Political Ruminations

Romney-Ryan Changes to Medicare Will Impact People Between Ages 55-65

Surrogates for Mitt Romney have admitted that he will have to cut Medicare benefits for people between the ages of 55-65 (despite his pledge not to do so) if he goes through with his plans to change Medicare. By Brian Beutler @ TPM, emphasis mine:

“Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan want to neutralize Democratic attacks on their plan to turn Medicare into a voucher program for future seniors by replaying the GOP’s 2010 campaign against Democratic members of Congress: by attacking President Obama for Medicare cuts he signed into law.

As has been noted repeatedly, that strategy requires Romney and Ryan to disavow Medicare reforms the GOP recently endorsed overwhelmingly as a part of the party’s budget, which Ryan authored.

But the ticket also contends that a key difference between Obama and Romney is that Romney won’t change Medicare at all for existing beneficiaries — only future ones. Recent statements from his advisers and surrogates, suggest the claim is false.

As outlined in a memo the campaign released Saturday, Romney plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act in its entirety, and thus to spend over $700 billion more on the program in the coming decade than the government would spend if the health care law stands.

That commitment would leave Medicare poised for insolvency in 2016, years before he proposes to phase in the voucher system. Which means Romney would have two options: find new Medicare cuts or taxes to extend the life of the program, or preside over its demise.

On Fox News Sunday, Romney adviser Ed Gillespie tried to address the conundrum. “There are other reforms as well. As you know Governor Romney supports increasing over time bringing the Medicare eligibility age in line with the Social Security retirement age.”

But raising the Medicare eligibility age is a benefit cut, and implementing

Robert Reich on the Romney-Ryan Economic Plan

Watch as economist and former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich explains the potentially devastating effects of the Romney-Ryan economic plan if it were to be enacted:

Share this video, tell your friends about it. It’s important.

Mitt Romney Embraces Paul Ryan's Radical Plan to Voucherize Medicare

Watch:

So, you heard Mitt Romney say: “for people 55 years of age and older, there’s no change.” You won’t like the translation.

Under the Romney-Ryan plan for Medicare, if you are younger than age 55, let’s say 54, and Romney-Ryan are elected to office, you will see a Medicare that is completely different from the one that your parents and grandparents enjoyed. It will be a voucherized plan, entailing fewer benefits and much higher costs to the beneficiaries.

Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman on Paul Ryan’s Medicare plan, emphasis mine:

In the first decade, the big things are (i) conversion of Medicaid into a block grant program, with much lower funding than projected under current law and (ii) sharp cuts in top tax rates and corporate taxes.

Is this a deficit-reduction program? Not on the face of it: it’s basically a tradeoff of reduced aid to the poor for reduced taxes on the rich, with the net effect of the specific proposals being to increase, not reduce, the deficit.

President Obama Knocks Down Romney-Ryan Lies About Medicare

Watch and listen to President Obama knock down the Medicare lies of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan:

President Obama on the Medicare lies (text) via Jason Easley, emphasis mine:

“Now, you know the truth is I think they know it’s not a very popular idea. Now they are being dishonest about my plans, since they can’t sell their plans. I mean they are trying to throw everything at the wall just to see what will stick. The latest thing they’ve been trying is to talk about Medicare. Now, you’d think they’d avoid talking about Medicare given the fact that both of them have proposed to voucherize the Medicare system. But I guess they figure the best defense is to try to go on offense.

So New Hampshire, here is what you need to know. Since I’ve been in office, I have strengthened Medicare. I’ve made reforms that have extended the life of the program, that have saved millions of seniors with Medicare hundreds of dollars on prescription drugs. The only changes to your benefits that I’ve made on Medicare is that Medicare now covers new preventive services like cancer screening and wellness visits for free.

Gov. Romney and Congressman Ryan have a very different plan. What they want to do is that they want seniors to get a voucher to buy their own insurance, which could force seniors to pay an extra $6,400 a year for their healthcare. Again, this is not my estimate. Remember those guys who analyze these things for a living? That’s their assessment. That doesn’t strengthen Medicare. That undoes the very guarantee of Medicare. That’s the core of the plan written by Congressman Ryan and endorsed by Gov. Romney.

So here’s the bottom line. My plan saves money in Medicare by cracking down on fraud, and waste and insurance company subsidies, and their plan makes seniors pay more so they can give another tax cut to millionaires and billionaires. My plan’s already extended the life of Medicare by nearly a decade. Their plan would put Medicare on track to be ended as we know it. It would be an entirely different plan. A plan in which you could not count on healthcare because it would have to be coming out of your pocket. That’s the real difference between our plans on Medicare.”

