Barack Obama's health care plan "will cost taxpayers $1,700 more to cover each new person."
Hillary Clinton on Sunday, April 20th, 2008 in in a television ad
Hard numbers are just guess-timates
Sen. Hillary Clinton has a new health care ad in Pennsylvania in which she accuses Sen. Barack Obama of attacking her, and then takes a few jabs at him.
Obama's plan "will cost taxpayers $1,700 more to cover each new person," Clinton's ad states. "Obama's health care plan leaves 15-million people with no coverage."
We've previously checked her statement that Obama's plan leaves 15-million people without coverage and found it to be Half True .
For evidence that Obama's plan will cost $1,700 more, the Clinton campaign pointed to a blog post by Paul Krugman of the New York Times. Krugman believes Clinton's plan, with its universal mandate that requires every person to have health insurance, is superior to Obama's plan, which does not.
Krugman's numbers come from a study by Jonathan Gruber, an economist with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Gruber's latest working paper is about covering the uninsured in the United States.
Gruber studied broad models for providing health insurance, comparing a plan that includes a mandate with one that does not. Krugman and Clinton's ad both correctly note that the per-person cost difference between the two models is about $1,700 per year.
But as Krugman notes, the models, while "broadly similar" to Clinton's and Obama's health plans, are not the same. For one thing, Obama's plan has a mandate for children, so it is not the same as a plan with no mandates at all.
Also, experts we've interviewed previously about the Clinton and Obama health plans have emphasized the difficulty of putting hard numbers to the campaign proposals. The proposals are broad outlines and contain little in the way of hard numbers for subsidies or eligibility for subsidized insurance. This makes it hard to say exactly how much the plans will cost. ( We looked at this point previously when Obama said his plan would save more .)
So Clinton's ad is pushing the envelope quite a bit to say that her plan would save $1,700 per person. Yes, there is evidence that a mandate lowers costs for everyone, but whether $1,700 would be the difference between her and Obama's plan is a different matter. We find her statement to be Barely True.
Editor's note: This statement was rated Barely True when it was published. On July 27, 2011, we changed the name for the rating to Mostly False.
Published: Monday, April 21st, 2008 at 12:00 a.m.
Subjects: Health Care
Paul Krugman, Healthcare Numbers , Feb. 2, 2008
Jonathan Gruber, "Covering the Uninsured in the United States," January 2008
PolitiFact.com, Clinton vs. Obama: dueling health plans , Dec. 3, 2007
We want to hear your suggestions and comments.
For tips or comments on our Obameter and our GOP-Pledge-O-Meter promise databases, please e-mail the Obameter. If you are commenting on a specific promise, please include the wording of the promise.For comments about our Truth-O-Meter or Flip-O-Meter items, please e-mail the Truth-O-Meter. We’re especially interested in seeing any chain e-mails you receive that you would like us to check out. If you send us a comment, we'll assume you don't mind us publishing it unless you tell us otherwise.
Keep up to date with Politifact:
- Sign up for our e-mail (about once a week)
- Put a free PolitiFact widget on your blog or Web page
- Subscribe to our RSS feeds on Truth-O-Meter items
- Subscribe to our RSS feeds on GOP Pledge-O-Meter items
- Subscribe to our RSS feeds on Obameter items
- Advertise on PolitiFact
- Shop the PolitiFact store for T-shirts, hats and other PolitiFact swag