Medicare cost cover up?

[Moe_Szyslak]

The way this adminstration behaves, they appear to believe WE work for THEM...

Medicare Cost Cover-up?

WASHINGTON, March 15, 2004

(CBS) An election year battle over the new Medicare law reached a fever pitch.
There are charges now the Bush administration is selling the program to the public in a very misleading way – and misled Congress about the true cost of the program, reports CBS Chief White House Correspondent John Roberts.

It passed by only a few votes -- and now there is evidence it took more than political armtwisting to get the President's prescription drug plan through.

An e-mail -- obtained by CBS News -- appears to show the White House was anxious to hide ballooning cost estimates. Sent on behalf of former Medicare administrator Tom Scully, it warns the agency's chief actuary, Rick Foster to not tell Congress the price tag would be well above the White House's stated 400 billion.

Foster is told "the consequences for insubordination are extremely severe"....

Democrats -- who want another vote on the bill -- are outraged.

"In the United States of America, in our democracy, there is no place for silencing the truth that belongs to the American people,'' said Bush's Democratic challenger, Sen. John Kerry.

©MMIV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.

[007]

Just thinking out loud: I wonder how often this crap happend b/f the age of the Internet and communcation prevalency other than the nightly news and papers...

[BurnKU]

Originally posted by 007@Mar 16 2004, 04:11 PM
Just thinking out loud: I wonder how often this crap happend b/f the age of the Internet and communcation prevalency other than the nightly news and papers...

I was going to say something to that effect. It doesn't excuse this, but I'll bet the government doesn't tell us the real cost very often when they are selling us a bill of goods.

[210]

Originally posted by 007@Mar 16 2004, 05:11 PM
Just thinking out loud: I wonder how often this crap happend b/f the age of the Internet and communcation prevalency other than the nightly news and papers...

Welcome to the "information age!"

[007]

Originally posted by BurnKU+Mar 16 2004, 04:12 PM-->

QUOTE (BurnKU @ Mar 16 2004, 04:12 PM)

lazydaze Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 34777 Share Tweet #6 03-16-2004, 03:14 PM Administration officials used estimates by the Congressional Budget Office What was the other proposal cost? Anyone know? Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist Comment Post Cancel dv6y Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 59978 Share Tweet #7 03-16-2004, 03:33 PM Originally posted by Moe_Szyslak@Mar 16 2004, 04:08 PM Foster is told "the consequences for insubordination are extremely severe".... The post-game spin is that he was "kidding" ... Dude. Can. Fly. Comment Post Cancel Moe_Szyslak Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 11484 Share Tweet #8 03-16-2004, 03:41 PM Originally posted by lazydaze@Mar 16 2004, 04:14 PM Administration officials used estimates by the Congressional Budget Office What was the other proposal cost? Anyone know? Here's a much better link...from the Miami Herald web site...appears the true cost estimates were over $100B higher - a greater than 30% difference... http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/...=cbsmarketwatch The Dude abides. Comment Post Cancel lazydaze Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 34777 Share Tweet #9 03-16-2004, 03:44 PM the White House was embracing an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office that it would cost $395 billion in the first 10 years. Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist Comment Post Cancel Damtoft Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 7867 Share Tweet #10 03-16-2004, 04:56 PM I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough"? And, frankly, it has never occured to me that "winning" a debate is important, or that I should be hurt when someone like Airshark or kah, among others (for whom winning a pseudo debate or declaring intellectual superiority over invisible others is obviously very important) ridicule me. -The Artist formerly known as King in KC Comment Post Cancel Moe_Szyslak Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 11484 Share Tweet #11 03-16-2004, 05:00 PM Originally posted by Damtoft@Mar 16 2004, 05:56 PM I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough"? from the Herald article... Rep. Sue Myrick of North Carolina, one of the 13 Republicans, said she was ''very upset'' when she learned of the higher estimate. ''I think a lot of people probably would have reconsidered [voting for the bill] because we said that $400 billion was our top of the line,'' Myrick said. so...no lies, no election year entitlement bill to stave off the Ds... Moe The Dude abides. Comment Post Cancel Damtoft Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 7867 Share Tweet #12 03-16-2004, 05:03 PM I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough". And, frankly, it has never occured to me that "winning" a debate is important, or that I should be hurt when someone like Airshark or kah, among others (for whom winning a pseudo debate or declaring intellectual superiority over invisible others is obviously very important) ridicule me. -The Artist formerly known as King in KC Comment Post Cancel Mr. Goalie Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1771 Share Tweet #13 03-16-2004, 05:06 PM The moderators are going to have to fix the acoustics on this thread. Mr. G Comment Post Cancel Moe_Szyslak Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 11484 Share Tweet #14 03-16-2004, 05:11 PM Originally posted by Damtoft@Mar 16 2004, 06:03 PM I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough". This is a Bush administration bill, passed by a GOP Congress. The story here is not about the bill Dems would've preferred, John. It's about an intentional misrepresentation of the data for the purpose of tricking members into voting for the bill. If you want to argue deficit, I'm happy to compare the records of any recent D to any recent R POTUS. Moe The Dude abides. Comment Post Cancel Damtoft Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 7867 Share Tweet #15 03-16-2004, 05:13 PM Republicans have finally quit playing Charlie Brown to your Lucy Moe. You'll just have to get over it. I'd invite the Ketchup Kid to submit his spending cuts at any time. And, frankly, it has never occured to me that "winning" a debate is important, or that I should be hurt when someone like Airshark or kah, among others (for whom winning a pseudo debate or declaring intellectual superiority over invisible others is obviously very important) ridicule me. -The Artist formerly known as King in KC Comment Post Cancel Previous 1 2 3 template Next English (US) Deutsch (Du) English (US) French Spanish Help Contact Us Go to top Copyright © 2003-13, TippingPitchers.com Powered by vBulletin® Version 5.7.3 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. All times are GMT-6. This page was generated at 05:06 PM. Working... Yes No OK OK Cancel X

