Jackson Jambalaya

Medicare has always been about to run out of money, ever since 1970, and yet it never does. Non-story.

As I understand the Ryan plan, those now under 55 will never get Medicare, but rather will be given vouchers, whose value will not keep up with the rising cost of health care.

I'm all for finding ways to make health $$$ spent more efficiently, but the bottom line is, we have an aging population, and we are going to spend more on health care for them.

Seems like a good thing to spend money on ... what did y'all want to use it for?

Tax cuts for job creators. Old age is a socialist plot to destroy America. Can't we find something to do with all of these old and sick and retarded people? Surely, someone has faced this problem before and found an efficient solution.

Also, it is a scientifically proven fact that if you take really good care of rich people, they will make all the people below them healthier, as their healthiness flows down, like a rainbow from under an angel's dress.

1:55PM,

How about other people? Besides, if it's broke in 12 years, that means no one get anything. Unless I skipped a step someplace.

I would like to spend money on healthcare, prime rib, red wine and cigars for all.

It's not wanting to not spend the money on healthcare for me. It's about wanting to only spend that which is available combined with a preference for personal responsibility in lieu of the government being the primary provider for its citizens.

"those now under 55 will never get Medicare."
ANOTHER BALD FACE DEMOCRAT LIE. THOSE UNDER 55 WILL BE ALLOWED TO CHOOSE REGULAR VANILLA MEDICARE IF THEY WANT. GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT BEFORE SPOUTING OFF ON THIS SITE!

Here's what I did on the story:

1. Compiled two AP stories together because the original one was a one-sided piece that held only negative comments against the Ryan plan. We wanted something balanced and detailed.

2. Inserted comments by Reps. Gregg Harper and Steven Palazzo. We wanted local reaction, and we wanted more balance. That's the only part I wrote. Everything else was written by AP writers.

Not getting into a back-and-forth here, but I did want to clarify what clearly was never verified.

If you ever want to talk to me about our coverage, you can call me at (601) 961-7163.

End Medicare and Medicaid. Taxes are thefts from the taxpayers.

Tax breaks for the job creators!

Without people like Mitt Romney and Sheldon Adelson there would be no jobs. Ask Newt what to do, he has lots of good ideas.

The can will always be kicked down the yellow brick road and the yellow brick road never ends. The can is made of really tough material and regenerates itself when it gets damaged.

Sam R. Hall said... Here's what I did on the story: ... Everything else was written by AP writers. ...

It was AP garbage in and Sam Hall enhanced AP garbage out.

Sam gets an Attaboy for coming over and posting his comments and phone number.

Sam Hall writing about politics and government for the CL like he is a reporter, how pathetic. I suppose next we will get commentary from Rickey Cole and Precious Martin. That rag is so on the way to not being able to make payroll and pay the light bill, maybe they can open an urban hip-hop club in their former downtown space before long, would probably generate more tax revenue.

THOSE UNDER 55 WILL BE ALLOWED TO CHOOSE REGULAR VANILLA MEDICARE IF THEY WANT

Link, please.

... Really, people? Think about it: Door A gets you a voucher for private insurance with deductibles, benefit caps, etc.

Door B gets you Medicare.

Who is going to pick Door A?

Anonymous "Anderson" wrote : ... but rather will be given vouchers, whose value will not keep up with the rising cost of health care.

Link, please.

Something has to give. The population is aging faster than LBJ's actuaries thought it would, and there are a lot of us old farts about to hit the number. At the same time, our tax dollars are more and more scarce with fewer earners contributing to benefits for a seemingly endless number of beneficiaries. We have to choose at some point what's more important, health care or roads, health care or schools, health care or defense, health care or food. Ryan's approach vs. Obamacare is a good place to start, but we need to have a serious discussion about how we plan to pay for all these government benefits and exactly what we're willing to give up to be guaranteed health care for life.

And give Sam a break - he's not exactly Bill Minor and he's fairly new on the job. Spicing up the article with a few local quotes isn't left wing journalism. Bill Billingsley

Here you go.

This column (which I hadn't seen before) enlightens me as to the germ behind the all-caps comment upthread:

If you want more expensive coverage — good old Medicare, say — you'd have to make up the difference in annual premiums.

That will be popular.

I can't believe that anyone who parrotted Palin on "death panels" thinks this is a good idea. You're old, your insurance runs out, you can't afford more care ... you die. It's certainly one approach to social policy, but it's a strange way to win an election.

Good post, KF. Thanks for the hard work.

