I wonder if the Senator knows whether this comprehensive health care bill--which is going to "save" the government money; not run up the deficit--includes the amount of money it costs the government to pay doctors to serve Medicare patients. If it does not include that amount--which I believe I heard the Representative from Wisconsin say was $371 billion in the President's budget over 10 years--would that not be like asking the Congressional Budget Office to tell you the cost of a horse farm without the horses? Can the Senator from Arizona imagine a comprehensive health care program that does not include the cost of paying doctors to serve Medicare patients? If it does not, does that not clearly mean that just that one provision will guarantee that the bill will increase the Federal deficit?
Editor's note · Context
The speaker questions the financial implications of a comprehensive health care bill regarding Medicare costs.
Share
More from Heidi Alexander
I’m deeply concerned to hear reports of the collision involving 2 East Midlands Railway passenger trains.
I am here this morning to talk about a hearing that we had in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee this morning that affects 20 million families who have to fill this out every year. This is called the FAFSA. Usually, there…
I thank my friend Mitch, and I thank my friend Chuck for their remarks. I will have more to say to them later. On March 9, 1967, Senator Howard H. Baker, Jr., the newly elected Senator from Tennessee, made his maiden address, his first…
Today we’re giving local leaders more power to shape transport in their community.





