First, call it what it is: an editorial (opinion piece).
Second, his post only shows that he hasn't read the plan. I posted a link to the latest plan here on the UT (it's over 1000 pages).
Third, I do agree with some of his statements (calling the Repubs to the carpet for their embellishments ) :o)





>From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/06/AR2009080603854.html?referrer=digg:
>
>The recent attacks by Republican leaders and their ideological fellow-travelers on the effort to reform the health-care system have been so misleading, so disingenuous, that they could only spring from a cynical effort to gain partisan political advantage. By poisoning the political well, they've given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.
>
>There are lots of valid criticisms that can be made against the health reform plans moving through Congress -- I've made a few myself. But there is no credible way to look at what has been proposed by the president or any congressional committee and conclude that these will result in a government takeover of the health-care system. That is a flat-out lie whose only purpose is to scare the public and stop political conversation.
>
>[...]
>
>By now, you've probably also heard that health reform will cost taxpayers at least a trillion dollars. Another lie.
>
>First of all, that's not a trillion every year, as most people assume -- it's a trillion over 10 years, which is the silly way that people in Washington talk about federal budgets. On an annual basis, that translates to about $140 billion, when things are up and running.
>
>Even that, however, grossly overstates the net cost to the government of providing universal coverage. Other parts of the reform plan would result in offsetting savings for Medicare: reductions in unnecessary subsidies to private insurers, in annual increases in payments rates for doctors and in payments to hospitals for providing free care to the uninsured. The net increase in government spending for health care would likely be about $100 billion a year, a one-time increase equal to less than 1 percent of a national income that grows at an average rate of 2.5 percent every year.
>
>The Republican lies about the economics of health reform are also heavily laced with hypocrisy.