As this issue of Healthcare IT News went to press, there was an uncanny feeling of déjà vu. Been there, didn’t do that.

I’m referring to the hold that Republican leaders in the House of Representatives placed on HR 4157, the healthcare IT bill sponsored by Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.) and Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.). The bill, which was passed by two House committees earlier in the year, promotes the adoption of healthcare information technology and calls for national standards for implementing electronic health records.

Prior to the hold, the Johnson bill seemed destined for passage.

First, it was sponsored by Republicans, who could claim credit for its success in an election year.

Second, a Senate version of the bill had already been passed, and reconciling the two seemed no great hurdle.

Third, the president has made healthcare IT one of his priorities, and with many experts predicting Democratic electoral gains in both houses of Congress this year, it may be harder for Mr. Bush to get anything he wants in the last two years of his tenure.

But this is Washington, D.C., where logic has never really applied.

According to the June 20 CongressDaily, the GOP got cold feet when the Congressional Budget Office forecast that the bill would increase spending and reduce revenues.

This particular train wreck was forecasted long ago by none other than former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who now heads the Center for Health Transformation. With the insights he won as the preeminent congressional insider during the 1990s, Gingrich has repeatedly called on the CBO to change the way it scores the financial impact of pending legislation.

Gingrich says the CBO does a great job when it comes to calculating costs, but it isn’t permitted – by law – to calculate savings.

“The CBO will not score savings,” he said in recent congressional testimony to the House Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization. “Ignoring the savings and outcomes from capital investments is foolish, much like trying to save money by refusing to change the oil in your car.

“Nearly every member of Congress will vote for a bill if it improves the lives of their constituents and saves money at the same time, but they are unlikely to vote for a bill that is simply scored as costing them millions of dollars. This backward approach is a significant barrier to passing legislation that will dramatically improve patient safety and drive down healthcare costs.”

The whole process is reminiscent of those heady days in November 2004, when a $50 million allocation seemed a sure bet for the newly formed Office of the National Coordinator. Instead, in a last minute retreat, Congressional budgeters slashed the allocation and left healthcare IT unfunded, limping along on the coattails of the Department of Human Services.

Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice – shame on us.