the cbo said that 92% of americans premiums would be reduced. it is true that for those that is not the case those americans whose incomes are too high to qualify for subsidies, that is the tax credit by an assurance in exchange. but those 7% would get a lot better insurance. a lot higher quality insurance, then they get today because of their insurance market reforms in this legislation. the provisions which deny to exist preexisting conditions health status the community through the market rating provisions as the recession, etc. so for all americans, it is true that this legislation can provide better quality insurance comparing apples with apples. 92% reduction for all americans. 93% and the other 7% will be the individual marketers. they will have a lot higher quality insurance and in fact it would exceed the increase in premiums to give them a better deal than they otherwise would be getting. they looked at this for the year 2016. but at least it is the case for 2016. in fact, for many in the nongroup markets, those individuals who buy ins

that's why we don't have any cbo information now for many days. but there is the committee -- commission for medicare and medicine -- medicaid that clearly points out that this legislation would increase taxes dramatically, increase cost dramatically and decreased care and would have the effect of forcing people not only out of the system, but even if they're in the medicare system, they would not have physicians to provide that care because more and more physicians would prevail to treat medicare patients. >> so we go back to the 72 hours. we're going to get a new bill. we're not going to have the opportunity to amend it. we're not going to get the time to read and study it. the american people won't get the time. what do you think the outcome of that is going to be? >> well, i think we know that what the outcome will either be able to reflect the feelings and the intense feelings of the american people about the majority of the american people about this legislation and say, let's go back to square one. let's all commit to a bipartisan approach

it's the choice of the cbo. we may find a something that was sent over there doesn't work at all, doesn't fly. they may say this is not going to work, start over. and so we have to reserve the right to do just that. and i think that is why we're waiting for the congressional budget office scoring as they call it to ensure that it did the levels we want in terms of deficit reduction and reducing the cost of health care. it's frustrating on your site and frustrating here. but i'm hoping that in a matter of hours and days that we will receive the cbo report. but i would like to ask the senator from arizona if he wouldn't mind responding to me on this area do you believe the current health care system in america is sustainable as we know it in terms of affordability for individuals and businesses. are you concerned that more and more people don't have the protection of health insurance. fewer businesses offer the protection. are you concerned -- the >> time period has expired. >> basking in its consent for five addi

we are waiting to hear from cbo. we are not going to see anything on parental ceo gets more involved but do you understand -- >> i don't think anybody is went seals the details until obviously a series of points have come to see you to make estimates and predictions on a full range of things. and we certainly will await that as well. >> the general since -- is the president says he supports and cons of the notion of making available to the public something akin to what government and please have an option of? >> well, look, the president certainly talked about that. >> is that what this is? is that what you think this is? >> that's certainly part of it. i mean, again, as jonathan said, there's two different -- as i understand, as i think people here understand there's two different aspects they would increase recent competition. one part of that is something akin to what -- what is set up fehpb. >> will dustin held during to something like a big lead utility? is that a good comparison? is that how much regulation --

instead cbo is confirming that the new coverage mandate will drive premiums higher. but the democrats are declaring victory. because of the opposite by new government subsidies. about 57% of the people who buy the insurance that will simply to these individual markets will qualify for subsidies and cover about two thirds of the total premium. so the bill will increase costs, goblin disguise this cost by transferring them to taxpayers from individuals. higher costs can be conjured away because they are suddenly on government balance sheet. the rebuild 371.9 billion new health tax is are also apparently not a new cost because they can be passed along to consumers or perhaps be hidden and lost wages. this is a paleolithic of the brute force wealth and a very long way from the repeated white house claims that the reform is about ending the costs are. the only thing being dense here is the budget truth. moreover cbo is underestimating the cost increases based on county by county actuarial data. the insurer well point tabulated that mr. baucus would cause him to triple in

the answer is cbo says both of those things would have very, very modest effects on costs and quality. so just for -- for the sake of sort of intellectual consistency, if you're going to point to cbo and say the bills don't do enough even though cbo suggested that they are deficit-reducing, and then put up those two proposals as the key missing ingredients, you should be willing to live by cbo's analysis of those two provisions and again, they're not overwhelming. i'd also point out as you know the house has a national exchange whereas the senate has a state-based exchange system. in a world in which you had a national exchange as under the house bill, the ability to purchase insurance across state lines is -- becomes effectively moot. so under the house bill, it's not even really particularly relevant. with regard to your first question, obviously, we'll have more to say about what will be in the budget when we put out the budget. but i would want -- i want to highlight that with regard to moving towards a continuous improvement system so getting in place an innovation center, more c

