Monday, 13 August 2012
How the Romney-Ryan Ticket Affects Elders
Until Mitt Romney announced Wisconsin Republican Representative Paul Ryan as his running mate on Saturday, he had already promised deep spending cuts to the federal budget if elected president.
As with his tax returns, Romney has refused to elaborate on just what those spending cuts would be, but now we know: Ryan's budget would starve the government of pretty much all funds that keep America's most vulnerable citizens from – well, starving.
Before we get to the axes Ryan's plan takes to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, let me be clear: you, I and other elders are not the only people who would be harmed by Ryan's budget plan: your children, your grandchildren and successive generations would suffer even more.
Ryan's overall budget plan retains the Bush tax cuts for rich people, reduces them further, raises taxes on the middle class, cuts anti-poverty programs and many government services.
But today, let's examine how it would effect elders.
MEDICARE/MEDICAID
First, in one of his few definitive statements about anything, Romney has said outright that as president he would repeal Obamacare, and so would Ryan's budget.
They can't do it on their first day in office as Romney has said he would – they need the help of Congress – but here are some of the things that would happen immediately to you and me and other elders if the Affordable Care Act ended:
• All free preventive screenings and tests would end
• The free annual wellness examination would end
• The prescription drug doughnut hole would immediately return to its full original size, increasing drug costs to millions of elders
• Elders with Advantage plans would again be charged more than those with traditional Medicare for some medical procedures
• States would again be able to cut elders from Medicaid
But those changes would hardly matter because the Ryan budget essentially kills Medicare and Medicaid. All the reporters and pundits use the qualifying phrase, kills Medicare “as we know it.” That's just journalistic “fairness” horse pucky. It KILLS Medicare. Here's how.
All the details, qualifiers and bureaucracy aside, the underlying promise of Medicare is that it is a guarantee that works amazingly well for most of us. That guarantee would end with Ryan's plan which would create, instead, a voucher program for elders to buy private plans which no expert believes would cover premiums. Plus, out-of-pocket costs would increase.
It is estimated that average cost for elders would go up by at least $2500 per year. Millions cannot pay that.
Traditional Medicare would remain as an option among private choices. However, if it winds up costing more than the government voucher, the elder pays the difference.
The other big Ryan money-saving idea is to increase the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 67 over twelve years beginning in 2023 with people born in 1958. Every year, fewer and fewer employers offer health coverage so millions of 66- and 67-year-olds would be without coverage for that period.
I went through that when I couldn't get coverage at age 64 and I lived in terror of getting sick or hit by a truck every day. It was just dumb luck that I stayed healthy and safe. Not everyone does.
MEDICAID
Ryan would turn Medicaid, which mostly serves elders and the disabled, into a block grant directly to states, removing the federal guarantee, under a formula that predicts huge cuts. From The New Republic:
“According to estimates commissioned by the Kaiser Foundation [pdf] and made by researchers at the Urban Institute, the end result would that between 14 and 27 million low-income Americans lose health insurance.
“That’s above and beyond those who are supposed to get insurance from the Affordable Care Act, starting in 2014, but would not because Ryan wants to repeal the law’s coverage expansion.”
SOCIAL SECURITY
During the 2004 presidential campaign, Paul Ryan was a leading proponent of privatizing Social Security, a proposal that President Bush unsuccessfully tried to sell the nation in 2005.
The idea was so overwhelmingly rejected by the people that Ryan has taken a different tack with spending cuts in his latest plan.
First, Ryan rejects raising the salary cap on payroll taxes along with any other proposal that would have rich people contribute a percentage of all their income as most Americans do. He also rejects any other proposal whatsoever to increase Social Security revenue in any way.
Ryan's plan instead adopts Simpson-Bowles ideas (Ryan served on that Commission) which proposed to cut Social Security benefits to the majority of recipients, weaken connections between earnings and amount of benefits and to decrease the COLA. In past versions of his budget plan, Ryan has backed private accounts and so that possibility remains should Romney/Ryan be elected.
