that element of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law kicks in, according to congressional projections released Thursday.

The penalties will average a little more than $1,000 apiece in 2016, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report.

The vast majority of people paying the fine will be middle class, which would violate Obama's 2008 campaign pledge not to raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year and couples making less than $250,000.

Republicans have criticized the penalties, even though the idea for a mandate was originally proposed by Republicans in the 1990s and is part of the Massachusetts health care plan signed into law by then Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, in 2006. Attorneys general in more than a dozen states are working to challenge the mandate in federal court as unconstitutional.

Democrats argue the mandate and the penalties are a necessary part of a massive overhaul designed to expand coverage to millions who now lack it. They point out that getting young, healthy Americans in the insurance pool will reduce costs for others.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/22/politics/main6422023.shtml?tag=stack

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Since when is a fine a tax, CBS?

[DJ13]

3. When the fine is collected by the IRS?

Just a hunch.

[backtomn]

30. The IRS thinks that it is a tax.

The IRS said that they would enforce this requirement......one way was to take the money from people's tax return. Sounds like a tax.

[zipplewrath]

4. When assessed as part of income tax

It is a tax applied to your income tax, and you get a deduction for having insurance.

[Oregone]

7. Why play stupid?

[Xithras]

11. The verbiage of the law calls it a tax.

It's called a fine in casual conversation, but the law itself defines it as a tax.

[katandmoon]

2. Fining people for not buying health insurance is obscene.

[truthisfreedom]

38. That's one way to look at it. The other way is, if people won't participate, it hurts the whole

arrangement, so they have to be fined for not participating. Yes, this is a grand experiment, but seriously, joining will HELP these people, not hurt them, in the long run.

[christx30]

84. If insurance is too much

for my family, I won't buy it. I'd have to give up food and rent to buy it for the 4 of us.
I had pink eye last year and i had to deal with it myself.
But I don't have extra money sitting around collecting dust.

[truedelphi]

5. The penalties for not obeying the mandates to a Tee are

predicted, by Congress itself, to amount to over this amount:

One Hundred And Sixty Seven Billion.

And that is just between the year 2013 and the year 2019.

Oh, and BTW,. in case you were wondering where we would get the money for our expanding the war in Afghanistan - the increase in the DOD budget for war matters in Iraq and Afghanistan (as requested and approved by Congress and the President in December 2009) comes to :

One Hundred And Sixty Nine Billion.

Wish I could say I believe in Coincidence, but I don't.

[pinto]

6. "People will not be required to get coverage if the cheapest plan...costs more than 8 % of income."

At $58,000 income, 8% = $4,640 ($387 / month) ~ pinto

About 21 million nonelderly residents will be uninsured in 2016, according to projections by the CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation. Most of those people will be exempt from the penalties.

Under the new law, the penalties will be phased in starting in 2014. By 2016, those who must get insurance but don't will be fined $695 or 2.5 percent of their household income, whichever is greater.

After 2016, the penalties will be increased by annual cost-of-living adjustments. People will not be required to get coverage if the cheapest plan available costs more than 8 percent of their income.

The penalties will be collected by the Internal Revenue Service through tax returns. However, the IRS will not have the authority to bring criminal charges or file liens against those who don't pay.

About 3 million of those required to pay fines in 2016 will have incomes below $59,000 for individuals and $120,000 for families of four, according to the CBO projections. The other 900,000 people who must pay the fine will have higher incomes.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/22/politics/main6422023.shtml?tag=stack

[SocialistLez]

9. Let me see if I have this right

If you can afford health insurance and choose not to buy it, you WILL face a fine?

If you CAN'T afford health insurance, you're cool?

[clear eye]

17. Not always.

People who are in their 50's and putting a couple of kids through college but who make over $250K as a couple may well find insurance unaffordable but will still get the tax penalty. This is especially likely as insurers can charge people who are between 55 and 65 up to 3 times as much as they are allowed to charge others in this law.

[superconnected]

67. I wonder how they'll find health issues when they come up, which are inevitable...

[wolfgangmo]

33. Not quite...

If you can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it, you will be fined.

If you can't afford the insurance that is offered, you are cool.

But rumor has it (from friends who work in insurance companies actuarial and underwriting divisions that they are being instructed to look at the numbers to put together plans that will have low premiums, but super high deductables and co-pays. Which means they will price these useless, can't-afford-to-use-this-crap-insurance-even-if-I-wanted-to at just over the amount of the fine. Look for policies that will be priced in the $200 to $350 per month range. Low enough to fleece, but useless enough to never even become a blip on the bottom line of the insurance companies.

