I'm hoping you meant 'party line voter,' and if so, you don't know WTF you're talking about even more so than I originally thought.
As for the actual numbers, I consider Dr. Jonathan Gruber, Professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as more credible than you on the matter:
Health Care Costs
The best available projections of the impact of the ACA on the level and growth of health care costs in the near term come from the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services Office of the Actuary (CMS). 10 With U.S. health care spending already accounting for 17 percent of GDP and growing, there is also concern about policies that increase this spending. And, as the CMS actuary points out, the ACA will increase national health care expenditures. At the peak of its effect on spending in 2016, the law will increase health care expenditures by about 2 percent; by 2019, the ACA-related increase will be 1 percent, or 0.2 percent of GDP.
It is worth noting that these increases are quite small relative to the gains in coverage
under the new law. The CMS predicts that 34 million more people will be insured by 2019 (which is similar to the independent estimate of CBO) relative to a base of 254 million insured.
The agency also estimates that without this reform, health care costs would grow by 6.6 percent per year between 20102019. So the ACA will be increasing the ranks of the insured by more than 13 percent at a cost that is less than one sixth of one year's growth in national health care expenditures.
Alternatively, consider the fact that under this legislation, by 2019, the United States will be spending $46 billion more on medical care than we do today. In 2010 dollars, this amount to only $800 per newly insured person, quite a low cost compared, for example, to the $5,050 average single premium for employer-sponsored insurance (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2010).
U.S. spending on health care is very high and a source of great concern, but it is the
growth rate of medical spending, not its level, that ultimately determines our country's financial well-being. If current trends persist, we will be spending an unsustainable 40 percent of our GDP on health care by 2080, as the growth of health care costs continues to outstrip the growth rate of the overall economy. In this environment, whether health care costs rise or fall by 1 percent or
even 5 percent is irrelevant -- all we do is move the day of reckoning less than 1 year closer or further away. Clearly, the key to the long-term viability of our health care system is to "bend the cost curve."
On this count, the CMS actuary's news is (slightly) good: although the ACA will boost
medical spending somewhat, its incremental impact on spending will decrease over time (as noted above, from 2 percent in 2016 to 1 percent in 2019). These declining estimates imply that by the second decade the ACA will actually lower national health spending. This is due to provisions such as the Cadillac tax, for which the definition of a high-cost plan is indexed to the growth in overall prices in the economy, not the (projected to be higher) growth in health insurance premiums. As a result, an increasing proportion of plans will be taxed, and more people will shift into lower-cost insurance options in order to avoid paying the tax, lowering national health expenditures.