iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Democrats Consider Offering Medicare Provider Cuts In Exchange For Revenue Increases

Baucus

First Posted: 06/23/11 06:02 PM ET Updated: 08/23/11 06:12 AM ET

NEW YORK -- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-Va.) decision on Thursday to leave ongoing debt ceiling negotiations seemed to bring those talks to an abrupt standstill. But aides on the Hill and a statement from White House Press Secretary Jay Carney seem to suggest that Cantor's absence means, simply, that the discussions will now get picked up by President Barack Obama and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

As the heavier hitters get set to pick up the slack, the contours of a grand bargain are once again emerging, and it may not be to the liking of either party. In exchange for revenue-raisers (most likely in the form of siphoned off tax breaks or the closing of loopholes) Democrats will agree to Medicare cuts -- not on the beneficiary side, which would have produced deafening howls from within the caucus, but on the provider side.

The first hint of this deal came on Thursday morning, when Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said the following with respect to the Cantor news:

I think we should stay at the table. I think we should keep working, difficult as it is, and try to balance between Medicare cuts -- additional Medicare cuts -- so long as there is commensurate additional revenue. We need balance here.

The notion that "additional Medicare cuts" would be exchanged for "commensurate" revenue increases piqued the interest of more than one Democratic operative, several of whom highlighted the quote in emails to The Huffington Post. Baucus has been one of the most steadfast backers of keeping Medicare out of the debt ceiling negotiations. For him to express newfound openness seemed suggestive about the party's thinking at large.

"No one has fought harder than Chairman Baucus against the House proposal to that would end Medicare as we know it and increase costs for seniors by thousands of dollars," a Senate Finance Committee aide emailed The Huffington Post. "Senator Baucus continues to fight for Medicare and made clear at the hearing that no changes in Medicare will be made unless Republicans agree to use revenue – in addition to spending reductions – to reduce the deficit, and any Medicare changes or savings would build on the type of efficiencies made in the Affordable Care Act, while protecting guaranteed benefits for seniors."

While such an explanation won't likely be enough to calm the nerves of inherently anxious progressives, the idea that lawmakers will build on the "efficiencies of the Affordable Care Act" is a notable tell. During the crafting of that legislation, Democrats had tried to lower the type of payments that Medicare makes to medical device manufacturers. They got fairly close to doing so, only to be told by now-former Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) that he would oppose the bill if it cut too deep. Desperate for 60 votes, it was an easy tradeoff to make. The language was dropped and Bayh, whose state houses many of those medical device manufacturers, became a yes vote.

Bayh is now gone from the Senate, and Democrats, eager to find some way to get Republicans to sign off on additional revenues, are now looking to trade in that chip. As one plugged in operative predicted: "There will be cuts on the provider side but not on the beneficiary side."

A second Senate source confirmed that cuts to Medicare providers were indeed being discussed as a tradeoff for revenue-raisers elsewhere. The source added that lawmakers would be looking beyond just medical device manufacturers, toward the hospital and prescription drug industries as well.

"We've been very careful distinguishing between cuts to Medicare beneficiaries and cuts to Medicare providers," the source said.

Whether this will work, practically or politically, remains unclear. Democratic voters will certainly be more open to protecting beneficiaries of Medicare at the cost of providers. But they also are wary that any cuts agreed to during the debt ceiling negotiations will dull the attacks that the party has been launching against the Medicare plan introduced by House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Then there is the question of whether the revenue increases will match the medical device cuts in size.

"They will never go near the type of tax revenue that progressives want," said the plugged in operative. "And, of course, providers can always come back and try to get more money."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
NEW YORK -- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-Va.) decision on Thursday to leave ongoing debt ceiling negotiations seemed to bring those talks to an abrupt standstill. But aides on the Hill and a...
NEW YORK -- House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's (R-Va.) decision on Thursday to leave ongoing debt ceiling negotiations seemed to bring those talks to an abrupt standstill. But aides on the Hill and a...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,157
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (27 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:59 PM on 08/09/2011
My Baby Boomer generation is the largest in history, retiring at a rate of 7-10,000 per DAY. Boomers retiring now can expect a 300 per cent return on the Medicare taxes paid in over their working lives. Medicare is the problem, not so much SS, because Medicare benefits are limitless.
Boomers are asking their children, a much smaller generation with the worst jobs outlook since the Great Depression, to bankroll this. It's OBSCENE. Medicare MUST be reformed. Democrats took 500 billion out of it to fund HCR. Now they're blowing smoke at seniors to get their votes. They know it's unsustainable.
09:01 PM on 06/26/2011
GIVE THE 500 BILLION THE DEMS STOLED FROM MEDICARE BACK TO THE SYSTEM.
photo
sus2222
My micro-biology is FULL
09:46 PM on 06/24/2011
So IF MEDICARE CUTS are created fairly by using MEANS TESTING
( eliminatin­g wasted payments to wealthy recipients ) that would be FINE.