Ain't unregulated capitalism grand?

[clear eye]

16. With the higher premiums for 55+ and those w/ pre-existing conditions

that will leave that group for the most part still uncovered as I understand it. The insurers are allowed to charge up to 3x's as much for those groups which will be unaffordable and over the 8% rule removing their tax liability but still swinging in the wind as far as coverage is concerned. During the lead-up debate a few desperate and ill DUers were adamantly supporting any bill labeled healthcare reform. I tried to tell them gently that the Senate & WH version would not help them, and that its opponents were trying to look out for their interests, but they were grasping at straws and refused to believe it. Tragically their situation will be even worse as federal assistance to hospitals for programs for the uninsured is to be drastically cut.

[backtomn]

31. Some might dislike this comment, but......

......if you are making more that $59,000 (individual) or $120,000 (family of 4) and you choose not to buy insurance, it is not because you can't afford it. Actually, why would not have insurance for a family of 4, while making $120,000. Is it not a priority?? I am not going to lose sleep over that 900,000. For the others, they have my sympathy. This will not help their financial situation.

Of course, we know why they do that...........the new health care bill will not raise rates much on the eldery (those using health care dollars the most), so it will need to get money from those that will not use much of the those dollars. Get used to it.

[wolfgangmo]

34. Well - I hate to disagree, buuuuuuuuuuuuut...

... If you are self employed like me then you are screwed. I run a medical clinic and like any small business owner who is in the service industry can tell you, you are not allowed to deduct non-payment from your bottom line. You can write off goods, but services no. This past year saw a ton of patients come in, use our services, thus costing us money in overhead, salary, etc. and yet I must just eat those losses.

What that means at tax time is that on paper, according to the IRS I make enough that I will be required to buy insurance (which I currently don't have due to pre-existing conditions) even though in reality I don't have enough cash flow to be able to pay for it. So I will also get fined. Yippee.

And to rub salt in the wound, the insurance that I will be required to buy will be priced with a huge premium (remember pre-existing -- yah, yah, I know they are not allowed to reject you for a pre-existing condition, but they can still charge whatever the fuck they want for insurance for pre-existing conditions) combined with high deductables and co-pays.

I suspect that many of the 900,000 who you will not lose sleep over will be losing plenty of sleep because a lot of them will be in the same boat I am in.

Please don't suscribe to the old divide and conquer rhetoric floating around. It is a remnant of the Reagan lies and it is beneath your dignity.

[backtomn]

39. I didn't hear the rate for businesses

Do you pay for a house, a car, vacations ??? Might health care for your family be more important. At an income of $120,000, healthcare should be a priority for your family.......MAYBE??

Oh...by the way, the companies cannot "charge what they want" to people with pre-existing conditions. You might look that up.

Sorry.....I don't feel sorry for you yet. If healthcare is not a priority to you or your family, be honest enough to say so. Don't question my dignity......while I had every reason to question yours. Someone challenges you and you bring up Reagan and challenge people's dignity.....but I heard NOTHING to change my mind......probably because you didn't offer anything but excuses for not buying an ESSENTIAL for your family.

I am UNEMPLOYED.....and still pay for my healthcare......with what I have left. If I had children, it would be a MUST. Now let's talk about DIGNITY.

[Abq_Sarah]

82. I imagine many small business owners

Will be in the same boat.

I had to cancel our insurance this year. By the time the mandate kicks in, my husband will be 56 and our premiums will be higher than the insurance I had to cancel because of cost.

The government looks at our "profit" at the end of the year, divides the amount by 12 and assumes we actually earn that amount every month. That assumption is not in any way reality based. If it comes down to having to take out a loan and pay interest in order to buy health insurance, I'll go with the penalty and good luck collecting it.

