Paul Ryan's "Roadmap for America"

by: Gary Patton

Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 12:22:46 PM EDT

"We're in trouble. Big, big trouble," says Agent G. "Word of Republican Congressman Paul Ryan's 'Roadmap for America' has leaked. News is spreading about Ryan's plan for Medicare and Social Security that he wants to become law after the November election. The public will be shocked if it finds out about his plan."

"Well, just what's so terrible about Ryan's plan?" says Agent O.

"Just listen," replies Agent G. "Here's what Ezra Klein writes in the Washington Post. 'To move us into surpluses, Ryan's budget proposes reforms that are nothing short of violent. Medicare is privatized. Seniors get a voucher to buy private insurance, and the voucher's growth is far slower than the expected growth of health care costs. Medicaid is also privatized . . . And beyond health care, Social Security gets guaranteed private accounts that CBO (Congressional Budget Office) says will actually cost more than the present arrangement, . . ."

" . . . The money seniors would get to buy their own policies would grow more slowly than their health-care costs, and more slowly than their expected Medicare benefits, which means that they'd need to either cut back on how comprehensive their insurance is or how much health-care they purchase ."

"And here," continues Agent G, "is what Frank Rich writes in the New York Times. 'His (Ryan's) much publicized Roadmap for America's Future . . . not only revives the failed Bush proposal of partially privatizing Social Security but tops him by replacing Medicare with a voucher system that, like Ryan's skewed tax cuts, would benefit the superrich while raising taxes and medical costs for everyone else."

"Well, if Ryan's plan is so bad," says Agent P. "Let's just run from it. Pretend that it isn't a Republican plan."

"We can't do that," replies Agent G. "Too many Republicans have endorsed it. Wisconsin congressman Sean Duffy, Pennsylvania senatorial candidate Pat Toomey, Indiana Senate candidate Dan Coats, and Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul all favor Ryan's privatization of Social Security. Do you realize that seniors would have lost trillions during the recession had Social Security been privatized? Because Social Security was government-run and not tied to the plunging stock market, no one lost a penny."

"Okay," says Agent P, "we'll try something else. Let's say that the plan is pie-in-the sky; that Ryan is a nobody so nothing will come from his plan."

"But Ryan isn't a nobody," responds Agent G. "He's very influential. Here's what Frank Rich wrote about Ryan in the Times, 'Take Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, who has been relentlessly promoted by the right as the intellectual golden boy of the G.O.P. and who would be elevated to chairman of the powerful budget committee in a Republican House.' After the election, Ryan will be in a great position to put his plan into effect. But we've got to stop voters from finding out about his plan before the election, or they'll be very upset."

"What's the opposition saying about Social Security," says Agent O.

"Democratic congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter signed a letter to the President which reads in part, "We oppose any cuts to Social Security benefits, including raising the retirement age. . . . We also oppose any effort to privatize Social Security, in whole or in part . . . if any of the Commission's recommendations cut or diminish Social Security in any way, we will stand firmly against them." (Barker, Blue Hampshire).

"The voters will like what she said" blurts Agent G, "We're in trouble. Big, big trouble. We can only hope voters don't find out about Ryan's plan before the November election. Just keep your fingers crossed."

This column appeared first in The Forum. It appears here with the permission of The Forum

New Hampshire Republican Candidates Silently Support Republican Plans to Privatize Social Security

by: HarrellKirstein

Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 20:22:22 PM EST

Concord - Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) pitched the reckless Republican plan to slash Medicare and Medicaid, and privatize Social Security in New Hampshire this weekend.  Ryan held a fundraiser for the New Hampshire Republican Party, and a breakfast with young Republicans.

While Judd Gregg has been a long time supporter of Paul Ryan's, the Republican candidates for Congress haven't been as vocal about Ryan, or any of the extreme Republican proposals he outlined over the weekend.

Shea-Porter's Donut Hole Fix Included in Obama's Bill

by: Dean Barker

Mon Feb 22, 2010 at 19:24:51 PM EST

"With more than 140,000 uninsured Granite Staters, and the recent news about astronomical rate increases for those with insurance, it is obvious that the status quo is not working.  We must lower health care costs for middle class workers and families, expand and improve coverage to those who are underinsured or uninsured, ban discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, and close the Medicare Part D Donut Hole for seniors.  I will review the President's plan over the next several days, and I look forward to Thursday's discussion."

The President's legislation brings that House fix over to the Senate, achievable through simple majority vote.

p.s. Here's a handy chard from the Wonk Room on the differences between House, Senate, and Obama bills.

