another article proving the media isn't liberal, disgusting, i think wyden is beingg naive as was obama early on.

and social security can be intacted and just improved a little like get rid of cap on income, problem solved....you want solutions that works. and vouchers don't fix medicare and privitzing is like bush did, increases costs. medicare is an issue because healthcare costs are an issue, but privitizing it more will increase costs more. and debts didn't matter under bush, now they do. and the cause of our debt now is past spending, and loss of revenue, like if you can't back on hours worked, you increase your debt by lowering your income.

Jeff - I think we all agree that these programs need some adjustment but like everything else the devil is in the details. Social Security is an easy fix...right now the eligibility is gradually increasing up to 67 done thanks to President Reagan. The age should continue to increase gradually until it reaches 70. Additionally, lift the $106,000 cap on income possibly to $250,000 or more. That's all that needs to be done for SS. Now Medicare....increase the FICA contribution that we all pay. Believe me I would pay a little more out of my paycheck in heartbeat to get the great benefit that Medicare offers seniors. If Americans knew how good the benefits were, no one would complain about a few dollars more out of your paycheck. But no, that would be too easy. Republicans have to give wealthy individuals yet another tax break on top of the two they already have. In order to achieve that they have to tell the American people what dire straits Medicare is in and the only way....the only way....we can fix it is to reduce benefits drastically for all those Americans under the age of 55. BULL S**T. They are trying to sell the American people a load of it. Republicans have no interest in saving Medicare. They've been trying to get rid of it since its' inception in the '60s. Don't let these people fool you. Once the Republican camel has his nose under the tent......Medicare will be a wistful memory....these people have no shame and Paul Ryan is the biggest cheerleader for the "I've got mine" crowd. He loves enriching the 1% and has no use for the middle class or the working poor. In his world view, they are not the important people.

Stronghorse,

The savings of 700+B in the ACA is used to expand coverage to more people. It does not decrease care; it increases efficiency.

Compare that to the 700+B cuts proposed by Ryan: That money goes straight to the wealthy in the form of tax-breaks.

This same old broken record gets carted out every election. Republicans are going to privatize Social Security, Republicans are going to end Medicare and throw Grandma out into the snow and give the money to their rich friends.

Been hearing the crap for decades now despite the fact that Republicans have held the Presidency, the Senate and Congress over those years and somehow Social Security and Medicare are still around.

All this is using fear to drive votes. It's dishonest and unethical. The Democrat way.

Why is it, that when Republicans get ONE Democrat to sell out, they call it bipartisanship?

Why is it, that when Republicans get ONE Democrat to sell out, they call it bipartisanship?

Why is it that Democrats lament the lack of bipartisanship but when it stares them in the face they call guy a sell-out?

I think the truth is that the Democrats are the party of extremists. It's they who vote in lock-step and punish any dissent, it's their Supreme Court justices that vote as a bloc - it's either Justice Kennedy or Roberts that have to switch sides, no one ever expects Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomeyer or Kagen to abandon the left side.

The only true moderate is Lieberman and he can't even call himself a Democrat because the Leftist extremists tried to oust him in the primaries.

I trust the government run by Democrats to be more interested in the welfare of the people than the private sector whose motive is to make a profit. Don't let the Repuglitards kill Social Security. Get rid of the teabaggers. They are only interested in the concerns of rich people. Here's a quote from the Virgin Mary in Luke Chapter 1 Verse 53.

"He hath filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he hath sent empty away.” The idea that we are given our rights not by the Government through the Constitution and the Bill of Rights but through nature is purely survival of the fittest. If you don't think the Bill of Rights give us our rights, then be sure and let the NRA know that and see what they think.

I trust the government run by Democrats to be more interested in the welfare of the people than the private sector whose motive is to make a profit.

I'll bet theose 20k Delphi employees who lost their pensions trusted the Democrats too. Suckers.

BIGTIMEj

and social security can be intacted and just improved a little like get rid of cap on income, problem solved

Just increasing the cap isn't enough. However, if we also increase the retirement age to 70, it largely fixes the problem.

laurie,

I agree with your assessment and recommendations for SS.

However, I disagree with some of your comments about each parties approach to medicare/medicaid. The difference I see is one party is focusing first on finding ways to pay for whatever the cost is, and the other party is focusing first on finding ways to reduce the cost. Sure, there are always some extremists, but I don't think many Reps want to end these programs - they just have different opinions on how to make them sustainable from a fiscal perspective going forward.

bigtime

The cap on social security is there because at the cut-off point those on the high end will already receive far less back in benefits than they paid in. If you are going to increase the cap, you are also going to have to increase the benefits to all.

