Slick brochure by the Heritage Foundation depicts Ryan budget plan supporters as flag-waving cowboys.
Benishek Hailed as Member of "Magnificent 11" Ryan Budget Backers
"Fights For Our Families," Says Neocon Mailing Seeking Voter Support
July 17, 2011
By: Dave Rogers
It has consistently been our position in this column that any federal legislation, especially relating to health care, that costs taxpayers and voters more is unacceptable.
That is not a liberal position, but one very much in the conservative playbook. That's why we are confused by the Medicare revision plan of Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican.
Seniors would end up paying almost twice as much out of their own pockets -- or more than $12,510 a year, the Congressional Budget Office estimates, for health insurance under the budget plan of Rep. Ryan.
The Los Angeles Times has noted: "Because commercial insurers cost more to run than government plans, the Wisconsin Republican's proposal to privatize Medicare starting in 2022 would actually spark a dramatic increase in how much the nation spends on healthcare for the elderly, according to an independent analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office."
Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Dan Benishek, a physician from the Upper Peninsula who represents the northern part of Bay County, is featured in a slick brochure boasting he is a member of "The Magnificent 11" who voted for the Ryan plan.
"Putting the well-being of our nation ahead of his career, Dan Benishek courageously voted for a bold plan to fix our economy," states the brochure.
It would seem that adherence to the Hippocratic oath binding all medical professionals would give Rep. Benishek pause if he considers the financial effects of the Ryan plan.
In our opinion the Ryan plan is, in effect, a huge new tax -- something that Republicans and conservatives of both parties claim to abhor.
If costs to seniors double, wouldn't the logical conclusion be that they would be financially less able to deal with everyday necessities as well as medical needs? Why would a physician support such action that seems so against the ethics of his field of medicine?
The "bold plan to fix our economy" appears to be one that would take more money from citizens while allowing continuance of unconscionable tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy.
It seems that Rep. Benishek has his priorities and ethics exactly backward and that the claim of "fighting for us" is totally hollow.
The Benishek brochure states: "Liberals claim the plan ends Medicare. This is a lie. The plan saves Medicare and gives Americans the same health care options as Members of Congress."
The mailing states it was "paid for by Heritage for America," 321 D Street, Washington, D.C. 20002," listing a website HeritageAction.com.
The flyer doesn't name 10 other Members of Congress who voted for the Ryan plan, but refers to a website: magnificent11.com.
Others who, "despite unrelenting liberal attacks came to the defense of our future," are representatives Justin Amash, Michigan; Steve Chabot, Ohio; Bill Huizenga, Michigan; Mick Mulvaney, South Carolina; Steve Pearce, New Mexico; Steve Southerland, Florida; Tim Walberg, Michigan; Joe Walsh, Illinois; and Allen West, Florida.
Not mentioned in the literature is the fact that Speaker of the House John Boehner, Ohio Republican, failed to vote on the Ryan plan that passed the House.
Ryan says applying "free-market principles" to the insurance market is the best way to control costs.
"We can drive innovation, productivity improvements and performance in healthcare," Ryan said recently in a presentation to the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington.
Under the Ryan bill, seniors and others on Medicare in 2022 would begin receiving a flat payment allegedly to offset the cost of buying private insurance that would "replace" Medicare.
Wealthier and healthier seniors would receive a voucher worth less, while poorer and less healthy beneficiaries would get more.
Ryan's vouchers or "premium support" would give the typical 65-year-old American $8,000 annually to buy a health plan, about the same as the Medicare program is expected to spend on each senior in 2022.
But the CBO report says private insurance, plus the costs borne by the typical 65-year-old, would total about $20,510 per year, according to the CBO. That would leave the senior to pay the estimated $12,510 difference.
The CBO estimates that it would cost about $14,770 to provide Medicare insurance to that same 65-year old in 2022, unless Congress slashes payments to doctors and hospitals.
Continuation of the current Medicare program still would leave the senior to pay $6,150 out of pocket.
"A typical beneficiary would spend more for healthcare," the CBO summarized Ryan's proposal.
Medicare is efficient at controlling costs, according to the CBO, noting: "Both administrative costs [including profits] and payment rates to providers are higher for private plans than for Medicare."
Previous research by the budget office and the independent Government Accountability Office found that private firms that contract with the federal government to provide Medicare Advantage plans to seniors have higher administrative costs.
"Because Medicare covers about 48 million Americans, it is also able to use its unrivaled market clout to pay lower prices to hospitals and doctors, saving money." said the LA Times.
We urge Rep. Benishek to rethink his support for the Ryan plan in light of the CBO's estimates and in the interest of the future for seniors. After all, "fighting for families" also includes older folks, doesn't it?
###