i talked to the head of the cbo that we will send something to them. some detail about what we are authorized to say about what we will send him. we will write it up and legislative language. he said the same as when you sent over the last bill, he said that when you start talking about the plan and start shipping iran, it will be made public and we do not want that to be the case. we want to know the score before we start giving all the details to our own members. you will not get answers to those questions. i asked senator schumer and senator pryor to work together with the group of moderates and progressives. everyone thought it was an impossible job. these two fine senators have done an outstanding job of leading these two groups of people. everyone knows who the 10 are, that they have worked hard for days now. this is a consensus that will help insure the american people in many ways. one way is that insurance companies will certainly have more competition and two, the american people will have more choices. i already know that all 60 senators do

we don't have a cbo estimate of the cost. we understand that they keep sending estimates over to cbo and it comes back and do they send them back, which is probably why last week the senator from illinois, the number two ranking democrat said to me, i don't know what's in the bill either. an exact quote, i would say to the senator from arizona that i'm in the dark almost as much as he has and i'm in the leadership. that's an interesting commentary. and of course, the issue of the protection of the rights of the unborn is still unclear. that is a big issue with a lot of americans. it's a big issue with me and they know it's a big issue with my colleagues. so here we are back off of the bill at self and apparently we are going to have some sort of a vote on christmas eve or something like that. what the american people are saying now when they're saying keep the status quo, they are saying stop, go back to the beginning, sit down and have bipartisan basis and let's get this done, but let's get it done right. americans know that

the answer is cbo says both of those things would have very, very modest effects on costs and quality. so just for -- for the sake of sort of intellectual consistency, if you're going to point to cbo and say the bills don't do enough even though cbo suggested that they are deficit-reducing, and then put up those two proposals as the key missing ingredients, you should be willing to live by cbo's analysis of those two provisions and again, they're not overwhelming. i'd also point out as you know the house has a national exchange whereas the senate has a state-based exchange system. in a world in which you had a national exchange as under the house bill, the ability to purchase insurance across state lines is -- becomes effectively moot. so under the house bill, it's not even really particularly relevant. with regard to your first question, obviously, we'll have more to say about what will be in the budget when we put out the budget. but i would want -- i want to highlight that with regard to moving towards a continuous improvement system so getting in place an innovation center, more c

this represents what the cbo has said from health care cost would do if this bill is enacted. the blueline represents the cost of doing nothing. the blueline represents what will happen if congress does nothing. the year-over-year increases it represents the status quo. we have heard people come from the other side and say you have to do better, the president, vice president, say that, our democratic colleagues you cannot accept the status quo. that matter president the blueline represents the status quo. that is what will happen year over year in terms of increases with health insurance premiums that small businesses will deal with a record does not matter where you get your insurance. the employer small group market and large market if you give the individual market the rates will be 1013% higher. can i ask unanimous consent to extend for another five minutes? >> without objection. >> does not matter of your market unless you're in the individual market you'll pay much higher premiums than just the status quo which locks in double the rate of inflation increases of the premi

just three days ago cbo wrote "cbo expects the proposal would generate a reduction in the federal budgetary deficit following the 10 year budget window" end quote. some on the other side assert this bill adds to the nation's burden of debt. the fact is, the nonpartisan cbo says this bill will reduce the deficit by $132 billion the first 10 years and by 650 billion and one point* 3 trillion in the second 10 years for a reduction. between $650 billion and one point* $3 trillion. and this is the most serious deficit reduction effort in more than a decade. some on the other side of the aisle assert medicare. the fact is medicare at independent actuaries say this bill will extend the life of medicare by nine years. the fact is it is the most responsible effort to shore up medicare in more than a decade. some on riverside assert this post not do enough to insure the uninsured. the nonpartisan congressional budget office says it will extend access to 31 million americans and other supplies have to go without. the cbo says "the sheriff legal residents would rise from about 83% to about 94% in quote

cielo has also underestimated savings in the past and i am not picking on cbo. they've done an incredible hard job and they've done an incredible job they completely overworked any number of efforts week asking them up for the models and analysis. but it's automatic and a process. according to the generic pharmaceutical association in 1984, it was predicted we would save our country 1 billion in the first decade. now generic medicines save more than that every three days to read every three days we do what was predicted to happen in savings every ten years. in the mid nineties the congressional budget office released analysis showing in 1994 the tenth anniversary of the hatch-waxman savings had reached approximately $8 million. the new data released showed by 1999, 15 years after the hatch-waxman became law, a generics were generating 49 million of annual savings. and in the last decade alone, generics have saved consumers, businesses, state and federal governments $734 billion. so, madam president, i am convinced -- i haven't even talked about the wellness' pro

