Denver Post: HHS audit says health overhaul will increase costs

[Badger]

Nonsense.  It was to give political cover to those "blue dog" Democrats who voted for the "health care" "reform" bill under the guise that it lowered costs.  It doesn't.  

The cover was about lowering the deficit, not the cost. And it certainly appears to lower per capita cost, as is discussed elsewhere.

Also, it's ludicrous to go haywire over a 1% increase in costs considering how easily that estimate could be off in one direction or another. Would you argue this is no big deal at all if it's off a little bit on the high end and the bill makes no change in costs, or a massive, massive scandal if it turns out to be slightly low and costs increase a skootch more? I should hope not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, they don't. Being able to go to an emergency room and get whatever emergency coverage they supply is not "having health care."

Not to mention being the absolute worst way to control health care costs.

[Badger]

This analysis was completed a week before the vote but suppressed by the Obama administration until late last week.  Gee.  I wonder why.

This turns out to be wrong, by the way.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_04/023543.php

Well, not completely wrong. The claims of "burying" or "delaying" the report until after the HCR vote are utterly bogus, yes. But the Wash Monthly article seems to indicate the underlying conclusions and cost estimations of the report appear to have been accurately reported.