Uher: Who is really pushing Grandma over the cliff?
By Guest Post | Tuesday, July 5th, 2011 | Columns, PolicyBy Lynne Uher, Virginia Beach
(The following letter to the editor was submitted to the Virginian-Pilot, but was heavily edited. Ms. Uher has permitted BD to print the original letter in its entirety)
Congressman Scott Rigell has been attacked for his support of the Ryan health care proposal.
Mr. Rigell explains the plan in his column of June 17, “Saving Medicare”, yet Democrats still say the plan hurts Medicare and low income recipients.
Under the Ryan plan, the program does not change for anyone 55 and older.
The plan proposes to fix Medicare for 54 and below with a system that works like the one in Congress, (sounds good to me).
It is referred to as premium support and works just like Medicare Advantage. And, if you’re a lower income person, you will have increased subsidies.
The Democrats government healthcare bill (ObamaCare) is referred to as, “affordable healthcare”, but it actually is a ticking bomb that is set to explode. It will saddle us with skyrocketing debt, reduced care, and an invasion of privacy.
Buried within two-thousand pages of complex regulations, the bill slashes $500 billion from Medicare, which is guaranteed to hurt seniors. The bill also puts a board of 15 unelected bureaucrats in charge of cutting Medicare for current seniors through price controls. This will lead to rationing and dropping of care. Millions of seniors will be impacted by Obama’s cuts.
Does anyone think slashing half a trillion dollars will not make an impact?
The centers for Medicare and Medicaid services recently placed a gag order on Medicare Advantage providers to prevent them from sharing information with their enrollees about pending changes in their plans. So, hold on to your pacemaker! After paying into the system for their entire lives, seniors will spend their remaining years with reduced coverage.
We need to defund, repeal, and replace government health care with a system that actually makes health care more affordable by enabling a competitive, open, and transparent free-market healthcare and insurance system that is not restricted by state boundaries.
Thank you, Congressman; and thank you for trying to save Grandma.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
20 Responses to "Uher: Who is really pushing Grandma over the cliff?"
While I respect Rep Ryan’s integrity, the Repubs are the ones who walked over the cliff. What was the need to vote on an unvetted plan that was never going to pass the Senate let alone be signed into law? Remember the criticism of Pelosi and Reid concerning the unread bills they passed? Well how many Repubs read Ryan’s plan? Of those how many understood it? Many people warned them against doing it including Charles Krauthammer and Pat Caddell. Would the Repubs vote for it again if it were put to a vote? Of course Boehner and Cantor deserve the blame here since they forced a vote on it instead of telling Ryan to make his case to the country first. If you are going to do something risky then at least prepare for the obvious attacks. Ryan was sucker punched and looked foolish. Then some group comes out with the lamest political ad I’ve seen since Creigh Deeds in support of Ryan 3 months after the fact. My recommendation is to retract the plan since the Repubs are so pathetically unprepared to explain and defend it.
I am one of those in 54 and below group (just barely). If Ryan’s plan is good enough for me, then why is not good enough for those 55 and older?
As for the Ryan plan being as good as the one in Congress? Ryan is constraining the rate of growth in Medicare by offering seniors a defined contribution, regardless of the rate of growth in health care costs. The federal government’s contribution in the plan for Congress, by contrast, reflects actual increases in premium levels.
In view of the abject failure of private insurance to keep americans healthy, it is strange that the writer would beg for replacement of Medicare, the best system we now have, with private insurance which is successful only for the insurance companies. Our country suffers from inadequate medical services for the large majority of our citizens, as shown by the our rates of obesity, hyper tension, diseases of the heart, stroke, and the silent killer, diabetes. Now most who read this post have great insurance because they are wealthy or they have government sponsored insurance, but anyone who believes they would get the same service as their Congressman is suffering from mental illness.
In response to Valentinus, I disagree because let’s remember where we are and what Ryan has accomplished. Last year,neither the House nor the Senate passed a required budget resolution. This year, President Obama proposed a budget that more than doubles the national debt. Ryan’s budget is the first budget proposed by the NEW CONGRESS and as chairman, Ryan has taken the serious steps to try and offer solutions to fixing the economic crisis. We can all agree that America needs to change course. NOW, the House, Senate and the President must do their part so that we may reclaim our nation’s future.
