GOP Wants U.S. to Believe Their “Obamacare” “Facts”

The following message is from the Michigan team at Organizing for America:

Greetings Michiganders,

After our hard work to pass historic health insurance reform
legislation, those against reform still continue to push
misinformation and fight to repeal this law tooth and nail. We will
continue to fight these smears and educate supporters of reform on how
they can counter the misinformation.

The RNC has recently sent out a fundraising e-mail that lays out 9
“facts” about “Obamacare” that are false and unfounded. This e-mail is
long, but counters each point:

RHETORIC: “Causes 9 million people to lose the insurance they now
have. … After all the spending is done and the bill is fully
implemented, 23 million people will still be uninsured in 2019.” [RNC
Email, 3/30/10]

REALITY: THE BILL EXTENDS COVERAGE TO 32 MILLION AMERICANS

The HealthCare Bill Will Cover 32 Million Americans. “Washington has spent the
past week or so waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to release
its preliminary estimate of the Senate bill with the reconciliation
fixes. Not only are those numbers important for the debate, but
Democratic leaders refuse to release the actual text of their changes
until CBO releases the specifics of its analysis. According to a
Democratic source, CBO has finished its work and will release the
official preliminary score later today. But here are the basic
numbers: The bill will cost $940 billion over the first 10 years and
reduce the deficit by $130 billion during that period. In the second
10 years — so, 2020 to 2029 — it will reduce the deficit by $1.2
trillion. The legislation will cover 32 million Americans, or 95
percent of the legal population.” [Ezra Klein, Washington Post,
3/18/10<http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/03/cbo_health-
care_reform_bill_cu.html>]

RHETORIC: “Increases the already bloated deficit by $260 billion over
the next decade when all the components are included and adds $371
billion to the deficit by not including the Medicare physician fee
schedule change, also known as the ‘Doc Fix’ provision.” [RNC Email,
3/30/10]

REALITY: CBO SAID THAT THE BILL CUTS THE DEFICIT BY $130B IN THE FIRST
10 YEARS AND $1.2T IN THE SECOND TEN YEARS

Source: CBO Numbers On Final Bill Show $130 Billion Deficit Cut In 10
Years, $1.2 Trillion Savings In Second 10 Years; 32 Million Americans
Covered, About 95%, And $940 Billion Gross Total Cost. “With the
unveiling of the health reform reconciliation compromise set for noon
ET, Democrats are beginning to leak results of the long-awaited
Congressional Budget Office score of the provisions. They’re pretty
good.  The deficit over the first ten years drops by $130 billion
compared to the baseline. Importantly, especially for wavering
Democrats like Brian Baird, it reduces the debt by $1.2 trillion in
the second ten years.  Apparently, the CBO says that the bill would
reduce Medicare expenditures by about 1.4% per year, extending the
solvency of the program by nine years. 32 million Americans will be
covered — about 95% of all those eligible. The cost over decade one:
$940 billion.” [Atlantic – Ambinder, 3/18/10<http://
www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/score-some-preliminary-cbo-numbers/37670/>]

RHETORIC: “Raises taxes by $569 billion on small businesses and
creates a new marriage penalty with new income and investment
taxes.” [RNC Email, 3/30/10]

REALITY: THE PRESIDENT’S HEALTH CARE PLAN PROVIDES THE LARGEST MIDDLE
CLASS TAX CUT IN HISTORY AND BILLIONS IN TAX CREDITS FOR SMALL
BUSINESS

