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.
So imagine our shock and surprise when we actually saw the phrase “Democrats seize” in a Washington Post headline.
Fact Checker: Democrats seize on cherry-picked claim that "Medicare-for-all" would save $2 trillion https://t.co/e1HeOx6nIu
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) August 7, 2018
Don't you mean "pounce"?
— Virginia Plain (@GinnyPlain) August 7, 2018
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.)
Oops!!! https://t.co/ZcaG0Tb3lz
— Thomas M Fountain (@ThomasMFountain) August 7, 2018
If you're including journalists in "Democrats" ( which you probably should ) this is correct, because it wasn't just politicians. https://t.co/9fLj6hPFeN
— BT (@back_ttys) August 7, 2018
Good point … but a lot of The Washington Post’s followers are not pleased with this fact-check:
This is embarrassing, @washingtonpost. Why are you cherry-picking data when you fact check? Why did you leave out how much it costs individuals for their healthcare now? This is a gross oversight. Apologize and issue a correction immediately. @Ocasio2018
— Demetri Papadopoulos (@DemetriPapadopo) August 7, 2018
This is disgusting. I am canceling my subscription to @washingtonpost immediately; they completely cherry-picked data in this "fact check."
This is myopic, politically motivated journalism at its worse. #WashingtonPost doesn't care about facts. #BlueWave #FactsMatter #1u #M4A https://t.co/dkgaIlNY2b
— Demetri Papadopoulos (@DemetriPapadopo) August 7, 2018
So you subscribed to The Washington Post until now, but canceled because suddenly the paper “doesn’t care about facts”? Fine with us.
It doesn't work. There are no pink unicorns. Facts matter. (There is, however, a tooth fairy.) https://t.co/UT7sEP7FbN
— Abigail R. Esman (@radicalstates) August 7, 2018
“For perspective on these figures, consider that doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax collections would be insufficient to finance the added federal costs of the plan,” ???
— S Hoff (@SHoff83845516) August 7, 2018
Yeah? And who would pay for that? Easy to hold a sign, isn’t it?
— Andrew Ross (@Professorross) August 7, 2018
Related:
"They'll live": Doctors will just have to take a massive pay cut for the US to be more like Canada https://t.co/Q6ttDmCR5L
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 7, 2018
Join the conversation as a VIP Member