[clear eye]

69. The struggling middle class is not your enemy.

You sound like someone who is either young and single and/or someone who has been dealing with poverty. When the upperclass uses their muscle to reduce everyone else's standard of living so that they can take a higher percentage as has been happening in the U.S. since 1980, there's a temptation to let hardship cause resentment against everyone a little better off than you are. The people at the top love you to divert your anger away from them like that. There is a real loss of the buying power of the dollar since the bank bailouts and wars have caused runaway national debt, job benefits have been disappearing, and many people at the incomes you have mentioned are actually struggling--especially those who are dealing with chronic difficulties in their families. The enormous costs of the remedial care needed for an autistic child are not covered, for instance. The new law allows private insurers to charge up to 3 times as much for insurance for those w/ pre-existing conditions including a sick child. People can be out of work for a month due to a catastrophic illness causing unmanageable medical debt, come back to work (putting the spouses' combined income at the $120K you mentioned), and current bankruptcy law will still take their house. As for assuming that having insurance would spare them, know that most bankruptcies filed due to medical expenses were for people who were insured. Many policies have caps or huge deductibles, and the percentage of such policies will increase as the tax on good ("Cadillac") policies will cause most businesses to switch to worse plans.

"The elderly" having been paying a small amount of taxes for Medicare all their working lives then pay monthly amounts for a Medicare that only pays a portion of medical charges. They either have to pay additional for private supplemental insurance or pay for the uncovered portion out of pocket.

You also have no idea of how much is being charged for real usable health insurance (w/ affordable deductibles & copays) these days and what the expenses of even a modest lifestyle plus college savings are for a family of four. After all people w/ middle class incomes get minimal aid for college and there's a limit to how much debt parents in that income range can carry. Or should their children's college not be a priority?

Having to choose between providing for college for their children or for effective health insurance for the family doesn't exist in the rest of the industrialized world. Put your anger where it belongs--at the power elite that has bought and threatened our gov't out of providing effective national health insurance for all in the U.S. paid for out of progressive income taxes including on capital gains.

[clear eye]

72. When the power elite grab so much that they are strangling the economy

by drying up averyone else's spending, let's not fight amongst ourselves for the scraps. We need instead to unite to demand they be taxed into thinking twice about what they're doing, and enforce regulations that stop their raids on our national treasury. That way we can afford necessary services for the vast majority.

[Zhade]

87. You couldn't be more wrong.

Take me for example -- I make a decent living, but I'm helping friends and family who have lost jobs and suffered economic setbacks due to the continuing ruination of our economy. If I had to buy this bullshit overpriced insurance, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO KEEP FEEDING THEM.

Your post is ignorant of many peoples' reality.

[nnorman]

8. No one will be forced to pay the penalty

The penalty is not enforceable and the IRS will not be able to collect or penalize anyone for not paying it. So, for those who do not want to purchase health care insurance there is no reason or motivation for them to do so--there are no consequences. The IRS has no power to garnish wages, apply liens or anything else.

It is a bit puzzling why there is an unenforceable fine, I suppose the Dems are hoping most Americans wont know that they don't have to pay the penalty and will purchase health insurance, and the Reps will be slamming the Dems for the mandate and penalty-never mentioning the fact that it is an unenforceable penalty.

Whenever the media mentions the penalty--the fact that it is unenforceable seems to be at the end of the article or not mentioned at all.

[FiveGoodMen]

10. And you know this how?

[sabra]

12. from the article:

<snip>

The penalties will be collected by the Internal Revenue Service through tax returns. However, the IRS will not have the authority to bring criminal charges or file liens against those who don't pay.

[Xithras]

13. No, they will just rack up penalties and interest.

And deduct them from any future returns you might claim.

[FiveGoodMen]

15. That conflicts with what I've read and heard for several decades as well as what I'm reading now...

The IRS, and in particular the IRS Criminal Investigation Division (IRS CID), has on more than one occasion been accused of abusive behavior.<23><24><25><26> Statements given in hearings before the Senate Finance Committee criticize the IRS:

“Does the IRS correct abuses when they become aware of them? Oftentimes, they do. However, the more important question is, does the IRS cover up occurrences of abuse? The answer is, yes! If the true number of incidences of taxpayer abuse were ever known, the public would be appalled. If the public also ever knew the number of abuses "covered up" by the IRS, there could be a tax revolt.<23> ”

Congress passed the Taxpayer Bill of Rights III on July 22, 1998, which shifted the burden of proof from the taxpayer to the IRS in certain limited situations. The IRS retains the legal authority to enforce liens and seize assets without obtaining judgment in court.<27>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irs

So, if we're saying that for this health-care-related stuff alone, the IRS has no power, my answer is: Just wait.

