Medicare Way Over Budget -- OOP$

www.peroutka2004.com ^ | February 6, 2004 | Michael Peroutka

[The_Eaglet]

Medicare Way Over Budget -- OOP$

February 06, 2004

In July of 2003, head of General Accounting Office testified before Congress that the Medicare program was a “highly vulnerable to waste, fraud, abuse and mis-management” and has been on GAO’s list of high-risk programs for more than a decade.

It remains on that list today.

Still, President Bush signs into law so-called Medicare “reform” which, he says will cost $400 billion over 10 years to help older citizens get their drugs.

Several weeks later, White House says, "Oooops!" - this program will cost $540 billion for next decade. The director of the Congressional Budget Office says that if you start with the year 2013, cost of Bush program ranges from $1.3 trillion to $2 trillion.

Bush’s Medicare drug for seniors program is the greatest expansion of a Federal entitlement program since Medicare became law in 1965 under President Lyndon Johnson.

But, even these costs of Bush’s program that I’ve mentioned are probably grossly underestimated. When Medicare first passed in 1965, the estimated annual cost was $10 billion a year; now it’s $244 billion a year.

In any event, regardless of the true cost of this new Bush entitlement program, it’s unConstitutional.

[The_Eaglet]

Groups unfairly targeted-Campaign Finance Reform Thread - Day 62

[The_Eaglet]

ping

[Golden Gate]

The IBEW (Union Electricians) has this color chart showing the Federal Budget and Unemployment. There are five text boxes that 'explain' how Democrat Presidents are better. Well, happily, there was some good FR response. - Check it out!-
Union Economic Chart: Fed Budget & Unemployment Rate =(Dem Pres. are better) NEED FR Response!

[The_Eaglet]

Thanks for the link.

The Bush administration (with the help of many socialists in Congress) has outliberalled the democrats in deficit spending.

The solution, however, is not to raise them, but to eliminate spending so that revenues will pay back the national debt. As this occurs, the income tax can also be reduced so that fiscal freedom will be restored to working American citizens.

[The_Eaglet]

Michael Peroutka is seeking the Constitution Party presidential nomination.

[The_Eaglet]

Constitution Party Bump

[sfRummygirl]

I recently have been introduced to the Constitutional Party platform. Pardon my crassness, but it's like a conservative orgasm.
So is this where everyone went?
Man, I haven't been this happy in a long time. God, I want to kiss that platform. I'm doing the conservative happy dance right now.

[The_Eaglet]

That sounds like something Savage would say!

I do think that many conservatives, now that they know about the Constitution Party are giving serious consideration to joining us or at least voting for our candidates even if they don't change parties. I have seen people indicate as much here on FR and on other online forums.

[WhiteGuy]

Well put.

[The_Eaglet]

Peroutka has a very straightforward communication style.

[WhiteGuy]

I watched a couple of the video clips on the site, he does seem to be direct.

Believe me, I will definitely explore this guy further.

As it applies to the platform of the party, it appears just a little too strict as it might apply to the First Amendment. It is simply my initial observation. I consider freedom of speech to be just that, including all the more controversial types of speech. Please don't misinterpret my thoughts here, I'm strongly libertarian in my beliefs, but I would certainly rather debate the scope of our freedoms once we can realign the proper role of government as it was intended.

Thanks for the additional response.

[The_Eaglet]

Thanks for the additional response.

Thank you for yours. The beauty of the federal government honoring the freedom of speech is that the states have the freedom to tweak where abuse might be dangerous, such as yelling "FIRE" in a movie theatre and things like that. However, an issue like that is note in the scope of federal power according to the Constitution.

[reelfoot]

BUMP.

[WhiteGuy]

Good point.

Let's get the size and scope of government reigned in, and put the comtrol of Americans' earnings back in their own hands first.

I haven't seen anything that would prevent my support.

[The_Eaglet]

Let's get the size and scope of government reigned in, and put the control of Americans' earnings back in their own hands first.

Agreed.

[TBP]

So what else is new? Did we expect that it would stick to its budget? Even if it had, it is an unconstitutional, lousy idea, but now it's an even more expensive, unconstitutional, lousy idea, which is even worse!

It looks like the Republican Party has abandoned all sense of principle whatsoever. Remember Gillespie telling the Manchester Union Leader a few months ago that limited-government views are not welcome in the GOP?

This is why the Constitution Party is important.

[sfRummygirl]

I actually am just registered indi, so I might re-register CP. Just by doing that one act alone, will send a message.

[The_Eaglet]

So what else is new? Did we expect that it would stick to its budget?

I'll admit that since so many Republicans were holding up Bush to be a relief from Clinton's big government liberalism, I was expecting as much. We were told that Bush was using liberal rhetoric just to get votes from the "moderates" and the left (wink, wink).

Instead we have the Bush administration outspending the Clinton Administration and introducing new socialistic programs, which are, as you mentioned, unconstitutional.

Even if it had, it is an unconstitutional, lousy idea, but now it's an even more expensive, unconstitutional, lousy idea, which is even worse!

It looks like the Republican Party has abandoned all sense of principle whatsoever. Remember Gillespie telling the Manchester Union Leader a few months ago that limited-government views are not welcome in the GOP?

No. Do you have an exact quote and source?

It is becoming more clearer than ever that concerned citizens will need to look outside the Republican Party for fiscal responsibility and constitutional fidelity.

These are some of many reasons why I am grateful that Michael Peroutka is running for President with the Constitution Party. This is why the Constitution Party is important.

[The_Eaglet]

I actually am just registered indi, so I might re-register CP. Just by doing that one act alone, will send a message.

I agree. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!