Medicare Part D went into effect in 2006.

2006 to 2009 is a lot less than 10 years.

Let's take a look at this program in 2013 and see how the true cost compares to the projected cost.

Actually, the Medicare Drug benefit for seniors is costing LESS than projected. Haven't located the actual numbers, but here are two references to this fact:

Fred Barnes:
The seventh achievement is the Medicare prescription drug benefit, enacted in 2003. It's not only wildly popular; it has cost less than expected by triggering competition among drug companies. Conservatives have deep reservations about the program. But they shouldn't have been surprised. Bush advocated the drug benefit in the 2000 campaign. And if he hadn't acted, Democrats would have, with a much less attractive result.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000%5C000%5C015%5C986rockt.asp?pg=2

Bill Frist:
Initially, conservatives howled because the prescription drug initiative "cost too much." Liberals hated it because it involved the markets and competition. But today, 23 million seniors live healthier lives, Medicare drug spending has been 20 percent to 30 percent less than predicted for each of the past two years and seniors overwhelmingly give the program enthusiastic reviews.
And, in addition, the program is highly redistributive -- giving advantages the poorest, introducing preventive care to Medicare, encouraging electronic prescribing and introducing chronic disease management. Who says Republicans can't lead on heath reform?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/15/frist.bush/index.html

Actually, it is the LOVE of money that is the root of all evil and those democrats sure do love other people's money.

My son-in-law works for a contractor. It's a known fact that if you're working on a federal project you can "stick it" to the government. The costs are always higher, accountability is lower. You are telling it like it is, Mike.

This is long, but Boortz should read it on the air.

Link: http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=28013

excerpt:
"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears not all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor--your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?

"Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions--and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

"But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made--before it can be looted or mooched--made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.'

Maybe you can help me here.

I have a running bet with my friends and associates that no one will take up.

Several years ago, I came up with the following:

-----------

John's Projection Principle: No government projection about money for 10 years (or more) in the future is ever within even 10% of the actual result.

Corollary: If the projection concerns a good thing, it is always overstated (e.g. revenues brought in or jobs created by a new policy); if the projection is about a bad thing, the projection is always understated (e.g. costs associated with a particular policy).

-----------

Since then, I have challenged anyone and everyone to prove me wrong.

To date, no one has been able to do so.

Think you can find an example which proves me wrong?