Driving America off a Cliff with Ryan's Republican Roadmap

by: Jennifer Daler

Wed Feb 10, 2010 at 14:24:52 PM EST

TPM's Christina Bellantoni

The roadmap has a GOP grab-bag of tax cuts, eliminating capital gains taxes, interest income taxes, the alternative minimum tax and estate tax Republicans dubbed the "death" tax. It also increases the standard deduction for tax filers.

It also eliminates the top three tax brackets for the wealthy.

"These are very, very dramatic changes in the tax code ... likely to lose a tremendous amount of revenue," said Jim Horney, director of federal fiscal policy for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBBP).

It tries to replace these with an 8.5 % "consumption tax", which according to Bellantoni, experts have said would increase the burden to the lower and middle classes by taxing all goods and services. Also, the revenue raised by this tax would not offset the revenue lost by the tax cuts.

Republican Shadow Budget Raises Taxes on the Middle Class, Cuts Social Security and Medicare

by: Jennifer Daler

Tue Feb 09, 2010 at 20:47:59 PM EST

In other words, it's sort of a 'shadow budget' or first draft of the Republican budget. And among a lot of other things it calls for deep cuts in Social Security benefits, partial privatization of Social Security and big shift of taxes to the middle class and abolition of Medicare in favor of vouchers which seniors will use to purchase private health insurance.

Marshall says Minority Leader Boehner and others are playing it coy, saying the budget is full of Republican ideas to cut deficit spending, but stopping short of saying it is the official Republican budget.

... the question is whether the entire 2010 congressional mid-term is going to be fought out as a colossal bait and switch gambit.

If the Republicans can dance around these issues, they may take the majority. This would be catastrophic on many levels, especially because the policies they're espousing are the ones that caused the financial meltdown. Individuals who counted on Social Security and Medicare and their families will be in a never-ending state of financial collapse.

As with school voucher programs that never pay the total cost of private school tuition, health insurance vouchers will not pay the total cost of insurance premiums. People who have worked all their lives for retirement will not have one, unless they are very wealthy. Instead of a "death tax" for the few, there will be paupers' deaths for the many.

On all these points, press failure to report the policies the Republicans are actually running on can pretty much be assumed. It's happening now. And House Republicans are already up in arms that they're being pressed on their support for privatizing Social Security and abolishing Medicare.

Voters need and deserve to know where each side stands on these issues. Because it's what is on the table in the 2010 election.

Roadblock Republicans Forcing Economy Off Cliff. Again

by: Jennifer Daler

Thu Feb 04, 2010 at 18:54:41 PM EST

According to a report out today from economists at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, federal spending on health care grew faster than private spending in 2009, as more people fell off private insurance rolls and signed up for Medicaid. While the recession is largely to blame for changes in 2009, CMS predicts the trend of an increasing government role in health spending to continue. One reason: As more baby boomers grow old enough to qualify for Medicare, that program is on track to grow substantially.

In other words, the government will account for over half of total health care spending by 2012 even if nothing changes. No tea party, no outrage, no insurance company lobbyists will be able to change this. The question is whether it is done consciously and with an eye to increased sustainability, or unconsciously in a piece meal fashion which will only serve entrenched economic interests. And it won't even serve them for very long.

Dramatic figures in the CMS report show that health care accounted for 17.3% of the U.S. economy in 2009. The increase in health spending, from $2.34 trillion in 2008 to $2.47 trillion in 2009, was the largest one-year jump since 1960. CMS predicts total U.S. health spending in 2019 will be $4.5 trillion. This will bolster the Democratic argument that dramatic health reform is an urgent need that must happen quickly. President Obama continued this week to push Congressional Democrats to get health reform legislation to his desk, both at a town hall in New Hampshire and speaking directly to a meeting of the Senate Democratic caucus yesterday.

By refusing to participate in serious health care reform, Republicans are saying, "So what if the health care system is careening down hill with no brakes. We'll block the way to get it safely on track because it'll bring us back into power. Who cares if the system crashes?" They'll filibuster us into economic oblivion, then blame it on others.

Pickert continues:

I've said here before that Democrats have basically failed to convince Americans that the health system needs to change, so whether they'll successfully translate this CMS report in a renewed call for reform is a very open question.

It's difficult to convince the public to support health care reform with the constant whirligig of misinformation and political posturing from the press and the GOP.

This is serious for the future of our economy. Policymakers and the public alike ignore it at our and our children's peril.