All conservatives (and President Obama) who want to slash Social Security use as their reason that the program is, as Bush kept repeating in 2005, “broke.” Of course, that is not true. There is more than $2 trillion in the trust fund and eliminating the salary cap would insure the program could pay full benefits for the next 75 years.
A further argument holds that the trust fund is empty because every administration has borrowed the excess replacing it with U.S. Treasury bills now said by those who want to kill Social Security to be worthless.
That is true only if you believe that the financial instruments China and other countries purchase are not backed by the “full faith and credit” of the federal government. Obviously, since those countries continue to purchase U.S. treasuries, they reject that notion and expect to be paid interest which regularly occurs.
The federal government is no less beholden to the debt in the Social Security trust fund than to the debt China holds. Default is not an option in either case.
There are many more details to the Ryan proposals for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security that along with the rest of his budget and taken together pretty much threaten what little security the 99 percent still possesses while greatly increasing the wealth of the one percent.
At The Elder Storytelling Place today, Joanne Zimmermann: Movin' In
Posted by Ronni Bennett at 05:30 AM | Permalink | Email this post
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
You are greatly misinformed and you are doing a tremendous disservice to your readers. If nothing is done to medicare or social security, they will be out of money in 9 to 12 years. That means that no one will be getting any of those benefits (Think Greece and rioting). You also failed to mention that Obama has already cut medicare by $700 billion dollars via his Obamacare plan. And Obama is just getting started.
I applaude Romeny/Ryan for taking on this problem and giving the American people solutions. What is Obama offering us? Just more Americans out of work, on welfare, food stamps and other govt handouts. No thanks. People want jobs, to be able to work and take care of themselves. Anyone born before 1958 will not be affected by any Romney/Ryan legislation.
Our choice is clear: we can vote for a failing president who only offers more govt handouts or we can vote for a successful business person who will get us jobs and a better American life. I choose the latter. Thank God for Romney and Ryan: real hope and change!
Posted by: hank | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 07:22 AM
OMG, I think you are on the wrong website!! The reality is that Romney/Ryan are sticking with the rich in this country, not with us average Joe's. No matter how cleverly they word it, their real agenda is to help build up their own riches and those of their friends.
Posted by: Eliza | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 07:32 AM
Hmmmm...I wonder which one (Hank or Eliza) is drinking the Kool Aid?????
Posted by: Marion Dent | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 07:52 AM
Sorry, Hank, but you are the one who is misinformed. Please check primary sources such as the CBO's report on Social Security before accusing someone like Ronni- who researches everything- of being misinformed.
That said, I have been wondering why so many middle class voters have been so down on the ACA. Now I see that if they believe what Hank expressed about the new healthcare act, they might think they have reason to fear it. Problem? What he said about elders born before 1958 not being affected by repealing "Obamacare" is simply untrue! And even if it was, how selfish to not care about health care and Social Security for those younger than us!
Posted by: Kathleen Noble | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 08:05 AM
I am leaning toward Obama on this one, as I am certain most elders are. I am for a balanced approach, rolling back Bush Tax cuts to the rich and increasing earnings cap for SS payroll tax. And, reasonable, gradual reductions in overall federal spending. When they lose my vote, they (the republicans) are in big trouble because I often vote republican but will not this time. Too uncompromising and therefore RADICAL!
Posted by: John | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 08:14 AM
I came on to comment today that surely, surely people are not going to vote for Romney and their devasting policies. And then I read the first post. I shake my head in bewilderment.
Posted by: Pamela (Lady Luz) | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 08:51 AM
I'm with Ronni and John on this one. It's a no brainer.
Posted by: Taru Fisher | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 09:17 AM
Hank is using the same talking points and misinformation that I see on other sites - for information on what the affordable care act does to (for) Medicare, try the National Council on Aging web site.
Social Security will not go broke in the near future - the surplus is diminishing because Congress has done nothing to adjust for that. Medicare could "go broke" but only if Congress fails in its responsibility to provide for the genera welfare of our citizens. Why we look at the programs that keep our citizens healthy and financially stable as costing too much and still continue to fund wars and not address fraud and abuse in the defense programs is beyond me.
