Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Does anyone know if this is true?

Factcheck.org:

[Obama] attacks Romney’s plan for Medicare as a “voucher” system that would leave seniors “at the mercy of insurance companies,” when the fact is, it’s structured the same as the system Obama’s health care law sets up for subsidizing private insurance for persons under age 65.

If the Republican plan is like what Wyden was pushing with Ryan, then FactCheck.org would seem to be right.

But is it, and are they?

NOTE I seem to remember a press conference where the Republicans proposed to apply a system like Health Care Exchanges to Social Security, where everybody was dumbfounded when a reporter gave the game away by pointing that that was a Democratic idea....

0
No votes yet

Comments

Submitted by hipparchia on

this headline says it well - Romney Medicare plan: Key details still in flux - but yes, the republican party wants to eventually just hand you money and make you buy insurance on your own if you are old
:

Broadly speaking, Romney calls for shifting people now age 54 and younger into a different sort of Medicare. Once eligible, these people would get a fixed payment from the government, adjusted for inflation, to pay for either private insurance or a government plan modeled on Medicare. Current beneficiaries and those nearing retirement could stay in the traditional program.

that would work much the same way that obama wants to just hand you money and make you buy insurance on your own if you're not old.

in a slight improvement over obamacare, the republicans apparently willing to let old people have a "public option" of buying traditional medicare... maybe:

Q: Romney's privatization plan would not affect current beneficiaries or anyone joining Medicare before 2023. But does Romney also guarantee that he will protect traditional Medicare from any future cuts?

A: The campaign is silent on this issue.

Submitted by hipparchia on

[further down the page, at the bottom of the medicare "dissection"]:

But claiming that it’s a “voucher” system that would put seniors “at the mercy of insurance companies” is misleading. It ignores the plain fact that Obama supports other, popular health-care programs that work the same way.

"voucher" and "premium support" and "subsidy" are all basically the same thing in the world of obamacare and romneycare, so no, it's not misleading to call romney's plan for medicare a voucher system that would put seniors at the mercy of insurance companies. romney's plan for medicare is precisely that - a voucher system that would put seniors at the mercy of insurance companies.

otoh, obamacare is also precisely that - a voucher system that puts people at the mercy of insurance companies - with the only difference being that obamacare, and the original massachusetts romneycare, put NON-seniors at the mercy of the insurance companies. so yes, obama is talking out of both sides of his mouth, as the saying goes.

caseyOR's picture
Submitted by caseyOR on

as Romney's plan. According to Wyden, the Ryan/Wyden plan will still let people choose traditional Medicare if they do not want to go the voucher route. Of course, the plan sets limits on how much Medicare costs can grow each year. And if real costs exceed the allowable costs, well, the old people will just have to cough up the cash.

Wyden has said that the Ryan/Wyden plan will strengthen traditional Medicare by forcing it to be "more competitive" due to the, I guess, amazing efficiency influence of private for-profit insurance companies. Or something.

Those who have looked closely at this plan say it will harm traditional Medicare by bleeding off healthy seniors to private insurance. The profit-makers will refused to insure the very sick. Traditional Medicare, left with few or no healthy people to balance out the pool, will see its costs rise more quickly than the amount allowed by Ryan/Wyden. And seniors will be screwed.

Of course, Wyden denies that traditional Medicare will be harmed. He is my senator, and let me tell you he is a fool. He has done some good things, especially on internet issues and the overreaching national security state, but Ron really blew it with this alliance.

And he is incensed that Romney/Ryan have been saying that Wyden supports their plan. Idiot. What did he think would happen when he teamed up with the man Charlie Pierce so aptly calls a "granny starver"?