GOP Message Fail on Medicare Buy In Proposal

by: Jennifer Daler

Tue Dec 08, 2009 at 20:16:32 PM EST

This is most likely because there wasn't the staunch opposition to these policies as there is to providing universal health coverage to American citizens, something most of the world enjoys, in many places for over a century.

In any event, although Senator Jim Demint (R-SC) declared health care reform would be Obama's "Waterloo", it seems it's the GOP playing the part of Napoleon.

Sam Stein at the Huffington Post

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-K.Y.) sent out a press release on Sunday, titled: "Cutting Medicare is not what Americans want." That was followed by a new press release on Monday. Its title: "Expanding Medicare 'a plan for financial ruin.'

In August, Republicans came to the conclusion that they could win political traction by framing their party as a defender of the government-run system, despite having decried it for decades. RNC Chairman Michael Steele released a "seniors' health care bill of rights" and held a testy exchange with an NPR reporter to drive this home his Medicare support.

It seemed like opportunism then. Now, however, it has the potential to trip the GOP up. Having spent the last two weeks insisting that Democrats were destroying the bedrock of health care coverage for seniors, Republicans may soon be forced to explain why expanding Medicare coverage would be a bad thing.

The party of "no" doesn't know which way to go on this.  No matter what happens with health care reform, to be against it is to be for allowing a crippling cancer of spiraling cost to drag our economy down. That is a fact borne out by years of research at Dartmouth and the work of health care economists such as Princeton's Uwe Reinhardt.

It seems most of the haggling over the bill has been among progressive and conservative Democrats with the Republicans relegated to spouting stale  rhetoric from the sidelines. Only Maine Republican Olympia Snowe has weighed in with any attempt to shape the policy.

It must be a drag to be on the wrong side of history.

On Fighting The Madness, Or, Send This To A Deather

by: fake consultant

Sat Sep 05, 2009 at 18:31:26 PM EDT

In addition to the Town Halls, opponents are flooding the email inboxes of America's "low information" voters with no end of lies. Those emails are getting passed around and around and around, and by now some of them have probably appeared in your inbox.

But it's summer...and who has time to respond to this stuff?

Well, guess what, Gentle Reader: I've already done the hard work for you.

Today's story is an email response that you can send right back to your "inbox friends". It's a reminder of some of the frustrations that we all share in this country and some explanations of what's being proposed...and a few words about socialism, to boot.

So get out there and copy and paste and forward and reply, and let's see if we can't fight the madness, one email at a time.  

Medicare: Rights, Entitlements and Just Desserts

by: hannah

Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 09:21:43 AM EDT

Conservative politicians, too, seem to have caught the failure bug as they discovered that not getting anything accomplished has served to increase longevity in office, to "try and try again."

On The Costs Of Care, Or, You Don't Want Every Item On This Menu

by: fake consultant

Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 10:11:54 AM EDT

For reasons that we won't go into here, they are in the process of pricing long-term care at care facilities...and yesterday afternoon, we had a chance to have a look at the "menu" of services (the facility's term) that can be purchased at this particular location.

If you are facing this issue in your own family, if you are a taxpayer thinking about how we plan to fund long-term care in the future...or if, one day, you expect to be old yourself...this conversation will surely matter.

Older adults should fear McCain-Palin

by: steve123

Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 20:00:55 PM EST

Take Medicare. The non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimates that McCain's health plan would cost $1.3 trillion over ten years. To pay for this, Senator McCain has proposed some minor changes in Medicare; however, no expert believes these can achieve the savings needed to finance the McCain-Palin health plan. The Wall Street Journal has reported that McCain will pay for his plan by making major cuts in Medicare
and Medicaid (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.html).

Although the McCain campaign has denied this story, he has not explained where he will find the money. Senator McCain is also likely to support Republican efforts to undermine fee-for-service Medicare and replace it with HMOs. He revealed his true attitude towards Medicare this past summer, when he skipped critical votes on a bill that benefitted "doctors and patients at the expense of overpaid private health plans" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/05/opinion/05sat2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin).  

As for Social Security, Senator McCain supports privatization. Although Republicans have said this would not impact current beneficiaries or those near retirement, seniors should worry about how it would affect their children and grandchildren.

Where will we find the trillions of dollars needed to create the private investment accounts? These would need either to be borrowed from general revenues, which of course would explode the deficit, or taken from funds needed for future retirees, requiring deep cuts in benefits.

Republicans believe the private accounts will provide enough to make up the difference. Unfortunately, we have learned the hard way that markets do not go up forever and can crash with little warning. Moreover, recoveries do not always happen quickly. It took more than two decades for stock prices to surpass their peak in 1929. It may be true that stocks pay in the long run, but we live in the short run, on a day-to-day basis. We can ill afford to gamble with Social Security, which, for most of us, is our retirement safety net.