"We wanted something balanced and detailed." Not even touching that line.

To add one other item to the mix:
"Several clips of prominent Democrats -- including President Obama -- praising Ryan have surged through the Internet in the days since Mitt Romney tapped the Wisconsin congressman as his running mate. They once called his ideas 'serious' and 'honest,' which is not what the Obama campaign and its affiliates are saying about him now."

Erskine Bowles, the White House chief of staff under former President Bill Clinton: "In a late 2011 talk at the University of North Carolina, Bowles told the audience 'this guy is amazing.' "I always thought I was okay with arithmetic. This guy can run circles around me, and he is honest, he is straightforward, he is sincere," Bowles said. "And the budget he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, honest, serious budget."

"Bowles went on to criticize the spending plans that had come out of the Obama White House."


November 2012
B.H.O.
Got To Go!

Oh GEEZ...

Specifics are lacking just as the specifics on which tax loopholes will be eliminated.

I would like to look at an analysis of both plans done by an objective source.

What is " regular vanilla Medicare?" Part A only? So those who need expensive medicines do what?

I just love it when people who haven't been on Medicare or had ill parents weigh in . I love it when people who haven't had a catastrophic illness hit anyone they know opine about health care.

Everyone who has health insurance is just fine, unless your program decides to deny or limit coverage because you've gotten too expensive or you lose your JOB. But, hey, that's the " other guy", right?

3:09 pm I think very few Americans are willing to have children die ( or adults) simply because their parents cannot afford a doctor. And, here's a scary thought for you, some of those poor people ( like some of the poor illegals in recent years) can make YOU and YOURS sick. Check out the increase in hepatitis or how whopping cough is back and is killing babies too young to be vaccinated? Might be your grandbaby some day, dummy , if you have your way. Or , since you lack any compassion, your liver might need replacing and all you did was go eat dinner out .

But,I suspect you aren't well travelled and have no idea what it looks like when a country just lets poor folks die. Nor, have you had to have tons of immunizations before you travel so YOU won't get sick or bring something back !

That's the future you want for us? People who travel here have to get immunized? You want us to be a bananna republic?

I must have missed something in civics class. Since when does a vp canidate,vp or congressman make laws. I thought it was the Senate and The House and The President who made such law. I would think that Ryan as a congressman would been better able to get that measure passed than as VP.

Sam Hall:

It's one thing for the failed director of an inept political party to try and pass himself off as a journalist.

It's another for the Clarion Ledger to have so little respect for the intelligence of its hundred or so readers to endorse the scam.

You're a loser with no credibility.

Obama 2005: Obama Attacks Bush For Not Tackling Medicare

Why doesn't Anderson ever tout the Kenyan's record?

Nowhere in the link does it say "... value will not keep up with the rising cost of health care."

Anderson, you are a generally amicable guy here and on Mr. Freeland's blog, and I enjoy your comments as they are not usually offered without some measured thought or research.

However, NOT cutting from entitlements is going to break us. Feel free to provide a link that says otherwise, but your recollections that you were told it was going broke before is NOT reason enough to do nothing with the current projections of this very administration.

I welcome any candidate from any party that will take the political risk to address the fact that we are not going to be able to continue the status quo without going broke. And, there are plenty of articles that provide the numbers that show no tax increase available is going to stop the bleeding. Spending has to be addressed, and entitlements can NOT be off the table. It's not politically safe, but it is leadership. Something this country has been missing for some time.

5:06 pm...agree ...would like to hear both parties get serious and co-operate.

There are few issues where the facts and practical options don't become obvious once one is informed.

Doing the right thing, sadly, will lose elections for both parties and already has.

We have to deal with entitlements , with subsidies, with tax reform, with defense waste, with congressional earmarks, with bureaucracies like the REA that have outlived their usefulness, with waste whether it's in defense contracts or welfare.

Ryan has some good suggestions that the right will love, but they will not address the problem without some pain on the right as well.

Medicare funding is a problem. It will not go away. If has been so corrupt for so many years that it now has real problems because we have a senior population(and growing) that is larger proportionally than we have ever had in our country since the inception of medicare. Add on top of that, this senior population is living longer. The medical cost of inflation(i. e. greed)is rising. The problems must be corrected by using several means. Doctors/hospitals, medical services, etc. must be required to honor medicare and they receive a tax break for doing so. Original medicare must still be available. Corruption must be countered by hiring additional agents to investigate and recover funds. Alternatives like medicare advantage must be available for those who choose to use this option but medicare must do a better job of policing this type of insurance because currently they lie to seniors and it cost more out of pocket. Also the vouchers should not exist. Right now the vouchers are given to the medicare advantage company and they are stealing our tax dollars. Let them stand on their own with out dollars from Medicare. Oh, and lets make sure and kill the corrupt politicians on the courthouse square and we will go a long way to fixing the problem.

