CBO scores the Senate Health Bill

[GG]

Let me ask you what I've asked others. The intel that was used to justify war was wrong. That cannot be contested by any but the most moronic. Definitely no nukes. Intel on WMDs was not right either. Not that Saddam didn't have them but he didn't have the facilities and stockpiles used to justify the attacks. Oh, and no ties to 9-11.

 

So who got fired for that monumental intel !@#$up? Bueller...Bueller?

 

I'll take "Slam dunk George Tenet" for $100 Alex.

[Magox]

Devon also explores and produces oil in select international areas such as China, Brazil, and Azerbaijan. Fail

 

Apache has become a large multinational company, with regional offices and operations in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Egypt and UK North Sea. Fail

 

Chesapeake... well they're pretty much exclusive to North America, but they don't produce oil, they're a natural gas company. Fail

 

So I guess what you're telling me is that drilling in the US doesn't reduce our dependence on foriegn oil because the oil produced in the US gets sold on the world market rather than some mythical USA exclusive market.

 

PS you also missed the distribution part. But I'll be looking for my local Devon or Apache Gas Station. They may exist but I've never seen one.

That's the way things are R.I, all these companies for the most part are globally interconnected. These are American companies, so just because they explore and drill on foreign soil doesn't mean that it isn't now part of American energy supplies, the only difference are the royalties and taxes that they have to pay. But the whole point of the discussion was lessening the dependence of the importation of Energy, so if we produce energy from one of our American companies, and we can do it within our US boundaries, then IT WILL help reduce the trade deficit, which is what the whole side discussion was all about.

 

So what I AM telling you is that drilling in the US DOES reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Also, you are incorrect to suggest that we are selling a significant amount of American Oil to overseas customers. What we do sell abroad are our refined products, big difference.

 

So this whole "Drill baby Drill" does address this issue.

[John Adams]

Would have been tough to possibly fire the entire CIA, NSA etc....what have you, no?

 

Serious Q. Did any of the other Country's that had the same intel as we did, and more, fire any of those people? I believe alot of those other nations and us shared what intel they had, true?

 

Regarding other countries, I don't know.

 

Think about it. A mistake of monumental proportion and not a single person fired. Government jobs are a !@#$ing joke. .

[Chef Jim]

Regarding other countries, I don't know.

 

Think about it. A mistake of monumental proportion and not a single person fired. Government jobs are a !@#$ing joke. .

 

Lot's of people in the Republican party got fired.

[Adam]

To answer your question, yes it would help our economy out alot if we didn't have to import as much energy as we do.

 

A few ways to address that, strengthen the dollar, drill baby drill and continue to expand on alternative energies.

The only reason I would want us to drill at all, is to sell the oil overseas. To drill for our own oil would create an excuse to continue its use. +1 on strengthening the dollar.

 

Looking at what goes on with the Niagara hydro-electric plants, it surprises me that we don't have more like that along the coast. While I don't know a lot about the technicalities, I would think that the tide rolling in and out could be used to generate a lot of power. I also would like to see nuclear power become more prevalent- when handled well, it can be quite clean.

 

I also laugh at the so-called environmentalists talking about clean coal- which is as ridiculous as talking about a deathless kill.

[Taro T]

The only reason I would want us to drill at all, is to sell the oil overseas. To drill for our own oil would create an excuse to continue its use. +1 on strengthening the dollar.

 

Looking at what goes on with the Niagara hydro-electric plants, it surprises me that we don't have more like that along the coast. While I don't know a lot about the technicalities, I would think that the tide rolling in and out could be used to generate a lot of power. I also would like to see nuclear power become more prevalent- when handled well, it can be quite clean.

 

I also laugh at the so-called environmentalists talking about clean coal- which is as ridiculous as talking about a deathless kill.

OK, the tide rolls in a couple of feet each day over ~12 hours. Unless you have an extremely wide turbine you aren't going to experience a lot of force with which to generate a lot of electricity.

