President Obama's reaction to the Kathy Hochul victory in NY-26
ignores the great big elephant in the room:
President Obama congratulated the winner of Tuesday's special election in upstate New York, in a statement that didn't mention Medicare: "I want to extend my congratulations to Congresswoman-elect Kathy Hochul for her victory in New York's 26th Congressional District. Kathy and I both believe that we need to create jobs, grow our economy, and reduce the deficit in order to outcompete other nations and win the future. Kathy has shown, through her victory and throughout her career, that she will fight for the families and businesses in western New York, and I look forward to working with her when she gets to Washington."
Which is quite odd, since as DCCC chair Rep. Steve Israel said: "This is about three issues: Medicare, Medicare and Medicare. Independents and seniors, if you look at the polling, are voting for the Democrat and when you ask them why, they say Medicare."
The polling showed that well before last night's stunning Hochul victory. It was apparent in all those town hall meetings Republicans have had over the last month. And yet, we have this: "Vice President Joe Biden and top lawmakers will examine government-run health plans [Medicare and Medicaid] on Tuesday as they try to work out a deal to raise the United States' borrowing authority, a congressional aide said."
There's changes to Medicare that the administration has been talking about that don't mean benefit cuts, like strengthening the Independent Payment Advisory Board which is under constant attack from Republicans, and reducing pharmaceutical costs, meaning trying to deal with PhRMA and Republican opposition. It's hard to see any agreement coming out of these negotiations that doesn't end up with some cost-shifting to Medicare enrollees.
Which in turn is potentially very bad political news, not just for Congressional Dems but also for Obama. By the way, that goes for slashing Medicaid, too.
Polling done in Ohio, Missouri, Minnesota and Montana shows significant resistance to cuts in benefits in these swing states. 58% of Ohio voters said they were less likely to vote for President Obama if he backed or signed cuts to Medicare, and 53% said they were less likely to vote for him if he altered the retirement age. Similar results were obtained in the other three states....
If President Obama supported or signed into law any cuts to Medicare and Medicaid benefits, would that make you more or less likely to vote for him, or would it make no difference to you?
Ohio: 12% more likely, 58% less likely, 30% no difference (522 voters, 4.3% MOE)
Missouri: 9% more likely, 57% less likely, 34% no difference (564 voters, 4.1% MOE)
Montana: 8% more likely, 52% less likely, 41% no difference (723 voters, 3.6% MOE)
Minnesota: 12% more likely, 42% less likely, 46% no difference (492 voters, 4.4% MOE)
Last night's election didn't have anything to do with the deficit, a lesson Dem budget negotiators really need not just to understand, but to internalize.