August 14, 2012 5:50 PM resides on the left.

4:15pm: "you're a loser with no credibility."

Mighty bold statement for someone who posts anonymously.

It is pretty clear that Obama was for saving Medicare before he switched to wanting to gut it.

Sam Hall worked at the Scott County Times long before he became directly involved in Democratic politics, if I recall. In fact, didn't Sid Salter hire him?

Dems Lie about Ryan's Medicare Plan

If they are truly ignorant of the Ryan plan, shame on them. Medicare is the United States’ single biggest fiscal problem. Its trajectory is menacing, as it is projected under the most realistic scenario to grow from 3.7 percent to 5.7 percent of GDP by 2035, swamping all other federal programs. It is mammoth, which is why the Obama administration plans to suck $700 billion from Medicare over the next decade to support expanded free healthcare to millions of Americans. It is the only place to look for the money.

It is also unsustainable. Reforming Medicare has to be the most important and challenging policy issue of our time. Paul Ryan is nearly alone in having tried to tackle this behemoth, and in proposing a detailed solution. His colleagues in Congress – on the Left and the Right -- have been terrified of stepping on this “third rail.” Still, he has received some support from across the aisle.

Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, to his credit, worked with Ryan last year to come up with solutions to our Medicare dilemma, finding common ground in advocating for adding competitive systems into the mix. By contrast, Mr. Obama’s answer is to impose a 30 percent cut on doctor reimbursement rates starting next year – a fee reduction that would sharply reduce the number of physicians accepting Medicare patients, and that, most important, will never be enacted. Through Obamacare, the president has also appointed an unelected board to rein in costs, presumably through deciding which treatments are cost-effective and which are simply too expensive.

Hall's columns were published across the state, and he was a respected journalist at the Scott County Times.

Until medical costs are brought under control, nothing will change. Rising medical costs are outpacing inflation and in something like 15 years, they will represent 45 percent of our GDP. Quick google search can show the figures. You want to "fix" spending, look at fixing what it is being spent upon.

Regardless of where we each come down on the medicare discussion, Mr. Hall did a pretty good job with the article. Besides, If Supertalk can turn a boring, monotone cartoonist into an even more boring talk show non-host......

Sam, you are missing the point. Unless you are putting the fact Medicare will run out of money front and center in the story and instead bury it at the end in one sentence, that in itself is editorial spin. What you should have done was focus on Medicare going broke and then asking what the campaigns intend to do about it. Instead of that, we get he said she said coverage and editorial statements by the reporter that were never sourced or had any basis in fact.

As for Anderson, yes, keep kicking that can down the road and sticking your head in the sand. Worked so well in California, Illinois, Greece, Spain and so on.

Great commentary KF! Plus, it's good to see your work listed as top story on yallpolitics.com

We can't have health care reform without addressing/affecting Medicare.

So, it's not true that others haven't tried to address health care reform. Whether it was Dole, Clinton, or Ted Kennedy, every health care plan proposal affected Medicare.

Every time someone does attempt to address health care, whether it's Obama or Ryan now, the attacks start. Some of those attacks are directly financed by those who have a vested interest in keeping things as they are.

It's also true, that like with Social Security, the public has been told it was going to go broke for over 30 years. This has been used as a scare tactic in too many political races.

That is always more true during a recession when revenues aren't coming in and unemployment is high so money isn't going into the system. Even if the warnings were " early" to the public, it seems like the " boy who cried 'wolf' ".

Then we have the reform suggestions coming from someone who is admired in the GOP by those who have clearly stated ( as they have on this blog), that they want to end Medicare entirely. But, more importantly, they don't think the government has any role in the health care of its citizens...that it's every man, woman and child for himself or herself. Such was even said during the primary. That is enough to raise suspicion. How can such people be comfortable with Ryan's plan unless they see it as the first step in dismantling the program?

Since I actually read the Obama health care bill in its entirety and know that most commenting haven't or else I wouldn't still be hearing " scare tactics" like the " death panel" nonsense, I fully expect the same attacks without warrant of Ryan's plan.

