The Congressional Budget Office  projects the House's health care reform draft would provide $535 billion in gross savings to Medicare over ten years.  However, factoring in spending provisions brings the net savings down to about $160 billion.  Here's how the Way and Means Committee describes the savings and spending side of their equation: 
"The draft proposals included in the estimate would slow spending, yielding more than $500 billion in gross savings to Medicare over ten years while also extending the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund and providing key payment and delivery system reforms. Included in the estimates released tonight are important investments in the Medicare program that would fix the deeply flawed physician payment system, close the Medicare prescription drug donut hole, encourage prevention and wellness by eliminating cost-sharing for preventive services, and improve access for low-income Medicare beneficiaries."
The House health care draft also includes $160 billion cut in overpayments to private Medicare Advantage plans.  This is among the biggest-ticket savings items in the House plan and one we here at the National Committee have urged for years. While insurers continue to call these subsidies "cuts to Medicare"  what they don't tell you is the true price beneficiaries and the Medicare program itself are paying for these wasteful industry giveaways.  Specifically, Medicare has lost more than a year of solvency to the hospital trust fund thanks to these overpayments.  In addition, all Medicare beneficiaries (not just those enrolled in private plans) are paying extra premiums to help cover these outrageous subsidies.    Of course, other health care providers have seen the writing on the wall and have offered their own pre-emptive "deals".  The latest comes from hospital groups who have agreed to $155 billion in cuts if a health overhaul bill is passed and the numbers of uninsured are reduced.  NPR has a good description of the hospital offer.  
"But are hospitals really giving up all that much? Maybe not. A significant portion of the funds are currently for payments to help hospitals offset the cost of caring for patients who are uninsured. But in a newly reconfigured system, "there will be fewer uninsured," says Richard Kirsch,(Health Care for America Now) "and it makes perfect sense that as the number of uninsured drop, that hospitals should get less money from the federal government for taking care of those people if they now are paying customers."
Here are a couple more interesting pieces on industry's role in this debate so far, in the New York Times and Health Beat.