Could history repeat itself? (OneNewsNow.com)

Could history repeat itself? (OneNewsNow.com): "Most people agree that one of the central problems with healthcare is it keeps getting more expensive. But there's no reason to think Congress' attempt to expand federal health programs is really the smartest way to bring these costs under control. In fact, history tells us otherwise. Studies shows that cost estimates for government programs are almost always much lower than the actual cost.

Consider the historical record for just two public health programs.



Medicare was first introduced in 1965. Currently, it covers 40 million people who are either older than 65 or have certain disabilities. At its inception, congressional estimates predicted that nearly every part of Medicare (Part A, Homecare Benefit, and Catastrophic Coverage Benefit) would cost much less than it actually has.

In fact, the cost of the program was so completely underestimated that a Joint Economic Committee (JEC) report in July noted, 'the House Ways and Means Committee predicted that the Medicare program in its entirety would cost $12 billion in 1990. Actual Medicare spending in 1990 was $110 billion -- off by nearly a factor of 10.'

Keep that in mind when lawmakers insist their bill will cost $1.2 trillion (a number the Congressional Budget Office reached after making several unlikely assumptions). Imagine, instead, that the House bill turns out to cost 10 times that much. That's more than $12 trillion -- more than the value of half of everything produced within the United States. Would this proposal even be considered if that were the case?"