In contrast with John McCain, Barack Obama opposes privatization and any effort to cuts benefits or raise the retirement age. Seniors should reject McCain-Palin and vote for Obama on November 4.

John McCain and Medicare

by: steve123

Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 23:38:52 PM EDT

Like George W. Bush, McCain seeks to undermine our system of employer-based insurance (EBI), under which most people receive coverage.  Many experts have noted that McCain's proposal to remove the tax exemption for EBI would give businesses an incentive to stop covering their employees and force millions into the unregulated, nongroup market, which typically offers fewer benefits than EBI.  Companies continuing to offer coverage would face an exodus of younger and healthier workers attracted by ostensibly lower prices in the nongroup market.  This would concentrate older and less healthy workers in the employer based system and cause premiums there to skyrocket.  Ultimately, this system would collapse, leaving many individuals, particularly those with preexisting conditions, unable to find coverage.    

Independent estimates place the cost of Senator McCain's plan at $1.3 trillion over ten years (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122315505846605217.html).  McCain believes he can pay for this in part through cuts in Medicare that would leave seniors with 'exactly the same benefits'" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/us/politics/19health.html?ref=health).  However, a report by the Center for American Progress Action Fund (CAPAF) (http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/pdf/mccain_health_strategy.pdf) questions this.  CAPAF estimates that as a result of Senator McCain's reductions, Medicare's expenditures will not "keep pace with inflation and enrollment growth-thereby requiring cuts in benefits, eligibility, or both."  While the McCain campaign has identified some ways they would reduce Medicare spending that would not impact beneficiaires, it is difficult to see how these amount to the vast sum needed to subsidize the Senator's health care plan (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/obama-attacks-m.html).  

In the long run, we can only solve Medicare's problems by reining in health care costs generally.  Compared in this regard with Barack Obama, John McCain's proposals fail miserably (http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=707948).  Obama and Biden have pledged to protect and strengthen Medicare and have the votes to back it up (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/09/kennedy-returns-to-the-senate/).  

We all know that actions speak louder than words.  This past summer, Senator McCain had a real opportunity to defend Medicare when the Senate voted on a bill that would have benefitted "doctors and patients at the expense of overpaid private health plans" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/05/opinion/05sat2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin).  Unfortunately, McCain skipped this critical vote.  When the bill was reconsidered a few days later, even an ailing Senator Kennedy made it to the floor to vote.  The only Senator not to vote on this critical bill was John McCain (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/09/kennedy-returns-to-the-senate/).  Obama and Biden voted for the bill.

New Hampshire seniors should think twice before trusting Medicare, and their vote, to John McCain.

Bush, Sununu, Gregg: Privateers Overridden by Change

by: Dean Barker

Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 20:17:30 PM EDT

The Senate followed suit an hour later, passing it with a  huge bi-partisan majority of 70-26.

So, who thought it would be better to stand with George Bush and the private health insurance industry rather than with seniors and doctors?

Not Wayne Allard. Not Ted Stevens. Not both of Mississippi's Republican Senators.  Not Liddy Dole or Saxby Chambliss. Not Loserpalooza pals Norm Coleman, Gordon Smith, and Susan Collins.

Nope. Just privateers John Sununu and Judd Gregg, and a handful of other dead-enders. And just how fitting is it that the latest poll has Bush's approval at... wait for it... 26%.

Note: jbd has got some more on this as well.

Sununu and Gregg Vote Against Medicare

by: Jennifer Daler

Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 19:20:52 PM EDT

Today the US Senate voted 70-26 to override the President's veto of HR6331, the abstract of which says

A bill to amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act to extend expiring provisions under the Medicare Program, to improve beneficiary access to preventive and mental health services, to enhance low-income benefit programs, and to maintain access to care in rural areas, including pharmacy access, and for other purposes.

New Hampshire is dependent on federal funds for health programs, including monies for Medicare, Medicaid and S-CHIP. Our Republican Senators are more concerned about supporting George W Bush than with the needs of the people of this state.

They were elected to represent us, but they represent Bush &Co. (I guess they're part of &Co)

We need to make sure Sununu is defeated and Governor Shaheen is elected and Gregg needs to be voted out in 2010.

It's July: Better Start Complaining About Health Care!

by: Dean Barker

Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 20:51:32 PM EDT

With blunt pragmatism, Sen. John Sununu came to Concord last week and told economic development leaders not to waste time worrying about the cost of health care.

