Propaganda Performer: Democrats Thank Stephen Colbert Online for His Years of Service to...
Let's Compare Other Late-Night Hosts' Finale Viewership to Numbers Colbert's Media Fans Ar...
Trump Trolls Colbert with Hilarious AI Video of Throwing Him in the Dumpster
Tulsi Leaves DNI Role to Care for Husband Abraham — A Heartwarming Example...
The Snake Emerges: Adam Schiff's Heartless Jab at Tulsi Amid Her Husband's Cancer...
POPCORN! FCC Chair Brendan Carr Asks for Public Comment About ABC's 'Bona Fide...
Moan of ‘Arc’: CNN’s Kasie Hunt Has ‘Grave’ Concerns About Trump’s America 250...
Reuters Gets Shredded for Anon 'Person Familiar With the Matter' Spin on Tulsi...
Power Hungry: Wasserman Schultz Invades Majority-Black District After Redistricting Wipes...
Rep. Thanedar Slammed as Disgusting and Vile for Attacking Tulsi Gabbard While Her...
DNC's Photo Tribute to Colbert Speaks Volumes About What the Show Was REALLY...
Trump Announces Decision on Attending Don Jr.'s Wedding Amid Iran Tensions and X...
Democrats Stage Mutiny Against Schumer As Party Loses All Hope
Tulsi Gabbard Resigning as Director of National Intelligence, Trump Responds With Support
Dem Rep. Katherine Clark Tried Pushing Biden-Era BS on CNBC and Got Called...

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