Steele Promises Government Will Never Get Between Seniors and Their Medicare
Michael Steele offering some nonsense in rare form. The venue, naturally, is the op-ed pages of the Washington Post whose editors once again display the casual contempt for the truth and for their readers that is the hallmark of their approach to journalism:
Second, we need to prohibit government from getting between seniors and their doctors. The government-run health-care experiment that Obama and the Democrats propose will give seniors less power to control their own medical decisions and create government boards that would decide what treatments would or would not be funded. Republicans oppose any new government entity overruling a doctor’s decision about how to treat his or her patient.
The crux of the matter here is that absent government getting between seniors and their doctors and offering to pay the doctors’ bills most seniors would be unable to afford the level of medical care they need. That’s why liberals created Medicare in 1965. Conservatives opposed this “government-run health-care experiment” at the time and derided it as likely to lead to socialism. Here’s Ronald Reagan laying out the case against Medicare.
But obviously once the government says it will pay for medical care the question arises of how much it should pay and for what. Currently that decision is in the hands of congress, which is not well-suited to making technical judgments about appropriate reimbursement rates for medical procedures. The Obama administration has proposed outsourcing the bulk of the decision-making to an expert body, known as IMAC, that would naturally still be subject to being overruled by congress. The idea is to prevent lobbyist-driven overpayments, not to deny care to seniors. And it would save the government some money over the long run. Which, you would think, conservatives would be happy about. Especially when you consider that conservatives don’t think Medicare should exist in the first place! But instead of being happy, we’ve got this campaign of deception, fearmongering, and opportunism.
So congratulations to Fred Hiatt for landing such a buzzworthy piece of nonsense for his publication and I hope the right-wing enjoys the giant tax hikes we’ll be enacting down the road once they show the political world that any attempt to trim Medicare spending, no matter how modest, will be savaged by opportunists on the other side.
27 Responses to “Steele Promises Government Will Never Get Between Seniors and Their Medicare”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
August 24th, 2009 at 10:02 am
As recently at 2006, the Republicans were bragging about being the Party of Ideas.
Now, they have to crib their arguments from the LaRouchies.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:05 am
And BO saying John McCain wanted to tax health care for the first time in history wasn’t at all ingenuous. I think the Republicans are a little lost and just copying you guys at this point.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:10 am
in·gen·u·ous (n-jny-s)
adj.
1. Lacking in cunning, guile, or worldliness; artless.
2. Openly straightforward or frank; candid.
Obama noting McCain’s central health care proposal was to tax benefits was not lacking in cunning, guild, or worldliness at all. It was, however, openly straightforward, frank, and candid.
So, 50/50.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:17 am
GOP = 100% tactics, no strategy
If Obama’s board wants to reign in Medicare spending, gets it out of the hands of Congress (almost none of whom are medical experts), and prevent huge future deficits, you would think the party that wants “entitlement reform” most of all would be for that.
Are Republicans just too stupid to pick and choose their battles?
Or just desparate or perhaps nihilistic? I think there are probably plenty of things for conservatives to attack that don’t contradict their own supposed positions.
If Obama propsed a 24 hour day, breathing oxygen, and 98.6 degree avg body temperature, I’m sure we’d see Steele out there with demagoguing against it.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:32 am
GOP = 100% tactics, no strategy
It’s been that way since the campaign, Jim.
“Obama’s a celebrity. Obama’s inexperienced. Obama’s a lightweight.” They banged away at that for a couple of months, with pretty good results, and then?
BAM, Sarah Palin! We are SO TOTALLY going to win the news cycle with this!
The Party of Stunts.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Right Wing extremist:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/08/24/steele-and-the-left-wing-republicans/
August 24th, 2009 at 10:37 am
If it’s any consolation to you, Syco, we can be almost mathematically certain that the Republicans don’t actually mean a word of it, and will reverse themselves on that issue with blinding speed.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:48 am
Again, I don’t see where Obama, the DNC, and MOVEON are limited to using the Washington Post to get their message out to the People. And PART of this is pointing out how the Republicans are lying through their teeth and WHO is helping them.