Posted by: Nancy | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 09:32 AM
There is so much wrong with Hank's logic (?) that I do not have time to address it. I am sure Ronni's followers recognize it for what it is; talking points from right-wing conservative talking heads on Fox and on some web sites. None of his points bear scrutiny when you research the facts on the non-partisan fact sites.
I have found that people like Hank would rather believe Rush than Fact Check. If confronted with the facts they refuse to accept them as it takes them out of their comfort zone. A friend of mine used the illustration, "Don't try to teach a pig to talk; it just frustrates you and irritates the pig."
Posted by: Darlene | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 10:07 AM
Maybe we should ask Hank where he's getting his information? Misleading info is everywhere, all jumbled together, and distorted by the super PAC ads - on both sides! At least he's reading the TGB viewpoint and willing to comment. I'm betting he'll continue to read this wonderful and entertaining blog, and perhaps come a bit more toward the center. Which is where all our elected officials belong.
Posted by: Lauren Nelson | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 10:24 AM
PS: When Romney picked Ryan, he cemented his loss. The "talking heads" will lead you to believe that it's a contest (good for their ratings), but it will not be, not even close now. Most Americans are very partial to Social Security and Midicare and will not stand for its dismantling. American's sense of fairness will prevail. By the way, the Bush tax cut was a scam!! It was to be temporary and the agreement was that it would end. Now the "rich" cling to it as permanent. And, their clinging to the SS payroll tax cap is pure greed if I ever saw it. I'm not poor but I'm not rich-I see both sides, and I'm not siding with those who wish to turn America into a banana republic / Latin America style land of gated communities with the residents come out to reach the airport, go to their exclusive retail outlets, or sail out to sea on their yachts--willing to ignore or step over and around the poverty stricken masses.
Posted by: John | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 10:30 AM
Interesting that Ryan wants to tinker with Social Security - a program that enabled him to go to college after his father passed away. If you want to tinker with it, let those making over $200,000 pay taxes on their entire earnings. I want these safety net programs around for my children and grandchildren. Look how CD's and investment in home values worked for retirees after the Bush Administration got finished. Seniors who buy the Romney/Ryan view that benefits will be there for us - to heck with younger people- deserve to be called "geezers"!
Posted by: Mary Flora | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 10:42 AM
Mary Flora and others...
I am continually amazed that politicians who want to cut Social Security and Medicare (well, they call it SAVING the programs) appeal to us by saying the changes will not affect anyone 55 and older.
It's my experience over nearly nine years on this blog and elsewhere, that elders are hugely concerned that the two programs remain in place for their children, grandchildren and beyond.
I wonder why the politicians believe current elders are willing to throw their progeny under the bus. Oh, right - I forgot: because they are willing to do so.
Posted by: Ronni Bennett | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 10:53 AM
That is an outstanding explanation/summary of what seniors can expect from the Ryan plan. Maybe you should send it to Barak and Joe. They could use it on the campaign trail.
We have a clear choice. It is up to us to choose wisely.
Posted by: joann wallace | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 11:09 AM
Ronni, don't you think this elders vs. younger in media is big piece of conservative game plan. Speaks to all the cultural uneasiness between old and young--changes in child-raising, women working while pregnant--that has been conflated recently.
Some other issues occur to me but need to write own post. Please nudge elderbloggers to do same. To quote Darlene's latest post, "Finally the Republican party has gone completely bonkers and half of the public don't even realize it."
Posted by: naomi dagen bloom | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 11:20 AM
To Hank:
I'm afraid it is you Hank who is sorely misinformed. According to the reliable assessments of the CBO, Social Security has ample funds to pay all recipients 100% of their benefits until 2036. If Congress doesn't try to make some changes that will alleviate a future shortfall, the trust fund will still have sufficient revenue to pay all recipients up 75% of their benefits until 2056.
The claim that OBAMACARE cuts $700 billion from Medicare is TRUE but the GOOD NEWS is that in doing so, it INCREASES HEALTHCARE FOR SENIORS and AT THE SAME TIME cuts fraud, WASTE and abuse.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office determined that the Medicare provisions in President Obama's health care law would save $700 BILLION over a decade and EXTENDS THE LIFE OF MEDICARE. Extends it EIGHT YEARS.