[OnlinePoker]

29. If you're entitled to a refund, will they confiscate it before sending you the residuals? n/t

[onpatrol98]

14. I actually heard this also

I also heard this on Morning Joe. It was considered a "downside" of the bill, because supposedly the mandate was how they were going to get the costs down for everyone BUT if the mandate wasn't really going to be enforced, what was the point?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aznpYT1phFs

[clear eye]

18. Sorry but that's a crock.

The R's are just throwing random s__t against the bill and hoping some of it sticks. There is a lawsuit in progress by a # of state AGs against the mandate, but no one seriously expects it to go anywhere.

Unless the law is changed, the tax penalty is just as enforceable as any other tax.

[wolfgangmo]

35. What enforcement means.

Is that the IRS will not actively pursue anyone who doesn't pay the fine, but that does not stop them from enforceing the law when you come to them, like say, when you file your taxes.

So once a year, you get to bend over and just take it. But luckily you now get to choose if you want a private insurance company of the IRS buttfucking you with a 2x4.

[Orangepeel]

19. It's in the bill. The penalty for not paying the fine is $0.

[clear eye]

20. That just means that IRS can't add add'l penalties to the liability

but it can still use its full powers to collect the originally assessed amount.

[FiveGoodMen]

23. And if the government starts actually losing large sums because everyone knows that...?

I'll bet that is one thing in the bill that will be "fixed".

[nnorman]

25. It is stated in the healthcare bill under "Enforcements"

The Healthcare Bill states it clearly that the IRS cannot impose any fines, liens, etc., on individuals not paying the penalty (in the bill under "Enforcements"). Even though it is clearly stated in the bill, the Reps will use scare tactics by saying the IRS will find ways to get them.

It may be that the ability for the IRS to enforce the penalty would be proven unconstitutional and Dems and others decided that it would be political suicide to start penalizing those who could not pay for health insurance--considering how most Americans feel about the IRS. I do think it is one of those aspects of the bill that Dems and Reps would rather keep quiet.

[clear eye]

27. You are confusing a prohibition against imposing penalties with not enforcing the original tax. n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

78. "the Reps will use scare tactics by saying the IRS will find ways to get them"

I hope you're not suggesting that anyone who thinks the IRS really wants to get the money -- wants it enough to find some way of getting it -- is on the side of the pukes...

[harun]

77. Everyone knows this except you.

[IndianaGreen]

21. Civil penalties include taking away one's property!

Anyone that has had tax troubles that did not involve fraud, will attest to the IRS civil penalties.

[mike_c]

26. they will have the power to withold tax refunds, however....

eom

[PassingFair]

71. If they are taking it out of your TAX RETURN without your permission....

you ARE being forced to pay the penalty.

[christx30]

85. So the IRS comes and

demands the money, and I tell them to go pound sand and they can't do anything. Just slink away?
You're gonna see agents up in front of congress testifying about that a year after it goes into effect. People are going to eventually know that the penalty is not enforceable and no one is going to pay it. Then congress will either give it teeth or someone will get the courts to kill it entirely

[FiveGoodMen]

86. Exactly.

There's no way they're going to lose all that money and just decide to let it go.

[christx30]

91. Then no one

is going to campaign on "making those selfish people that can't get health insurance pay their fines." You'll never see anyone give a straight answer to that one.
And people are going to be voting on anyone that promises not to enforce it. I know I will.
That's my biggest problem with the HCR law. That you have to have insurance in order to f'ing breathe in the country. I don't have insurance. I can't afford it. Hell... last year I had pink eye. I had to work for a week (tech support job, sitting in front of a computer for 8 hours a day) with some over the counter herbal remedy in one hand and a full pack of tissues in the other.
But now you tell me that because I choose rent and food over something I might never use, I have to give the government money? They can go pound sand if they think I'm going to pay them just to breathe without insurance.

You're going to see people game the system a lot. I mean... the insurance companies can't deny you coverage if you have existing conditions. So you just pay the fine for a couple of years.. $1000 for the fine or $12,000 or more for a health policy that might or might not be worth it. So you get sick, find out that the treatment is going to cost 23,000 or more. So you get a policy at a minimum outlay of cash and you get treatment. It's not like they can turn you down for the pre-existing conditions any more. They will have to take you. So you find the best deal. You will pay in a minimum into the system, but you will get a LOT out of it. The young and healthy people are going to do this a lot, leaving the old/sick to pay for it all.

