BCT Editorial – 9/23/04

This page was last updated on September 25, 2004.

Going up; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 23, 2004.

You won’t catch me defending anything to do with the expansion of Medicare. My position is Medicare should be phased out responsibly so current beneficiaries get what they were promised – but no more – and current workers gradually take ownership of their personal/family healthcare responsibilities. The purpose of this critique is merely to point out the editorial’s inaccuracy and inconsistency.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Remember the original cost of President Bush’s Medicare drug prescription plan? It was originally supposed to cost no more than $400 billion over 10 years.

“Shortly after it was signed into law, federal actuaries boosted the estimate to $534 billion. Bush administration knew about the higher cost prior to passage of the bill but chose not to inform Congress.”

[RWC] Contrary to the editorial’s claim, the two different Medicare prescription plan cost estimates were known to Congress, though not every member knew about the two estimates. The lower figure was not solely a White House estimate. The non-partisan (according to John Kerry) Congressional Budget Office also estimated the cost at about $400 billion. I don’t support the program regardless of cost, but we need to get the facts straight.

“Now, The Washington Post reports a ‘mid-session review’ by the Office of Management and Budget and Medicare actuaries found the drug plan would cost an additional $42 billion.

“The Bush White House disputes the numbers, but quite frankly its credibility on this issue is shot.”

[RWC] Perhaps the Times can provide us with a list of non-trivial government programs for which the cost estimates were revised down. I don’t like cost estimates going up, but making it sound like the Medicare drug prescription plan is an exception is disingenuous.