Did You Notice That Romney Added $716 Billion to the Debt?
Along the lines of a recent post here, here’s an LA Times piece on Romney’s ridiculous statements regarding Medicare.
Before the presidential campaign hurtles off to the next skirmish, take a moment to notice what happened this week: Mitt Romney vowed to increase the national debt by $716 billion, and no one so much as blinked.
Romney’s handling of the $716 billion in Medicare cost cuts comes close to being a perfect example of why federal spending so seldom gets cut – everyone favors restraining government spending in theory, but voters seldom love it in practice.
To recap: As part of the Obama health reform law, Congress voted to reduce payments to certain hospitals, insurance companies and other healthcare providers by about $716 billion over the next 10 years. The law directed the money to help pay for expanded prescription drug coverage for seniors – eliminating the so-called doughnut hole – and to help cover younger Americans who do not have insurance at their jobs.
When Rep. Paul D. Ryan, Romney’s choice as his running mate, drafted his budget plan, he included repeal of Obama’s health law. But he kept those Medicare cost cuts and applied the savings to reducing the federal deficit. Why wouldn’t he, after all? Ryan was trying to close a huge budget gap, and here was a rare case in which Congress had already agreed to a spending restraint that was relatively non-controversial — the hospitals and provider groups had agreed to the cuts, and they would not reduce benefits to Medicare patients.
But Ryan’s decision – logical though it may have been in the budget context – blunted a Republican attack on Obama for “raiding” Medicare. So on Wednesday, Romney made clear that he would eliminate the Medicare savings, and Ryan fell into line.
The move would mean Medicare’s main trust fund would run out of money in just four years, rather than 12 under Obama’s plan. And because Romney did not offer any new revenue to cover the $716 billion cost, nor any offsetting reductions, the price tag would simply be added to the national credit card – worsening the “prairie fire of debt” that Romney decried in a speech this spring.
How much is $716 billion? It’s equal to half of all the money that Congress agreed to cut last summer after a two-month standoff over the national debt.
Needless to say, both sides indulge in this sort of thing during a campaign year. This week, Obama was in Iowa, pledging support for a wind-energy tax credit that’s popular with Iowa farmers. But the tax credit costs a bit over $1 billion a year, roughly one-seventieth of Romney’s Medicare move.
Whether Romney’s move helps him win the election remains to be seen – it’s too early to know who is winning the campaign battle over Medicare. But if he does win, this week’s decision will make his governing tasks $716 billion harder.
Beezer. Does Romney even know what he’s talking about? It seems not.
Tags: David Lauter, Los Angeles Times, Rep. Paul Ryan's 2013 Budget, Romney raises $716 Medicare Debt
August 18th, 2012 at 11:17 am
Amazing how liberals twist things around to cover their ass and you are an expert ass coverer. The 716 billion was money stolen from medicare to cover the cost of Obama care and once Romney is elected there will be no Obamacare.
August 18th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
We’re 16 trillion in debt, unemployment has been above 8% since Obama has taken office, we haven’t had a budget for over 3 years, 23 million are unemployed or underemployed, food stamp recipients have increased from 26,000 to 47,000, a one trillion dollar stimulus bill was a waste OBAMA has raided 715 billion out of medicare you and liberalscontinue to ignore any responcibility and only find blame in others. It’s time to end this mess by throwing all dems out on the street and face the reality of the hole they have put us in.
August 18th, 2012 at 7:42 pm
Keep on mistaking what the $716 billion is. Pretty much everyone else is beginning to realize what the $716 billion is, even Ryan. Romney doesn’t get it or is willfully pushing the lie in hopes ad money will make it stick.
Of course there’s more people using safety net money, the economy is growing too slowly. Even Obama acknowledges this. But a lot of guaranteed job creating legislation has been held hostage in Congress–by the GOP. Obviously the GOP is more interested in making Obama look bad than it is in putting people back to work.
And you conveniently pass over one of the main purposes of Obamacare: Universal coverage. The GOP apparently believes there’s too many people with health care under Obamacare. Nice of them to make that their policy point to the public.
August 18th, 2012 at 8:12 pm
Maybe the economy would grow a lot faster if govt got out of the way of buisness and stop the interfering and over controlling.. Too many people are on the dole and you and liberals like you want to expand this type of dependency. Unfortunately there are too many out there who want nanny to take care of them. We have to go back to the days when people looked out for themselves and their loved much like our founders. I believe you would be far happier living in Greece, it would be perfect for you.