cbo says so.nd is paid for in a fiscally responsible way it reduces the federal deficit, provides quality affordable health insurance to millions of americans and is a net tax cuts. for american families, businesses and workers which in these tough economic times means more than ever. mr. president the senator from oklahoma. >> thank you. i stained a confused from the chairman of the finance committee because we have all the reports that the bill you were talking about isn't the bill we're going to be voting on because we're totally changing what we're doing. what is out there now is we are going to expand medicare to those down 255 years of age and we are going to expand medicaid up to those at 150 percent, going to add billions of dollars of man days even at 90% copiague by the federal government to the states over the next 10 years. we have a medicare program that you've taken $465 billion out of it going to add 34 million new people to enter the new plan in the new plan we are talking about, y

the cbo estimates it would be roughly at savings of $54 billion. that does not take into consideration the cost of defensive medicine and doctors have to practice because of fear of being sued. i would ask the distinguished chairman of the committee where is it any meaningful medical malpractice reform in this 2000 page bill? where is it? i had a town hall meeting the other day in arizona, as i do quite frequently. the rate lot of doctors said came. doctors, nurses, and cared givers. i asked them, what do you do about medical malpractice reform? every one of them said we practice defensive medicine. we prescribe additional testing procedures. we have to do it because we find ourselves in court by the trial lawyers. to not underestimate the stunning success of the american trial lawyers association who have made sure there is no provision in this bill that has to do with medical malpractice reform. by the way, if there is an example it is called the state of texas. the state of texas enacted meaningful and yet not draconian medical malpractice refor

there is a letter, information received on the cbo. as jeff sessions mention on the floor this morning. you can do so on our website, c- span.org, posted there for you. we will have a news conference coming up about an hour from now, at 11:30 eastern. from this morning's "washington journal," discussion on crime and dr. line -- host: thank you for joining us. let's begin with some statistics, the so-called crime clock. you'll see that a violent crime is committed once every 22.8 seconds, a murder, one every 32 minutes. a forcible rape every 5.9 minutes. a robbery every 1.2 minutes. aggravated assault, one every 40 seconds. what does this tell you? guest: it tells us we have a problem with crime in the scourge. but it tells us there are many, many victims. -- in this country. but it also tells us there are many victims. host: what rights do they have? guest: we have rights. they have rights at the federal level but also at many state levels, state constitutions. there are victims' rights, and we have been working at that for 25 years. e

so in effect a week, and this has already been certified by cbo. we lower the premiums for seniors triet that's the benefit. the opponents claim that the medicare cuts to providers are going to result in decreased access. it's interesting the very same people who brought us the so-called death panels that never existed are really at this again with respect to access. they want to scare you and say you're not going to get access to a doctor or to your medical care and they claim that medicare beneficiaries can be harmed by the bill, and yet even as they say that, the people who represent 40 million retired americans say no, no, that's not true. our people are protected. the american medical association says no, no that's not true. the folks with much care about are protected. this bill fully protect guaranteed medicare benefits for seniors. it will keep medicare from growing broke in seven years. it extends the life of the medicare trust fund. it reduces prescription drug costs for seniors. it ensures seniors can keep their own doctors next year by

this is a cbo correction, 24 hours after the first cbo estimate. that is an important new development today. we are learning more about the sweetheart deals that have been made. i am going to ask my colleagues to comment on that. the taxpayers of kentucky are not excited about having to underwrite the special deals that were apparently made in nebraska, vt., and maybe massachusetts. i will remind the taxpayers of my state that they are subsidizing these other three states because their senators have extracted a price for passing this bill. this is just another good reason why a bill like this should not be done on a narrowly partisan basis. when you decide to do something and you have 60 votes, you are open for business and creates the kind of silly proposition that we have seen on full display. it empowers every single one of those 60 to extract some special deal for them at the expense of everybody else in the country. after all, this is supposed to be all of our but health-care. with that, let me call on senator kyl. >> i was born in the state o

we don't have a cbo estimate of the cost to the? we understand they keep sending estimates over to cbo and it comes back so they send them back which probably is why last week the senator from illinois and number two ranking democrat said to me i don't know what's in the bill either. and exciting quote i would say to the senator from arizona that line in the dark almost as much as he is and i am in the leadership. that's an interesting commentary, and of course the issue of the protection of the rights of the unborn is still unclear. that is a big issue with a lot of americans. it's a big issue with me and it's a big issue with my colleagues. so here we are back off of the bill itself, and apparently we are going to have some kind of vote on christmas eve or something like that. but the american people are seeing now when they see keep the status quo, they are sinking stop, go back to the beginning, sit down in a bipartisan basis and let's get this done but let's get it done right. americans know medicare is going broke, american st