 

Niagara Falls has ~170 ft of drop. With 6 MM cu ft of water flowing over it every minute. Unless you have a turbine a few miles wide, you won't come close to the force you can generate at the falls.

[John Adams]

Lot's of people in the Republican party got fired.

 

Less would have been fired if they'd fired some of their own. They were unwilling to cull their own herd.

[Chef Jim]

Less would have been fired if they'd fired some of their own. They were unwilling to cull their own herd.

 

Logic very rarely plays into politician's thinking.

[Magox]

Even more good news.

 

AT&T Inc., the U.S.’s largest telephone company, said it will take a $1 billion first-quarter charge related to the health-care law signed this week by President Barack Obama.

 

The non-cash charge has been triggered by a change in the tax treatment of Medicare subsidies, the Dallas, Texas-based company said today in a regulatory filing.

 

AT&T joins Caterpillar Inc. and AK Steel Holding Corp. in taking non-cash charges against earnings as a result of the law. Health-care charges may shave as much as $14 billion from U.S. corporate profits, according to an estimate by benefits consulting firm Towers Watson.

 

“As a result of this legislation, including the additional tax burden, AT&T will be evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health-care benefits offered by the company,” the company said in the filing.

[/dev/null]

Logic very rarely plays into politician's thinking.

 

Or the thinking of some of the folks who post here

[Magox]

Obama health bill hid $30 billion in Medicaid costs

 

 

Call it Doc Fix 2.0.

 

The federal government already has the “Doc Fix,” an annual shortfall of about $20 billion that must be paid to maintain current payment rates to physicians under Medicare.

 

Now, it looks like President Obama’s health-care bill created another funding cliff, costing an additional $5.5 billion or so each year.

 

Critics say the costs were hidden from view in the $940 billion health-care bill to lower the price tag by about $30 billion, and also as a way to gain the support of doctors and hospitals without angering governors.

 

The recently passed bill mandated that, starting in 2013, state governments must pay primary care physicians the same amount for Medicaid recipients, who are mostly poor, as it does for Medicare recipients, who are mostly elderly.

 

Low Medicaid reimbursement rates have cut down on the number of physicians that will even see poor and indigent recipients in the first place.

 

Some states pay doctors and hospitals about the same rates for Medicaid as they do for Medicare. But states with some of the largest Medicaid populations – New York, New Jersey and California – pay some of the lowest rates for Medicaid.

 

 

Health officials in the state governments of New York, New Jersey and California either did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday or said they were unable to respond in just a few hours to questions about such a complicated issue.

 

The White House also did not respond to numerous requests for comment on why the increased Medicaid obligations were funded for only two years in the health bill.

 

“The political brilliance of this is that when the move comes to extend it, I assume the governors will be on board because it doesn’t cost them anything,” Hennessey said in an interview. “They figured out a way to reward the doctors without upsetting the governors.”

 

 

For anyone who has an interest, I would suggest reading the entire article.

[meazza]

Looks like Nationalized Health Care is failing in other countries.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/20...bec-budget.html

 

Annual $25 health-care fee with yearly increases, to $200 by 2012, with a possible health deductible in the future.

 

So not only does the average Quebec resident have to pay 25% of their taxable income (which averages approximately 42-50% of income) to sustain health care costs, they also in the future will have to pay per visit and include a deductible.

 

 

USA this could be your future.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Looks like Nationalized Health Care is failing in other countries.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/20...bec-budget.html

 

Annual $25 health-care fee with yearly increases, to $200 by 2012, with a possible health deductible in the future.

 

So not only does the average Quebec resident have to pay 25% of their taxable income (which averages approximately 42-50% of income) to sustain health care costs, they also in the future will have to pay per visit and include a deductible.

 

 

USA this could be your future.

 

 

How 'bout them Habs meazza! I want the bottom three in East to stay the same... Just as long as ATL (seems to be Sabre killers) and the NYR's are kept out!

