Associated Press
Democratic President Lyndon Johnson at a 1965 Medicare signing ceremony, along side Democratic President Harry Truman.
I was reading Charles Krauthammer's column this morning, and noticed that he's adopted the Romney/Ryan talking points on Medicare -- the far-right columnist accused President Obama of "robbing Granny's health care."
My first instinct was to explain how wrong this is, but it occurred to me how disjointed the nature of the debate has become. The fight over Medicare, on a conceptual level, got off track recently and has been careening in the wrong direction ever since.
Given how critically important this is in the presidential election, let's pause for a moment to consider the bigger picture.
The Romney/Ryan argument is that Obama/Biden is cutting Medicare, hurting seniors, and undermining the financial security of the Medicare system. All week, I've been making an effort to set the record straight by pointing to the facts: Obama's savings strengthen the system; benefits for seniors have been expanded, not cut; the Republican budget plan embraced the same savings Romney/Ryan is now condemning; the GOP privatization alternative is dangerous; etc.
The facts are, to be sure, still true, and they're important. But let's ignore the trees and look at the forest.
What is Medicare? It's a massive, government-run system of socialized medicine. It's wildly popular, very successful, and one of the pillars of modern Democratic governance. This government-run system of socialized medicine was created by Democrats against the opposition of conservative Republicans, and it's Democrats who've fought to protect it for more than a half-century.
Or to summarize, the left loves Medicare and always has; the right hates Medicare and always has. For liberals, the system is a celebrated ideal; for conservatives it's an unconstitutional, big-government outrage in desperate need of privatization.
In 2012, once we get past all of the talking points and attack ads, we're left with this: Romney/Ryan wants you to believe they're the liberals. No, seriously. Think about what the Republican presidential ticket, Fox News, Krauthammer, Donald Trump, and the Republican National Committee have been saying all week: those mean, rascally Democrats cut our beloved Medicare and voters should be outraged.
In other words, the argument pushed by the most right-wing major-party ticket in a generation is that Barack Obama is a left-wing socialist who wants government-run socialized medicine and that Barack Obama is a far-right brute who wants to undermine government-run socialized medicine.
If you care about protecting the popular system of socialized medicine, the argument goes, your best bet would be to put it the hands of conservative Republicans who steadfastly oppose the very idea of a government-run system of socialized medicine.
The questions voters should ask themselves, then, are incredibly simple: putting aside literally everything else you've heard this week, why in the world would a Democratic president want to "gut" Medicare? Why would liberal members of Congress and the AARP join a Democratic president in trying to undermine the system Democrats created and celebrate?
Why would voters expect conservative Republicans to be the trusted champions of socialized medicine?
As a political matter, I understand exactly what Romney/Ryan is trying to do. As Greg Sargent explained this morning, "It's important, though, to get at the true nature of the Romney strategy here. It isn't about drawing an actual policy contrast with the Obama campaign. It's about obfuscating the actual policy differences between the two candidates over the program."
That's exactly right. The Republican plan to deal with the intense unpopularity of the Romney/Ryan plan is to simply muddy the waters -- both sides are accusing the other side of being against Medicare; the media doesn't like separating fact from fiction; and voters, even well-intentioned folks who want to know the truth, aren't quite sure what to believe. For all I know, this obfuscation strategy might actually work.
But while assorted hacks may find partisan value in falsely accusing Obama of "robbing Granny's health care," does that make any sense on a conceptual level? Since when do Republicans look at President Obama and think he's too conservative when it comes to socialized medicine?
All I'm suggesting is that a little critical thinking on the part of the electorate and the political world can go a long way.
Leave a Comment:
What it boils down to: Obama claims his cuts to providers will not cause them to provide less services to users. He also has a nice bridge in NYC he's willing to sell you.
Another wingnut troll's been watching Fox. Providers agreed with the declining increase in payments.
http://swampland.time.com/2012/08/16/romneys-medicare-nonsense/
"...
As Kate has written in the past, the bottom line on the cost reductions in the Romney-Ryan and Obama Medicare packages is pretty much the same. The question is, how do you get there? Romney-Ryan relies on mythology, the notion that a “free” market in Medicare will reduce the costs (and will reduce government spending by $6400 per senior citizen on average in anticipation of these efficiencies). But we’ve had an experiment in private Medicare delivery the past few years. It’s called Medicare Advantage and, as Kate has reported, it costs, on average, 14% more than standard fee-for-service Medicare.
