The Blog

House Debates Repeal of Obamacare

5:45 PM, Jan 18, 2011 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

Watching the debate over the repeal of ObamaCare that's taking place on the House floor right now, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D., Tex.) said late this afternoon, "The choice here is whether to give more money to insurance monopolies or leave just a little bit in the pockets of middle-class Americans."  There are only two big problems with this characterization of the choice at hand:

House Debates Repeal of Obamacare

One, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), ObamaCare would cost more than $2 trillion in its real first decade (2014 to 2023).  One wonders where Rep. Doggett thinks this $2 trillion-plus would come from, if not from Americans' pockets.  That which doesn't come directly from Americans' pockets through increased taxes would come from digging into the pockets of seniors through decreased benefits, as ObamaCare would get about half of its windfall from raiding money from Medicare.

Two -- and even more pointedly -- the CBO also projects that, in its real first dozen years (2014 to 2025), Obamacare would funnel $1 trillion from American taxpayers, through the federal government, to private insurers.  So this is money that would be taken out of Americans' pockets, funneled through Washington, and then deposited into insurers' pockets.  ObamaCare is a financial boon for insurers, who merely have to agree to stop operating as genuinely private businesses to receive their (taxpayer-funded) payouts.

So, the real choice is to let Americans control the money that's in their own pockets (repeal, and then real reform), or to have the government reach into Americans' pockets on behalf of insurers (ObamaCare).

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 19 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers