iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Paul Abrams

GET UPDATES FROM Paul Abrams
 

Ryan's Plan Kills Medicare Now, Not in 10 Years

Posted: 08/13/2012 7:11 pm

I just read a fast-moving mystery novel, Pryme Knumber, by Matthew J Flynn. It was a great read, and none other than Paul Ryan (R-WI) appears briefly. Very appropriately, he appears first standing with a lobbyist. Presciently, Flynn says that, because he does not appear as someone who would "torch a lingerie factory," and for that reason only, he was considered a "future leader" by Republicans who might "do something."

We know what that "something" is -- killing Medicare. And, that is not fiction.

Like all Republicans, Paul Ryan really hates Medicare, not just for the political reasons of his fellow travelers (it makes the elderly more likely to vote Democratic), but also because it violates the philosophy espoused by the Russian Ayn Rand that Ryan somehow believes defines Americanism.

So, they are, and always have been, out to destroy it. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich thought Medicare should "wither slowly on the vine."

Romney-Ryan has a quicker plan in mind. They just do not want to tell us about it.

Ryan claims that his plan will not impact anyone 55 or over.

He is lying. Romney-Ryan will kill Medicare now.

It is not complicated. First, repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act ("PPACA," a.k.a., "ObamaCare") will cause Medicare to start paying out more money than it takes in in 2017. ObamaCare increased Medicare's longevity until 2029.

So, with Romney-Ryan, we will have to start finding more money for Medicare very, very soon.

But, here's the rub: Both Romney and Ryan have pledged to Grover Norquist that they would never, ever, ever, raise any taxes on anyone. So, raising Medicare taxes is out.

Here's another rub: they are determined to provide the wealthy with about a $4T tax cut. And, they are going to increase defense spending.

So, there is only one place left to go -- Medicare itself. By first repealing the PPCA, Romney-Ryan will force themselves to... end Medicare for all seniors, including those currently being covered.

OK, we are going hear more lies about $700B cut from Medicare because of ObamaCare. That $700B is savings in payments to hospitals and other providers (other than physicians) negotiated as part of the health care deal plus elimination of over-payments under a program called "Medicare Advantage" that did not work.

No one's benefits were reduced or eliminated. No money went from Medicare to ObamaCare. Otherwise, how could ObamaCare extend the solvency of Medicare?

The PPACA, "ObamaCare," not only extends the solvency of Medicare, it also closes the "doughnut" hole in the prescription drug benefit, so that eventually seniors will have their cost of prescriptions fully covered.

Romney-Ryan will rob seniors of that, too. After all, we don't want to make anyone "too dependent"... except on tax accountants and lawyers to hide taxes overseas, because that is a true reflection of our values.

So, from Romney-Ryan to the rest of you who have contributed to Medicare all these years, including those who are currently on it -- good luck, you are on your own. And, good luck finding insurance at all, since many of you will have pre-existing illnesses and the repealing ObamaCare lets insurance companies deny coverage, and set life-time limits again.

As the 17th Century British philosopher, Thomas Hobbes, reminded us, "life in the state of nature is solitary, poor nasty, brutish and short."

Welcome to Romney-Ryan world.

 

Follow Paul Abrams on Twitter: www.twitter.com/pabrams2001

FOLLOW POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 26
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tommy6860
Religion requires the lack of critical thinking
05:55 PM on 08/28/2012
Actually Paul, ACA only extends the solvency of Medicare by eight years once fully implemented into law. So having last until 2029 was an older assumption, but not now. The fact that unemployment has been fairly high since that article you linked to that extended date, means far less people had payrolls taxes being pain into the medicare fund between then and now. I am assuming this is why the reduction in the years of solvency.

Having said that, the Romney/Ryan plan would kill Medicare and I totally for ACA.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dougaus1
01:52 PM on 08/26/2012
This is solid analysis of the GOP plant to kill Medicare. All the jigsaw puzzle pieces are there. The GOP is betting that the American people are too stupid to figure this out. Grover Norquist is the key piece to the puzzle here in that they would have to raise taxes on Medicare to make it solvent if they repeal ObamaCare, raise defense spending, and give millionaires additional tax cuts. Or they could raise taxes on the middle class, which is another thing they're being silent about with their plans for the country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Fanney
Scribbler
10:54 PM on 08/14/2012
Obama removed a wasteful, corporate crony Medicare D program, closed the donut hole, extended Medicare's solvency, and reduced costs for seniors.