the cbo uses a unified budget. they simply say the money comes into the treasury and is spent here and they do not score this as a debt. when you listen to both their reports, they make clear it does increase the debt instead of a $130 billion increase, reduction of debt in america, the 10 year deficit would be increased by $170 billion under this plan. >> thank you very much and thank you for explaining it. let me try to put it in simple terms. the seniors have been had and our kids will get the bill. that is what this comes down to. we're talking here about spending the same money twice in order to create a massive new entitlement that has nothing to do with seniors taking their money and spending it on this new entitlement and then climbing with a senior citizen'' program which is medicare is better off because of that. as jeff has pointed out, the actuary of the president and the cbo has said that is dishonest accounting. i want to read that language again. i have not heard this blunt a language on manipulation

i'm wondering if it would be helpful if that was built into cbo scoring and why isn't it? >> just to be clear, i'm talking about the interest rate, interest rate and potential for a spike in interest rate. >> so it is built into cbo's analysis of the present budget, which is the only comprehensive budget proposal it sees in a cycle, and the cbo in the context of doing that analysis looks at that and look at applications for interest-rate, and all the feedback that happens to the economy. the difficult on a piece of legislation on a piece of legislation based as you don't know where all the moving parts are so you can't do that with the deficit impact might be. >> there's a question right here and in one in the back. >> thank you. i'm not with any particular group. >> a citizen. >> i pay taxes and am now on medicare and have worked in health care. i want to address this question to the whole panel. you mention, mr. nussle, a trigger. i don't hear anyone here talking about and i think the trigger is here, the average american. we understand we are not working. so as you talk

, because i know the cbo is working on just that, just as the cbo had told you all before that legislation bends the cost curve, that legislation would slow the growth rate in health care spending, that health care legislation wouldn't add to the deficit, but it would in fact help our fiscal situation. and you've seen the cbo talk about the extended life to the medicare trust fund that legislation that the senate is currently debating would have in terms of the specific policy. again, that's what the cbo is evaluating, and i think many on capitol hill await what they have to say. >> is the white house agnostic on which approach to a public option is better? >> the president is not agnostic to continue to making progress on health care reform and we're trying to get it through the senate. scott. >> thanks, robert. a quick question on compensation. you phrased it that the bank executives acknowledged they have a problem with compensation. how did the president understand that? that these bank executives haven't come up with an effective way to pay their people, or -- >> no, no, no. i'm sorry

that trend would continue the cbo says, over the next decade. during the next decade the cbo says it would reduce the deficit by $450 billion, that is nearly a half a trillion dollars in deficit reduction according to the congressional budget office and the second ten years. i have also heard it argued that health care reform will raise taxes. that too is false. and that health care reform will provide billions of dollars in tax relief to help american families and small businesses to afford quality health insurance. tax cuts. the joint tax committee again bipartisan served both bodies, but the house and the senate, tells us for example our bill would provide $40 billion in tax cuts in the year 2017 alone, $40 billion alone in the year 2017. the average effective tax there will get a tax cut of nearly $450. the average effective tax fair with an income under $75,000 in the year 2017 will get a tax cut of more than $1,300. let me repeat that. the average effective taxpayer with an income under $75,000 in the year 2017 will get a tax cut of more t

is the conductivity of the cbo. -- objectivity of the cbo. they are bipartisan. the cbo report said it is responsible for creating as many as 1.6 million jobs. a couple of my friends wrote me a note saying, stop quoting that it created over 600,000 jobs. i said, i promise i will do that if you start saying it created 1.6 million jobs. it has created jobs. there has been progress. it is not enough. that laid-off teacher does not want to hear about the gdp. that out of work autoworker or that teamster does not want to hear about a cbo report. my grandfather was from scranton, pa. when your brother law is out of work, it is a recession. when you are out of work, it is a depression. that is what he said. it is a depression. it is a depression for over 10 million americans. i am pleased that the next phase of the recovery act we are entering in a more rapid rate. we are spending with a particular focus on those aspects with proven success, but zero paychecks in the pockets of hard-working americans. -- and by putting paychecks in the pocket of har

some of the same people who cited the cbo when they said it did not reduce the deficit, they say theythe most credible are biter of -- arbiter and are now ignoring them. finally, we agree on reforms that will make coverage affordable for 30 million americans who don't have coverage. every day that goes by, another 14,000 americans lose their health care coverage a recent study shows that in the next decade, half of all americans under the age of 65 will be without coverage at some point. if this reform passes, when it passes, for the very first time in their lives, these americans will be able to provide health insurance for their families. those americans who are already covered will no longer have to live in the fear that their family might fall through the cracks of the system we have now. these are not small changes. these are big changes. they represent the most significant reform of our healthcare system since the passage of medicare. they will save money. they will save family's money, businesses money, and they will save government money. they will save lives. that is why this