Increases in TAXES should pass the same test. That could easily involve
a Lower TAX RATE ( LOWER TAXES , my Repub friends )
with LESS DEDUCTIONS and DODGES.

BOTH would be FAIR and would benefit the programs and all Americans.
Problem Repubs NEVER UNDERSTOOD the moral of the fable
THE GOOSE THAT LAID THE GOLDEN EGG.
09:02 PM on 06/26/2011
YOU MUST BE A FRUIT CAKE
photo
sus2222
My micro-biology is FULL
12:31 AM on 06/27/2011
Did it take you long to come up with that? Or are you in the 3rd grade?
01:33 PM on 06/24/2011
I think its obvious to anyone thinking clearly that if your serious about defecit reduction then LESS spending and MORE revenue is needed. One without the other is like trying to run a race with one leg. I was really dissapointed that the Republicans with a deadline looming are leaving meetings and refusing to discuss taxes. How are you supposed to negotiate with these people?

I think (i hope) they will budge because i firmly believe it will bite them on the behind if they don't - people don't like taxes but they dont like cuts either and its this whole idea of shared sacrafice that will make both pills easier to swallow. You can't gut medicare and at the same time dramatically reduce taxes on millionaires and corporations its just obscene and immoral and the majority of people simple arent going to turn up and vote for it imo. Tax rates are at their lowest since WW2, and revenues are even worse because of the economy, so this is obviously a big factor in reducing the defeci. Stop playing politics and actually solve the problem please thats what your paid for.
09:04 PM on 06/26/2011
AND OVERLY PAYED AT THAT.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fourex
01:05 PM on 06/24/2011
Grand Bargain On Debt Ceiling Would Have Pain For Both Parties

It will be a huge surprise as the wealthy have contributed nothing but debt and malfeasance for the past 30 years.
photo
Ed C Atlanta
Justice for all,,It's an Entitlement
12:04 PM on 06/24/2011
Republicans are so blinded by tax cuts and wanting to srtip entitlement programs as they call them,,that their leaders are actually running around saying and believing notions as this,,

www.marketwatch.com/story/e-coli-have-rights-too-republicans-say-2011-06-24?link=home...

They want to treat corporations as people,,now e-coli have rights also..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Wundrow
11:59 AM on 06/24/2011
What the GOP is counting on is that the Dems will do their usual cowardly dance: cave in, back down, back up, back out--and give them everything they want. The GOP has plenty of past experience to back them up on this assumption. I have little faith it'll be any different now.
11:51 AM on 06/24/2011
Why would a poor or middleclass person vote for a Republican when they want to Kill Social Security, Medicare and public schools? Why would a middleclass person vote to make the lives fo the Rich easier and their own harder?
09:06 PM on 06/26/2011
ROSIE YOU ARE SO FULL OF IT, THE DEMS TOOK 500 BILLION, THAT BILLION OUT OF MEDICARE FOR OBAMACARE. READ THE OBAMACARE BILL AND SEE WHO IS DOING THE SCREWING.
09:30 PM on 06/26/2011
Well what are you complaining about? You Republicans hate Medicare and Social Security. If left up to Republicans Medicare or SS would never have existed. It cuts into the tax cuts for the wealthy you see.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Summertown
A former traveler of the US now a country wife jus
10:50 AM on 06/24/2011
Are the Repubs going to own the deaths that are liable to occur with their demands that cuts be made to the life lines of the weakest in this country? All the while they continue to line the pockets of those that want for nothing except more money.

People who vote strict party lines, especially R's, should be thinking long and hard about this. My own spouse is a dyed in the wool Dem and we can get in to some heated discussions about his inability to look at the candidate and not the affiliation.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:33 AM on 08/10/2011
Oh and you don't think HCR is going to cause deaths? It will replace virtually all primary care doctors with nurses who have half the training of physicians, and a few notches down the IQ ladder. Missed diagnoses will be rampant. Some people will die in the 2-3 month wait for their appointment, unaware their condition was serious. Others patients will progress in an undiagnosed cancer from the time they call for an appointment and when they actually get in months later. Some of them will die unnecessarily.
Anyone who thinks we can add 31 million people to our health care system without reducing quality of care for everyone, well I used to believe in Santa, too. Its the same pie cut into 31 million more pieces.
photo
Grannysue
Been around for awhile!
10:36 AM on 06/24/2011
The Family values clan just cannot bring themselves to say that making themselves and their wealthy friends pay more taxes would help, nope, the only family that matters are the ones in their tax bracket everyone else can pretty much suck eggs!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Elvin Frantz
10:17 AM on 06/24/2011
Obama and the other Democrats must stand firm on their proposition of "We will not allow Medicare as we know it to be changed"
09:10 PM on 06/26/2011
THE DEMS ARE THE ONES MESSING UP THE SYSTEM. TAKING 500 BILLION OUT OF MEDICARE, SORRY BUT YOUR A IDIOT. YOU DEMS NEED TO READ INTO THE OBAMACARE PROGRAM BEFORE YOU START BLAMING THE REPS FOR WHATS GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY. A PRESIDEN THAT APOLOGIES FOR WHAT WE HAVE DONE FOR OTHER COUNTRIS. WHAT A COWARD.
12:27 PM on 06/27/2011
Dude. Lower case letters. Look into it.