Obama gets his many of his reductions by eliminating the bonuses to private insurers that participate in Medicare Advantage. He would also reduce some payments to hospitals. But the most important reforms in the Affordable Care Act have to do with the wasteful fee-for-service nature of Medicare as it now stands. Obama promotes electronic record keeping and reviews best medical procedures to see what really works and what’s really wasteful. He also encourages medical group practices to see how much money they would save–and allows them to keep some of those savings–if they try a “team” approach where doctors are paid salaries instead of paid for each test and procedure they perform...."
Oh well, that changes everything - they just not going to pay the doctors, nurses, hospitals what they've been paying. Wonder if that's going to impact how many of them continue to care for MediCare patients??
Maybe you need to get some learnin', too:
http://swampland.time.com/2012/08/16/romneys-medicare-nonsense/
"...
As Kate has written in the past, the bottom line on the cost reductions in the Romney-Ryan and Obama Medicare packages is pretty much the same. The question is, how do you get there? Romney-Ryan relies on mythology, the notion that a “free” market in Medicare will reduce the costs (and will reduce government spending by $6400 per senior citizen on average in anticipation of these efficiencies). But we’ve had an experiment in private Medicare delivery the past few years. It’s called Medicare Advantage and, as Kate has reported, it costs, on average, 14% more than standard fee-for-service Medicare.
Obama gets his many of his reductions by eliminating the bonuses to private insurers that participate in Medicare Advantage. He would also reduce some payments to hospitals. But the most important reforms in the Affordable Care Act have to do with the wasteful fee-for-service nature of Medicare as it now stands. Obama promotes electronic record keeping and reviews best medical procedures to see what really works and what’s really wasteful. He also encourages medical group practices to see how much money they would save–and allows them to keep some of those savings–if they try a “team” approach where doctors are paid salaries instead of paid for each test and procedure they perform...."
"Missing the Medicare forest for the trees" Translation: Let me continue to blur the facts so you're not convinced by whatever Romney is saying.
Stop the bleeding; vote Romney/Ryan.
Apparently reality is not your thing. Or is it just reading you have a problem with?
Love the maturity level.
"Missing the Medicare forest for the trees" Translation: Let me continue to blur the facts so you're not convinced by whatever Romney is saying.
Stop the bleeding; vote Romney/Ryan.
Oh, you didn't need to type post it twice. We got the intensity of your stupidity the first time.
Why did Obama gut Medicare? Because his voting coalition consists of the young, minority, lower class and illegal immigrants. Why not take from the elderly block which votes more Republican in favor of those who vote Democratic. This is basic political math Ms Maddow.
Another wingnut troll with reading problems I guess. Well, I guess it won't do much good to post yet more debunking of your Fox-education, but I will anyway:
Medicare Myths, Debunked
PolitiFact | Mitt Romney said Barack Obama robs Medicare of more than $700 billion to pay for Obamacare
PolitiFact | Ryan's plan includes $700 billion in Medicare "cuts," says Stephanie Cutter
PolitiFact | Checking the facts on the $700 billion Medicare 'cut'
Jonathan Cohn: If Somebody Is Raiding Medicare, It’s Not Obama. It’s Romney And Ryan. | The New Republic
Let me know if you need more. There's SO much more exposing Team Romney and its Republican lies.
Another liberal website that will try and scare the life out of seniors just so they vote for our Dear Leader, Barack Hussein Obama.
God help us!
Easier if you just came out and told everybody you really don't know anything about the topic and have nothing to say.
So, Rachael you are saying Liberals and the media do not have talking points? LOL
Steve is saying Republicans have to memorize their talking points because they can easily get tripped up in their lies if they're not synchronized. And that's pretty much what is happening as the liars set about telling unsynchronized lies.
It is a fact obama is gutting 700 billion from medicare to pay for his unconstitutional obamacare (see Federalist 45). Ryan will embarrass obama on this. Three months and he's through.
Uh, oh!! You need to tell all people how wrong they are. Quick, get you some wingnut glory:
Romney’s Medicare Nonsense
CNN's O'Brien Corrects Right-Wing Media Medicare Falsehood
Medicare Myths, Debunked
PolitiFact | Mitt Romney said Barack Obama robs Medicare of more than $700 billion to pay for Obamacare
PolitiFact | Ryan's plan includes $700 billion in Medicare "cuts," says Stephanie Cutter
PolitiFact | Checking the facts on the $700 billion Medicare 'cut'
Jonathan Cohn: If Somebody Is Raiding Medicare, It’s Not Obama. It’s Romney And Ryan.
