Paul Ryan To Obama: Do Not Continue To "Mischaracterize" Medicare Plan

[Susan45]

Does anyone have an answer to how insurance/Medicare works under Paul Ryan's Plan if you have an expensive condition?

You’ve already answered you own questions, just remove the question marks from your posts:

Ryan wants to give Medicare beneficiaries a voucher they can use to get coverage from a private insurance company. Initially, the vouchers would enable beneficiaries to get coverage comparable to what they have today. But the value of the vouchers would diminish over time. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that 65-year-olds would be paying 68 percent of their Medicare coverage costs by 2030, compared with 25 percent today.

What this means is that almost all Medicare beneficiaries would eventually be woefully underinsured, just as an estimated 25 million younger Americans already are and just as most of the nation’s elderly—the ones who could afford coverage at all—were before Medicare was enacted in 1965. (Most senior citizens had no health coverage before Medicare because insurance companies refused to sell it to them. That’s why it was so urgently needed.)

Thank you for posting this. For those that don't know, Wendell Potter was an executive with insurance companies for over 20 yrs. That is until he started feeling guilty and turned whistle blower. He is top notch which is probably why some on the right are trying to smear him.

This is my first post here so please feel free to let me know if I am making any mistakes. Also, I had to delete the url to your article in order to post.

 

[Trajan]

Unless you bring down healthcare costs, it's a zero sum game anyway. So you cut Medicare benefits -

seniors will still get sick. Seniors will still need healthcare. Private insurers aren't any better equipped to provide affordable coverage than Medicare is.

Seniors will simply go broke trying to survive. Or go without healthcare. Or bankrupt their children trying to survive (the ones that will help their parents).

The fundamental problem with the Republican solution is that it isn't a solution.

so cutting 4-500 billion from medicare is what? funding it?

So you're gonna keep going with that spin, huh?

Nonpartisan agency says House bill would reduce senior care - washingtonpost.com

“There is an issue here on the budget because your own actuary has said you can’t double-count,” said Shimkus. “You can’t count — they’re attacking Medicare on the CR when their bill, your law, cut $500 billion from Medicare.”

He continued: “Then you’re also using the same $500 billion to what? Say your funding health care. Your own actuary says you can’t do both. […] What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?’

Sebelius’ reply? “Both.”



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukaIZ7pmabo&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - ‪Shimkus Questions Sebelius on Budget Gimmicks in the Health Care Law‬‏[/ame]

Health and Human Services Director Kathleen Sebelius admitted the White House double counted Medicare cuts in the President’s Healthcare Reform Act.

 

[peach174]

What is being mischaractized is that you can choose between Medicare insurance plans or private plans.

If by "Medicare insurance plans" you mean public health insurance (which, indeed, is what folks generally mean when they refer to Medicare), then that's not true. Medicare as a public health insurance program ceases to exist under the Republican budget. Those grandfathered in do get that choice; no one else has the choice of a public insurance plan.

Where is the Democratic plan to save Medicare?

This is bizarre. The Democratic plan to reform Medicare is called the Affordable Care Act. If folks are somehow still unaware of that, I'd recommend reading about some of the Medicare reforms in it.

If you're asking that the ACA's reforms be built upon, that's a great idea. The ACA is designed to be a foundational piece, not the end of reform. It's supposed to be extended strengthened in future year (hence the inclusion of a variety of payment and delivery system reforms on different scales--those that prove themselves to be most effective will need to be implemented Medicare-wide). In fact, one of its more interesting contributions is creating engines for continuous reform within Medicare and Medicaid.

No I mean the actual plans that each of the states have now under Medicare. Each state has different ones.
Like here in AZ we have;

Abrazo Advantage -Central Az.
Banner MediSun - Maricopa County
CareMore -Pima County
Cigna
Desert Canyon
Health Net
Humana
SCAN
Secure Horizons
Universal American
Universal Health
And each one of these have about 3 to 6 different types to choose from.
These are Government Medicare Programs, they are not private.
None of these will become private they will remain as Medicare Ins.
That is where the mis-characterization comes in, it will still be Medicare Insurance.

 

[EriktheRed]

Nonpartisan agency says House bill would reduce senior care - washingtonpost.com

Written in 2009 about a bill that didn't even become law in the end.

