Bad news, Righties: while the CBO has previously estimated that the Republican House health care bill would save $4.4 billion from fraud enforcement, they’ve come back and corrected their numbers. Looks like your health bill is no solution after all:

The HCFAC funding at issue is $266 million a year of direct spending under current law. CBO’s earlier understanding was that the intent was to increase funding by $300 million a year, for a gross direct spending cost of $3 billion over 10 years. As drafted, however, the substitute amendment has the effect of setting (and freezing) HCFAC funding at exactly $300m a year. In other words, the language as drafted would increase funding by $34 million a year, or approximately $0.3 billion over 10 years (not the $3 billion). As noted above, our original estimate shows an increase in direct spending of $3.0 billion over 10 years. With that level of funding, we estimated nonscoreable savings of $4.4 billion over the budget window. (Those savings are “nonscoreable” because Scorekeeping Guideline #14, as adopted by the Congress several years ago, specifies that any estimated reductions in direct spending or increases in revenues that stem from direct spending for program administration purposes cannot be counted for purposes of budget enforcement.)

The corrected estimate, to reflect the language as drafted, is an increase in direct spending of $0.3 billion over 10 years. With that change in HCFAC funding, we estimate nonscoreable savings of $0.5 billion over 10 years. The net result of that correction is to increase the net pay-as-you-go savings of the Boehner substitute by about $2.7 billion (by removing $3 billion in direct spending cost and adding back in $0.3 billion). Because of Scorekeeping Guideline #14, the change in nonscoreable savings does not affect the tally of direct spending for budget enforcement purposes.

But really… did anyone expect a solution out of the No Party?

You’ll hear it, and soon: “the people are tired of Obama already, and we can expect huge gains for the GOP in coming elections.” Exit polling suggests differently, however.

Yes, there are two major GOP gains: Virginia and NJ have both just voted in Republicans for their respective Governors. According to initial reports, this is due to a lack of turnout on the Democratic side, possibly due to unrest within the party concerning many (not all, but many) Democratic politicians lacking the backbone to stand up to teabaggers with Big Health on their side on the issue of the much-needed Public Option. One thing appears clear, however: Obama ain’t got nothin’ to do with it.

Still, majorities of voters in both states (55 percent in Virginia and 60 percent in New Jersey) said President Obama was not a factor in their vote today. Those who said Mr. Obama was a factor in New Jersey divided as to whether their vote was a vote for the president (19 percent) or against him (20 percent). In Virginia, slightly fewer voters said their vote was for Mr. Obama (18 percent) than against him (24 percent).

Among Corzine supporters in New Jersey, 38 percent said one reason for their vote was to express support for Mr. Obama, while 39 percent of Christie voters said it was to express opposition to Mr. Obama.

Keep this in mind as the GOP spin machine makes this into an anti-Obama vote. They will, as usual, read waaaaay to far into these election results. If there’s one thing Republicans are good at, it’s misreading the populace.

There was, in fact, a time when I had great respect for Joe Lieberman. In fact, it was right about the time he was running as Al Gore’s VP.

Since then, however, Lieberman has proven an unworthy Democrat. Sure, he still caucuses with them, but he’s no Dem; his self-defined Independent status doesn’t do him justice, either. Rather, Lieberman is a rat: in this case, a rat who is trying to kill health care reform.

Lieberman has said he will side with a Republican filibuster if the current health care reform bill as being floated my Majority Leader Harry Reid still contains a public option when the time comes. His reasoning? He doesn’t want to add to the deficit – even though the bill in its current form would LOWER the national deficit.

Let’s be clear: Reid just sent the bill to the CBO, which will detail its findings soon concerning the impact of the bill on the deficit. He did this quickly, because the calculations of his own aids show it decreasing the deficit. When the CBO releases its report stating that the health care reform bill, with the opt-out public option, will indeed save the country money, will Lieberman drop his foolish opposition?

No. He won’t. This isn’t about the deficit, nor is it about partisan politics. Lieberman is fighting against reform for the same reason as everyone else: the insurance industry gives him money.

In fact, a quick check shows that the insurance industry is the third largest contributor to Lieberman’s Leadership PAC. Of course he’s against the public option. This isn’t about principle or the good of the citizenry, folks; find any politician who opposes the public option, and I’ll show you his contributions from Big Health.

Today was the first in what this blogger believes will be a series of victories for health care reform. The Senate Finance Committee approved a bill for health care reform, commonly known as the Baucus plan. Now, it becomes time to merge the 5 separate bills together to craft the final product – and I’m betting it ends up with a Public Option.