[lazydaze]

Administration officials used estimates by the Congressional Budget Office

What was the other proposal cost? Anyone know?

[dv6y]

Originally posted by Moe_Szyslak@Mar 16 2004, 04:08 PM


Foster is told "the consequences for insubordination are extremely severe"....

The post-game spin is that he was "kidding" ...

[Moe_Szyslak]

Originally posted by lazydaze@Mar 16 2004, 04:14 PM

Administration officials used estimates by the Congressional Budget Office

What was the other proposal cost? Anyone know?

Here's a much better link...from the Miami Herald web site...appears the true cost estimates were over $100B higher - a greater than 30% difference...

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/...=cbsmarketwatch

[lazydaze]

the White House was embracing an estimate by the Congressional Budget Office that it would cost $395 billion in the first 10 years.

[Damtoft]

I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough"?

[Moe_Szyslak]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Mar 16 2004, 05:56 PM
I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough"?

from the Herald article...

Rep. Sue Myrick of North Carolina, one of the 13 Republicans, said she was ''very upset'' when she learned of the higher estimate.

''I think a lot of people probably would have reconsidered [voting for the bill] because we said that $400 billion was our top of the line,'' Myrick said.

so...no lies, no election year entitlement bill to stave off the Ds...

Moe

[Damtoft]

I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough".

[Mr. Goalie]

The moderators are going to have to fix the acoustics on this thread.


Mr. G

[Moe_Szyslak]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Mar 16 2004, 06:03 PM
I thought the Democrats said the plan "wasn't rich enough".

This is a Bush administration bill, passed by a GOP Congress.

The story here is not about the bill Dems would've preferred, John.

It's about an intentional misrepresentation of the data for the purpose of tricking members into voting for the bill.

If you want to argue deficit, I'm happy to compare the records of any recent D to any recent R POTUS.

Moe

[Damtoft]

Republicans have finally quit playing Charlie Brown to your Lucy Moe.

You'll just have to get over it.

I'd invite the Ketchup Kid to submit his spending cuts at any time.