Damagin' Doug Piles On

I've written a few times on the nerdfight between the Congressional Budget Office's "Damagin'" Dough Elmendorf and the Office of Management and Budget's Peter "the Piper" Orzag over the costs of ObamaCare. The last time we encountered these guys, Elmendorf had just crushed Orzag's claims that a new "Medicare Commission" would magically solve ObamaCare's crippling budget forecast.

Orzag has not been heard from since. (I'm kidding... kinda.)

And yet, Elmendorf's onslaught continues today with this 7-page dismantling of the President's bold claims that ObamaCare's "prevention" and "health" programs would create massive long-term savings for the US health system. In a letter to Congressman Nathan Deal (R-GA), ranking member on the House Health Subcommittee, Elmendorf made clear that no such savings exist, and in fact the prevention/health programs will raise costs:

Although different types of preventive care have different effects on spending, the evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, not lower, medical spending overall.

...

More generally, however, designing government policies that are effective at inducing people to be healthier is challenging. Even successful efforts might take many years to bear fruit and could involve significant costs. Moreover, many employers already support some wellness services for their employees, and new government efforts to encourage such services could end up paying for services that some individuals are already receiving — which would add to federal costs but not reduce total future spending on health care. As with preventive medicine, the net budgetary effect of government support for wellness services depends on the balance of two factors — the reduction in government spending for people who reduce their future use of medical care and the costs to the government of providing or subsidizing wellness services.

Damagin' Doug wins again. I just hope Orzag's on vacation or something.

Did Elmendorf Just Break Out His Finishing Move on Orzag and ObamaCare?

Over the last few days, we've joyously followed the soap-operatic nerdfight between CBO's "Damagin'" Doug Elmendorf and OMB's Peter "The Piper" Orzag (note: fake nicknames) over the House ObamaCare legislation. The quarrel has been intense, and pretty much indecipherable (it's the federal budget, afterall), so for those of you who find numbers scary, here's a visual interpretation of the fracas:



(CBO is obviously represented by the team throwing lightning bolts and sleep spells. Obviously.)

Well, it appears that Elmendorf may have just unleashed his finishing move on Orzag and his ObamaCare Obfuscations (holy alliteration, Batman!). From Ed Morrissey:

The CBO released a new analysis of the House version of ObamaCare yesterday, after getting blasted by White House budget director Peter Orszag for "exaggerating” the costs associated with the proposal. Douglas Elmendorf tells Rep. Dave Camp (R), the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, that the changes proposed by the White House will have little impact on their cost analysis, and that in fact the news gets worse in the second decade after the first runs up a $239 billion deficit: ... "In sum, relative to current law, the proposal would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year-budget window."

"Fatality" for ObamaCare as we know it? Greg Mankiw sure thinks so, and Chuck Todd says that the House definitely won't vote on the current version before Summer Break. But whether the bill changes dramatically over that time remains to be seen. I think it has to change, and significantly, but I'm certainly no expert. (Rumors are that the Senate version could replace the public option with a "co-op" that might garner some squish GOP'ers.)

But whatever form ObamaCare takes, here's what we know for sure: Orzag better bring his A-game because Damagin' Doug is a bad, bad man.

To which I can only say: Finish him, Doug.

Top-Eds

Top-eds will be a recurring feature in which I highlight some of the better opinion pieces and editorials for the day/week. Hence, "Top-eds." Get it? Oh, shut up.

He Said/VIP Said - Mark Steyn, NRO

-Steyn's tone is a little over-the-top, but I haven't read a more devastating takedown re: Gates-gate.

What You Might Not Know About the Recovery - Vice Pres. Joe Biden, NYT

-The op-ed itself is drivel, but it's noteworthy because of Biden's (and, by extension, the administration's) complete about-face on how the Stimulus* was supposed to work.

5 Freedoms You'd Lose in Health Care Reform - Shawn Tully, Fortune

-Tully reads the ObamaCare bills so we don't have to. Unsurprisingly, personal liberty loses. Big.

The White House Goes to War Against the CBO - Ed Morrissey, Hot Air

-Morrissey details the Orzag-Elmendorf tensions (Nerdfight!) and the White House's overt, and pretty unprecedented, attacks on the CBO.

CBO's Elmendorf Does Not Heart ObamaCare

This is cold, Douglas. Just cold, dude. First, you start ObamaCare's freefall with your comments about the plan's "economic insanity" and "complete lack of spending controls."

And now this.

We thought you were cool, man. We thought you had come around after Barack invited you to hang at the White House. We thought we were buds. Boy, do we feel stupid.

Let's hand it over to the Politico for the big news:

For the second time this month, congressional budget analysts have dealt a blow to the Democrat's health reform efforts, this time by saying a plan touted by the White House as crucial to paying for the bill would actually save almost no money over 10 years.

A key House chairman and moderate House Democrats on Tuesday agreed to a White House-backed proposal that would give an outside panel the power to make cuts to government-financed health care programs. White House budget director Peter Orszag declared the plan "probably the most important piece that can be added" to the House's health care reform legislation.

But on Saturday, the Congressional Budget Office said the proposal to give an independent panel the power to keep Medicare spending in check would only save about $2 billion over 10 years- a drop in the bucket compared to the bill's $1 trillion price tag.

"In CBO's judgment, the probability is high that no savings would be realized ... but there is also a chance that substantial savings might be realized. Looking beyond the 10-year budget window, CBO expects that this proposal would generate larger but still modest savings on the same probabilistic basis," CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf wrote in a letter to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Saturday.

The proposal's meager savings are a blow to Democrats working furiously to bring down costs in order to win support from their party's fiscally conservative Blue Dogs, who have threatened to vote against the bill without significant changes. The proposal was heralded as a breakthrough on Tuesday after Blue Dogs and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman emerged from the White House with agreement on giving the independent panel, rather than Congress, the ability to rein in Medicare spending.

Republicans pounced on CBO's analysis as another demonstration that Democratic proposals don't control costs.

"The President said that rising health care costs are an imminent threat to our economy and that any reform must reduce these long-term costs. But CBO has made clear once again that the Democrats' bills in Congress aren't reducing costs and in fact could just make the problem worse," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.

Saturday's CBO analysis caps a tough week of blown deadlines, partisan bickering and fierce intra-party fighting among Democrats. On Friday, the tension between the Blue Dogs and Waxman exploded when Waxman threatened to bypass his committee and bring the reform bill straight to the House floor without a vote. The move infuriated Blue Dogs who have used their crucial committee votes to leverage changes to the bill.

But by late Friday, Waxman said their colleagues had pulled the two groups "back from the brink" and back to the negotiating table.

Still, Hoyer said there was little chance that that the House would pass a health reform legislation before Friday when lawmakers are expected to leave Washington for summer recess.

Thus concludes the President's Worst Week Ever. A week that started with such Hope ends with Steny Hoyer's sad revelation that even a House vote seems unlikely before Summer Break.

What Doug Elmendorf beginneth, Doug Elmendorf endeth.

What a jerk.