“There is an issue here on the budget because your own actuary has said you can’t double-count,” said Shimkus. “You can’t count — they’re attacking Medicare on the CR when their bill, your law, cut $500 billion from Medicare.”

He continued: “Then you’re also using the same $500 billion to what? Say your funding health care. Your own actuary says you can’t do both. […] What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?’

Sebelius’ reply? “Both.”

So you think they oughtta harp about $500 billion in wasteful spending from Medicare Part D going to fund other parts of the healthcare bill, giving more people access to insurance they wouldn't otherwise have? Ok. Worked for the GOP last year; maybe not so much next year.

 

[Bfgrn]

Does anyone have an answer to how insurance/Medicare works under Paul Ryan's Plan if you have an expensive condition?

You’ve already answered you own questions, just remove the question marks from your posts:

Ryan wants to give Medicare beneficiaries a voucher they can use to get coverage from a private insurance company. Initially, the vouchers would enable beneficiaries to get coverage comparable to what they have today. But the value of the vouchers would diminish over time. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that 65-year-olds would be paying 68 percent of their Medicare coverage costs by 2030, compared with 25 percent today.

What this means is that almost all Medicare beneficiaries would eventually be woefully underinsured, just as an estimated 25 million younger Americans already are and just as most of the nation’s elderly—the ones who could afford coverage at all—were before Medicare was enacted in 1965. (Most senior citizens had no health coverage before Medicare because insurance companies refused to sell it to them. That’s why it was so urgently needed.)

Thank you for posting this. For those that don't know, Wendell Potter was an executive with insurance companies for over 20 yrs. That is until he started feeling guilty and turned whistle blower. He is top notch which is probably why some on the right are trying to smear him.

This is my first post here so please feel free to let me know if I am making any mistakes. Also, I had to delete the url to your article in order to post.

Welcome Susan. I am a big fan of Wendell Potter and I have offered an interview he did on PBS numerous times on this board. The right wingers won't even WATCH it. It would disturb their dogma.

 

[Greenbeard]

No I mean the actual plans that each of the states have now under Medicare. Each state has different ones. [...]

These are Government Medicare Programs, they are not private.
None of these will become private they will remain as Medicare Ins.
That is where the mis-characterization comes in, it will still be Medicare Insurance.

Medicare Advantage plans are private insurance plans. You're confusing them with the dominant mode of Medicare, in which Medicare (CMS) constructs a network of providers and compensates those providers for services rendered to beneficiaries. Medicare Advantage plans, on the other hand, are private capitated plans.

But I'm curious: why do you believe Medicare Advantage is retained under the GOP budget? Granted, very little detail has been attached to the proposal but whatever account Ryan gave CBO to analyze clearly distinguished between "traditional Medicare" (which it defined as "the benefits covered under Parts A, B, and D of Medicare and includes benefits provided both in the fee-for-service sector and by participating private plans (that is, through the Medicare Advantage program, prescription drug plans, or the Retiree Drug Subsidy program).") and "the new system," which I assume everyone is familiar with by now. This is also KFF's understanding of the proposal.

There's no indication that Medicare Advantage survives the dismantling any more than Medicare-as-public-health-insurance does.

 

[Zona]

Paul Ryan To Obama: Do Not Continue To "Mischaracterize" Medicare Plan


"I simply explained what our plan is, how it worked. It's been misdescribed by the president and many others, and so we simply described to him precisely what it is we've been proposing so that he hears from us how our proposal works so that in the future he won't mischaracterize it," Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said after meeting with the president this morning.

Click here for video

Dont worry about this.....old people like when you fuck with medicare and, here is the kewl part...they dont vote...lol

Run on this idiots. Look what happened in ny.

Go Obama! 2012.

 

[mudwhistle]

How are we supposed to know who that is holding that sign?

Show proof that a Tea Party leader was holding that sign or even somebody that wanted to be called a Tea-bagger or even somebody that didn't have his head up his ass.

Unless you show me something that says the Tea Party agreed to be called Tea-baggers I think you've lost your case.

The assumption was that we agreed to be called Tea-baggers.

It's one thing to hang a bag of tea off of your hat, and quite another the want to be called one.

 

[Zona]

Btw...Somebody needed to tell Obama to apologize for calling the Tea Party "Tea-Baggers"

Why? In the beginning, they called THEMSELVES teabaggers - you remember, back when they were so culturally unsophisticated, that they didn't know what that term is slang for. Remember when Fox aired the plea to "stop making fun of us!". Remember?