Current benefits will remain unchanged under Obamacare so the talking points you have repeated from FOX and Red State blogs are all bogus and unfortunately have led you to support a policy that will ultimately hurt you and your family if Romney and Ryan are elected. Unless of course you are part of the 1%
Posted by: Larry | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 11:46 AM
"I'm not siding with those who wish to turn America into a banana republic"
I'm with you, John.
Posted by: Hattie | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 01:22 PM
I salute your timely, forceful, and precise appraisal. You clearly and engagingly said what needed to be said.
Posted by: Richard Townsend | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 01:30 PM
The ultra-rightists seem to conveniently forget that we had complete privatization before Social Security and Medicare were enacted. The result was a huge number of elders living in poverty.
John's comment is a very level-headed approach. We need to preserve vital safety nets and begin cutting total federal spending in increments over a long time.
Some of our lawmakers apparently failed to stay awake in Economics 101. The trick to preserving a viable free enterprise system is pretty simple. Government needs to increase spending during down cycles to minimize the pain; during "good times," government should be reducing deficits by holding federal spending in check and reducing debt.
Any other approach is pure nonsense. We are not far into recovery from the Great Recession at the moment, so proposing vast cuts in federal spending immediately is ridiculous.
Posted by: Gabby Geezer | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 02:15 PM
one hopes that AARP will provide an easy to understand breakdown of the disaster the R & R ticket will bring, esp to the elder portion of the public.
Posted by: chrome agnomen | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 03:55 PM
Hattie, America is already a banana republic. As you noted in your own neighborhood, poverty has increased. You think the solution is more handouts. Good luck with that.
As it stands now, 1 in 5 Americans are on some sort of govt handout. Isn't that just marvelous. Obama is brilliant. 23 million Americans are still out of work. Unemployment has been steady at over 8% for the past 4 years. How wonderful this new world of hope and change Obama has had in store for all of us.
I don't have to watch the news. I just have to get in my car (or bicycle for you libs) and look around. Just like Hattie does. Businesses closed. Homelessness on the increase. Tons of people on food stamps, energy assistance, walking around like deer in the headlights.
Is this what you want? Is this the vision you have for your future? And the future of your children? What these people need are jobs. Jobs to bring themselves back up by working for it. Not getting a hand out which is demoralizing.
Larry, Medicare and Social Security are going to go broke in a few years. Period. We all know that Congress does nothing. So, what makes you think they will do anything to save these programs by 2024 (not 2036 as you stated). Obama will never get rid of the fraud. Never.
Want to know your future under Obama, look at Greece. If you like that, then by all means, vote for Obama and that do-nothing VP joke, Biden.
I agree with the cut off to be 55. The next generation will have different plans to prepare for their own retirements. I want a better life for my children and grandchildren. I don't want them to sit around and beg a government for their livlihood. Neither should you. Most current older Americans don't even have $30K in a savings bank.
I'll be back in 85 days and gloat. Obama is a joke. Romney and Ryan are successful, vibrant men who emulate a positive vibe. That's what I want for myself AND my children: success! Not a failed ideologue rogue president.
Posted by: hank | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 06:43 PM
Save your breath. "Hank" (or whoever he/she really is) is just winding us all up with more phony Republican lies.
Not worth getting fussed about.
Posted by: Charlotte Dahl | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 08:13 PM
Thanks for once again explaining the facts about Social Security and it's financial status -- likewise the issues surrounding Medicare and Medicaid.
Clearly the two r's every effort is directed toward channeling citizen monies to those wonderful financiers on Wall St. who did so much to bring us the GreatRecession. They're doing fine, but the same cannot be said for too many Americans.
I think it's incredibly naive to think this nation would have recovered much better under an administration run by the rr's, or would now with what they propose.
I agree with the approach of gradually reducing this nation's debt and not at the wholesale expense of those whose life experiences have necessitated their needing assistance.
