Who Do We Trust To Score Health Care Reform?

Why It Matters

Which scoring authority is trusted will shape legislative negotiations, public perception and policy design, since these estimates directly influence budget decisions and political arguments. If consensus on a neutral scorer erodes, partisan numbers could complicate passage and implementation of reform.

Summary

As Congress and stakeholders debate health-care reform, competing camps are likely to produce their own scores, heightening disputes over which estimates to trust. The Congressional Budget Office is cited as the traditional arbiter, tasked with estimating impacts on the number of insured, GDP and the federal budget. While individual technical tweaks and disagreements occur, CBO directors and career staff are generally regarded as trusted economists who produce broadly acceptable analyses. Even supporters acknowledge occasional margin disputes but view the office as a credible source.

Original Description

In an era when every side wants its own numbers, who can still be trusted to call it straight? Hoover fellow Lanhee Chen explains why institutions like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) still matter in debates over health coverage, GDP, and the federal budget.

Watch the full conversation via the "Related Video"