Morning Quote: Mitt Romney on Social Security & Medicare

Repeating much of what he told a Koch Brothers audience in November, Mitt Romney told Conservatives at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) that he would cut Social Security and Medicare:

“We're going to have to recognize that Social Security and Medicare are unsustainable, not for the current group of retirees, but for coming generations. And we can't afford to avoid these entitlement challenges any longer.

We are going to slowly and gradually raise the retirement age for Social Security from the current 66 for full benefits. And we'll slow the growth rate in benefits for higher-income retirees.

Tomorrow's seniors should have the freedom to choose between Medicare and a range of private plans [think the Ryan Plan]. And if these future seniors want a more expensive plan, then they will have to pay the additional cost.”

Morning Quote: Republicans Discuss Spinning End of Medicare as We Know It

Republicans respond to the Democratic electoral victory in New York 26 by doubling down on the spin for their plan to end Medicare as we know it:

Rep. Tom Cole (R., OK):

We need to make it a choice between a do-nothing approach that will ultimately destroy Medicare, and life-saving reforms.

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL):

It's a wake-up call on how you frame it. It obviously wasn't framed right.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the author of the end Medicare plan, lashes out at Democrats:

They [Democrats] are shamelessly demagoguing and distorting it.

Senate Republicans Vote En Masse to End Medicare

In a vote held today, 40 out of 47 Republican senators voted to support the Paul Ryan Plan, which would end Medicare as we know it. Brian Beutler, emphasis mine:

The GOP continued its bloody walk into the Medicare buzzsaw Wednesday, when 40 out of 47 Senate Republicans voted in support of the House GOP budget, and its plan to phase out and privatize the popular entitlement program.

The test vote failed by a vote of 57-40. But the roll call illustrates that Medicare privatization -- along with deep cuts to Medicaid and other social services -- remains the consensus position of the GOP despite the growing political backlash against them.

Voting with all of the Democrats against debating the plan were Sens. Scott Brown (R-MA), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) -- both 2012 incumbents -- along with Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). Rand Paul (R-KY) voted against it because it wasn't radical enough.

Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Pat Roberts (R-KS), and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) did not vote.

Democrats intentionally scheduled the vote less than 24 hours after a Democrat won a special election in New York's 26th -- and heavily Republican -- congressional district, on the strength of defending Medicare from a GOP onslaught. The outcome of that election heightened the political stakes, but sent few Republicans bolting for the exits.

"I've been surprised a lot of the times about how they're voting here," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a press conference after the vote.

“Rand Paul voted against it because it wasn’t radical enough.” Unbelievable.

The GOP Plans to Eliminate Medicare as an Entitlement Program

Just stunning. From Talking Points Memo:

If anything will make it easier for House conservatives to back off on shutting down the government this week, it's the prospect of a different, and much larger fight over the federally funded social safety net. House Republicans are preparing to introduce a 10-year budget Tuesday that will eliminate Medicare and replace it with a private insurance system that closely resembles the new health care law, and end Medicaid as an entitlement program all together.

This plan, which also will include major restructuring of the tax code and cap discretionary spending, will reduce the deficit by over $4 trillion in 10 years, according to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan.

What the House Republican budget plan being proposed on Tuesday would mean to you if you’re poor and/or disabled:

Low-income Medicaid beneficiaries will lose their guaranteed benefits altogether. Currently, Medicaid is jointly financed by the federal government and states, which are required to provide comprehensive health care benefits to people in poverty. Ryan's plan turns the program into block grants for the states -- states get a bunch of cash from the feds and have to make the best of it. For many states, that will mean severe benefit rollbacks.

And, what this would mean to the elderly and non-poor disabled:

Seniors, and others on Medicare, would be in a slightly different predicament. Currently seniors 65 and over are guaranteed a defined benefit program: taxpayers finance the system, and the government agrees to pay for seniors' health care services (though seniors have to pitch in too). Ryan's plan would leave that system intact for anybody currently on Medicare, or expecting to be on Medicare within 10 years. For everyone else the program would be radically overhauled. Future beneficiaries would no longer have a single payer system to rely on. Rather, they'd be given a menu of private insurance plans to pick from, and subsidies to help pay their premiums. If those premiums skyrocket, that's on them. If the insurers themselves aren't required to pay for whatever the doctor orders, then the guaranteed benefits will erode.

Princeton economist Uwe Reinhardt, a well respected health care expert, called the plan ‘radical’:

Under the defined contribution approach envisaged by the Rivlin-Ryan plan, most of the risk of future health-care cost increases would be shifted onto the shoulders of Medicare beneficiaries. This feature makes the proposal radical.

Scary stuff. And so unnecessary.