In response to Mike Barrett: Like any budget plan, which is the result of give and take, there are also elements in this plan that are missing and places where it is deficient. But, one thing it does NOT do is replace Medicare,as you have indicated. Ryan creates, for Medicare, a new premium-support program for all future retirees in 10 years. Each enrollee would get a fixed government contribution to the HEALTH PLAN OF HIS OR HER CHOICE. This IS the sysytem that members of Congress themselves enjoy. The result is that health plans and providers would be compelled to compete directly for enrollee’s dollars. History shows that this approach to reform would control the growth of health care costs while increasing patient satisfaction. Obamacare takes half a trillion dollars away from Medicare. You don’t address that. You say Medicare is the best system we have now, but it is going broke. Babyboomers are living longer. (perhaps because of the best private free-market healthcare system in the world) We don’t need to replace our system with heathcare run by the government.
Dear Lynne,
I did not criticize Ryan for proposing a plan. I wouldn’t even criticize Pelosi for proposing a plan. Yes we agree that the Dems and Obama are irresponsible and worse. They are leftists and that is how they act. The issue is whether far reaching plans that affect all Americans are discussed and vetted before a vote is taken. The Repubs rightly slammed the Dems for rushing through such legislation under cover of night. You did not address my specific points so I assume you agree with them. I will add two more points. If the debt is such a crisis then why does Ryan propose a budget that has deficit spending for 20+ years? If Medicare is in crisis then why do we do nothing to control costs for another 10 years? I’m noting the incoherence of the messaging as well as the substance. What is the problem with Ryan and the Repubs revising the plan based on input? They cannot run on the current plan so they might as well improve it now. They cannot change it a year from now.
Lynne, the CBO agreed that the health care reform bill, by ensuring that virtually all americans will have health care, will reduce future Medicare costs. That is not my assumption, it is theirs. In regard to Ryan’s premium support substitution for the current system, I fail to see how this will keep costs down; added costs will simply be paid by the recipients, and with the record over the last decade of cost and premium increases in private health plans, who would want to enter that system?
Oh, I understand your concerns and share most of them. Is it enough, soon enough? too soon? Why did the Republicans put this out there? I don’t want to think of the political ramifications. We needed someone to show responsibility and I am going to give the Republicans credit for starting the difficult discussions. We need to stand behind them. Not always criticize or question. The liberal media does a great job in that department. According to Heritage Foundation,”Ryan’s budget proposal brings discretionary spending back below 2008 levels and then freezes it for five years. The budget cuts corporate welfare, rolls back Pell grants, reduces the size of the federal bureaucracy by 10 percent, and reforms federal’s workers compensation. It also reins in mandatory spending by addressing food stamp spending and trimming farm subsidy programs that predominately go to large ari-businesses;these farm programs cost taxpayers $25 billion/year. No budget in decades has had the potential for so fundamentally improving the nation’s prosperity and restoring it’s promise. The Ryan budget would finally begin to take entitlments off autopilot, forcing Congress to consider long-term costs of new programs beyond the 10 year window. It locks in savings and requires continuous cuts with mutli-year enforcable spending caps on all government spending.” Is it perfect? I don’t know, but Heritage studied it and agrees that it is a very good proposal.Now, let’s hear from the Democrats because they are the ones in control, spending, growing government, regulating everything beyond belief, destroying small businesses…on and on. You know.
Actually, I support cuts in programs as well, but note the clear lack of increasing revenue in your proposals. If the deficit is really the problem republicans make it out to be, we need to agree that through a combination of reductions in spending and revenue increases, that by 2020 or so, both should equal about 20% of GDP. This can be done without dramatic steps that would force us back into recession. This effort to use raising the debt ceiling to force cuts that will put us into recession is not what we need. Even Ryan’s budget would require that the debt ceiling be raised. The grandstanding by republicans on this issue will hurt our economy and if they force us to default, not one should be reelected.
I hate it when I agree with Barrett… Ryan’s plan should never have been put on the table for a vote and Scott Rigell was wrong to vote for it.
Scott Rigell is on record saying he has no blowback for his vote on the Ryan plan but we all know that simply isn’t true. BTW: I’m 54 and I support Medicare as is is today. Leave it alone!
If the budget debate is to be believed, the Bush/Obama tax cuts would have expired and our deficit borrowing would be lower. The cuts were continued and our problem worsens every minute. Cuts are not the only way we are going to end this problem. JMO
If I may interrupt this discussion with a few questions:
-Can anyone provide example a first world country where private health insurance companies provide acceptable service?
-Can anyone provide an example of a first world country with acceptable public health coverage?
However, my opinion is that people over age 55 should be the ones bearing the brunt of this. Younger generations shouldn’t pay for the mistakes of their parents and grandparents.
Mike, Regarding Medicare- The CBO director Doug Elmendorf disagreed with the president’s rosy assessment. Obama is cutting half a trillion out of Medicare. Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee, Elmendorf stated that any Medicare cuts “would reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries through medical Advantage plans.” Now, Ryan’s plan is only a proposal. It means nothing right now because Obamacare is the law. So, Obamacare cut half a trillion out of Medicare. Why aren’t seniors( and you for that matter) concerned about that? Mind-boggling to me!