Over the last month or so, the tides on the health care debate have been changing in favor of reform. Polls show most Americans support it (even with the Public Option), and more and more lawmakers are getting pressure from their constituents to support real reform. This vote, a day after a Big Health scare tactic concerning rate hikes seems to have failed, is historic.

In the spotlight is Republican Olympia Snowe, who broke with her own party to support reform.

“Is this bill all that I would want? Far from it,” Snowe told her colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee. “But when history calls, history calls.”

And that’s plenty good enough. Ironically, this move makes Snowe the only real maverick in the GOP today, a fact certain to irk many hard-line Republicans siding with those in the pockets of the insurance industry.

Thanks to yesterday’s attempt to scare the American people into supporting corporations which profit off of their illness, Big Health may have shot itself in the foot concerning the creation of the oft-cited Public Option. The tone today is one of great hope that such an option will make its way into the final reform bill.

Democrats didn’t shrink from voicing changes they’d like to see in the final reform bill, but their main target was the health insurance industry, which released a report Monday claiming that reform will increase health insurance premiums. “It’s one more indication that we’re on the right track,” Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said of the report, while Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) said the “last-minute obfuscation” illustrated the need for a public option to keep insurers honest.

Republican House member John Bohner had this to say of the reform bill:

[He] said the requirement that all Americans buy health insurance amounts to a middle class tax hike. “The American people want reform,” Boehner said, “not a trillion-dollar experiment.”

This illustrates, of course, that after all these months the GOP still doesn’t get it. The people would much rather like a “trillion-dollar experiment” (although that’s not what’s been proposed in the least) over nothing at all; the GOP supports the latter, and people quickly tired of the No Party’s obstructionism.

The President commended those who worked on the bill passed today, but urged that it was less a time for celebration and more a time to get things done.

I commend the chairman and the committee’s members for their achievement and the example that they’ve set. And I look forward to continuing to work with Congress in the weeks ahead. We are going to get this done.

Thank you very much, everybody.

It’s officially the people versus the corporations when it comes to health care reform; the insurance industry is now claiming that they will raise rates if comprehensive reform passes.

Let’s call this what it is: the death roll. The industry has realized that it’s losing the war to continue to profit off of sick Americans, and they’re throwing everything they’ve got at reform to try and keep their outrageous bounty. This is fear, at its best.

The good part is, however, that we now know we’re on the right track. An opt-out public option is continuing to gain steam, and other items of reform such as an end to the outrageous citation of “preexisting conditions” are already in the bag. If we stay on the current track, we’ll pass meaningful reform in a matter of weeks. We cannot allow the insurance industry to scare us out of our health and our future as a nation.

Instead, let’s keep fighting the good fight. Let the only one in fear be the insurance industry.

While many Republicans in California have had high hopes for a “stronger Republican Governor” to be elected in 2010, their chances are quickly approaching nil.

Every Republican candidate trails Gavin Newsom by just single digits, but Newsom is trailing his Democratic rivals by double-digits. This puts Jerry Brown comfortably ahead of any Republican in the race.

It would thus appear that California is going to be bluer than ever in 2010, as this state has had quite enough of being purple. It remains to be seen whether or not this sentiment will carry over onto the nation as a whole, but with the Republicans upholding their moniker as the “No Party,” and a health care reform bill that will help every American just weeks away on the Democratic side, they’ve certainly got an uphill battle ahead of them. Couple that with the fact that the GOP is becoming increasingly the party of Right-wing extremism, and you’ve got a recipe for a truer, bluer America.

I’m an ardent supporter of the President, and I’m still as surprised as anyone to hear this:

OSLO – President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday in a stunning decision designed to build momentum behind his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.

Obama said he was surprised and deeply humbled by the honor, and planned to travel to Oslo to accept the prize.

Congrats, Barack.

Senate Democrats have begun discussions on a compromise approach to health care reform that would establish a robust, national public option for insurance coverage but give individual states the right to opt out of the program.

The proposal is envisioned as a means of getting the necessary support from progressive members of the Democratic Caucus — who have insisted that a government-run insurance option remain in the bill — and conservative Democrats who are worried about what a public plan would mean for insurers in their states.

“What folks are looking for is what gets 60 votes,” said a senior Democratic Hill aide. “The opt-out idea is very appealing to people. It has come up in conversations. I know personally that a handful of members have discussed it amongst themselves.”

Essentially, it’s a trigger option in reverse. But would it work?

