take a look at this ad in the wall street journal. first of all i want to draw your attention to the cartoon. there is obama on a tortoise with a whip. what was it supposed to be the tortoise and the hare? the newspaper denied the catchy cartoon but every word was written by glen hubbard. here in the second to last paragraph is the claim. president romney would create about 12 million new jobs in his first term and millions more after that. which means 250,000 jobs each and every single one of his 48 months in office. he says he will do that by cutting regulations and cutting taxes. does it add up? first the good news. tlt have been a few times in american history where this has happened. the chief economists of jp morgan notes it happened in the 1990s. that is where the good news ends for the romney jobs claim. since 1939 only 27% of monthly jobs reports have shown growth of 250,000 jobs or more. the research also notes the united states has never had four straight years whe
good evening. i m erin burnett. mitt makes a bold promise. 12 million jobs. take a look at this ad in the wall street journal. first of all i want to draw your attention to the cartoon. there is obama on a tuortoise with a whip. what was it supposed to be the tortoise and the hare? the newspaper denied the catchy cartoon but every word was written by glen hubbard. here in the second to last paragraph is the claim. president romney would create about 12 million new jobs in his first term and millions more after that. which means 250,000 jobs each and every single one of his 48 months in office. he says he will do that by cutting regulations and cutting taxes. does it add up? first the good news. tlt have been a few times in american history where this has happened. the chief economists of jp morgan notes it happened in the 1990s. that is where the good news ends for the romney jobs claim. since 1939 only 27% of monthly jobs reports have shown growth of 250,000 jobs or more. th
at the reality of real numbers. back when they first started medicare, they projected out 25 years and said it would cost $12 million in 1990. it cost $110 billion. and you re talking about these studies conducted within medicare. cbo just conducted a study of 34 programs to cut costs i understand this argument, but it didn t cut any costs whatsoever. this isn t going to help you on the campaign trail. specifically, how did cbo game the numbers for the president s health care plan? just projecting these phantom savings in medicare. let s face it. we have not implemented the $208 billion worth of sgr cuts yet, ok? why does anybody think that congress is going to actually implement the $529 billion worth of the first 10-year cuts, much less the $1.6 trillion that would be required to be cutting medicare in the time frame of 2016, 2025, when the real bill really comes due? where are we going to get $1.6 trillion worth of cuts? steve rattner, i want to put
years. that sounds great. but in october of this past year, the president and his health care secretary did away with the class act which wiped out about $70 billion worth of the projected $143 billion savin savings. you say they knew going in the class act wasn t going to work and that was a gimmick to sell it. the budget chairman called the class act a scheme. they included $1100 million in exchanges that chips away at the deficit reduction. the real doozy in terms of that sleight of hand is the fact that they actually said they were going to reduce medicare by $529 billion. they haven t reduced medicare or payments from providers by $208 billion under the sgr, what makes anybody think they re going to do that with the $529 billion. this thing is going to add hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars to our debt and deficit and we can t afford it. real quickly, you would know something about that. you were in a small business and you owned one for 31 years.
they take $590 billion out of the medicare program and one thing i have pointed out, if you notice, we have not imposed the $208 billion of supposed medicare cuts to providers that is required under the sustainable growth rate formula and we have not enacted that because congress understands if they do that, access to care is beginning to be hampered. quality of care will go down. and, i am skeptical those $529 billion of cuts would occur in medicare but if they did, understand what that would do to the quality of care to the access of care. because medicaid frequently doesn t even cover the cost to providers, in some states, some districts, less than 60 percent of providers actually accept medicaid patients. what will happen if the cuts go through? you will reduce the number of doctors that will see medicare parents and, by the way, 25