Unless you show me a quote of a Tea Party rep calling himself a Tea-bagger I'll consider that a lie.

I never saw anyone call themselves a tea-bagger. They may have hung tea bags from their hats, but I never heard anyone call themselves a tea-bagger.

Btw, Obama knows better then calling millions of Americans essentially ball-sack suckers.

Of course he hasn't the class not to.

Mud whistle, ...comment...?? I cant believe you actually thought we started tis. Fucking idiot tea baggers are funny.

 

[Zona]

Here you go stupid...

YouTube - ‪Rep Paul Ryan: Reform Medicare - Don't Raid It‬‏

Paul Ryan is trying to save Medicare from bankruptcy

Talk about a mischaracterization!


That's just funny right there, I don't care who you are...

Ryan's a real piece of work.

I wish someone would mention the fact that his plan brings back the donut hole. This is huge.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And how do you think we are going to continue to pay for Medicare? And Social Security for that matter?

According to a recent analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, tax rates would have to increase by 90% to pay for projected spending in Medicare and Social Security through 2050.

As the population ages, the study says, the lowest tax rate on individual income will need to jump from 10% to 19%, the tax rate on incomes in the current 25% bracket will have to soar to 47%, and the highest rate could jump from 35% to 66%. To meet the accelerating cost of entitlements, the top corporate income tax rate also will likely need to increase from 35% to 66%.

Can you say job killer!!!

Unless you bring down healthcare costs, it's a zero sum game anyway. So you cut Medicare benefits -

seniors will still get sick. Seniors will still need healthcare. Private insurers aren't any better equipped to provide affordable coverage than Medicare is.

Seniors will simply go broke trying to survive. Or go without healthcare. Or bankrupt their children trying to survive (the ones that will help their parents).

The fundamental problem with the Republican solution is that it isn't a solution.

so cutting 4-500 billion from medicare is what? funding it?

Funding has to match cost. That's not that complicated.

 

[Trajan]

Like tuition?

 

[Nic_Driver]

How are we supposed to know who that is holding that sign?
Show proof that a Tea Party leader was holding that sign or even somebody that wanted to be called a Tea-bagger or even somebody that didn't have his head up his ass.

Unless you show me something that says the Tea Party agreed to be called Tea-baggers I think you've lost your case.

The assumption was that we agreed to be called Tea-baggers.

It's one thing to hang a bag of tea off of your hat, and quite another the want to be called one.

You can see the web site on the sign in the picture.

Latest Articles

http://www.freerepublic.com

 

[mudwhistle]

Paul Ryan To Obama: Do Not Continue To "Mischaracterize" Medicare Plan


"I simply explained what our plan is, how it worked. It's been misdescribed by the president and many others, and so we simply described to him precisely what it is we've been proposing so that he hears from us how our proposal works so that in the future he won't mischaracterize it," Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said after meeting with the president this morning.

Click here for video

Dont worry about this.....old people like when you fuck with medicare and, here is the kewl part...they dont vote...lol

Run on this idiots. Look what happened in ny.

Go Obama! 2012.

Go Obama?????

You talk about someone else being an idiot.

Pathetic.

 

[mudwhistle]

How are we supposed to know who that is holding that sign?
Show proof that a Tea Party leader was holding that sign or even somebody that wanted to be called a Tea-bagger or even somebody that didn't have his head up his ass.

Unless you show me something that says the Tea Party agreed to be called Tea-baggers I think you've lost your case.

The assumption was that we agreed to be called Tea-baggers.

It's one thing to hang a bag of tea off of your hat, and quite another the want to be called one.

You can see the web site on the sign in the picture.

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

What, do you think I'm stupid??? I saw that.

Since when has a Freeper been an official spokesperson for the Tea Party?????

That is quite a leap from telling someone to Tea Bag someone and wanting to take it on as an official name.

Btw, are you suggesting that an unidentified teenager holding up a stupid sign or some unidentified blogger represents every Tea Party members' wishes?

 

[mudwhistle]

Talk about a mischaracterization!


That's just funny right there, I don't care who you are...

Ryan's a real piece of work.

I wish someone would mention the fact that his plan brings back the donut hole. This is huge.

How can you bring back something that's still in full force?

The government's failure to pay full price created the donut-hole in the first place.