It is Obama’s REFUSAL to discuss the subject and to LEAD that is allowing Republicans to define healthcare reform in a deceitful way.
Salon has an article pointing out Obama’s failures over the past several months:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/08/24/town_halls/index.html?source=rss&aim=/opinion/feature
Enjoy the vacation.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:53 am
1) And it is really SAD how people here are trying to deny reality — trying to convince themselves that it is the Republicans who are failing.
2) Especially with that article yesterday in the LA Times. What was the Headline??? Ah, Yes:
“Healthcare insurers get upper hand
Obama’s overhaul fight is being won by the industry, experts say. The end result may be a financial ‘bonanza.’”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-healthcare-insurers24-2009aug24,0,2392720.story?track=rss
3) Newsflash: The way the Republicans win is by ensuring that the Democratic grassroots gets infuriated at the sellout within the Democratic leadership and decides to stay home next November.
Obama better stop worrying about sucking up to the Republicans and worry more about trying to get back the support of those who voted him into office.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Don,
Obama made the decision early on to let Congressional Democrats take the lead both in drafting the legislation and selling it to the public. That’s why town halls led by Democratic members of Congress during the August recess were the primary means of spreading the message. Obama didn’t want to step on toes by Bigfooting Congress, which is a mistake Clinton made. He also thought that this strategy would gain some Republican votes.
So much for that. Now, Plan B.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:57 am
And you are, apparently, working a full-time job devoted to infuriating the Democratic grassroots.
Hmmm….
August 24th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Re Joe at 11: “And you are, apparently, working a full-time job devoted to infuriating the Democratic grassroots.”
——–
Yes –because we all know that when a coach criticizes a football player, it is because the coach wants his own team to lose the season.
It is not I who is handling the Republicans a victory on this issue.
But go ahead. Rah Rah Sis Boom Bah!
That worked so well in 2004, no?
August 24th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Republicans are failing. Just like during the campaign, they are snatching at short-term tactical successes and ignoring long-term strategy, with the result being that they’re stepping on their own message.
We have to contain costs, but they want to cut Medicare, and OMG the deficit!
There were always panicky people who fainted with every feint from the Big Republican Daddies during the 2008 campaign, egged on by a national media that never tired of writing stories about the Elmers finally catching dat wascally wabbit this time.
You’d think people would learn.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Don was in a coma in 2006 and 2008. I forget sometimes.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Joe at 14: “Don was in a coma in 2006 and 2008. I forget sometimes.”
Evidently, 2006 and 2008 were great victories. For Goldman Sachs and Ben Nelson.
For the rest of us? Well, we’ll see.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:36 am
You’re abandoning your argument, which was about how the Democrats can win the political debate.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:46 am
I think you’re right about Obama needing to change his strategy and tactics, and take the lead, Don.
I think you err in describing the situation as too dire, and talking about the outcome of this fight in the past tense. It’s not even the fourth quarter, it’s a close ballgame, we’re figured out their stunts and made adjustments, and haven’t even brought out the big guns yet.
Remember Reverent Wright? Death Panels aren’t squat compared to “Nah nah nah, God damn America.” John McCain was relatively popular, unlike the Congressional Republicans and the insurance companies.
All of Obama’s best moments on the campaign trail were, like the Philadelphia speech, counter-punches. He needs to take a few hits before he really get fired up.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:46 am
“Newsflash: The way the Republicans win is by ensuring that the Democratic grassroots gets infuriated at the sellout within the Democratic leadership and decides to stay home next November.”
Loathing for the GOP outweighs and griping about Dem pols any day.
The GOP ratcheting up their xenophobia, hatemongering, thuggery, lies, mob violence, gun nuts, etc only anger us more.