Social security would have plenty of money, if only Congress would keep their hands off.

Nice to see people talking about issues and not talking points, feels good don't it folks? ;~)

Show me any GOP plan that actually details HOW (verified that it actually will do what they say) they are going to lower medical costs when they want to privatize everything in the hands of the insurance companies (part of the reason medical costs are like the Energizer Bunny). What the ACA does is eliminate the subsidies to the insurance companies for the Part C Medicare premiums that were SUPPOSED to cover all of the expenses NOT covered by the Part B that was an option for NON-HOSPITAL care. That is where the savings were coming from. It was NOT a cut in benefits per se.

Ryan needs to prove first that his so-called open market insurance plans are NOT going to cost more than Medicare Parts A and B, while offering equal or better coverage before he offers the "option" to younger people in place of their normal Medicare costs. If I were a younger person, I would still choose the Medicare option if he couldn't prove that I would get the same or better coverage under the private plan with a guarantee of NO increase in that rate more than any rate increase in the "tax" withholding for Medicare.

Seniors pay a premium for Part B Medicare (physician) coverage, then pay an addition outrageous fee for Part C (so-called) Advantage coverage (those golden packages that Congress gets) plus an additional outrageous fee for Part D (that you can't get without Part B.) And residents of the US Territories can't even get Part C and get restricted coverage under Parts B & D.

One Democrat does not make that bill BIPARTISAN. Mitt Romney today was "thanking" the coal miners. Talk about disconnection.

This man REALLY can't relate too the average American, let alone the people that have one of the nastiest jobs: Coal miner. He had the sleeves of his shirt up, as if he was ready to jump into the mine with them.

What a clown!

IRESPOND, I am no more a Clown than George W Bush, now put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Ron-1861300

Just increasing the cap isn't enough. However, if we also increase the retirement age to 70, it largely fixes the problem.

Especially if enough people die before they're 70 and able to retire.

There can be no doubt that the Democratic Party is the party of the people. Where would the nation be without the Democratic Party and their long and distinguished history of fighting for the rights of the American people? Here is a great read, one that should make every Democrat proud of their party.

http://www.federalobserver.com/2011/09/14/blacks-file-class-action-racial-discrimination-suit-against-obama-democrats/

Yeah Romney, why can't you be more truthful and honest like our current administration?

LMFAO!!

You silly, gullible liberals.

The Ryan Medicare Plan approved by the House is a voucher plan for those 55 or younger. I quote the Congressional Record HCON 34 RH section 501 C2 of this year "For future generations, when they reach eligibility, Medicare is REFORMED to provide a PREMIUM SUPPORT PAYMENT and a selection of guaranteed health coverage options from which recipients can choose a plan that best suits their needs." This is the section of the Ryan Medicare plan that was approved by the house.

The Ryan-Wyden plan is not a plan but a position paper that Ryan chose to ignore in favor of his voucher plan. The House approved Ryan plan is the plan Romney has endorsed all along until magically changing yesterday to the Ryan-Wyden paper that has not gotten anywhere in the House. I ask you, if Romney really supported preserving the Medicare option for those 55 or younger, why didn't he speak out earlier instead of just endorsing the Ryan Budget's voucher plan.

Now, he's accusing Dems of lying about his support for the voucher plan when in reality, he just changed what he supports without explaining the shift.

In business, you can say almost anything to make a sale or strike a deal, but it's what is in writing that defines the deal or sale. The Ryan budget is in writing and all Romney can do is lie about its Medicare provisions.

Romney is apparently well practiced at this art of deception. I want to see his last 10 years of tax returns. This is a man who cannot be trusted to tell us the truth about anything!!!!!!!!!!!

Senator Ron Wyden (D) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R) worked together to develop a bipartisan plan to redesign and fix Medicare. The plan was touted as a great start to a big problem by many Democrats and Republicans alike.

That's exactly what we want... right? Well, isn't it? Isn't the purpose of our elected officials to help solve these kinds of problems?

But now, as soon as the political heat is on, the scare tactics are being hurled and it appears that Senator Wyden is being pressured by the Democratic Political Machine to backpedal.

Metaphorically speaking, who's throwing who over a cliff here? Do you want Medicare to still be there for your kids and grand kids? The reality is that we have to fix it or there won't be any money left.

Would you sacrifice solutions to these kinds of problems for the sake of getting someone elected or reelected?