It certainly has the ability to appease Dems and Dinos alike, which is good. It might even be enough to entice Snowe. But what would be the implications of giving each state the ability to opt-out of the public option?

PROS:

• It adds a method of recourse absent from the standard Public Option. If a state finds that the option is somehow detrimental to its economy, it has a way of dropping it without having to go federal. Presumably, this would come in the form of state-wide opt-out elections.
• It allows citizens to witness the public option first-hand. If it’s a good system, no state will drop it. If it isn’t, no one is stuck with it.
• It has the same potentials as the standard Public Option, but by allowing each state control over their own eligibility, it loses some of the fright for those who fear a “government takeover.”

CONS:

• What if California keeps it, but Nevada doesn’t? What would this imply? Possibly nothing, if neither state ends up with any more or any less problems with or without the Public Option. Still, it brings back an old question: should citizens be allowed to shop across state lines? Can those in Nevada come to Tahoe and sign up for the Public Option?
• Furthermore, it’s…. um….. nope, that was all.

This could be the dealmaker; it might just be the jolt the Public Option needs. Its passage would certainly make this blogger happy… unless, of course, California is stupid enough to opt-out.

The past few days have been good for those supporting health care reform. President Obama’s poll numbers are rising, the Public Option (according to many in the House and the Senate) is back from the dead, and many Dems are finally waking up to take a stand against Baucus and his useless Co-Ops. As if that wasn’t good enough, poll numbers have been released which suggest that Olympia Snowe’s constituency wants a Public Option in a final health care reform bill. Why is this important? Olympia Snowe just may end up being the sole dissenting voice in the Republican Party which ends up sealing the deal for health care reform.

Not only does her constituency support the Public Option, they really support it, 63% – 27%.

Let’s not forget that her entire state is drenched in controversy right now concerning Wellpoint, the parent company of Anthem Health insurance company. Anthem has about 12,000 customers in Maine, down from previous years. Although Wellpoint itself is still collecting the record profits one would expect of a health insurance company, Anthem’s profits with such a low number of customers dropped below 3%. Instead of improving their business strategy in an attempt to draw in more customers, however, Anthem FILED SUIT against the state of Maine for not finalizing legislation which would allow them to maintain a minimum 3% profit. No. I’m not kidding.

Of course, our “liberal media” is far too Right-wing to even cover such an astonishing act by a health insurance company in these trying times. The fact is, health insurance companies are less regulated than Las Vegas casinos, so it’s no wonder they’re starting to run amok.

Anyway, let’s hope Snowe listens to her constituency and not the talking heads of the GOP. The former votes; the latter loves insurance company money.

The GOP and its blind followers have been all aflutter lately with claims that the Dems are planning to cut Medicare benefits in order to pay for health care reform. Luckily for we who actually investigate claims, these cries are just dead wrong.

Firstly, many on the Right claim that the Democrats are planning to cut up to $550 billion annually from Medicare. Of course, a little research shows that Medicare costs around $420 billion annually. I’d love to know how you cut $550 billion from a $420 billion program.

There is, however, the issue of increasing costs. Medicare is essentially a subsidy program, and as such it is still subject to the costs of the industry. These costs are ballooning, as we all know, and the result is Medicare spending outpacing Social Security in another two decades.

Clearly, something has to be done there. Health care reform, anyone?

A good reform plan will end up lowering costs, and the Dems are counting on this. The current plan for Medicare is to continue to increase government spending on the program over the long run to keep up with the currently increasing costs. If health care reform is successful in lowering costs, those increases won’t be needed. Thus, the current House health care reform plan eliminates those increases, as it aims to eliminate the costs which require them.

All in all, nothing’s being cut. The proposal simply eliminates the need for increased spending.

The House health care proposal would reduce projected increases in Medicare payments to some health care providers by more than $500 billion over 10 years. Some of that money would be put toward avoiding cuts in payments to doctors so seniors have better access to physicians. Democrats plan to reduce payments to private providers in programs such as Medicare Advantage, which is operated by private insurance companies and bought by seniors to fill gaps in coverage. Democrats propose to also reduce Medicare’s costs by targeting fraud and waste, such as overpayments to some home health providers. Some of the savings from Medicare would be used to cover uninsured workers who pay Medicare taxes.

There you have it: the Dems aren’t killing Medicare. If you’d like someone to fear, however, look no further than the single group which has been against Medicare and its benefits since its inception in 1964: the GOP. In fact, the GOP has tried nearly every year for the last 44 years to cut from Medicare, only to claim in the last few months that they support the program.

They were against it before they were for it, after all.