I believe there is value in offering individuals a hand up to get back on their feet when circumstances have created such a need. After reading one comment, I do have to wonder why anyone would assume their children and grandchildren would sit around and not work just because assistance was available to others in need.
I, too, recall family members stories and old folks fears of going to the poor house despite their lives of hard work when unexpected health, accident, or business upsets destroyed their financial base.
I see nothing that the 2 r's (readin' and writin' but they ain't got no sound 3rd R 'rithmetic) propose that hastens the creation of jobs and begins to return a decimated middle class to this nation. I do see their power play grab to consolidate absolute control of our government into the hands of the 1% wealthiest citizens and corporations.
Posted by: joared | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 11:00 PM
I agree with Eliza. Kathleen, Nancy, Darlene and others who disagree with the content of Hank’s posting. In my opinion, Hank stepped in it and alienated most of Ronnie's readers right from the start with his “misinformed” accusation.
You may disagree with what Ronnie has written, Hank, but accusing Ronnie of being “misinformed” reveals not only your unsubstantiated, unbalanced bias but completely closes my mind as to the points you are trying to make. Having read your posting, I wouldn’t waste my time arguing with you. Actually, you have done me a favor by revealing, no reminding me, of the mind-set that I oppose.
Finally, thank you so much, Ronnie for tasking the time to help us to stay informed.
Posted by: Sky McCain | Monday, 13 August 2012 at 11:53 PM
Surely there is video of Ryan talking about his budget proposal. Let's get some clips out there in campaign ads, letting America know he plans to destroy Social Security, posthaste. We'll see how popular the idea is at the polls.
Posted by: Mara | Tuesday, 14 August 2012 at 05:08 AM
Hank
The CBO says you're wrong about your conclusions on social security and medicare. What's your source to dispute them?
Posted by: Larry | Tuesday, 14 August 2012 at 07:07 AM
I think hank is a troll.
Charlotte's response is the best way to deal with it.
Posted by: Midori Barstow | Tuesday, 14 August 2012 at 07:43 AM
If "Hank" is a real person, I'd like to say that I'd totally expect him to gloat if Ro/Ry win the election. It's SO Republican. We all remember Bush in a flight suit gloating (very prematurely!) under his "Mission Accomplished" banner, don't we? BTW, Hank, it was two wars fought off the books courtesy of Dick Cheney plus the chicanery of financial manipulators that got us into this mess in the first place.
It's going to take time, combined public-private effort, a Congress that actually WORKS and shared sacrifice to get us back on our feet again, but I sure don't hear the Repubs saying anything about that! Seems to me like all they want is more, more, more--for themselves.
However, Hank probably doesn't want to hear that, especially from a 75 year old on a "government handout". No matter that I've been a contributing member of the workforce for 55 years (and still am part-time). No doubt I'm just a greedy geezer-ette in his eyes.
Posted by: Elizabeth Rogers | Tuesday, 14 August 2012 at 03:33 PM
There are a few interesting details on Social Security here:
http://www.nationofchange.org/happy-birthday-social-security-now-about-your-gift-1344958166
Posted by: Sky McCain | Wednesday, 15 August 2012 at 12:53 AM
I guess you didn't like my post. If I broke a rule, other than disagreeing with the librals on this site, let me know what it was. Rayy8
Posted by: Raymond Wyatt | Wednesday, 15 August 2012 at 11:28 AM
Disregard the above remark, It was posted on the wrong string. My appologies. Rayy8
Posted by: Raymond Wyatt | Wednesday, 15 August 2012 at 11:35 AM
I see Rommey and Ryan's vision of America as looking very much like "Potterville" in "It's A Wonderful Life".
Posted by: eJean1981 | Thursday, 16 August 2012 at 11:09 AM
Division is well noted, however, everyone needs to do more research on both sides. Medicare does not have a prayer with either party.. but money does. How about the 40% taxes you will pay for obama care and the penalties. How about the law Obama tried to sneak in the back door to give illegal aliens drivers license and all benefits of a US citizen. I will vote for the man that wants to save America, not destroy her!!!
Posted by: dj | Saturday, 18 August 2012 at 12:39 PM