I haven't found the Ryan plan in a specific form as yet. Unless it's 1000 or more pages, it may lack sufficient specificity as we now have an unwieldly system and every aspect needs to be addressed.

But, there is one thing of which I am certain, Ryan's plan will have to be about more than just how one pays for healthcare coverage.

ANY new plan will need to deal with pre-existing conditions as most of those who have coverage today will have to be protected in a new system. Any new plan will have to grandfather in some parts. Any new plan will have to deal with the rising costs of prescription drugs, especially the cancer drugs.

This is NOT just about the budget. This is also about people's lives...literally. And, every now and again, a good number of people remember that not everything in life is all about the money.

Mr. Hall, I think you are being unfairly criticized. As far as I can tell, your report was no different from the methods which are now standard . I am not happy with the newer way of reporting now that most all papers are corporately owned, but that doesn't warrant a personal attack on any reporter especially since the reporter doesn't get decide if his story goes in or goes in as written.

Then we have the reform suggestions coming from someone who is admired in the GOP by those who have clearly stated ( as they have on this blog), that they want to end Medicare entirely.

Show us where anyone (you wrote "those") on this blog have stated they want to terminate Medicare entirely.

Since I actually read the Obama health care bill in its entirety and know that most commenting haven't ...

Logical fallacy.

Mr. Hall, I think you are being unfairly criticized.

But you are still here reading and commenting.

5:06, thanks; I treasure every kind word I get on this blog (all three of them).

Medicare's a problem, sure, and the ACA does a few things to address costs. The most interesting to me is funding some study of the immense piles of data inherent to the Medicare program, to study what treatments work. That & funding some fraud investigation (like that hospital system busted the other day for bogus heart treatments) can do a lot to control costs.

BUT, like I said, we have an aging population. The amount of $$ we spend on health care is just going to go up, at least for a generation.

It would be useful to discuss how to pay for this: trim Defense? increase the withholding tax? means-testing for the more affluent Medicare beneficiaries?

But the Ryan "plan" is a non-starter, because it's not an effort to address growing costs: it's a raid on the federal budget to pay for the lowest tax rates on the rich since the 1920s. No one seriously concerned with reducing our national debt could propose such tax cuts.

The sad truth is that, to have any kind of serious effort to reduce the debt and deficit, it looks like we'll have to re-elect Obama and get Dem majorities, unless enough dissidents in the GOP say enough is enough and it's necessary to work together (and curb some Dem extravagances). Nothing but budget-busting happened with 6 years of GOP control of White House & Congress; it's the Dems or nobody, unfortunately.

August 14, 2012 4:49 PM
Give me a break, so tired of this style argument...if you don't do it this way, everyone will die, you don't know cause you never dealt with injured/elderly, don't you care, do it MY way or your heartless and/orprejudice!... Take your old sad argument and sell it on the street. System is broke, needs to be fixed.

August 15, 2012 7:23 AM
Is Ricky Cole commenting on the blog now?

August 15, 2012 6:10 AM
I agree with 7:07, good post, KF.

August 15, 2012 8:57 AM
"The sad truth is that, to have any kind of serious effort to reduce the debt and deficit, it looks like we'll have to re-elect Obama..." Sir, with that one sentence, you've totally blown any credibility you had.

Well, I have to agree with Kingfish. If it was Mr. Hall's intention to bury the fact (that medicare is going broke) toward the end, for his own editorial benefit, then, Hall should be on the editorial page. Don't we get enough of that crap on the three evening news programs?

4:49:

"And, here's a scary thought for you, some of those poor people ( like some of the poor illegals in recent years) can make YOU and YOURS sick. Check out the increase in hepatitis or how whopping cough is back and is killing babies too young to be vaccinated? "

Babies get vaccinated at 8 weeks because the vaccine is not effective younger than that. Furthermore they are protected by their mother's antibodies until about 12 weeks. Please provide a link to a reputable report (say, from the CDC or state DOH) about dying "babies too young to be vaccinated" because of pertussis.


"Or , since you lack any compassion, your liver might need replacing and all you did was go eat dinner out ."

Another interesting comment - you seem to be unaware of the fundamental differences between Hep A and Hep B. Unless you share bodily fluids with somone after your dinner (e.g., sex, sharing IV needles) you will not get Hep B, which is the sort of hepatitis that may require a liver transplant. Hep A, which can be food-borne, is nasty but does not turn into chronic active hepatitis which requires a liver transplant.


"But,I suspect you aren't well travelled and have no idea what it looks like when a country just lets poor folks die. Nor, have you had to have tons of immunizations before you travel so YOU won't get sick or bring something back "!

