Posted on 09/08/2012 8:43:44 PM PDT by chessplayer
I know that every campaign promise Barack Obama makes has an expiration date … but this is ridiculous. The confetti is barely off the floor at the Time Warner Cable Arena in Charlotte, North Carolina after Obama’s acceptance speech, and already we find out that he’s flip-flopped. Remember this part of the speech, in which he attacks the Paul Ryan plan to apply free-market reform and cost controls to Medicare?
And I will — I will never turn Medicare into a voucher.
"No American should ever have to spend their golden years at the mercy of insurance companies. They should retire with the care and the dignity they have earned. Yes, we will reform and strengthen Medicare for the long haul, but we’ll do it by reducing the cost of health care, not by asking seniors to pay thousands of dollars more. And we will keep the promise of Social Security by taking the responsible steps to strengthen it, not by turning it over to Wall Street."
Expiration date — the very next day:
"In his convention speech in Charlotte, President Obama vowed to block the Republican Medicare reform plan because “no American should ever have to spend their golden years at the mercy of insurance companies.”
"But back in Washington, his Health and Human Services Department is launching a pilot program that would shift up to 2 million of the poorest and most-vulnerable seniors out of the federal Medicare program and into private health insurance plans overseen by the states."
Obama said that at the convention knowing full well it was a lie. How long was that voucher thing in the pipeline; long before this speech I bet
Exactly.
But does that mean those seniors have to pay thousands of dollars and/or use vouchers? Or is it just the states run it rather than the federal government? I didn’t see anything there that said seniors have to pay a lot of money and/or they had to use vouchers.
“But back in Washington, his Health and Human Services Department is launching a pilot program that would shift up to 2 million of the poorest and most-vulnerable seniors out of the federal Medicare program and into private health insurance plans overseen by the states.”
Nope, that’s the HillaryRomney plan, to benefit the phony banking and insurance papers with no collateral, and the National Bureau Socialists. The plan all along.
The bailout pushed all along. Romney Massachusetts Extortion Care.
And so it starts, Socialist “insurance company” and “banking” fascism. Romney their tool.
It sounds like Medicaid.
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
I just heard a zero add on tv.
~a promise made ... You’ve payed in to it your whole life, don’t let Romney replace those funds with a voucher~
Twilight Zone
Oh my if you cannot get their votes just kill em. My, my, this guy is trying to give the most evil men of world history a run for their dirty deeds done dirt cheap.
To Ed Morrisey-Hotair:
Please source your quotes because without them, we cannot safely use this information in columns, emails, etc.
thanks
We need numbers to define the word “poor” here.
In his convention speech in Charlotte, President Obama vowed to block the Republican Medicare reform plan because “no American should ever have to spend their golden years at the mercy of insurance companies.”
But back in Washington, his Health and Human Services Department is launching a pilot program that would shift up to 2 million of the poorest and most-vulnerable seniors out of the federal Medicare program and into private health insurance plans overseen by the states.
The administration has accepted applications from 18 states to participate in the program, which would give states money to purchase managed-care plans for people who are either disabled or poor enough to qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid. HHS approved the first state plan, one for Massachusetts, last month.
Obama’s 2010 health reform law allows experimentation in delivering health care at lower cost through demonstration projects. Many states would like permission to shift their entire population of so-called dual-eligible beneficiaries into the new plans. HHS has indicated that it will enroll about 2 million beneficiaries, out of about 7 million who qualify for full benefits from both government health programs.
California is already counting on more than $500 million in budget savings from its own program this year. Most states are proposing to automatically enroll people. Those who don’t want to participate would need to opt out. The Massachusetts plan includes that feature.
Potential cost savings are a big incentive for states. Patients who qualify for both federal health programs are a costly population and include many who need nursing-home care or other expensive services. About 40 percent of Medicaid’s costs go toward patients who are also eligible for Medicare. Advocates of the pilot program also say it could lead to better coordination of care for patients who often struggle to navigate the two different programs.
Still, there is powerful opposition to the pilots among doctors, hospitals, nursing homes, patient groups, and key lawmakers, including Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., who wrote the provision in the health law that created the office in charge of the pilot program.
“I urge you to take immediate steps to halt this initiative as currently structured and to take the time necessary to develop a well-designed and thoroughly evaluated care coordination model for dual eligibles that meets the standards outlined in the law,” Rockefeller wrote in a letter to HHS.
The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, a group of experts who advise Congress on Medicare policy, has also weighed in with an 11-page letter to HHS, warning that the speed and scope of the program raised questions about whether patients would receive the care they need.
Scott Gottlieb, a former health official in President George W. Bush’s administration, called the program “immoral.”
“Why are we taking the duals, who are entitled to Medicare benefits, and moving them into Medicaid?” asked Gottlieb, now a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
Well thank goodness you posted this to cut down on the conclusion jumping. Jay Rockefeller needs to be pist and chagrined and humiliated as does Obama, of course!!!
Remember this part of the speech, in which he attacks the Paul Ryan plan to apply free-market reform and cost controls to Medicare? "And I will -- I will never turn Medicare into a voucher." ...Expiration date -- the very next dayIn Zero's defense, he stated "I will" as well as "I will never". So he's covered either way. And no one else is...
He was against Medicare vouchers before he was for them. What a fraud!
They are so driven to make dependents of their "wards of the state" and control their lives that they have created these "dual elgibles" who are eligible for coverage of their every acute/serious medical need plus permanent, chronic illness long term nursing home/care homes and even home care/day care and then eligible for Medicare for acute care as well.
Of course this is liberal Democrat over-reach and they cannot tolerate Republicans giving any possible consideration of improvement and taking their "ownership" of this most popular program away from them. They will not share. Have you noticed how upset they were over the Republicans and Bush passing the Medicare Part D (Drugs) prescription enhancement? They were fried because it wasn't more expensive and left a gap (donut hole) in that coverage.
If Romney and Ryan can pull through on this election and implement these potentially good options without forcing anyone to leave original Medicare, It will create a fatal wound to the phony reputation Democrats unjustly enjoy of being more compassionate than Republicans. It will pave the way for far-reaching reform of entitlements far into the future and they know it and are very, very afraid!!!
Then why has he limited the ability of women to 74 for Momo’s? Death Panels. I have very painful issues with them but for those who can tolerate them they should be there. MRI’s are actually cheaper in the long run as no false readings in the process witch means needless furthering testing. They are 100 % accurate and no false positive, vs the 97% testing of Mamos with lots of false positives.
It is 7 TRILLION over 20 years via the WSJ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.