i know that we've sent over there to the cbo, tamar, not everybody's going to gregory on every piece we sent but it doesn't mean everybody disagrees on what we said. i applaud and congratulate the ten senators led by senator schumer and senator bayh. i think it's important to mention their names. brown, carper, feingold, nelson, rockefeller, as i indicated we can't disclose the details of what we've done but believe me when we've got something this could and i feel for osset moves this bill we down the road. >> senator schumer, you gave details earlier today. can you just at least tell if any of those have dramatically changed? >> we are not going to talk about what we are sending to marra for the reasons that leader reid said. >> things change all the time. >> we have seen all kind of articles in the newspaper said schumer, senator pryor, i have said things, other parts of the ten. as elmendorf and i talked to light of the things you've read in the newspapers, all the things you for the newspapers for a simple one of our people, and i won't mention which of them, the public option i

the party out of power seems to like the cbo numbers. democrats voted to use cbo numbers during the bush presidency. republicans demanding for the use of cbo numbers of democratic objections. the out party has come to the table to negotiate. it may be the only way that these issues can be addressed effectively. reflecting back over the recent decades, it appears that most of the significant budget agreement that lower federal deficit were adopted when one party controlled congress and the other the presidency. ithis includes the clinton year. the 1983 social security reform also occurred under conditions of divided government. bipartisan compromise is just about the only way that the american government functions. given the large numbers, the crowding of the agenda and the effectiveness of the party obstruction, major legislation is almost never passed any other way. the powerful political parties stand in the way of compromise. >> thank you very much. before we move on, we're talking to the earlier panel. it looks like the health care v

if they disclose the details of the proposal now according to the rules the operate under, cbo would be obliged to make public their cost estimate. >> when are we likely to see any of this on the senate floor? >> that's a good question. i would say probably not before next week. >> alex wan of congressional quarterly, thank you. >> thank you. >>> there's been kind of a long journey. we've confronted many hurdles and have taken big steps in a lot of little steps. but tonight we have overcome a real problem that we had. i think it's fair to say that the debate to this stage has been portrayed as a very divisive one. many have assumed people of different perspectives cannot come together. but i think that what we were able to work out the last few days as culminated tonight believes that fact. we have a broad agreement. now i know people are going to ask give me every detail of this. i talked 20 minutes ago to doug elmendorf. i told the head of the cbo that we were going to send him something tomorrow that he would have to score. and the reason i mention that to you, i also went over in

>>eporter: according to cbo estimates the sete bill wod cost $781 billion over ten years. it wld also cover 31 million uninsured americans. mandate that iividuals buy insurance or pay fine. provide tax credits to low income americans thelp them affo coverage, and create an inrance exchange where those who don'get coverage through their employers n shop for a plan. the bill does not include government-run plic insurance opon. and does not allow people as young as 55 to buin early to medicare, a proposal floated in recent weeks. instead,t envisions nearly half trillion dollars in dicare spending cuts to help fund t new coverage. publicans like john mccain of arizona warned today itll means years of pain fore any benefits >> it's one of the great bernie madoff gimmicks tt i'vever seen, that anybody has ever seen. if theill were signed by the prident on the first of january, the taxes would kk in andhe medicare cuts and other cutsould kick in and it wouldn't be fouyears later that any othe benefits begin to accrue. what is that that's nuty stuff. and by t way, it's unacceable.

out of work all the mobile worker or the teamster, they do not want to hear about the cbo report.en your brother-in-law is out of work, it is a recession. when you are out of work, it is a depression. and it is a depression. over 10 million americans. which is why i am pleased that the next phase of this recovery act, and we're only about half way through it, we are entering at a more rapid rate where we are distributing the money quicker, projects are hitting the ground faster, and we're spending and focusing on those aspects that have proven successful creating jobs, putting will paychecks in the pockets of hard-working americans. by design, the biggest impact are in the days to come. in the next few weeks to a month, another roughly $13 billion will be announced doling out in terms of both investments in broadband and high-speed rail, competitive education, infrastructure. the money spent on clean water, a renewable energy, superfund sites, and much more will more than double. it will more than doubled this quarter and will maintain a similar pace the next two quarters. tomorro

this represents what the cbo has said. health care costs would do if this bill is enacted. the blue line represents they are the cost essentially a few bill of doing nothing. in other words, the blue line represents what will happen if congress does nothing. that is the year-over-year increases that were already seen. represents the want to call it the status quo. what we forgive, from the other side they want -- we've got to do better than the status quo. the president, the vice president, you can't ask that the status quo republicans are attacked for being in favor of the status quo. we'll madam president the blue and represents the status quo. the blue line is what's going to have been year-over-year in terms of increases in health insurance premiums and small business and individuals in this country will be dealing with. it doesn't matter where you get your insurance in a small group, individual market. ironically he did in the individual market our rates are going to be 10% to 13% higher. and ask unanimous consent to extend for another five minutes? >> without objectio

