On April 5, Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan released his plan for the 2012 Federal Budget to which he plans, through spending and departmental budget cuts, to save over $6.2 trillion over the next ten years.
I have liked Paul Ryan for over five years now and hated the fact the Republican Party always pushed him to back of the group on anything in financial talk, especially when he produced his “Road Map to Recovery.” Now the Republicans are giving Paul Ryan his chance to walk his financial talk.
It always amazes me how one party can be against an issue, and when it’s their turn to care for it, all of a sudden they embrace it. In this case, everyone in focusing in on Ryan's plan to "save" Medicare.
In 1965, the American Medical Association and the Republican Party ran an unsuccessful campaign against a new program called Medicare. They created a 10 minute infomercial to talk about the ills that Medicare will bring to America with a slick spokesperson in an up and coming politician named Ronald Reagan.
“Ronald Reagan Speaks against Socialized Medicine” gained little steam, but the term “Socialized medicine” resurfaces whenever a politician attempts to make changes to any form of healthcare.
Republicans helped overload the Medicare system in 2003 with their Medicare Advantage Plan D and add $1 trillion to its federal cost. And five years later, many of those Republicans that voted for Plan B came forth to say “Well we wanted it right then with no questions asked, but never knew how to pay for it.”
Ryan’s Plan to help Medicare is mainly tweaking the current system and cutting over $380 billion. Those that are currently using Medicare will be stay as is, it’s for those about to enter the system in the future that the changes will affect. Services will be cut every year, a little at a time. But the request to have those “Wealthy seniors” take cuts in services, to let the less fortunate seniors receive more in services, well is that not a form of socializing medicine? Democrats are dumb to stoop down to call this “Killing Gramma” as the Republicans did during the health care debates, it’s so third grade.
Everyone pays their fair share, but no one receives the same care. Kind of different wording compared to the wealthy paying an extra percent or two in taxes to help.
People cried “socialism” over that nugget but not on Ryan’s Plan. Wonder why? Oh(!) because the agitating opinionators of the Right agree with the plan. They just leave out the little tidbits like “wealthy seniors” caring for the “poor seniors” by taking less and still paying the same.
I have complained for years about the abundant fraud happening within the Medicare system. During the Health care summit two years ago, Oklahoma Senator Dr Tom Colburn, even stated that once you clear up the fraud, a whirlwind of millions can be saved. Heck you only have to look at Florida's Governor Rick Scott and learn about Hospital and Doctor fraud in Medicare.
Rick Scott was the CEO of hospital giant Columbia/HCA. In 1997, Columbia/HCA was implicated in the biggest Medicare fraud case in US history. Columbia/HCA was found guilty and paid fines up to $1.7 billion.
Funny how those that were against Medicare are some of the biggest abusers of it. And it should be known that Gov Rick Scott is currently trying to pass a law that would rid any anti-fraud databases that track dristributions of addictive prescription drug in the state of Florida. I'm sure Miami resident Rush Limbaugh is happy for this law.
Paul Ryan's 2012 budget plan may call for many cuts and spending freezes, but depends highly on two ideas:
The Repeal of Obama care
Lower taxes for the wealthy to 25%
Seriously, the wealthy gets another tax break! Donnie Deutsch was so enraged by this that his skin turned white through his fake tan. Deutsch is a wealthy guy and he believes if you raised the tax for the wealthy 3%, it could bring in millions of money to help. And I agree, because 3% tax is not going to change their spending habits nor the savings habits of these people. It’s just defining what we consider wealthy.
Deutsch says anything over $1 million and I can agree especially with the fact that there are more millionaires in the United States at the end of 2010, then in 2006-2009. How? So many people bought into the low cost of the stock market during the Recession is how.
The notion that the wealthy create jobs that Pat Buchanan keeps repeating is a myth. If that was so, then when the Bush Tax Cuts roared in 2003, we wouldn’t be sitting at 8.8% unemployment right now, it would be closer to 4%. But as I have said time and time again, those cuts for the wealthy were sent elsewhere, mainly their pockets.
Buchanan & Deutsch did however come to an agreement, if you tax the wealthy 3%, then you should also raise the tariffs on Chinese goods and make sure Corporate America starts paying their due as well.
The second part of Ryan’s Plan is the repeal of “Obama care,” the not-so-universal health plan. “Obama care” is coming to the United States in spurts, a little here and a little there till 2015, but Ryan’s prayer for repeal, that be betting on the repeal to happen all at once, not as each spurt comes close to life.
The more interesting note to Ryan’s Plan is the $6.2 trillion note. If the repeal of “Obama care” and the tax cut for the wealthy are axed, his budget cost comes to a sliver over $4 trillion over the same amount of time. Backtrack to December 2010 Ryan also held a seat on President Obama’s Finance Committee and when it ended, Ryan voted against the final product. That Committee’s budget came close to $4 trillion, but as Ryan stated “it didn’t do enough in spending cuts.” In other words, it’s all sleight of hand of what you feel is necessary spending cuts.
As for Defense cuts, I think we can chalk up the dream of a floating tank that’s been draining the bank for the past 20 years as one way to get finances on track. Even Stalin realized the idea of a flying tank wouldn’t leave ground as the Germans advanced. (Yes, the Russians actually attempted such an idea.)
However, people need to realize that it’s not just the democrats calling for Defense cuts, Actually the Tea Party members of Congress are pushing for double what the Democrats are. However, once again those agitating opinionators will never mention that nugget and still push the myth on which political party wants less for our Defense.
One major difference between Pres Obama’s committee plan and Rep. Ryan’s plan is that Obama’s committee actually had an idea for Social Security, where Rep. Ryan punted. Obama's plan on Social Security was to raise the age limit to start. Ryan's plan is blank
The age limit on Social Security must be raised, there’s no argument in that fact, but if Ryan’s plan asks for the “wealthy seniors” to take less on Medicare (to which they pay into) then why not on Social Security as well? The winds are silent from the Right on that thought.
It’s all in tinkering of numbers with adjustments, cuts and deletions, it just all depends on what one feels is necessary for the government to pay for and what services they should keep.
We need a leader like Harry Houdini to help us escape the partinship of Washington D.C.
No comments:
Post a Comment