[clear eye]

92. Seems to me the most likely scenario is that a taxpayer will fill out the 1040

which will include a question under oath about insurance coverage (and don't even think about lying to the IRS) and a little worksheet to figure the penalty. The penalty of, say, $950 is added into the amount the taxpayer owes on the 1040. The taxpayer decides to pay $950 less than the 1040 says they owe. He/she even includes a little note saying that they can't afford insurance and disputing their liability for the penalty. The IRS just treats the situation as a $950 underpayment, adds interest and penalties and goes about sending threatening letters, not acknowledging that the $950 is in any way a separate issue. Further refusal would cause IRS escalation. How could a taxpayer succeed in proving the specific $950 not payed was the portion for the uninsurance penalty? And as the IRS expects people to have enough witheld from their pay or to prepay themselves quarterly, most people end up claiming refunds. The whole expected refund up to the amount of the penalty would be kept by the IRS.

I think rumors have been started to lull folks into a false sense of security so as to undercut pressure to reopen the health care reform issue.

[activa8tr]

22. 4 million won't be buying? About ALL the Tea Party people in

the USA!

[IndianaGreen]

24. Tea Party people are well to do and have private insurance

This is going to hit us, not the tea baggers!

[clear eye]

28. From the look of them, most Tea Partiers are on Medicare. n/t

[hayu_lol]

32. Seniors are really disturbed by this patient reform bill...

if pensions are tapped to pay for healthcare ins., this will leave many with no money coming in.

We needed a Single-Payer National Health Plan. We got/bought a PIG IN A POKE.

[clear eye]

73. Agreed.

The enormous cost of paying for the ever-increasing profits included in the premiums will be a disaster, especially as the tax on decent misnamed "Cadillac" plans (which are the ordinary old Fords in the rest of the industrialized world) will inevitably cause only inadequate plans to be available to the vast majority.

Of course, Social Security pensions seems to be the goto place for funding the wars and the bank bailouts, too.

[naaman fletcher]

36. This is obscene

I understand the argument that you don't want people only buying insurance once they get sick..so, you are going to insure everybody, you need everybody to buy insurance.

Fine.

The problem, as we know from the Wellpoint story today, is that if you are not in a group plan the second that you get sick they will drop you. That is why I don't have insurance. Look, I can afford it. But, it's worthless. IT is totally fucking worthless. If I get cancer, in an individual policy, they will drop me.

So the health care bill comes along and tells me that I have to buy this worthless product or else I will be taxed?

WTF?

That is why this bill is so bad. So we are going to cover everybody? Great. Let's do it. Instead we are all just being forced to buy this shit product.

[jwirr]

37. The IRS already collects child support arrears and college loans.

That is not a tax.

[RainMickey]

40. Report: Health overhaul will increase nation's tab

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law will increase the nation's health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.

A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15 percent of hospitals into the red and "possibly jeopardizing access" to care for seniors.

The mixed verdict for Obama's signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts.


Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jvD9Os2EoI5FD7PWJFvlxRy_wCcAD9F8FGI80

---

Well fuck.

[Aramchek]

41. the Repukes thank you for spreading their trash

[Ralphie40]

43. this came from HHS

"A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls."

IT isn't from the repukes. They're not even smart enough to put these numbers together.

[Aramchek]

47. HHS wrote a report. This article picks and chooses numbers to support the Repuke line

Nice try though.

[harkadog]

46. Guess you didn't read the OP did you?

[Aramchek]

48. I did better, I read the article. It is biased at best, dishonest at worst.

[Ralphie40]

53. Biased yes, but is it true

[harkadog]

59. Then you can tell us where HHS got it wrong.

I always like to hear from the panel of experts on DU.

[RainMickey]

49. We stick our heads in the sand and we'll get handed them later.

This is ONE thing Obama has done that I cheer. I don't want to see reports like this give ammo to those who would undo it, but like I said, we either pay attention or someone's gonna shove it down our throats.

[Ralphie40]

54. you're kidding , right?

how are they going to shove it down our throats. I think this might just be a case of getting the bad news out of the way, as soon as we can. It'll be forgotten soon enough, once we start on immigration reform.

[Ralphie40]

42. Sickens me

I saw this earlier too. I think we might have made a deal with the devil on this one.

[pinboy3niner]

44. " . . . first comprehensive look by neutral experts"?