i'm wondering if it would be helpful if that was built into cbo's scoring and why isn't it? just to be clear, and talking about the interest-rate -- the interest rates and the potential for a spike in the interest rates. >> it is built into cbo's and ounces of the president's budget, which is the only comprehensive -- analysis of the president's budget, which is the only comprehensive study. except the interest rate and they feed back to the economy. the problem on a piece of legislation by piece of legislation base, you do not necessarily know what all of the user impact might be. >> there's a question here. and then there is one in the back on the right. >> thank you, i am not with any particular group. i may citizen who pays taxes and is now on medicare and has worked in health care. i want to address this question to the whole panel. you mentioned, mr. nussle, about a trigger. i do not hear anyone talking about -- and i think the trigger is here for the average american. we understand, we are not working. when you talk about entitlement reform, social security and medica

we will see what cbo scores so we don't see the changes that are suggested. my hope and belief is it will improve more. >> let me just add the first part of your question. your premise of your question which was the biggest challenge -- not sure how you can find it. struggles are in our caucus. first of all, the republicans have chosen to be off the plane. they could have been on the playing field but chose not to be. when they walk away after months of max baucus meeting with several of their members and the leadership came down very hard on several of them and said we don't want a bill. bottom-line is of course when you are left to do all of the 60 votes, when you have a filibuster process which they have led which requires 60 votes and all 60 votes are likely to come from democrats, of course the debate is going to be how do you make the best bill within a certain universe. they have taken themselves out of it. that is a point that is important to make. the second part is in the medicare provision if it is sustained, that has been something the democrats f

instead cbo is confirming that the new coverage mandates will drive premiums higher. the democrats are declaring victory, claiming that these higher insurance prices don't count because they'll be offset by new government subsidies. while about 57% of the people who buy insurance that will supplant these individual markets will qualify for subsidies to cover about two thirds of the total premiums. for the bill will increase cost, but it will and disguise the cost by transferring them to taxpayers and individuals. kobe conjured away because they are suddenly on the balance sheet. the rebuild 371.9 billion in new health tax is are also apparently not a new cost. because they can be passed on to the consumers are or have been hidden in lost wages. this is a pill you liberal of the root ball distribution and a very long way from the repeated white house claims that the reform is about mending the cost curve. the only thing being bent here is the proof here at mow over, cbo is certainly underestimating the cost increases based on county by county actuarial dancer well poin

the party out of power seems to like the cbo numbers. democrats voted to use cbo numbers during the bush presidency. republicans demanding for the use of cbo numbers of democratic objections. the out party has come to the table to negotiate. it may be the only way that these issues can be addressed effectively. reflecting back over the recent decades, it appears that most of the significant budget agreement that lower federal deficit were adopted when one party controlled congress and the other the presidency. ithis includes the clinton year. the 1983 social security reform also occurred under conditions of divided government. bipartisan compromise is just about the only way that the american government functions. given the large numbers, the crowding of the agenda and the effectiveness of the party obstruction, major legislation is almost never passed any other way. the powerful political parties stand in the way of compromise. >> thank you very much. before we move on, we're talking to the earlier panel. it looks like the health care v

some of the same people who cited the cbo when it was saying it didn't reduce the deficit, the same cbo's, the most credible, possible arbiter of whether or not this ads to our deficit, now suddenly or ignoring what the cbo says. tctc they will save money. they will save the family's money, they will save businesses money and they will save the government money. and they are going to save lives. that is why this reform a supported by groups like the aarp that represents most of american seniors. that is why this reform has to pass on our watch. thunell let's be clear. the final bill would include everything that everybody wants. no bill can do that. but what i told my former colleagues today is that we simply cannot allow differences over individual elements of this plan to prevent us from meeting our responsibility to solve a longstanding and urgent problem for the american people. they are waiting for us to act. they are counting on us to show leadership. and i don't intend to let them down and neither do the people standing next to me. there is too much at stake for families who can't

or not this ads to the deficit now suddenly are ignoring what the cbo says. finally we agree on reforms that will make coverage affordable for 30 million americans who don't have it. every day that goes by another 13 million americans lose health coverage. another study shows have all americans under the age of 65 will be without coverage at some point. on the other hand of this reform passes, when it passes for the very first time in their lives these americans will be able to provide health insurance for their families and those americans already covered will no longer have to live in fear their family might fall through the cracks of the system we have now. these are not small changes. these are big changes. they represent the most significant reform of our health care system since the passage of medicare. they will save money. they will save family money, businesses money and government money. and they are going to save lives. that's why this reform is supported by groups like aarp represents most of america's seniors. that's why this reform has to pass o

