Feed on
Posts
Comments

That year, Congressional actuaries (CBO wasn’t around then) expected Medicare to cost $3.1 billion in 1970. In 1969, that estimate was pushed to $5 billion, and it really came in at $6.8 billion. House Ways and Means analysts estimated in 1967 that Medicare would cost $12 billion in 1990. They were off by a factor of 10-actual spending was $110 billion-even as its benefits coverage failed to keep pace with standards in the private market. Medicare spending in the first nine months of this fiscal year is $314 billion and growing by 10%. Some of this historical error is due to 1970s-era inflation, as well as advancements in care and technology. But Democrats also clearly underestimated-or lowballed-the public’s appetite for “free” health care.

On the latter point, the 1965 Medicare statute explicitly stated that “Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize any Federal official or employee to exercise any supervision or control over the practice of medicine or the manner in which medical services are provided.” Yet now such government management of doctors and hospitals is so pervasive in Medicare that Mr. Obama can casually wonder in a recent interview with Time magazine how anyone could oppose the “benign changes” that he supports, such as “how the delivery system works.” Oh, is that all?

From the Wall Street Journal. But I guess since they are a right-wing biased nutjob publication, none of that is credible.

2 Responses to “When Folks Don’t Like the Historical Facts, They Call it Revisionism”

  1. nagaway says:

    167352 45409I discovered your blog web site on google and check just a couple of of your early posts. Proceed to maintain up the exceptional operate. I just extra up your RSS feed to my MSN Details Reader. Seeking forward to reading much more from you in a whilst! 325490

  2. 789bet says:

    726327 331716An very fascinating go by way of, I might not concur entirely, even so you do make some truly legitimate factors. 927750

Leave a Reply