Ryan would increase costs for seniors, reduce the lifespan of Medicare, and shift the money 'saved' into tax cuts for the wealthy.

The choice here is the difference between functional government that helps the American people and a dysfunctional government that rewards the greedy and those who manipulate politics to loot the system for their own benefit.
07:09 AM on 08/14/2012
ne overlooked aspect of health care is pre- and post-natal care of babies. Politicians have spent a disproportionate amount of time and energy on life, and hardly a single nanosecond on actually caring for that new life yet to be. When it comes to keeping newborns alive, the United States ranks last of twenty-three wealthy countries. As long as we don't have single payer health care the health of newborns will rest on whether providing care is profitable, and bribery. That's why I support Rocky Anderson for President. Vote Rocky: http://www.voterocky.org/healthcare_solution
maddiemom
Retired teacher and ex-corporate wife.
03:41 PM on 08/16/2012
Newborn? They're on their own, after they're actually born or being carried to term.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JeanRR
08:26 PM on 08/16/2012
I am sure Rocky is a great guy with great ideas but this election is too important to waste my vote. Romney/Ryan will destroy my own livelihood and will destroy this country.
08:44 AM on 08/17/2012
I understand that sentiment. But I feel I wasted my vote in '08. Matt Taibbi documented how on Nov 5th - the day after - Obama tuned out Main St., and tuned into Wall. St.
11:16 PM on 08/13/2012
Way to over-simplify and show a total lack of understanding of the political opposition. Saying all Republicans hate Medicare (when the program was created with large bi-partisan support in the first place) is like saying all Democrats hate the free-market. Sure, there are extremists on both sides, but they do not define the whole of either party. And Republicans do not adhere to Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. Ayn Rand has never been a very respected person among the Republican party. She has been popular with the far right libertarians, and even then, it depends. Ayn Rand is good for espousing the virtues of the free-market, but not for much else.

Ryan's plan seeks to preserve Medicare from going over a cliff. If people think it is wrongly designed, that's fine, but that is th goal.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Paul Abrams
05:40 PM on 08/14/2012
Republicans were against Medicare when it came up, but turned in the end to vote for it when it was clear it was going to pass. Gingrich et al. wanted it to "wither slowly on the vine".

It is certainly true that Republican voters, many of whom love medicare, support it. But, not the leadership.
09:58 PM on 08/14/2012
I think the leadership support it too. One of the complaints among many in the Republican base is that the leadership too often does not govern in a limited government manner but rather governs in a big-government manner. For example, during the 1990s, some prominent Republicans (such as Gingrich) supported an individual mandate universal health insurance program. And then George W. Bush tried his big government conservatism ("compassionate conservatism"). So I don't think the leadership dislikes Medicare at all as it is a very popular program and doesn't go against the Republican concept of limited government. I mean there's a huge difference between having a welfare state that people can live off of versus a safety net for the elderly that they pay into throughout their working life that is then there for when they are old. Some on the more far-right would get rid of Medicare, but as said, the extremists on both sides don't define the parties. It would also be politically suicidal to try to kill it!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Fanney
Scribbler
11:01 PM on 08/14/2012
The Ryan plan kills Medicare by turning it into a low-value voucher system. Obama and Obamacare extended the lifetime of Medicare by killing the corporate crony, poisoned pill, Medicare D program.