Frankly, I don't want Medicare or Medicaid to survive. Neither program has ever delivered on its promises for the predicted costs. We've got less, in every year, than promised and it has cost more, in every year, than predicted. These programs are failures, so why would I want them to survive? SS is another matter too. If you had sought to devise a system which systematically fleeces blacks and blue collar workers and sends their assets to mostly white women, while promising to take care of everyone, you'd be hard pressed to have created something better.

Our nation is already broke. We are indebting our heirs so we can continue to live beyond our means. The tax rate on the rich might alter this calculus in a minor way, but the fact remains that these programs are going to financially wipe us out.

There are ways to do the things these programs ostensibly purport to do, but to actually do them, and to actually do them at far less cost. But because the left despises anything which would empower the individual at the expense of the government, and favors everything which empowers the government at the expense of the individual, there is no way to solve these problems and to reform these programs. This fight will simply go on, and on, until our bond holders recognize we look more like Greece. But no one will be big enough, or willing enough, to bail us out so we can continue to be irresponsible.

BIGTIMEj - You are correct....it's an insurance program. We pay into the programs all our lives so that when we retire we collect on our insurance. Americans pay for that program and desire every last benefit they get for their hard earned dollar.

Bigtime/Laurie Then why is Obama cutting 500 billion from medicare?

Mike Mathias - You really need to be informed my friend.....President Obama didn't cut $500 billion from Medicare. Roughly 12 years ago, Republicans argued that the private insurance industry could administer Medicare better and cheaper than the government so Medicare Advantage was born which is supposedly Medicare administered by private insurers and subsidized by the federal government. Over the next 12 years rather than being cheaper to administer than government run traditional Medicare, it was 25% higher to administer. Under ACA, Medicare Advantage Plans were funded at the same level as traditional Medicare and thus the $500 million figure that Republicans throw around. No senior lost any benefits in fact they gained quite a few including a 50% closing of the donut hole in Medicare Part D, free preventative screening such as colonoscopy, breast cancer, lung cancer, free yearly physicals, free yearly gynocological exams for women, etc. The private insurers were in effect told that they had to adminstered their programs at the same level as traditional Medicare. Care to change your attitude?

Mike,

As I understand it, the 500 B cuts are in cost-savings, not cuts to actual benefits received by seniors who use Medicare. It is a bit of deception to say that Obama "stole" the money from Medicare as if seniors were being hurt.

Have any seniors out there noticed cuts to your benefits?

Also, the private sector has already had the chance to provide benefits to seniors through the Medicare Advantage program. It was created because of the claim that private insurers could deliver benefits more cheaply. It ended up costing I think 14% more than traditional Medicare. Why? Hint: the US Government doesn't pay the huge administrative costs (astronomical execs salaries, advertising, lobbying, etc) that private insurers do. Not to mention the fact that the private insurers have a profit line and stockholder dividends to attend to.

You mean just like Congressmen and Senators who are spending 2/3 of this year OUT OF SESSION, shouldn't be entitled to their full pay?

According to the Kaiser Family Health Assoc. these are cuts in coverage. You can spin this how ever you want the ACA has 500 billion in cuts to medicare to cover the cost of the ACA.

Very good points Laurie. The problem is not Medicare or Medicaid. The problem is the ever rising cost of health care in this country. We've got to do something about this. In 2007 my health care policy cost my employer $475 monthly. Today my plan with far less benefits and much higher co-pays costs $1000 monthly. This is crazy. If something happens to my job I won't be able to afford COBRA. This is the same thing that will happen if Medicare is turned into a voucher system. We've got to do more to control cost. The problem is any time you talk of controlling something....you're a socialist and other nonsense.

Mike it's not spin. I work with this program every day helping seniors with their Medicare issues. There have been NO cuts to benefits for seniors only enhancements and extra benefits. Sorry to burst your Republican talking points bubble. You've been sold a bill of goods by Republicans to get you to want to vote against your best interest which by the way is preserving the guaranteed benefits of Medicare and Social Security for "All" Americans.

laurie, As soon as you open your lips and regurgitate the "progressive" talking point " ... to get you to want to vote against YOUR best interest ..." you lose ALL credibilty.

The basic liberal mantra is that "we're smarter than you" so if you don't agree with us ... well then, hhrmmnph, you must be ignorant, or uneducated, or ...or the product of inbreeding or ....(insert here whatever othe garbage you can choose).

An extension of that progressive arrogance is that if you do not agree with us, well then you are voting against your own best self-interest. Of course, you libbies put yourself in that position of being better able to judge FOR SOMEONE ELSE instead of them ..... judging for themselves.

