Iranian Women Celebrating FREEDOM Take Nasty, 'Antisemitic Karen' Slut-Shaming Them As HOO...
Eric Swalwell Tries Picking a Fight With Dave Portnoy Over Operation Epic Fury...
Jihadis NEVER Learn: Israel Takes Out Gathering of Islamic Experts Meeting to Select...
WOW: Abigail Spanberger's Admin and VA Democrats ALREADY Have EMBARRASSING Yet DELISH Scan...
Scott Jennings Renders Anti-Trump CNN Panel SPEECHLESS With Straight-Fire Defense of Iran...
Democrat Podcaster Jim Acosta Fears That Republican Scott Jennings Will Soon Have His...
Mark Cuban: Democrat Party Should Shell Out Millions to Hire Mamdani’s Socialist Social...
Deranged Clickbait Islamist Prays for Wrath of Allah, Gets Biblical Spanking Instead
Saturday Night Live Sketch Mocking Tourette's Gets a Community Note
WSJ: Trump Admin Using English Tests to Crack Down on CDLs for Asylum-Seekers
NYT’s Peter Baker Seems Upset Trump Didn't Rush Back to the Oval Office...
'Going to Be HILARIOUS'! Trump Announces a FIRST in His 2 Terms (Have...
Axios CEO: Debate If Death of Khamenei Was Worth 3 American Lives Will...
Loon Who Campaigned for Elizabeth Warren Says Every US Official Is a Legitimate...
Guy From Project Liberal Thinks He's Found the ‘Republican Benghazi’

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