As far as the cuts go, the ACA does enact cost controls to bring down the growth of Medicare spending, because Medicare spending is on a path to bust the budget in the long term. So the goal is to identify wasteful spending, of which there is a lot (why do you think other countries spend so much less on health care while getting better results?), and eliminate it while maintaining quality of care.

Contrast the Republican approach, which is to privatize Medicare and trust the magic of the free market to make it all work. Go ask a self-employed person how much fun free market health care is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Edward Watters
If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal
09:26 AM on 06/24/2011
"The notion that "additional Medicare cuts" would be exchanged for "commensurate" revenue increases piqued the interest of more than one Democratic operative...Baucus has been one of the most steadfast backers of keeping Medicare out of the debt ceiling negotiations. For him to express newfound openness seemed suggestive about the party's thinking at large."

This is called incrementalism. The Repubs want to slash Medicare and Social Security immediately. The Dems tell them, "no, you can't do it all at once - the people will protest. We have to slash it little by little."

Two sides of the same sleazy coin.
01:26 PM on 06/24/2011
We need to raise taxes and codify the fact that health care and Social Security are rights, not options. People who paid into SS should expect a return on THEIR INVESTMENT....shortages caused by Congressional mishandling should result in litigation. We have elected officials that should be representing the electorate, not their special interests. We actually have governance, at this time, bowing allegiance not to the flag, but to the interest groups. Whereas the most vocal is the Tea Party, the most insidious is "The Club for Growth" that has tied up the Republicans, forced them to receite the "lower taxes mean more jobs" hogwash (forgetting that trickle down stops at the first pocket it meets) and made them ignore the fact that taxes need to be re-apportioned, and the tax code needs serious revision. "K" Street will put a halt to that. We need a parliamentary system in the USA so we can make them stick to a party platform, and if they don't, have a vote of no confidence and change the government, and vote all these bums out. You'd say we have no "House of Lords". Really? Have you looked at the Senate?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:27 AM on 08/10/2011
It's the 21st Century. We have zero chance of competing with China, India, or even Brazil by emulating European welfare states. It's time for out of the 20th century box thinking, which I do not see in Democrats or Republicans.
Before you throw a ,you're Republican" blanket over my post, I should say I am an independent who voted for Obama in 2008. 2012 is doubtful at best. Democrats know they've alienated independents like me, and independents call the electoral shots. That's why they're demagoguing Medicare to get the senior vote. Unattractive. don't think I can vote for that 2012.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MeinNH
Ooooo Silly Me
09:23 AM on 06/24/2011
Jesus Tapdancing Christ....why can't these people get the message that the American people want NO NEGOTIATING on these matters. Pass a frigging clean bill and argue later. This drama and grandstanding is making me sick!
martman1
retired business owner
08:12 AM on 06/24/2011
This is a lot better than I thought it was going to be. It doesn't seem like it will hurt the average person.
1) Some tax loop holes closed
a) probably for very high-end earners
b) maybe also for mortgage interest rate deductions but only for $1 million dollar + houses
2) Cuts to payments to large, corporate owned for-profit hospitals
3) Cuts to payments to some medical devices (they'll have to lower prices)

I was fearing a complete Democratic "cave" with no revenue increases and cuts to beneficiaries.
Its not over yet but, at least it doesn't seem that bad.
09:42 AM on 06/24/2011
But it isn't over and nothing is passed by itself. They will vote on the whole thing.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:53 AM on 06/24/2011
Balancing the budget is required by the 14th amendment, it's at the very end. America is bound to pay ALL it's debts. Hands off my SS money I've paid in, it was a loan and the govt is REQUIRED to pay it back, get use to it ritchie.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
09:43 AM on 06/24/2011
It is how you read it. They are bound to pay all of it's debts doesn't mean they have to pay them all at once.