Jamie Raskin Tries Playing STUPID on CNN About the MANY Pictures of Bill...
Karen Bass's Weepy Post About How SCARED Poor Illegals Are This Christmas Goes...
Our Gift to You This Holiday Season
When Even Alex Jones Says You've Gone Too Far? WOOF
Byron York OWNS Dems Insisting Scandalous TRUMP Pic Is Missing From Epstein Files...
Candace Owens Learns the HARD WAY That Calling Ben Shapiro a Parasite (and...
One Post PERFECTLY Sums Up the Democrats' Hilarious BACKFIRE After Pushing to Release...
Mogadishu Utopia? X Users Say It's Funded by Minnesota's Missing Billions in Welfare...
Somali Sheriff Says Now That We've Been Hired, It Means We're Working for...
As Operations Move to Columbus, Officials Vow Not to Work With ICE
Scott Adams Thanks Perma-TDS Dems for Helping Perpetuate Trump's 'Unmatched Political Skil...
Minnesota AG Keith Ellison Posts Cringe-Inducing 'Scam Stopper Showdown' Video
Photographer Critiques Vanity Fair's Photos of Trump Administration Officials
City of St. Paul Tells ICE to Cease and Desist Using City Parking...
Outrageous Stalking of ICE Ends with Epic Warning: Follow Us Again and You're...

Stop the presses! This time it's the Democrats "seizing" — on cherry-picked Medicare-for-all numbers

It’s become a well-known joke here that whenever Democrats do something stupid, the headlines the following day always use phrasing like, “Republicans pounce” or “Republicans seize on” whatever stupid thing the Democrat did, thus changing the focus of the story.

Advertisement

So imagine our shock and surprise when we actually saw the phrase “Democrats seize” in a Washington Post headline.

Glenn Kessler writes that Democrats cherry-picked bits of a report written by Charles Blahous that they say proves that Medicare-for-all would save the country $2 trillion. However, Blahous is calling foul on that claim. Kessler writes:

In the fourth sentence of the report’s abstract, Blahous wrote, “It is likely that the actual cost of M4A would be substantially greater than these estimates, which assume significant administrative and drug cost savings under the plan, and also assume that healthcare providers operating under M4A will be reimbursed at rates more than 40 percent lower than those currently paid by private health insurance.”

The main point of his study is being ignored by Democrats — that even by generously accepting [Bernie] Sanders’s assumptions that he could squeeze providers so much, the plan would still raise government expenditures by $32.6 trillion. This is in line with a 2016 estimate by the left-leaning Urban Institute of an earlier version of the M4A plan — that it would cause federal expenditures to increase by $32 trillion. (Without the provider cuts, Blahous estimated the additional federal budget cost at nearly $40 trillion over 10 years.)

Advertisement

Good point … but a lot of The Washington Post’s followers are not pleased with this fact-check:

So you subscribed to The Washington Post until now, but canceled because suddenly the paper “doesn’t care about facts”? Fine with us.

Advertisement


Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement