Texas Loser John Cornyn Tries to Insult Scott Presler and, Yeah, THAT Didn't...
And Then There’s Fraud: Jeffries Says California’s Elections Are Secure But Trump Is...
Debt Wish: Dem Ayanna Pressley Wants Reparations and MAGA Is Begging Her to...
Scott Jennings Reminds Karen Finney She Worked for Bill Clinton During Her ‘Character...
UK Politician Claims Elon Musk Orchestrated the Riot in Belfast After Beheading Attempt
Boston Police Searching for Suspects in Armed Robbery of Lemonade Stand
Former Court Clerks Arrested for Allegedly Helping Illegals Evade ICE
Thank You, European Soccer Fans, for Reminding Us How Great America Actually Is
Professor Blames Austin Metcalf’s Father for Not Teaching His Son ‘Black Boys Have...
ABC News Show Riot Damage After Asylum Seeker ‘Allegedly Attacked Another Person With...
NBC News: Burning Cross in Chicago Park Shocks Residents; January 6 Connection?
Ryan Grim: Republicans Looked Silly When ‘Nazi Tattoo’ Turned Out Not to Be...
What Stuck Out to Karmelo Anthony’s Father Was the ‘All-White Jury’
World Cup Tourists Find Surreal Sporting Goods Store With a Firing Range; Also...
Gavin Newsom's 'Donald Trump's Dream' Video Melts All Remaining Projection Detectors

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