House GOP considers privatizing Medicare

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gHtd2HdtY4-e71IJUsu19XrUDUrA?docId=0d2aec5c16fa4c228c6c038eff513fd6

(AP) – 5 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Months after they hammered Democrats for cutting Medicare, House Republicans are debating whether to relaunch their quest to privatize the health program for seniors.

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is testing support for his idea to replace Medicare with a fixed payment to buy a private medical plan from a menu of coverage options.

Party leaders will determine if the so-called voucher plan will be part of the budget Republicans put forward in the spring.

I thought so.

:-(

Imagine how many profits this would generate for rich bankers/investors! It'll also eliminate thousands of government job and replace them with fewer private jobs, whose responsibility is to deny claims so further profits may be gleaned.

Race to the bottom!

rise to the top.

Never attribute to mere incompetence or stupidity those things which are better explained by malice and corruption.

Can anybody doubt it? I knew it would come to this. :(

There are so many health insurance companies lining up to insure those 65 and older.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/119xx/doc11966/11-17-Rivlin-Ryan_Preliminary_Analysis.pdf

"Congressman Ryan and his staff recently provided specifications for a proposal that would
substantially change federal payments under the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Although an
extensive analysis of that proposal is not feasible in the time available, CBO has conducted a
preliminary analysis of its major provisions—the results of which are summarized here.

Key Features of the Proposal
MEDICARE

People who turn 65 in 2021 or later years would not enroll in the current Medicare program
but instead would receive a voucher with which to purchase private health insurance..."


Alice Rivlin Wants to Cut Social Security So John Boehner Can Spend It On Wars

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/06/29/alice-rivlin-wants-to-cut-social-security-so-john-boehner-can-spend-it-on-wars/

By Jane Hamsher

"Alice Rivlin is the chief wonk appointed by President Obama to the debt commission, and has long supported cutting Social Security benefits as a way to address the country’s financial woes..

Quelle coincidence. Rivlin and Boehner both support raising the retirement age, “fixing” the COLA, and reducing benefits for those who are “more affluent” (sounds like Alan Simpson’s “Lexus driving retirees in gated communities”) .

In testimony last year before the House Budget Committee (chaired by fellow deficit commission member John Spratt), Alice Rivlin said that “projections of the federal budget show rapidly rising spending over the next several decades attributable to three major entitlement programs; namely, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.” (PDF) Because “rapidly rising debt threaten our credibility as sound fiscal managers,” Rivlin told the committee that:

It will take some combination of several much-discussed marginal changes: raising the retirement age gradually in the future (and then indexing it to longevity), raising the cap on the payroll tax, fixing the COLA, and modifying the indexing of initial benefits so they grow more slowly for more affluent people.


According to the Urban Institute, raising the retirement age would push an estimated 1.5 million senior citizens into poverty.

Rivlin appeared on the notorious CNBC segment where Peterson Institute head David Walker spoke longingly about the return of debtors’ prisons. On that segment, Rivlin reiterated her support for reducing benefits to those with higher incomes..."

But, the Associated Press can't be bothered to mention that, can it?

then this could have been avoided. Honestly though I'm not too worried about right now though, simply because the odds of it passing the senate and getting through a veto are slim to none, however if the repulicans gain the White House and Senate in 2012 then I will be very worried. This would have to pass a vote in the Senate right and the President could veto it couldn't he? For some reason I heard somewhere that budget concerns only had to pass the House, but I'm almost certain I heard wrong.

I NEVER mention party affilliation (any more) in my editorials,even though I have been accused of being partisan by my neighbors.I don't have to.
i won't this time,either.
I will simply point to the house majority support of sick and elderly.