What's Not to Like About a Massive Deficit?

Mary Jo Kilroy is a Democrat and a lawyer. Historically that demographic tends to require clarification for what the definition of “is” is. Even if I parse the definition of “is” it befuddles me to explain what Congresswoman Kilroy meant when she said of Obamacare, “It is paid for and will lower the deficit. What is not to like about that?” Not a single part of her statement is true. Which, I guess, is what's not to like about it.

When will Mary Jo learn that it takes more than a plastered-on smile to pull the wool over our eyes? Claiming Obamacare is paid for is like if I swiped my credit card to buy a luxury yacht and then boasted to my friends, “Yep. That sucker’s bought and paid for… assuming I win the Mega Millions.” Although, in order to pay for Obamacare the U.S. Government would have to win the Mega TRILLIONS.

Unfortunately, no such lottery exists. However, if it did, I’d rather play the odds on winning that than believe that Congress is going to follow through with all the actions its members would have to take in order for Obamacare to actually reduce the deficit.

The other big fib in Congresswoman Kilroy’s statement is that Obamacare will lower the deficit. The entire argument that Obamacare will reduce the deficit is constructed around estimates from the Congressional Budget Office. Due to the constraints placed on the CBO by the Congress, these estimates didn’t take into account several major elements of the Democrats’ healthcare reform package.

Despite the previous poor track record of government cost estimates (the actual cost of Medicare was nearly nine times the estimate), for the purpose of this blog entry, we’ll pretend that the CBO estimates are accurate. After making that enormous departure from reason, let’s take a look at what the CBO estimates don’t take into account.

First, the oft-cited CBO estimates do not include a $208 billion increase in reimbursements to physicians for treating Medicare patients. This repayment plan referred to as the “doc fix” was a part of the original House healthcare reform bill but was removed because of its high cost. Speaker Pelosi has stated that the “doc fix” is “very important” to Democrats, and that they “have made a commitment to do this.” If passed, the “doc fix” would, according to the CBO, cost an additional $208 billion for a net increase in the deficit of $59 billion dollars.

Second, the Congress must cut $523 billion from Medicare spending—and keep it cut. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, a non-partisan public policy research organization, thirty-three million people will be at risk of losing Medicare access as a result of the proposed cuts. Senior citizens have the highest voter turnout rates of any demographic. In an election year, I seriously doubt the Democrats are going to want to antagonize thirty-three million senior citizens by eliminating their Medicare; it tends to be an issue very near and dear to their hearts.

Time will tell how deep the Medicare cuts actually go. However, it’s a safe bet the cuts won’t be $523 billion dollars deep. That leaves us in an even deeper deficit than the $59 billion dollar deficit the “doc fix” will have us in.

Congresswoman Kilroy’s statement, “It is paid for and will lower the deficit,” leaves me wondering: How can she really believe we're that gullible? I can't wait to give her a reality check in November.