 

Oh... Health Care... So... Once the boomers drop dead, we will be made in the shade!

[meazza]

How 'bout them Habs meazza! I want the bottom three in East to stay the same... Just as long as ATL (seems to be Sabre killers) and the NYR's are kept out!

 

Oh... Health Care... So... Once the boomers drop dead, we will be made in the shade!

 

They're playing well. Cheers to Jacques Martin for his excellent coaching on a team missing many key qualities to being a contender.

 

But obviously i can't go to Habs games since I pay too much taxes

[Booster4324]

They're playing well. Cheers to Jacques Martin for his excellent coaching on a team missing many key qualities to being a contender.

 

But obviously i can't go to Habs games since I pay too much taxes

 

 

Stop hanging out at bars where you have to tip so much....

[ExiledInIllinois]

They're playing well. Cheers to Jacques Martin for his excellent coaching on a team missing many key qualities to being a contender.

 

But obviously i can't go to Habs games since I pay too much taxes

 

 

Ah... They don't seem to have a problem filling The Forum (I know, I know it is the Bell Centre...But who cares)!

[Magox]

Last week, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke wrote a piece on the WSJ criticizing these corporations (AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar, etc. etc.) which in their view they believed they were overstating their losses and not including the governments anticipated savings from the bill. Of course this was more of the same from what we have seen from this administration, which is that any time they are criticized no matter how credible the source they look to go out on the offensive in defense of their miserable policies.

 

Today I read an article in the WSJ that responded to these criticisms.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...0712566924.html

 

Commerce Secretary Gary Locke had it backwards last week on these pages when he cited the "hype and overheated rhetoric" of U.S. corporations that have reported large writedowns in response to health-care reform.

 

In fact, the companies' accounting announcements were written in the most bland prose imaginable. It was the Obama administration that created the controversy by suggesting that these legally required filings were politically motivated. Mr. Locke himself publicly criticized the companies for being "premature" in making these disclosures, even though rules enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission require immediate disclosure.

 

Notwithstanding the unusual tax treatment in the original provision, the bottom line is indisputable: The subsidy exists for the express purpose of saving the government money by keeping retirees on company prescription drug plans rather than having them enroll in the Medicare drug plan. Now that Congress has reversed the policy, corporations must report eye-popping charges on their financial statements.

 

As for the government's assertion that companies are failing to adequately account for all the savings they will enjoy from health-care reform, isn't that exactly the kind of "creative" accounting that got Enron in trouble? Even assuming the administration is right that the various features of the new law will reduce future health costs, it would be highly inappropriate for companies to try to book these speculative future savings.

 

The real story here—and the one that is getting little attention—is that the new law will likely result in a change of drug coverage for 1.5 million to two million retirees as they are moved from their employer-sponsored plans, according to a study we commissioned by former Office of Management and Budget official Don Moran. Reasonable people can differ as to whether shifting retirees to the Medicare drug program is good or bad policy. But two things are certain. First, it will cost the federal government more money. Second, employers will be excoriated when it happens.

 

 

When an administration is unwilling to accept criticism of two sentences in a 2,700-page law there is a problem. The White House needs to stop being so defensive. Here's a new talking point for Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to try: "Overall, we are very proud of the sweeping legislation we have enacted. But we acknowledge that the drug-subsidy provision is having unintended, negative consequences for companies, and potentially also for retirees and government costs."

 

Short of admitting that they were repeatedly warned this would happen, the administration and the Democratic leadership in Congress might at least stop accusing companies of hype and inflated rhetoric.

 

Mr. Klein is president of the American Benefits Council, which represents major U.S. employers on health and retirement policy.

[Doc]

Repeal and replace.

[Alaska Darin]

Repeal and replace.

So Republicans can waste money we don't have on different **** we don't need? Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[DC Tom]

So Republicans can waste money we don't have on different **** we don't need? Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

 

Repeal the bill and Replace all the congresscritters.