ToR We have the best healthcare system in the world, right here. We just need to get costs down and there are ways to do that-like creating competition, capping lawsuits, etc… But, you also mention over 55 needs to pay for Medicare. That age group have been paying into the system their entire lives. Unfortunately, with Obamacare, which is law now, and we will soon start feeling the effects(mostly by 2013), 500 billion dollars has been cut from Medicare which will have an impact on seniors. By the time you want to get Medicare-who knows what it will look like. Definitely not like it is now!
Lynne, cuts in the budget of Medicare are legitimate because the system will benefit from health care reform. When more of our citizens have access to health care in their productive years, Medicare will benefit from that when they reach eligibility for Medicare. A study at MIT released just yesterday proved that point. Regretfully, your comment about the “best healthcare system” in the world depends upon of whom you are speaking. Yes, perhaps for the wealthy, and those served by cadillac health plans. But for the vast majority of our citizens, and especially the 40,000,000 or so who have had no coverage, or those cut off from coverage because of preexisting conditions or “overuse”, the system is deplorable. Overall health statistics belie your argument and render it elitist. Lastly, as perhaps your have forgotten, republicans used to be for the same system until they were against it. Just like “deficits don’t matter” until they decided they do. What do they really beleive?
Lynne,
What is mind boggling to me is that you complain about the cuts to Medicare under Obamacare that “would reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries through medical Advantage plans” but then support the draconian increases to health care costs for those 54 and younger.
Here is a link that discusses the explosion of costs to younger citizens:
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/ryan-medicare-2011-04.pdf
Please note that they are just comparing the costs for raw Medicare benefits, not the additionally subsidized Medicare Advantage plans.
You also try to justify the 55 year old cutoff with: “That age group have been paying into the system their entire lives.” I am 53 and I have been paying in only a few years fewer then the 55 year old. Also, for me the increase in age for eligibility starts to kick in so that I will have been paying if for longer by the time it kicks in for me then they would have for when it kicks in for them. I’ll be paying in for longer for less benefits.
If sacrifice is required then everyone should sacrifice, there should not be a golden age group that gets off scot-free.
Well, Mike and Little David- Don’t worry. We all have Obamacare soon and we all know that the government can run anything better then private companies. There’s never any waste and they are always on budget. Mike-for all the low income people that don’t have health insurance or the people that just don’t want it-what the hell is Medicaid for? Trust me-they get healthcare and it is paid for by you and me. Illegals also benefit from FREE HEALTHCARE! Pre-existing-guess what-it’s not in the Obamacare bill for children like it was suppose to be. If you find it-please send me a copy. But, again-Obamacare is here, signed into law-so, don’t worry.
Well Lynne, in all due respect, the health care reform act will not really change much for me. I will still have private health insurance, not run by the government, but it will require that coverage still be provided despite pre existing conditions, with no exclusion if I use too much. We plan to provide this coverage at work, and frankly, after double digit increases in the past, are optimistic rates will not increase so much in the future. And Lynn, Medicaid does not cover everyone who has low income; the program has very specific eligibilty requirements, and in fact, in Virginia, we rank 48th of 50 states in coverage. And yes, the whole point of requiring insurance is that we who have it now pay the highest costs in emergency rooms for those who don’t have the coverage that they will under health care reform. And please remember, the individual mandate first appeared in proposed law by a republican Senator. They were for it before they were against it.
Lynne: I have to ask when you indicate we need to “keep the costs down” in Medicare, do you support restricting what a doctor or hospitals can charge for the services? I know that that Medicare limits what they can charge (currently) but are you suggesting the rate but cut by half or some other random amount to “keep costs down?”
It would seem to me the outcry from the medical field would be great “if” MD and hospitals income levels were to be set by the Government to restrict private income levels.
Just asking how you plan to keep costs down and what you think is acceptable?
According to The Washington Post, President Obama wants “significant” cuts to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for Republican agreement to let tax breaks for the nation’s wealthiest families expire at the end of this year.
Lynne, even though I dispute your claim that ….”We have the best healthcare system in the world, right here….” I do believe that the most important issue is not health care, Medicaid, nor Medicare reform. It is one simple modification that could change everything, that is, what we eat. If americans would simply eat whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, limit fish and poultry, and avoid red meat, processed foods, and dairy products, our health would improve dramatically, our need for health care treatment would lessen, and our health and productivity would be better as well. So simple, yet so hard.
Leave your response