Gavin Newsom Said Last Year He Moved on From Joe Rogan but That...
Harold Ford Jr. Warns Fellow Dems Their Socialist Takeover Is Turning the Big...
Hilarious Memes Explode As Mamdani's Cringe Theater Kid Energy Delivers Peak Political Com...
WNBA Bombshell: Gorgeous, Hilarious Sophie Cunningham Drops Truth Bomb: No Men in Women's...
'America Deserved It' Streamer Hasan Piker Now Proudly Displays Framed Burning Twin Towers...
Scott Presler Thanks NJ's Dem Governor for Proving Why the SAVE Act MUST...
CNN’s Abby Phillip Demanded Evidence of Voter Fraud, Now There’s Proof and She’s...
Media Blackout: Mamdani Calls Bibi a War Criminal — Zero Questions for Dems...
Mark Warner Turns Into a Stammering Mess When Asked About the Socialist Takeover...
DSA Brain Trust Confuses Two Jewish Joshes, Then Ilhan Decries Bombs She Voted...
Scott Jennings Calls Out CNN’s Abby Phillip’s Word Games and Whataboutism on Non-Citizen...
CNN’s Jake Tapper Grapples With Non-Citizen Voting in NJ After Claiming It Wasn’t...
Chris Hayes: The Most Left-Wing People Have Postgraduate Degrees but Are Financially Strap...
Trans Wisconsin Assembly Candidate Who Lives in Poverty Pledges to Be GOP's Worst...
Senate Candidate Abdul El-Sayed Says 'ICE Has Nothing to Do With Immigration'

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