Romney and Ryan and the Medicare Lies - The Daily Beast
Brad DeLong: The Romney Campaign Lies All the Time. About Everything. Especially Medicare
Rachel - I know you've made a lot of comments about the Paul Ryan Kill-Medicare Plan. But I think it would be interesting to see it a different way. Paul Ryan's 2013 budget (Path to Prosperity) says on p. 52 that seniors should get their health care from an "exchange" in which private insurance plans would compete with traditional Medicare, and premiums would be subsidized. Wait -- that's the same as Obamacare! only for seniors, and with a public plan as an option. So Ryan wants an exchange for old people, and Obama wants an exchange for everyone else. Why not just do both? I think Obama should thank Ryan for coming up with this great idea. An exchange -- why didn't I think of that?
Nope. All Ryan is trying to do is starve the traditional program. We've tried private insurance and it's inefficient; 14% more costly than the traditional program. Best would be single-payer for everybody, i.e., Medicare for everybody, but it wasn't politically possible. As with the rest of your wingnut friends, a little reading could do you well:
Medicare Myths, Debunked
PolitiFact | Mitt Romney said Barack Obama robs Medicare of more than $700 billion to pay for Obamacare
PolitiFact | Ryan's plan includes $700 billion in Medicare "cuts," says Stephanie Cutter
PolitiFact | Checking the facts on the $700 billion Medicare 'cut'
Jonathan Cohn: If Somebody Is Raiding Medicare, It’s Not Obama. It’s Romney And Ryan. | The New Republic
The article has no substance, but that is to be expected in a Medicare debate. In the end it's a math problem. With 10,000 people retiring EVERYDAY the numbers become pretty plain. So keep churning childish insults. If you are old enough, you're probably fine, if you are young, well, good luck and keep thinking that there's enough Millionaires and Billionaires or bankers or whatever bogeyman you want to create to cover you.
Apparently you just didn't like the numbers you saw. Romney/Ryan => Medicare trust fund runs out in 2016. Obama => 2024.
I think this talk of the right hating socialism, and therefore the left can be trusted with Medicare, is a great way of getting at the "Forest." But it misses some key components:
1. Everything government does is "socialistic." There is no argument in our country over whether some socialism is good. Those conservatives don't even exist any more. That's part of what's so ironic about the backlash against Ryan for suggesting that social programs grow more slowly than they have been--he envisions an INCREASE in socialism, but he's a "right wing radical." We all want to do more for the poor. Saying otherwise is disingenuous.
2. Democrats have always promised more than they could deliver. That's why Democratic policies always poll so popular, yet are always defeated. The voters like the idea of everyone having great doctors--who wouldn't? But the voters know that just SAYING everyone will have a great doctor might actually mess things up for those who really do have a great doctor. The voters like the idea of everyone having bigger pensions--but they're smart enough to know that this leads to school closings and firings.
3. Trying to do a little, and do it well, is fundamentally more trustworthy than promising to do everything, and doing it poorly. So the real "Forest" here is one more set of broken promises by Obama--and the possibility that an adult in the room, by ending the double-counting and ambitious social engineering, can actually get something done. That "something" will, of course, be a government program. But it will be a more modest government program and hence, by definition, more likely to work.
By far the group promising to do more than they can deliver is Republicans. No more evidence is needed than the complete failure of supply-side economics. And yet that's the only arrow the GOTea has in its quiver. So they double down on their failed ideas and policies and hope the public is too stupid to see through their lies.
"the far right columnist"
leave it to benen to be unable to even start a column without throwing pejoratives around. here's one i like to use : "hack." that's what you're reading, folks, the words/thoughts of a total hack. no different than listening to sean hannity.
Robert97, you have it right. maybe you should pen this hack's columns from now on...
So now a "far right columnist" is a pejorative. Well, I guess I'd be embarrassed about a rightie if my side had failed as much as the right has in the last 30 years.
This is a great summary of the current medicare debate. Note that the Obfuscation strategy has been in play already in other debates and campaigns in recent times. Scott Walker used it, tea party candidates used it in 2010.