Anyone saying that Ryan helps Medicare or Medicare beneficiaries is spewing falsehoods.
01:15 AM on 08/15/2012
Medicare Part D is one of the only successful government programs in existence as it has constantly come in under projected costs while also proving to be extremely popular. And Ryan's plan creates a voucher system that people can try, but if they do not like it, then they can remain with conventional fee-for-service Medicare.
10:08 PM on 08/13/2012
If you want to talk about Ayn Rand, and who stands under the banner that she would, it would be the Democratic Party. They want a "true" democracy where the mob has full right to do what ever they want as long as the majority backs it. Such examples would be the killing of Socrates for no reason other than that a majority of the people "did not like what he was saying." Republicans want what this nation was intended to be, a constitutionally limited Republic. That means there is a writ or document with laws that are there in place to protect certain inalienable rights of all individuals. Even those we disagree with. And yes that does include you. Aren't you glad you can continue to espouse your lies and half truths to your black little hearts content.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Paul Abrams
09:58 AM on 08/14/2012
You obviously have never read Ayn Rand. Her Russian "philosophy", if you can call it that, was that everyone should always be out for him or herself.
With respect to Republicans favoring "constitutionally limited government", I don't recall seeing in the Constitution any provision that would allow a woman to be forced to carry her child to term, or to force a doctor to lie to his patients about the long-term effects of an abortion, or to impose a medically-unnecessary test she does not want and force her to pay for it, or to ban contraceptives....and, that's just for starters. Where, pray tell, are those provisions in the Constitution?
11:48 AM on 08/14/2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/todays-republicans-embrac_b_1031400.html

What actually happened between the revolutionary war and the Constitutional convention in 1787 was a government organized under the Articles of Confederation (the "Articles"). The Articles did, indeed, breathe the vapors of the Declaration in that it created a very, very weak central government and left most powers with the states.

But the Articles produced what we would call today a "failed state".

The Founders realized that their fear of a powerful central government arose from their experience with an absolute monarch, and that fear had resulted in a failed state.
The Constitution, therefore, created a strong central state, by design. Although many of the people were the same as the signers of the Declaration, the Founders now had the experience of a failed state. That strong central government would be kept from being too powerful by the separation of powers -- legislative, executive, and judicial -- and by the Bill of Rights.
photo
planetjeffy
On the other hand, you have different fingers.
09:21 PM on 08/13/2012
Powerful stuff. This needs to be made into an ad for Obama
09:11 PM on 08/13/2012
Fact Check . ORG = http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/no-end-to-end-medicare-claim/

No End to ‘End Medicare’ Claim

Democrats are still hammering an old, and since replaced, GOP proposal, claiming it would “end Medicare,” and cost seniors $6,000 more a year for their health care. The newest Republican budget, proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, keeps traditional Medicare — unlike his plan from 2011 — and the increased cost claim is no longer applicable to it.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Paul Abrams
09:49 AM on 08/14/2012
In which case, his so-called "plan" does absolutely nothing. Who would opt for the voucher? Under Medicare, there is a guaranteed benefit. If someone wants insurance BEYOND what the guaranteed benefit is, they can purchase it today. Why would anyone give up the guaranteed benefit--for which he/she has paid into for his/her entire life--in favor of a voucher to help pay for insurance.

Moreover, if--as they say they will--repeal ObamaCare, then they STILL have to find a way to pay for the increase of outflow over inflow that occurs in 2017 after the repeal (with ObamaCare in place, that date is 2027 or 2029). What are they going to do about that? Raise taxes? Shiver-me-timbers, NO!. There is never any reason to raise any taxes for anything--right? Cut elsewhere? Where--not defense, that needs to be increased. Right? Social Security? Ryan wants to privatize it, and the transition costs alone are $2 Trillion. What's left? The other programs don't amount to a hill-of-beans as a percentage of the total budget.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Fanney
Scribbler
11:03 PM on 08/14/2012
Fact Check is run by the conservative Annenberg Foundation...
09:08 PM on 08/13/2012
"Like all Republicans..."

You write like a college journalist major.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anthony Barnes
11:21 PM on 08/13/2012
All is an exaggeration but most probably is not. Regardless,that is one hell of a scary plan he has laid out, especially if you are old or have old people in your life.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alexeiz
Since I lost all hope, I feel much better!
01:48 AM on 08/14/2012
How do you know? Are you a colledge journalist major yourself? Do you have some posts or a blog? I'd be interested. I bet they are boring,