If McCain’s Health Plan Is Costly, What Would That Make Obama’s?

Funniest headline of the day: NY Times - McCain Plan to Aid States on Health Could Be Costly

Health economists say it could take untold billions to transform the patchwork of programs into a viable federal safety net. The McCain campaign has made only a rough calculation of how many billions would be needed and has not identified a source for the financing beyond savings from existing programs. Finding the money will only get more difficult now that Mr. McCain has pledged to balance the federal budget by 2013, which already requires a significant reduction in the growth of spending.

Mr. McCain’s proposal stands in sharp relief to that of his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, who wants to require insurers to accept all applicants, regardless of their health. That is now the law in five states, including New York and New Jersey.

Nice try, Grey Lady. The Times just gives us the phrase “untold billions,” and that is to transform the existing programs. Hmm, I guess they missed the stories of how Obama’s plan will cost $50-$65 billion per year.

But, hey, it does get better. Kevin Sack, who wrote the Times story, probably should have checked with board of loons member Paul Krugman first

Mr. Gruber finds that a plan without mandates, broadly resembling the Obama plan, would cover 23 million of those currently uninsured, at a taxpayer cost of $102 billion per year. An otherwise identical plan with mandates would cover 45 million of the uninsured — essentially everyone — at a taxpayer cost of $124 billion. Over all, the Obama-type plan would cost $4,400 per newly insured person, the Clinton-type plan only $2,700.

Woops.


No Responses to “If McCain’s Health Plan Is Costly, What Would That Make Obama’s?”

You can subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. No comments posted yet

Comments are closed.