Spoil Sport: Campaign Manager Blames Trump Culture for Sporting Shows Dropping Kamala
January 6 Committee Democrat Won’t Refuse Biden Pardon Despite Saying He Broke No...
Definitely Defeated: Kamala Serves Up Repetitive Word Salad at Annual DNC Holiday Dinner
Trophy Treat: Pop-Tarts Unwraps Tasty Toasty College Football Bowl Prize
Host of Cringemas Present: Celebrating Our Final Kamala-Cackling Holiday Season
State of the Chart: Chris Cillizza Blind to Fox News Post-Election Viewership Rise
Poll Position: Pollster Who Had Kamala Winning Iowa is Refuting Election Interference Clai...
Kamala Eyeing Full-Court Shot at Presidency Despite California Governorship Layup
ABC News Sends ‘Regrets’ But No Apology for Trump Rape Lies Spread by...
Seven Years Ago, Disney Enacted Order 66 on the Movie Industry (but We...
Israel Closing Embassy in Ireland, Citing 'Extreme Anti-Israel Polices' of Government
Infectious Disease Doc Gets WRECKED for Calling Lockdowns a 'Necessary Evil'
J. K. Rowling Pitches an Amazing New Action Series
BUT, BUT, BUT: Yet Another Democrat Defends Murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO
Set Phasers to BURN: Captain Kirk Throws Some MAJOR Shade at Luke Skywalker...

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