A few days ago we noted the split between major papers and the Associated Press about how to characterize the cost of the health care reform bill put forward by House Democrats. Not wanting to be left out, the D.C.-based publication Roll Call has now waded into the fray, too.

In its analysis, based on data from the Congressional Budget Office, Roll Call concludes that the gross cost of the bill is “more than $1.6 trillion.” That suggests it’s following the same logic used by the AP, which tallied up expenditures from the public exchange, Medicare adjustments and other sources to arrive at a $1.65 trillion total. (An AP spokesman said the organization’s $1.5 trillion figure “comes from our reporters being conservative and careful, rounding broadly.”) The Roll Call analysis is reasonably detailed, and it explicitly states, as the AP did in a follow-up story, that it is incorporating Medicare provisions that aren’t included in other estimates.

The inclusion of those Medicare provisions seems to have the effect of driving up projected gross costs while bringing down net expense, which raises a question about which of those figures media outlets should give most attention too. (The CBO, tasked with acting as a sort of institutional budget hawk, is most concerned with net cost.) And the fact that some outlets are including the Medicare figures, while others aren’t, prompts a question about which changes constitute “reform,” and which are just routine legislative tinkering. The lack of consensus on these points suggests again that media outlets should do more to explain the complexity, and the contingency, of these numbers.

If you'd like to get email from CJR writers and editors, add your email address to our newsletter roll and we'll be in touch.

Greg Marx is an adjunct lecturer at The Medill School and a facilitator with The OpEd Project. She served as an editorial board member, columnist, library director, and No. 2 in the features department of the Chicago Sun-Times.