Re: [QUAD-L] vote for the right man Medicare Increase!

Wed, 27 Oct 2004 18:08:29 -0700

Hi Stuntman,
 
I'm still getting caught-up on my messages so while this reply is late I believe it's still relevant so I suggest anyone interested read the Web Sites I've quoted from below.
 

Summary

A Bush ad falsely claims that Kerry "voted five times to raise Medicare premiums." Actually, Kerry voted for maintaining the same premium formula that had been in place since well before he was elected to the Senate.

The Bush ad also falsely implies that Kerry referred to required premium increases as "a day of vindication," when Kerry actually was referring to items such as increased health coverage for children.

Bush's ad is meant to counter a Kerry TV spot that isn't much better. Kerry's ad falsely implies that Bush alone was responsible for next year's increase in Medicare premiums. Actuaries say rising costs and other factors account for nearly half of the 17.4% increase, and have nothing to do with Bush's Medicare legislation. And some of the costs imposed by Bush's legislation are aimed at providing increased benefits for seniors who choose HMO's over traditional Medicare.

 
Your research puts the 17% increase on The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA), which made the 25% formula permanent so that Congress would not have to continually renew the rate. 
 
It passed overwhelmingly, 85-15 , with most Republicans in favor.

It is true that premium costs would have fallen had Congress allowed the 25% formula (25% of the total Part B costs, which allowed premiums to rise more quickly and slowed the rising cost to taxpayers) to lapse, reverting to a formula that would have decreased premiums and increased the expense to taxpayers. Only in that sense did Kerry vote "to require premium increases."

...

Bush's Medicare bill does account for 9.9 percentage points of the total 17.4% increase in premiums, according to Medicare actuaries. 
 
The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimated that the general inflation adjustment (prior to the MMA) and the increased use of services would together require an increase of about 4.8% in premiums. Other factors include replenishing reserve funds drawn down by higher-than-expected costs in the past.
A large part of the Bush-mandated premium increase goes to provide a very small increase in fees for physicians -- just a 1% rise, much lower than the overall rate of inflation. It looms much larger in the accounting, however, because the law prior to MMA would have imposed a 4% cut in fees. So Bush's law gets the blame for reversing that fee cut as well as allowing a modest increase for doctors.
Congress increased payments to doctors to address a problem created by the 1997 Balanced Budget Act, which had slowed the growth of costs (and premiums) by severely restricting payments to physicians and other providers of health care. But a consequence of the cuts was that a number of doctors and healthcare providers dropped out of the program altogether.
Another portion of the Bush-mandated increase is due to higher payments to HMO's offering alternatives to traditional Medicare under so-called "Medicare Advantage" plans. Administration officials argue that these payments will lead to increased benefits for those who choose the plans, while Democrats argue that this will "force" seniors into HMOs.
 

The Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997:

The Right Thing to Do for America and Its Families

WASHINGTON - The President and Congressional Leaders announced an historic bi-partisan agreement which will benefit Americans of today and tomorrow. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete V. Domenici, R- NM, called the landmark deal "an agreement that promises the first balanced budget in thirty years -- marks a great victory for American taxpayers and America�s working families. During the past year, we have heard a lot about the bridge to the 21st Century. We are here today to suggest that this agreement serves as a solid underpinning for that bridge." 

"Moreover, we have done just what the American people asked us to do last year. We have worked together to make this happen. We have worked in a bipartisan spirit. Each side has had to compromise on what they want, but neither has had to sacrifice their fundamental principles.

This agreement includes $250 billion in tax cuts over ten years, helping Americans through the $500 per child tax credit, death tax relief for small businesses and farmers, capital gains relief, expanded IRA�s and relief for parents who send their kids to college. The plan also saves over $850 billion over ten years to achieve the first balanced budget in over 30 years.

Additionally, Americans will benefit from a stronger economy which will produce more and better jobs for our workers. Lower interest rates mean more affordable homes and education for families across the country.

http://www.senate.gov/~budget/republican/analysis/dealpr.htm

 

I guess it's just which poison you pick!
 
With Love,

CtrlAltDel aka Dave
C4/5 Complete - 28 Years Post
Texas, USA
 

Stuntman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Medicare Increase

Have you seen the John Kerry commercial in which George Bush
pledges to help Seniors on Medicare and "the very next day
imposes a 17% premium increase -
the biggest in history"? That ad is a stoke
of genius on Kerry's part and will surely gain him many votes
among the uninformed.

I found it so amazing that I did some homework on the issue.
As it turns out the 17% increase was not imposed by President Bush
but was mandated by the "balanced budget agreement" signed by
then President Clinton, voted into law by Senator John Kerry, and
was scheduled to come into effect during the Bush administration.
President Bush had no authority to reverse what had been voted
into law by Senator Kerry during the Clinton administration. Once
again Kerry is counting on the ignorance of the American people.
Don't be duped by! his mendacity.


>
> He is not promising a cure... REALLY! JUST WHAT WOULD YOU CALL
C.R.
> GETTING UP OUT OF HIS CHAIR AND WALKING AGAIN? YOU ARE REALLY
MINCING WORDS HERE.
> HE EXACTLY SAID, "IF KERRY WAS ELECTED, QUADS WILL WALK AGAIN."
THERE'S NO
> MISUNDERSTANDING THAT SENTENCE UNLESS YOU HAVE A BENT FOR KERRY AND
THE REST
> OF HIS STORY.
>
>
> "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we
> will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve
> will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again,"
>
>
>
>--
It's not the fall that hurts.
Home page http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/
Graphics portfolio http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Domain space http://nw-in.com/index.html


Reply via email to