 The legislation would expand insurance coverage to an estimated 32
million people who now lack it, according to the report, creating a
demand for services that "could be difficult to meet initially ...
and could lead to price increases, cost shifting and/or changes in
providers' willingness to treat patients with low-reimbursement
health coverage."The analysis was issued by Richard Foster, the
chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, which is
part of the Health and Human Services Department. The study was
conducted at the request of House Republicans, who quickly tried to
turn it against the Obama administration.
Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the House GOP leader, issued a
statement saying the study "confirms that this bill violates
President Obama's promise to ‘bend the cost curve.' It's now beyond
dispute that their bill will raise costs."
Obama and congressional Democrats have said one of their goals
with the legislation is to slow the growth of health care costs
nationally.
With one exception, Republicans voted against the legislation
when it cleared the House, and the GOP now is girding for a fight in
the Senate, where debate on health care is expected to begin within
days.
In the party's weekly radio and Internet address, Rep. Mark Kirk
of Illinois accused House Democrats of missing opportunities to
improve the legislation when they rejected Republican proposals to
limit lawsuits and give states more flexibility to enact innovative
changes.
Kirk, who is running for the Senate in next year's elections,
said health care costs could be lowered by "reining in lawsuits" and
allowing consumers to buy coverage from across state lines.
The report issued by Foster estimated that as a result of the
legislation, total health expenditures would be an estimated $289
billion higher in the coming decade than would otherwise be the
case, slightly less than 1 percent.
Separately, the report cast doubt on the claims of House
Democrats that the bill is fully paid for. It said that because of
reductions in planned Medicare payments, acute care hospitals,
skilled nursing facilities and home health care agencies "could find
it difficult to remain profitable and might end their participation
in the program (possibly jeopardizing access to care for some
beneficiaries)."
[to top of second column] |
Any attempt to remedy that problem "would likely result in
significantly smaller actual savings" than estimated, the report
said.
There was no comment from the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
D-Calif.
Kirk piled on the criticism in his GOP address.
"In sum, the bill opens a new trillion-dollar entitlement just as
our national debt tops $12 trillion," he said.
Congressional budget experts say the House-passed bill would cost
$1.2 trillion over 10 years and expand coverage to an additional 36
million people. The Republican plan Kirk touted is estimated to push
down premiums for privately insured people but would reduce the
number of uninsured by just 3 million, according to an analysis by
the Congressional Budget Office.
The legislation that passed would raise $460 billion over the
next decade from a surcharge on incomes over $500,000 for
individuals and $1 million for couples. There are also more than
$400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid and a new $20 billion
fee on medical device makers.
The GOP bill had no new taxes, and unlike the House-passed
measure, would permit insurance companies to continue denying
coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions.
[Associated Press;
By David Espo, AP special correspondent]
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.
 |