The President’s Health Care Plan Provides The Largest Middle Class Tax
Cut For Health Care In History. “It makes insurance more affordable by
providing the largest middle class tax cut for health care in history,
reducing premium costs for tens of millions of families and small
business owners who are priced out of coverage today.  This helps over
31 million Americans afford health care who do not get it today – and
makes coverage more affordable for many more.” [President Obama's
health care plan<http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/
proposal>]
The White House Health Care Plan Would Give Out $40 Billion In Tax
Credits To Small Business To Help Them Offer Coverage. “The White
House ‘plan’ contains many of the same elements included in the House
and Senate bills already passed by Congressional Democrats, but makes
adjustments and adds provisions that were on the table when House and
Senate Democrats were merging their bills shortly before Scott Brown
was elected in Massachusetts. … There is also a $40 billion infusion
of tax credits available to small businesses to help them offer
coverage beginning in 2010.” [Time Magazine, 2/22/10<http://
swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/02/22/details-of-obamas-health-care-plan/
#ixzz0iGu1HtT4>]
Business Roundtable: Health Insurance Overhaul Should Be A “National
Priority,” And Without Action, “If Present Trends Continue, The Cost
To Provide An Employee With Health Care Will Rise From $10,000 To
$28,000 Over 10 Years.” The New York Times reported: “The White House
is also pressing business supporters to take what could be a final
stand in favor of the Democrats’ initiative. Mr. Obama’s emerging
message against higher insurance costs was seconded on Monday by the
Business Roundtable, a Washington group representing major
corporations. Mr. Obama spoke to the group last week, and had its
executive board to the White House for dinner. In a statement, the
group’s president, John J. Castellani, repeated its position that
overhauling the health insurance system should be ‘a national
priority’ given the burden of rising expenses on individuals, the
government and especially employers. Without action, Mr. Castellani
said, ‘if present trends continue, the cost to provide an employee
with health care will rise from $10,000 to $28,000 over 10
years.’” [New York Times, 3/2/10<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/
health/policy/02health.html?ref=politics>]
Study: “Over The Next 15 Years, American Businesses Would Collectively
Spend $637 Billion Less On Their Share Of Health Insurance Premiums,
And Their Workers Would Save A Collective $177 Billion.” A study by
The Third Way Economic Program outlined 12 major ways health reform
legislation would cut costs in the health care system: “Over the next
15 years, American businesses would collectively spend $637 billion
less on their share of health insurance premiums, and their workers
would save a collective $177 billion. For a typical business with 500
employees, the cost of coverage would be $2.5 million less than it
would be otherwise over 15 years. In other words, these reforms will
slow the annual growth rate of costs for job-based health care
coverage over the next decade and a half from a projected increase of
5.8 percent to 5.0 percent per person. For American businesses, these
savings will translate directly into higher wages for workers, more
money to expand and invest, and a greater ability to succeed in a
fiercely competitive global marketplace. For workers, these savings
will lead to coverage that is more stable and more secure.” [Bending
the Curve: 12 Ways Health Reform Will Tackle Runaway Costs,
1/12/10<http://www.politico.com/static/PPM130_report--
twelve_ways_reform_bends_the_curve-prerelease_version.html>]

RHETORIC: “Cuts Medicare by $523 billion.” [RNC Email, 3/30/10]

REALITY: THE BILL STRENGTHENS MEDICARE AND EXTENDS THE LIFE OF THE
MEDICARE TRUST FUND

AARP Endorsed Senate Health Care Legislation And Said It “Strengthens
Medicare For Current And Future Generations.” “With your commitment to
closing the doughnut hole in conference, consistent with the
President’s pledge, and the many positive features referenced above,
AARP is pleased to support your efforts to obtain cloture, and urges
timely passage of this legislation by the Senate. We look forward to
working with you in conference to finalize health care reform
legislation that strengthens Medicare for current and future
generations, and which ensures that all Americans can obtain
affordable coverage—particularly those aged 50 to 64—who face the most
difficulty securing coverage they can afford in the individual and
small group markets.” [AARP letter to Sen. Harry Reid, 12/14/09]
FactCheck.org: “We Never Have Said That Seniors Would Suffer ‘Massive
Cuts To Medicare Benefits’ Under [Health Reform Legislation], And In
Fact Have Done Our Best To Debunk [Those] Claims.” FactCheck.org
wrote: “We never have said that seniors would suffer ‘massive cuts to
Medicare benefits’ under the pending House or Senate overhaul bills,
and in fact have done our best to debunk claims to that
effect.” [FactCheck.org, 11/3/09<http://factcheck.org/2009/11/boehner-
misrepresents-factcheckorgs-findings/>]
CMS Report: Senate Health Care Bill Extends The Life Of The Medicare
Trust Fund By 9 Years. According to a recently released CMS report,
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act extends the life of the
Medicare Trust Fund by 9 years – significantly longer than any
proposal in recent years. [CMS Report, 12/10/09]

RHETORIC: “Increases premiums by 10% for people without employer-based
insurance.” [RNC Email, 3/30/10]