One has to wonder why they would intentionally exclude the nonpartisan CBO from the category of "neutral experts" . . .

[Aramchek]

50. this is nothing more than a Repig attempt to tarnish Obama's success

and the Haters latch on to it like snapping turtles...

[IndianaGreen]

83. Funny you mention CBO, I posted a CBO story yesterday--it ain't good for HRC defenders!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x276203

WASHINGTON, April 22, 2010

4M Estimated to Pay Health Care Penalty in 2016

Failure to Buy Coverage Would Result in a $1,000 Fine in New Law, Affecting Mostly the Middle Class, Reports the CBO

(AP) Nearly 4 million Americans will have to pay a penalty if they fail to get health insurance when that element of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law kicks in, according to congressional projections released Thursday.

The penalties will average a little more than $1,000 apiece in 2016, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report.

The vast majority of people paying the fine will be middle class, which would violate Obama's 2008 campaign pledge not to raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year and couples making less than $250,000.

<snip>

About 3 million of those required to pay fines in 2016 will have incomes below $59,000 for individuals and $120,000 for families of four, according to the CBO projections. The other 900,000 people who must pay the fine will have higher incomes.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/22/politics/main6422023.shtml?tag=stack

[bluestateguy]

45. Oooh! Uh Oh! A Report Says So!!!!

:eyes:

[Ralphie40]

51. How do we approach this

Has anyone heard of how we should approach this. It doesn't look good. The Teabaggers will be all over this.

[RainMickey]

52. Damn right they're going to be all over it. And they'll scare the shit out of

seniors with it as well. Mark my words, it's coming.

[bluestateguy]

56. The Tea crowd is not our constituency

and I am not in the slightest bit interested in pandering to them.

[Ralphie40]

58. pandering?

they frighten me, that's all. I even read today that Chomsky said that the Tea Party and Palin are the only ones that are telling the truth.

[FarLeftFist]

63. And what is the truth Palin and the tea party are telling?

Chomsky's vision of the world would be Sarah Palins nightmare.

[pinboy3niner]

64. Where did you find a Chomsky quote like that--a comic book?

I would really like to know what your alleged source is. Can you give us a link, or at least a hint?

[alp227]

55. Never mind the nonpartisan CBO's finding, and this ain't really official

The AP report says further:

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.

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.

[Ralphie40]

57. 10 years is too long

I can't afford anymore increases in the next 10 years. Heck I can hardly afford the $600 it's going to cost me for not buying insurance.

[FarLeftFist]

60. I got a good fucking idea...

Why doesn't the private sector LOWER their premiums to make it more affordable, they only make billions of fucking dollars a year in profit. What a sad world we live in when profits over human life is actually not only being justified but the 'radical' notion of cutting into a companies profits to better the well being of our citizens isn't even a fucking option.

[Ralphie40]

61. Won't be long, they'll cut staff

Downsizing, ya right. Pocket the difference. Ha Ha, the laid off employees will just go work for HHS and the Insurance companies will have to pay more tax to pay for the government wages. It'll look good on them to go broke.

[FarLeftFist]

62. Then it's time for single-payer.

[RainMickey]

65. Indeed! And we need to campaign on just that this fall! n/t

[Socal31]

66. Why does this sounds like a Republican dream plan?

[superconnected]

68. If you don't want to pay for insurance QUIT expecting to go to the emergency room if you have a

problem. Honestly, you have no right chalking up a bill you can't afford. It drives up the medical cost for the rest of us.

To have national healthcare, we have to pay for it one way or another. The healthcare bill is a start and the in for much needed regulation. Are you better off with no insurance, no. The vast majority of you will need it at some point. All you're doing is being welfare cases right now because when you get sick if you can't afford insurance, you sure as heck can't afford an emergency room visit and you're going to go anyway and stick everyone else with the bill. I fully believe you should be denied entrance to the emergency room if you declined insurance, unless you can pay upfront.

I took my violin teacher to the emergency room for kidney stones last summer - 3 hours - 2 of it waiting to get in, and a test, was 8 thousand dollars. He doesn't have insurance and that's his bill. That's the reality of medical expenses. That reality isn't going away by declining health insurance, all declining is doing is keeping the healtch care industry unregulated and keeping your medical so you can't afford it. Really, if you loathe paying for insurance, then man up and don't go to the emergency room and chalk up a bill you can't pay either.