 

[peach174]

No I mean the actual plans that each of the states have now under Medicare. Each state has different ones. [...]

These are Government Medicare Programs, they are not private.
None of these will become private they will remain as Medicare Ins.
That is where the mis-characterization comes in, it will still be Medicare Insurance.

Medicare Advantage plans are private insurance plans. You're confusing them with the dominant mode of Medicare, in which Medicare (CMS) constructs a network of providers and compensates those providers for services rendered to beneficiaries. Medicare Advantage plans, on the other hand, are private capitated plans.

But I'm curious: why do you believe Medicare Advantage is retained under the GOP budget? Granted, very little detail has been attached to the proposal but whatever account Ryan gave CBO to analyze clearly distinguished between "traditional Medicare" (which it defined as "the benefits covered under Parts A, B, and D of Medicare and includes benefits provided both in the fee-for-service sector and by participating private plans (that is, through the Medicare Advantage program, prescription drug plans, or the Retiree Drug Subsidy program).") and "the new system," which I assume everyone is familiar with by now. This is also KFF's understanding of the proposal.

There's no indication that Medicare Advantage survives the dismantling any more than Medicare-as-public-health-insurance does.

I don't know about Medicare Advantage, but I know that the Medicare insurance will be around, because 55 year olds and up wiil still be on those programs,not to mention all of the federal workers.

 

[rightwinger]

Paul Ryan To Obama: Do Not Continue To "Mischaracterize" Medicare Plan


"I simply explained what our plan is, how it worked. It's been misdescribed by the president and many others, and so we simply described to him precisely what it is we've been proposing so that he hears from us how our proposal works so that in the future he won't mischaracterize it," Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said after meeting with the president this morning.

Click here for video

Dont worry about this.....old people like when you fuck with medicare and, here is the kewl part...they dont vote...lol

Run on this idiots. Look what happened in ny.

Go Obama! 2012.

The Republicans tried to handle that by telling old people..."Don't worry, it doesn't apply to YOU......YOU get to keep Medicare"

Guess what? Old people understand how important their healthcare is and want it there for their children and grandchildren

 

[EriktheRed]

Paul Ryan To Obama: Do Not Continue To "Mischaracterize" Medicare Plan


"I simply explained what our plan is, how it worked. It's been misdescribed by the president and many others, and so we simply described to him precisely what it is we've been proposing so that he hears from us how our proposal works so that in the future he won't mischaracterize it," Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said after meeting with the president this morning.

Click here for video

Dont worry about this.....old people like when you fuck with medicare and, here is the kewl part...they dont vote...lol

Run on this idiots. Look what happened in ny.

Go Obama! 2012.

The Republicans tried to handle that by telling old people..."Don't worry, it doesn't apply to YOU......YOU get to keep Medicare"

Guess what? Old people understand how important their healthcare is and want it there for their children and grandchildren

I'm hoping that it's finally starting to sink in with them that the Republicans can't be trusted on this because, ultimately, they hate the very idea of Medicare to bgin with. It's totally ludicrous that they would even TRY to argue that it's they who are Medicare's real champions, yet last year they did and got away with it.

 

[Trajan]

No I mean the actual plans that each of the states have now under Medicare. Each state has different ones. [...]

These are Government Medicare Programs, they are not private.
None of these will become private they will remain as Medicare Ins.
That is where the mis-characterization comes in, it will still be Medicare Insurance.

Medicare Advantage plans are private insurance plans. You're confusing them with the dominant mode of Medicare, in which Medicare (CMS) constructs a network of providers and compensates those providers for services rendered to beneficiaries. Medicare Advantage plans, on the other hand, are private capitated plans.

But I'm curious: why do you believe Medicare Advantage is retained under the GOP budget? Granted, very little detail has been attached to the proposal but whatever account Ryan gave CBO to analyze clearly distinguished between "traditional Medicare" (which it defined as "the benefits covered under Parts A, B, and D of Medicare and includes benefits provided both in the fee-for-service sector and by participating private plans (that is, through the Medicare Advantage program, prescription drug plans, or the Retiree Drug Subsidy program).") and "the new system," which I assume everyone is familiar with by now. This is also KFF's understanding of the proposal.

There's no indication that Medicare Advantage survives the dismantling any more than Medicare-as-public-health-insurance does.

medicare adv. is a private supplemental to medicare coverage...yes?