REALITY: THE HEALTH CARE BILL WOULD LOWER PREMIUMS FOR THE VAST
MAJORITY OF INDIVIDUALS

WSJ: On Premiums Going Up Or Down, “Overall, The Bills Would Mean That
More Consumers Would Pay Less For Their Insurance.” The Wall Street
Journal wrote: “Sen. Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) touched off a debate
with President Barack Obama, saying that the Democrats’ bill wouldn’t
actually lower most consumers’ insurance costs. The president replied
that the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan scorekeeper on
Capitol Hill, had found the Senate bill would lower insurance premiums
by 14% to 20%. As to the criticism that it could send premiums up, he
said, that’s only because certain consumers would be buying more-
comprehensive coverage. ‘They didn’t say that the actual premiums
would be going up,’ Obama told Alexander… The wrinkle in whether this
would actually increase premiums is that consumers buying policies on
their own with a new insurance exchange would be required to buy plans
that, on average, are more generous than the ones they currently have.
Because of that, they would pay higher premiums, the report found. So
overall, the bills would mean that more consumers would pay less for
their insurance.” [Wall Street Journal Washington Wire, 2/25/10<http://
blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/02/25/health-insurance-premiums-up-or-down/
>]
NYT: “Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office Persuasively
Contradicted” Insurance Industry Claim That Reform Legislation Would
Drive Up Insurance Premiums; “Tens Of Millions Of Uninsured Americans
Can Be Covered Without Driving Up Costs For Everyone Else.” The New
York Times editorial board wrote: “The health insurance industry
frightened Americans — and gave Republicans a shrill talking point —
when it declared in October that proposed reform legislation would
drive up insurance costs for virtually everyone by as much as
thousands of dollars a year. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office persuasively contradicted that claim this week. Undaunted, the
industry issued a rebuttal report, claiming again that premiums would
soar. We find this second industry report no more persuasive than the
first…And we have far more confidence in the C.B.O.’s expertise in
evaluating a wide array of databases and in its objectivity. The chief
message Americans should derive from the C.B.O.’s analysis is that
tens of millions of uninsured Americans can be covered without driving
up costs for everyone else.” [New York Times Editorial, 12/4/09<http://
www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/opinion/04fri1.html?_r=1&ref=opinion>]
Bloomberg News: 134 Million Americans Insured Through Large Employers
Will See No Rise In Premiums And May Pay 3 Percent Less…Subsidies Also
Will Lower Costs As Much As 59 Percent For 18 Million People Buying
Their Own Insurance.” Bloomberg News reported on CBO estimates of the
Senate health insurance reform bill’s impact on insurance premiums:
“On average, 134 million Americans insured through large employers
will see no rise in premiums and may pay 3 percent less than they
would if Congress failed to pass a health-care overhaul plan, the
nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said yesterday. Subsidies also
will lower costs as much as 59 percent for 18 million people buying
their own insurance.” [Bloomberg, 12/1/09<http://www.bloomberg.com/
apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ajZfFs7TUGhw>]

RHETORIC: “Expands the power of the IRS to enforce a government
mandate that requires Americans to purchase government-approved
insurance.” [RNC Email, 3/30/10]REALITY: THE CLAIM THAT THE POWER OF THE IRS WILL BE EXPANDED IS AN
“OUTRIGHT MISREPRESENTATION”

FactCheck.org: The Law Requires The IRS “Mostly To Hand Out Tax
Credits” And The Claim Of 16,500 New Agents “Stems From A Partisan
Analysis Based On Guesswork And False Assumptions, And Compounded By
Outright Misrepresentation.” Q: “Will the IRS hire 16,500 new agents
to enforce the health care law?” A: “No. The law requires the IRS
mostly to hand out tax credits, not collect penalties. The claim of
16,500 new agents stems from a partisan analysis based on guesswork
and false assumptions, and compounded by outright
misrepresentation.” [FactCheck.org, 3/30/10<http://factcheck.org/
2010/03/irs-expansion/>]

AP: “New Health Insurance Requirement … Was GOP Idea.” “Republicans
were for President Barack Obama’s requirement that Americans get
health insurance before they were against it. The obligation in the
new health care law is a Republican idea that’s been around at least
two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to Bill and
Hillary Clinton’s failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These
days, Republicans call it government overreach. Mitt Romney, weighing
another run for the GOP presidential nomination, signed such a
requirement into law at the state level as Massachusetts governor in
2006. At the time, Romney defended it as ‘a personal responsibility
principle’ and Massachusetts’ newest GOP senator, Scott Brown, backed
it. Romney now says Obama’s plan is a federal takeover that bears
little resemblance to what he did as governor and should be repealed.
… In the early 1970s, President Richard Nixon favored a mandate that
employers provide insurance. In the 1990s, the Heritage Foundation, a
conservative think tank, embraced an individual requirement. Not
anymore. ‘The idea of an individual mandate as an alternative to
single-payer was a Republican idea,’ said health economist Mark Pauly
of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. In 1991, he
published a paper that explained how a mandate could be combined with
tax credits — two ideas that are now part of Obama’s law. Pauly’s
paper was well-received — by the George H.W. Bush
administration.” [AP, 3/27/10<http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/
article/ALeqM5izYhdHhNfFOmxYz4pJ48SpKoSowgD9EN15K80>]

–
Organizing for America is a Special Project of the Democratic National Committee, and not endorsed by any candidates or candidate committees. 606 Townsend St, Lansing MI 48911.