[totodeinhere]

74. So let me get this straight.

If I decline to purchase health insurance, perhaps on philosophical grounds because I believe that the government should provide single payer health care to all, and then I have a life threatening emergency, I should be denied emergency room treatment and be left to die? My, how compassionate of you.

[superconnected]

76. No, I think right now, if you're not paying for health care insurance you should be not be admitted

to the emergency room, and you should be left to die, unless you pay up front.

Why should everyone else absorb your medical cost that you can't pay because you refused to pay for insurance?

I said nothing about single payer. If you get single payer then you have insurance, if you don't, well then I don't think you should be admitted.

I like how you think you should get something for free - emergency health care you likely can't afford, but you are angry if you get charged $600 that goes into a system where the poor get coverage for free, and you can still go to the emergency room - albeit, with an extortous price you likely can't pay, so it still costs all the rest of us.

I hope you don't support the idea of free national health care because that comes with a tax to pay for it and that would take dollars out of your pocket. I support free national health care and am willing to be taxed, but, I think everyone should have the option - not willing to pay, fine, take a chance that you don't need it. But, no services unless you pay up front, that includes for every test before it's preformed after you pay for your visit to get through the door, don't stick the rest of us with your unpaid bill.

What's your problem anyway - it sounds like a fair trade to me. Why think it's fine to charge up bills you can't pay?

Don't start talking about compassion when you're unwilling to pay into a system you may not need that helps others. Why should you get any services you haven't paid for if you yourself, aren't willing to pay for others in need?

[totodeinhere]

79. It is quite simple. Health care is a human right and should be afforded to all regardless of...

either their ability to or their willingness to pay, period.

[superconnected]

80. At that point, that human right has to be funded. Hospitals and doctors aren't imaginary things

that spring up for free when you need them.

Agree to a national tax for that service and I'll agree we should all get health care - have that right.

Don't agree, and refuse to pay anything, and I'll say take your religion somewhere else.

[clear eye]

88. Do you understand that your opinion would put you at odds w/ the status quo in Europe?

They pay for their coverage for the most part from a progressive tax on all income including capital gains. It's doable because even in the countries where private insurers participate, profits are kept extremely limited similar to the way we used to regulate home energy providers before deregulation. Other countries have a single gov't payer for all but some luxury elective treatments. And their economies, while dragged down some by the banking crisis, are still significantly better than ours by most measures.

BTW, who is it you imagine thinks health care doesn't cost anything to provide? Why do we need to provide it in the most expensive way imagineable w/ companies who raise their premiums 30% after a year of record profits because they expect a captive market? What kind of ugly society have we created by squeezing exhorbitant payments out of people who are trying to put their children through college, for example, just for policies that often give out just when you need them most? And what do you suggest the hospitals do w/ people who bought the best policy they could find in their price range and when they had a health crisis found the coverage seriously inadequate?

Oh wait, I know. Let them die.

[Zhade]

93. LET THEM DIE? You are a horrible, horrible person.

I pity you.

[Vinca]

70. Given the trajectory of current health insurance premiums,

in 4 years time - if big insurance remains essentially unregulated - 4 million who can't afford to buy in will be a rosy number. With no public option to compete with, big insurance will take the next 4 years to get rates to the highest possible level. The more I think of it, the more disgusted I am at how the Democrats squandered this moment in history.

[superconnected]

81. They're trying to regulate the health industry. The people against the insurance bill

aren't trying to pass any laws to regulate it.

And since you recognize the cost is escalating, perhaps you can grasp why having insurance at this point is better than not. By turning down the healtcare bill you get what you have now. Health care nobody can afford. By accepting it you get a start at regulating it - a whole government office gets made to oversee it(which is why the health conglomerates are against this), and you get health care at a barely affordable price, yet those who really can't afford it get it for free.

We're better with it than without.

[clear eye]

89. Firstly it is seriously muddled to lump together all opponents of the recently passed law

The people who oppose it from the right have completely different ideas on what should happen than the people who oppose it from the left. Numerous polls indicate that those opposing it from the left--wanting a plan similar to the European ones or at least a "strong" public option--way outnumber the Tea Partiers. "Medicare for All" is exceedingly popular, despite the tax implications. Most Americans understand that their costs will be less if they didn't include humongous private profits.

[Gecko6400]

75. Deleted already posted

[DuaneBidoux]

90. This money should be redistributed among providers that get stuck with the bills