My daughter just went to Rwanda and all she had to get was a yellow fever vaccine - hardly my idea of "tons of immunizations".

"That's the future you want for us? People who travel here have to get immunized? You want us to be a bananna republic?"


Uh, people who travel here legally already have to get immunized. It's the ones here illegally that Obama and Big Sis won't deport who are spreading Tb and other disease. But thanks for playing - next contestant please!

Cute, SFX. How much did Reagan reduce the deficit? How much did Clinton? Did Dubya?

Explain to me why I should believe a Romney administration would deliver deficit reduction, as opposed to tax reduction.

LMAO. Now the Donkeys don't want the Kenyan questioned about Simpson-Bowles during the upcoming presidential debates.

OK let me reflect; Part AP story Dem?Lnb Part AP story Rep/Consev. Part his own, but balance comes from AP story?? It has been generations since AP was the hallmark of balance!

I watched a CL commercial on Fox News last night. Leave it to the crowd now in charge to relect backwards to a neighborhood paper boy on a bicycle, delivering delicate electronic equipment door to door! Yes by throwing them from the side walk to the porch.They all land in perfect spots and without damage. I get it but what a mixed message.

President Epic Fail Screws Democrats

They [Democrackheads] have a sense that health care is no longer a good issue for them, that it might have cost them the 2010 elections and will hurt in 2012, but they haven’t grasped that Medicare — which for decades has been a trusty battering ram against Republicans in the contest for the votes of seniors and others — is also no longer their issue.

This becomes evident in part when you consider that the arguments the Democrats naturally fall back upon regarding Medicare are just false now. So for instance David Axelrod on CNN’s State of the Union referred to “Congressman Ryan’s idea that we should turn Medicare into a voucher program, shifting thousands of dollars ultimately onto the backs of seniors.” But that’s simply a lie — Ryan’s actual Medicare proposal (which Romney has backed) simply doesn’t shift costs to seniors.

But it’s even more evident when liberals try to confront what they themselves — the supporters of Obamacare — propose to do to Medicare. Thus we find Rachel Maddow like a deer in headlights when Rich Lowry asked her a simple question on Meet the Press yesterday: “Do you support $700 billion in cuts in Medicare over the next ten years?” Obamacare takes that amount out of the program and spends it on other things, especially its new exchange subsidies. Maddow literally refused to answer the question. At one point she even said she shouldn’t have to answer it because “I’m not running for anything,” even though her occupation, as I understand it, is to express her opinion. And in the end, her defense of the cuts (though she still never said she supported them) was that Paul Ryan’s budget actually keeps them in place, eliminating Obamacare’s spending but not its Medicare cuts.

...

President Obama has put Democrats in the position of being the party that seeks to cut current seniors’ benefits (especially those in Medicare Advantage) and access to care (thanks to the IPAB) while still allowing the program to collapse in the coming years and so watching the deficit explode and bringing on fiscal disaster.

"Ryan’s actual Medicare proposal (which Romney has backed) simply doesn’t shift costs to seniors."

Where is this "actual" proposal? Ryan's Medicare plans change every time he's called out on them. Do you mean the Ryan-Wyden proposal?

Here is a description of Ryan-Wyden:

Instead of tying the amount of the voucher to an arbitrary increase in the future, it would be tied, in his 2011 proposal, to how much insurance costs. Each year, companies will submit bids for how much it will cost to provide insurance for a senior that year. The voucher would then be set at the price of the second-lowest bid. In other words, seniors could get the second-cheapest plan for very little. If they chose the cheapest plan, they would actually get a rebate. If they want anything more expensive, they would have to pay for the difference.

Moreover, traditional Medicare will be one of the choices. If it is the second cheapest, not much will change. If, however, it is more expensive, then seniors would have to pay for the difference, but in this way they will have the option to keep their Medicare.

Since all I hear from the GOP is that Medicare is bankrupting America, the chances that it will be the cheapest or second-cheapest option seems slim.

A good summary of the Kenyan's record on jobs.

U.S. Government's Foreign Debt Hits Record $5.29 Trillion

The U.S. government’s indebtedness to foreign interests has grown by 72.3 percent during President Barack Obama’s term in office. In January 2009, when Obama was inaugurated, the U.S. government owed $3.0717 trillion to foreign entities, according to the Treasury Department. That has increased by $2.2206 trillion—or 72.3 percent—to the record $5.2923 trillion reported for yesterday.