GOP = Best liberal recruiting tool ever
August 24th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Conservatives haven’t been about cutting spending or even small government for decades. Conservatives principle aim is to protect the wealth of the rich.
Medicare is a good conservative program now. It’s funded with a regressive tax, paid mostly by the middle class. The payments go to wealthy individuals and stockholders in medical care corporations. The proposed reforms would leave it as a social program while eliminating its purpose as a tool to redistribute money to the wealthy. That’s unacceptable to them.
August 24th, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Conservatives haven’t been about cutting spending or even small government for decades. Conservatives principle aim is to protect the wealth of the rich.
So Clinton balanced the budget entirely on his own?
Medicare is a good conservative program now. It’s funded with a regressive tax, paid mostly by the middle class. The payments go to wealthy individuals and stockholders in medical care corporations. The proposed reforms would leave it as a social program while eliminating its purpose as a tool to redistribute money to the wealthy. That’s unacceptable to them.
What about rich people outside of the medical sector?
It’s funded with a flat tax because it’s benefits are maximally progressive. You can argue that rich people get more use out of roads, security, etc. and pay more in income taxes. With Medicare everyone gets the exact same check in the mail, pure progressive redistribution.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
So Clinton balanced the budget entirely on his own?
Pretty much, considering the Republican’s plans were cut taxes and…cut taxes. Or don’t you recall the government shutting down?
August 24th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
The only thing that’s surprising about this is how long it took Republicans to adopt the tactic of scaring old people. From early days it’s been clear BHO has viewed private sector Medicare subsidies as a prime target for paying for healthcare reform.
August 24th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Pretty much, considering the Republican’s plans were cut taxes and…cut taxes. Or don’t you recall the government shutting down?
You do realize Congress authors spending bills? And what is so bad about the government shutting down?
August 24th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
[...] Finally, Yglesias thinks long ball: [...]
August 24th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
I don’t let Steele speak for me, but I’m not at all happy about this talk of cutting 400 or 500 billion from Medicare to fund these individual premium subsidies. It’s already next to impossible to find medical specialists still willing to accept new Medicare patients. Subsidies, under HR 3200, for families of 4 earning up to $88,000? Come on. And why so equivocal about the insurance coverage to be provided to the indigent? Is it to be “equal care for all,” or some sort of “safety net”? If the former, you have collectively gone off the deep end. If the latter, you will not lack for conservatives willing to “dialogue” with you.
What is badly needed here, and what I do not find in HR 3200, is an effective mechanism for dealing with provider “overutilization.” We need medical review boards armed with the authority to chastize the mercenary.
August 24th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Talking to my 94 year old grandmother yesterday about the health care debate was interesting. It will take me two months to get her a Lenovo ThinkPad, so she can get the information she wants. She watches news—NOT FOX—and reads newspapers, but can’t make head nor tails of the debate. She worked as a newpaper typesetter and editor all her life, so it isn’t a problem with comprehension. She is left with general anxiety about losing MEDICARE benefits and having to pay more for less. She is very happy with her MEDICARE and her doctor, but she has noticed that the people in her assisted living apartments who have MEDICAID get a better deal with more perks. She had the unfortunate impression that health care for illegal aliens is a major cost. I hope I put an end to that. I reminded her of my friend who will die without insurance.
The elderly who are not hopelessly right-wing and ignorant need the internet and someone to teach them some basic computer literacy. Or the MSM needs to do its job. I’d wager that a computer literate population of senior citizens will happen before the MSM engages in quality journalism.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
[...] Matthew Yglesias: So congratulations to Fred Hiatt for landing such a buzzworthy piece of nonsense for his publication and I hope the right-wing enjoys the giant tax hikes we’ll be enacting down the road once they show the political world that any attempt to trim Medicare spending, no matter how modest, will be savaged by opportunists on the other side. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Steele Names RNC Communications Director [...]