Skip to main content


Don't let the seniors you know get bamboozled by the Romney-Ryan Tag Team -- now filled with TWICE the falsehoods, as before.

Help the seniors you know get the Medicare Facts, instead ...


Romney Slams Obama For Medicare Cuts In Ryan’s Budget

by Sahil Kapur, talkingpointsmemo.com -- August 11, 2012

With Paul Ryan as his vice presidential nominee, Mitt Romney’s central argument pushing back against critics of the House budget chief’s [Ryan's] Medicare plan is that President Obama cut deep into Medicare under the Affordable Care Act. But Ryan’s plan includes the same cuts, which don’t target beneficiaries.

Unlike the current president, who has cut Medicare funding by $700 billion, we will preserve and protect Medicare and Social Security,” Romney said Saturday while introducing Ryan.

The trouble with this argument -- made frequently by Republicans, including Ryan himself -- is that Republicans have voted overwhelmingly for Ryan’s own budget which sustains the Medicare cuts in “Obamacare.” Conservatives argue that Ryan’s plan, unlike the Affordable Care Act, doesn’t use the Medicare savings to fund additional spending.
[...]

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found last month that the Medicare provisions in the health care law would save $700 billion over a decade and extend the life of Medicare.

The cuts don’t target beneficiaries -- they come largely in the form of reduced payments to hospitals, discounts on Medicaid prescription drugs, and pay cuts to private insurers under Medicare Advantage. The hospital and drug industries endorsed the law despite the cuts.
[...]


Ahh, the Affordable Care Act is designed to keep Medicare running -- Seniors (beneficiaries) are NOT targeted by these cost-cutting measures.

Who knew?   Obviously not the Romney-Ryan Tag Team, if their rhetoric is intended to be taken at face value.


What's more, Romney was warned last year about how he was mangling the truth concerning the Medicare cost-saving measures, promoted by Obama.

Did Mitt change his truth-mangling ways since then -- does a wealthy-billionaire explain where all those millions came from? -- Hardly!


Romney says only Obama has cut Medicare

politifact.com  -- Dec 12, 2011

Truth-O-Meter Says:  FALSE

[...]
"Let's not forget, only one president has ever cut Medicare for seniors in this country, and it's Barack Obama," Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, said in a Republican presidential debate on Dec. 10, 2011.

We looked into the accuracy of that statement and found Romney is way off.

First, did Obama cut Medicare?

The Romney campaign did not respond to our inquiry about this statement. We assume that when he said Obama cut Medicare, he was talking about the 2010 health care reform law that, among other things, reduces future Medicare spending by $500 billion.

But that’s just it -- the cuts don’t come from the current Medicare budget, they put a leash on future growth and payment increases.

PolitiFact has explored this before:

"The Affordable Care Act does reduce Medicare spending by $500 billion over the next 10 years. But here’s the catch: Those dollars aren’t taken out of the current budget, they are not actual cuts, and nowhere does the bill actually eliminate any current benefits," we wrote last month.
[...]


The Romney-Ryan Tag Team has no excuse on this one, other than they want to deflect seniors wary eyes from themselves, to their opponent.  To scare their votes out of them.

But the truth is always a bit more complicated than what the Republican let on, now isn't it? And far too often it's exactly the opposite of what they pretend that it is.


Seniors don't be taken in, by these modern-day snake-oil salesmen. Because what Romney-Ryan are trying to sell you, is only long-term prescription for pain.




EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The Cuts Are From Medicare ADVANTAGE...... (10+ / 0-)

    not Medicare.  Medicare Advantage is a private insurance company.  It is an extra, an option.   The cuts in the ACA essentially involve government subsidies to Medicare ADVANTAGE not Medicare.

    Paul Ryan has the exact same cuts in his plan.....Mitt just doesn't want you to know about them.  

    Watching FOX News right after the announcement today was enlightening.  They tried to put a good face on things, but you could see it in their eyes.  They know it's over.  

    •  for their false attacks work (7+ / 0-)

      I've had several people ask me:

      "Why is Obama cutting Medicare?"


      Neither Romney nor Ryan, bother to explain the Medicare Advantage difference.

      They make it sound like cuts to Medicare beneficiaries.

      When it's not.


      Are you ready to Vote? Are you still 'allowed' to Vote?
      -- Are you sure?

      by jamess on Sat Aug 11, 2012 at 07:44:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's kind of like Ryan's plans (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jamess

      Medicare Advantage -- I'm on it, for one reason: the plan I found is a PPO. The first year I spent on Medicare, I found the 20% Supplement plan that was a PPO. But those plans are disappearing for HMOs. So the private insurer can tell you, "No, you don't need that treatment," and I can't accept that. I lived many years in Canada, and even thinking about the cost of your treatment is unnecessary. Oh, boy, let me be a "freeloader" and get a free heart transplant because I'm lazy and undisciplined. People are having heart operations just for fun!

      I believe the ultimate thing about the Ryan plan is not subjecting anyone under 55 to it is being "liberal," in their opinion. I mean, your cohort is getting it, they say. Don't think about the young'uns, because you've got yours. Solidarity with humanity? That's crazy!

  •  Erskine Bowles (0+ / 0-)

    Does not fit your narrative.  Alan Simpson does not either.  What The Future!

  •  Both Ryan and Romney Have The Same $500 Billion... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jamess, Eric Nelson

    ...in reductions in their budgets.

  •  why is Kathleen Sebelius not on TV more? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ekgrulez1, JamieG from Md, jamess

    Is the Secretary of Health Services not a good speaker or able to articulate her thoughts? I wish the Obama admin / campaign would organise a session for the Beltway stenos so that they are informed that the cuts in Medicare did not affect patients but closing loop holes and Medicare Advantage. Even though they may spout the same BS later on, at least they can be called on it..

  •  Fraud too (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jamess

    There's a lot more prosecutions for Medicare fraud now. This is a good cost to take on, because the payment situation isn't secure enough. Fake doctors and fake devices, etc., abound, because a lot of bad people have found holes in the payment procedures. Locally, I remember some rings that do about $2 or $3 million were busted, saving a lot more money than the detective work caused. This would count as a cut, though it leaves more funds for care. Also, it keeps fraud down in hospitals too. Another investment is in digital records will save money. I've heard the idea of having a medical committee name a series of "best practices", which would mean less unnecessary spending and only mean you pay a doctor more for the "best practices" than overdoing it with the tests on his cousin's MRI, etc., that might be okay; there should be some regulation of doctors buying equipment, setting it up and then getting multiple unnecessary tests billed by their own labs -- the main abuse -- but I'm never sure if they'll dare be confrontational. But correct, the only things a Medicare patient has noticed is that when the donut hole begins, you pay half retail for medicine, not the whole thing. And it's harder and harder to find a PPO for the 20% Medicare doesn't cover.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site