"This may be the most bizarre recommendation, but I am sincere," Sununu said. "I'm not saying it's not an issue or it's not important, but proportionally speaking, stop complaining about health care."

Sununu said business leaders would be better off putting their energy elsewhere. For starters, "if there was something that we could do about it that were quick or easy, it would be done," he said, predicting only marginal policy changes. "There is no solution" anytime soon, he said.

...Health care "is so darn expensive," he said, "because it's worth it."

John Sununu, 4 months, and 2 Medicare cutting votes away from election day:

"I've been an effective leader and independent voice for New Hampshire on the issue of health care.  I understand that in New Hampshire, the coverage for health care starts with small businesses. That's where most people work, where most people get their paycheck, and get their health insurance coverage," said Senator Sununu. "The real challenge in our health care system is with those that are uninsured and those who don't have access to affordable insurance. The legislation that I have announced my support for today would make great strides toward achieving this goal."

More on this shameless silly season pandering by the NHDP Coordinated Campaign's Alex Reese, as well as Zandra Hawkins, who heads up GSP.

Morning Update: John Sununu speaks for me!

"What I am highlighting today is there has been no effort in the last year and a half to address this problem," Sununu said.

For Privateers Sununu and Gregg, Ideology Trumps Shame

by: Dean Barker

Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 07:25:22 AM EDT

Despite pressure from local physician and senior groups, New Hampshire Sen. John Sununu voted against a bill to eliminate payment cuts for doctors who treat patients with Medicare.

Nevertheless, the bill moved forward yesterday, thanks to Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy, who came from a cancer treatment in Boston to Washington to supply a crucial vote. The bill had been one vote shy of a 60-vote, veto-proof margin needed to bring it forward, and advocacy groups have been pushing aggressively to make Sununu that deciding vote. Sununu, a Republican, is up for re-election this year. Polls favor his Democratic rival, former governor Jeanne Shaheen.

After Kennedy's unexpected appearance, several Republicans who had previously voted against the measure switched sides. Sununu and New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg continued to vote no.

Sununu Sticks to his Medicare Cuts

by: Dean Barker

Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 22:00:54 PM EDT

Others like Sens. John Sununu, R-N.H., and Roger Wicker, R-Miss., have indicated that they won't reverse their vote against the bill despite tough re- election battles ahead.

I think it's important to note, in news like this, that John E. is a different sort of pol than the likes of Charlie Bass and Jeb Bradley.  Unlike those latter two, Sununu is having a much harder time pulling to the center as he gets closer to election day to try to swindle the electorate into believing that he's some sort of moderate/independent.

He just can't bring himself to do it - he's a government destabilizing privateer, and true ideologues such as he don't bend easily to the winds of silly season. In a way, I can respect that more, because the reasons for his coming defeat will be clearly laid out by none other than him himself.

On the other hand, there's plenty of time between now and November, so I'm not holding my breath.

Morning Update: If you can look past the boilerplate Union Leader right-wing spin and focus on the content, their op-ed explains pretty well why John E. can't get on board - his ideology refuses to let go of a bill that includes government destabilizing privatization efforts.

Not Enough Hours in the Day

by: Dean Barker

Mon Jun 30, 2008 at 23:34:24 PM EDT

(Manchester, NH) - John Sununu's deciding vote last week against stopping a 10% fee cut for doctors who treat patients under Medicare will take effect tomorrow, resulting in what the American Medical Association calls a "Medicare meltdown." [New York Times, 6/30/08] Last Friday, John Sununu voted with George Bush and cast the deciding vote against the reimbursement rate correction, which means many doctors will reduce the number of Medicare patients they see, making health care less accessible to over 40 million seniors who use the program.

Sununu Blocks Lower Drug Prices for Your Grandmother, Again

by: Dean Barker

Thu Apr 19, 2007 at 05:56:00 AM EDT

You see, Sununu, the anti-Teddy Roosevelt, yesterday didn't vote against a bill that would have allowed Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices, he went a step further and filibustered it, being only one of five Senators standing in the way of our seniors not having to choose between pills and bread.

This callous act is even more shocking when you factor in that fellow endangered Republican Senators Collins, Coleman, and Smith, all voted for cloture.

And it becomes downright despicable when you learn, as I did from the NHDP last night (full release below), that Sprintin' Sununu has taken over $100K from Big Pharma. Well, as John E. himself related: "Health care "is so darn expensive," he said, "because it's worth it."

Worth it for him, I guess.