August 21st, 2012 at 7:07 am
Cheaper anyway.
You don’t get out much, so let me inform you that a lot of families are taking in their elderly, and in many cases, their youth who cannot get a job, in order to get by. Most of the folks receiving food stamps or other assistance are employed–in jobs that don’t pay enough to survive.
We need jobs and although the private economy has hired 4.5 million people since the bottom of the slump, it’s not enough. Governments have fired 700,000 people, so that’s been a drag on the economy.
The only way to guarantee faster highering of more people is infrastructure. But the GOP won’t let the programs pass Congress. Just cutting taxes will, at this stage, only increase deficits.
August 21st, 2012 at 7:12 am
Obamacare, don’t forget, is intended to expand the number of people who get health care. Just downshifting the costs to elderly budgets isn’t going to improve matters.
Romney Ryan have no real plan. It’s more ‘tooth fairy’ wishful thinking that if we just spend less on health care, without doing anything to improve the current dysfunctional system, somehow prices will go down. Nope. All that will happen is that fewer people will have health care.
For most people, that’s not an acceptable outcome.
August 21st, 2012 at 3:08 pm
First it’s 3,5 million and that comes far short of those who are joining the market or retiring, that’s why 23 million are unemployed or underemployed. The more we reduce govt employees, the better. If Obama got out of the way of buisness, rid us of Dodd-Frank, eliminated Obama care, have a energy policy and revised the tax system our country would take off. Romney’s medicare plan keeps all over 55 on medicare as it stands now and allows all those under 55 to choose their own as congress now does. He wants tort reform so if you think this is tooth fairy thinking, you come from never never land.
August 22nd, 2012 at 11:01 am
Until the Congressional Budget Office can score anything Romney proposes, there is nothing being proposed. The CBO can’t score Romney’s tax proposals. The CBO can’t score Ryan’s 2012 budget. Which means it can’t score the Medicare part of that budget.
Obama’s tax proposal is scored as were his budget proposals, which included Obamacare, which was scored too. So the President has proposed real plans. You may not like those plans, but they’re real.
I’m not into ‘trust me’ campaigns. Romney/Ryan don’t have real, scorable plans, so that means they can say absolutely anything about anything. And that’s what they do. Works for you, but not for me.
August 22nd, 2012 at 11:07 am
By the way, Medicare Advantage plan costs are down 16% and enrollment is up 17%. They’ll go down even more once the national insurance exchanges are up and running. I’d just expand Medicare, because even at these lower costs Advantage plans are still more expensive than Medicare so it’s a taxpayer subsidy.
August 22nd, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Medicare advantage will be gone under Obama. Fact check it.
August 22nd, 2012 at 9:22 pm
I guess the CBO can’t score Obama’s budget either. Oh yeh, forgot there hasn’t been a budget in the past 3 years, Wake up Beez, you’re not stupid, just endoctrinated.
August 23rd, 2012 at 11:39 am
I did fact check it. Medicare Advantage plans have decreased in price by 16% and enrollment is up 17%. Under Obamacare subsidies will be provided to those who cannot afford Medicare Advantage, thus the so-called donut hole will effectively disappear. But not Medicare Advantage. In fact more people will become customers. It’s a subsidy for these private suppliers, but Obamacare will force them to be more efficient. They agreed to this bargain, by the way, figuring all the additional customers will support lower profit margins. We’ll know the answer once the national exchanges take effect.
All of the president’s budget proposals have to be scored by the CBO. They cannot be proposed without a score. Republicans simply didn’t want anything to do with anything Obama proposed, budget or otherwise, unless it was another tax cut. The Ryan/House budgets were not scored because they couldn’t be scored–they lacked sufficient detail for scoring. Those budget made huge assumptions that were unsupportable. The excuse provided was that it was up to the pertinent committees and their sub committees, to figure out how to make the targets. Ryan demanded the CBO accept his assumptions but to its credit the CBO refused.
August 23rd, 2012 at 12:20 pm
I’m beginning to suspect that Capt., doesn’t even read the posts before commenting.
August 23rd, 2012 at 2:04 pm
As I recall the one budget proposed by Obama was voted down by the dem controlled senate 97 to 0 and yes I do read your posts but hold my nose while I do. Gag later also.
August 23rd, 2012 at 9:41 pm
and exactly who agreed, not doctors nor hospitals,nor nursing homes, maybe harry reid though.
August 25th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Actually all of them agreed. And you forgot Big pharma, which also agreed.