just three days ago cba wrote and i quote, cbo expects the proposal would generate a reduction in the federal budgetary commitment to health care during the decade following the ten-year budget, end quote. some on the other side of the aisle assert that this would add to our nations burden of debt. the fact is that the it will reduce the budget by $132 billion the first ten years am i $650,000,000,000.1.3 trillion in the second ten years, reduction. in the second ten years between $650,000,000,000.1.3 trillion in the second ten years of this bill. the fact is this is the most serious deficit reduction efforts in more than a decade. some on the other side of the aisle assert that this bill would harm medicare. the fact is that medicare's independent actuaries say that this bill would expand the life of medicare by nine years. the fact is that this is the most responsible effort to share up medicare and more than a decade. some on the other side of the aisle assert that this is not doing enough to ensure the uninsured. the fact is the nonpartisan congressional budget office says that th

the reason there is not more in it is because cbo once corrette. because we have never demonstrated the capability and one final point. this bill only scores the way cbo scores because it says you intend to do what no congress has ever done. it says you intend to cut medicare. $462,480,000,000,000. if you intend to cut medicare the american people like to nowhere you are going to do it in how it's going to affect them but if he were just doing it for a scoring point, the young people in this country ought to know that too. because where you say you are claiming $460 billion you are really just getting to the deficit if in fact we don't cut medicare that much and is it fair, is it fair to the medicare advantage patients who are poor, who don't qualify for renewal coverage with medicaid, can't afford a supplemental policy. is it fair to take away the benefits that they have today that we have given them and it was not price by the insurance industry, it was priced by sea mfn say because the government agencies didn't private we are going to take away

it says although, no final decision is expected until cbo data are in hand which could be as early as today, democrats left a 90-minute emergency caucus meeting monday night convinced of the problem of the proposal's demise. it looks like that's the case, the senate finance chairman, max baucus. it is just a matter of getting support from 60 senators. gross on to say that liberal senators took news with surprising ease. we've got to move it. the health care committee chairman tom harkin said. a champion of the public option. and senator sherrod brown, democrat of ohio, another champion of public option told reporters i want to see health care reform. there's going to be a good bill. your thoughts this morning. hollywood, florida. reed on the democrats line . what do you i this of this latest on the negotiations. >> caller:? hello? >> host: reed, what do you think. >> i am absolutely opposed. i think it case pitlation. it is false bravado on part of democrats. they failed miserably. i think it's, i studied in europe many years ago. and i was, i envoyed their -- envied their health care

but if we just do enough to satisfy the scoring requirements of cbo the congressional budget office,alling a day but not yet to enough to make health care to the affordable and sustainable for the decades ahead than most of the other reforms will prove unsustainable. in fact, the entire system will be unsustainable. the good news is it is time still to get right. the barrier which is tall and wide is the perception that the politics of washington inevitably make it impossible to take on health care costs in a comprehensive fashion. for example, the bills before congress settled for a timid pilot programs rather than requiring a major challenges or changes. creates incentives that only applied to medicare rather than across the board and it establishes a new oversight body but severely limits the scope of review. at best the approaches miss the opportunity to focus on of the forces that drive up health care costs for the 200 million people with private coverage as well as for medicare and medicaid. at worst the pending legislation actually creates incentives for costs to accelerate. f

i don't know how many questions i have been asked about cbo numbers.. there are millions of people without health care this okchristmas. there are millions of people watching health-care rates skyrocket. instead of giving chippy interviews, w3might be good to e part of a solutioni]ç to get hh careçq reform and make a reali. that is what the american people want to see. >> can i follow up on the question about the president's involvement? senator feingold said the lack of support made keeping the public option an uphill struggle. i asked if it was the administration's fault? he said yes. there are some democrats who believe the president did not push hard enough. >> i think everyone is entitled to their opinion. we would not be at this point in health care reform were it not for the president's leadership. we would not be at a point where we were a couple of votes awayç to getting health care reform through the senate. at that point -- is somebody ordering a pizza? >> [inaudible] >> it is $30,000 if you answer that call. [laughter] we will have healt

among the participants will be a member of the former cbo -- director. i think it is one of the important issues, that the people who make it up have run in past administrations. the federal reserve board, budget committees -- they are the budget gurus of the country in the come together with a six- step plan to focus on moving and coming up with a plan to stabilize the debt. i think it will be an important thing and get the conversation we know needs to happen moving here in washington and. throughout the and host: maya, thanks, as always for joining this. please come back again. we'll come back in just a moment with our sunday roundtable discussion. in our it 9:00 p.m. hour we will ask you think people magazine should select as a person of the year. congressman joe barton, republican of texas, a ranking member on the house energy and commerce committee -- we will ask him what he thinks causes global warming. here's an excerpt. >> the shortage would be god. i think it is a natural cycle. i do not believe that mankind is a dominant influence. at least on

