[Congressional Budget Office] and [Joint Committee on Taxation] now estimate that, on balance, the direct (mandatory) spending and revenue effects of enacting H.R. 3590 as passed by the Senate would yield a net reduction in federal deficits of $118 billion over the 2010–2019 period. (Direct spending—as distinguished from discretionary spending—is spending that stems from legislation other than appropriation acts.) In our earlier estimate, the budgetary impact was a net reduction in deficits of $132 billion.So much for the Republican "argument" that the Senate health reform legislation will increase the deficit. So, what other arguments against this do they have? Other than insane (and, of course, completely false) charges like "death panels" and "government takeover of health care," that is. [cue sound of crickets chirping]
P.S. Let's not forget that a robust public option, which we should certainly have, "provides the largest deficit reduction over 10 years." Remind me again why that isn't in the Senate bill?!? Because Republicans and a few conservadems are against giving people an option, also known as a choice, of a public health care plan along with all the private ones? Oh, horrors! Socialism! Communism! Lions and tigers and bears! Heh.