that is what the cbo is evaluating. of the president is not agnostic about trying to get health care reform through. you said that bank executives acknowledged the problem they have with compensation. how did the president understand that? these bank executives have not come up with an effective way to pay their people or is it a public perception? >> they understand that given put the taxpayers have done, the extraordinary steps they have taken, that compensation in that environment is out of step with any notion of common sense. that is what the president has talked about before and that is what the president reiterated, not just in structure. the president was clear and picked up on what another of the bankers said. it is not just about ensuring that any compensation should be more directly tied to a long- term equity versus short-term cash but you have to make a strong evaluation about the sheer level and size of your compensation and the environment in which we exist. >> the president believes that the bankers unde

the cdo handles this just the right way -- the cbo handles this in the right way. we hope we will be able to deliver good news to the american people, and we passed a pro consumer pro patient bill. host: more from "the washington post." host: and senator brown told reporters -- i want to see health care reform. . your thoughts this morning. hollywood, fla., what do is think of the latest on the negotiations? caller: i am absolutely opposed. i think it is capitulation. i think it is false bravado on the part of the democrats. they failed miserably. i studied in europe many years ago. in t envied their health-care system 40 years ago. we probably have one of the worst health care systems in the world. i did it is a tragedy. -- i think it is a tragedy. i think this is a disaster. the republicans are probably celebrating. they have brought down a president who have all the capital in the world. i think it is a tragedy. host: north adams, mass., wrrick on the independent line. what are your thoughts? caller: good morning. i hope not. are really do. host: why? caller: i

guest: you have to trust cbo. in the city, they are like god. if you do not believe them, it takes a super vote to override. they are professionals. they are non-partisan. here is where you have to read between the lines. the ones that have individual policies, not group policies, will probably see premiums go up 10% to 13%. it does not talk about increase in taxes. and there will be money diverted from the medicare to subsidize people's health insurance so those premiums do not go up. you have to take that into consideration that somebody else is paying. if you were in a small town in texas or iowa, and they were talking about health care reform, and i walked into the coffee meeting and said something like you know the bills before congress will increase taxes. they will increase premiums. they will take $400 billion out of medicare that is already in trouble, and put into a new health insurance program. and we are not going to cut down on inflation of health care. they would say, that does not sound like health care reform to me. the word refo

the need to go to the cbo and get a cost estimate which could make or break it.e are 50 other democratic senators who will also have a say. it only takes one person to slow it down. host: review for us what we do know. guest: we know that the public option as it was is essentially gone from this deal. it has been replaced with a series of non-profit healthcare plans that would be offered and administered, or least organized by the government. there is also a medicare by and for people from 55-64, which is a big win for liberals. -- that is a medicare buy-in. there will not be subsidies for people to buy those before they are 55. we're waiting on the toes. some of it will probably depend on what happens with how much this bill costs. host: a caller, david, asked the question -- can you leave your health insurance plan at your work and join medicare? giving what he said would be a break to small businesses. guest: we do not know at this point. the details of this medicare buy-in will be very important. there are many questions. let's say that you are 55 year- old m

it is a good primer as to what politicians gauge the cbo.ll. our science correspondent talks about how in an ideal world we would be talking about markets and not mandate on health care and how we can create markets and enable them so we can on least the good things about those to help solve these problems. host: the print version has the cover and you confided online at reason.com. you can check it out for yourself. we'll take our next call from new york city, on our democrat line. caller: i want to comment on the previous guy. his ideas about the 40 million was interesting. i also want to say that i had an opportunity to live in france and a couple of years. i was a teacher in normandy. i had an opportunity to experience the french health care system, as well. it was very inexpensive. i had a major procedure done on my teeth due to gingivitis issues in the u.s.. prior to moving to france. there was another procedure that needed to be done but it would cost thousands of dollars. when i moved to france that fall, it cost about $70 or 70 bure

i do not know how many questions i have been asked about cbo numbers in the last nine months.in cahoots with the congressional budget office is delusional. to put it mildly. i would suggest this for the rnc and for anybody in the republican party. there are millions of people that do not health health care this christmas. there are millions of people that are watching their health- care rates skyrocket, and instead of giving chippy interviews, it might be good to be part of the negotiations and a solution to get health care reform, to make it a reality for the american people. i think that is what they want to see from their political parties in washington. >> can you talk about the president's involvement? senator feingold said the lack of support for the administration made it -- made keeping the public option in a struggle. i asked chairman dean yesterday about this, and he said, yes, there are democrats believe that there are democrats who believe that he was not a ball to. >> they are certainly entitled to their -- that he was not involved. >> they are certainly entitled