The absolute arrogance of your own, self-appointed intellectual superiority is truly breathtaking .... and it is not a good brath to take in.

Obamacare will raise the cost of delivering healthcare for everyone in the U.S. who has existing insurance coverage. Maximum payouts are blown away, coverages are broadened to include those who cannot afford it (subsidized by government), and 159 new federal bureaus, agencies, boards and commissions are set up ...... just to administer the law !

NOTHING in Obamacare reduces costs ! Medicare is going broke !! Social Security is right behind, and the Social Security disability fund is only about 3 years away from being depleted.

You have not figured out how to sustain the payments, The numbers will not crunch.

Gee Jim, how much do you get for posting meaninless drivel and hate. Probably not much but then you never paid into SS so you have no benefits right? Worked for cash all your life and now hate the result, I see a lot of this stuff. To bad.

Paul Ryan calls himself "The champion of fiscal responsibility" However, he voted for the two wars: Iran and Afghanistan, he voted for the stimulus money, he voted for all the tax brakes of Bush, and he voted for the No child left behind policy.

Suddenly, he is "fiscally responsible" because he wants to strip all Americans from every single safety net that exists for the poor and disabled.

Don't allow this arrogant self-serving man to take the money that you have been paying to Medicare away from you to give it to big oil in subsidies, or to the military to start new wars.

VOTE DEMOCRAT!

jimmmm, know more than the CBO, do you???? If you can only repeat the overly debunked GOP talking points, you are contributing nothing but wasted space. If we Liberals seem like we make you all feel stupid, it might be because you have reading comprehension problems or simply want to ignore facts to make a political point instead of learning something about a program that will ultimately help you or a family member.

Ron, above, was saying that Social Security and Medicare could be preserved by eliminating the salary cap and raising the retirement age to 70. This could work since SS only needs to get past the bulge in the population caused by the Baby Boomers. When they finally "age out" of the system then SS should become more nearly balanced. This may take another 50 years but it will happen.

The current problem with the suggestion is that there already is no cap on Medicare premiums and there is no bridge to cover the millions of workers who are being laid off because they are now 60, or even 55 or younger, and NO ONE will hire anyone over age 45.

Well I'll just be gwaddamned! Romney and Ryan have revealed themselves. Nothing but a pair of Insurance Salesmen. Someone needs to check and see if they have the required licenses. Everytime any of us, at any age, turns around, these gwaddamned republicans are trying to hoodwink us into buying into some healthcare scheme. I thought the ACA was passed and deemed Constitutional by the US Supreme Court. One with the mind of a "half assed Canary" would know by now, these 2 sons-a-bitches, and the whole republican party are desperately trying to steal the "Social Security" money we pay in to the Government. I say; keep your gwaddamn thieving hands to yourselves! Sons-a-bitches!

Mac it would be appreciated if you would just keep your profanity to yourself and off this site. It does not make you any more convincing just ignorant for a lack of words to better express yourself.

Thanks in advance.

@TGMcCallie-3141305: You are a rather silly bastard. Don't like what I post don't read it. I've read a few of your posts. Generally you are one of the best definitions of ignorance I've seen on here. You think you own this site? As deluded as you are I would not be at all surprised.

i think u are being sarcastic, your point does remain, it was conservative policies that caused our depression and them that has kept the job market bad.

Liberal policies sure haven't fixed 'em! Who had control of Congress/Senate since 2007? The Dems! When did the economy go into the toilet? 2008, a year after they took over. Maybe you should look up some facts before you spout hate.

tlins - Social Security and Medicare are NOT entitlement programs. They are insurance programs bought and paid for by the American people through their very own hard work. No one on Medicare and Social Security didn't pay handily into those programs all their working lives. If you bought an insurance policy when you were 16 wouldn't you want to collect on the defined benefit that you contracted with the insurance company when you turned 65? SS and Medicare are no different. I was 16 when I started to pay into those programs. I earned every last penny of the benefits I'll receive when I turn 65 and 66.3 respectively.

Folks, stop blowing out talking points and think for a minute! If we don't work together, both programs implode from lack of money. If we raise taxes to cover the shortfall, we take money straight out of the economy. If we cut benefits, then we seem to shove our children and grandchildren over the cliff. If we don't figure this out, and sooner as opposed to later, we all wind up screwed!

Everybody seems to be a lot more interested in placing blame than in solving the problem. We can play the blame game for another 50 years and will no closer to a solution than we are after blaming everyone in sight for the last 4 years.

Can we work together toward a solution that won't kill or impoverish us all? I hope so; otherwise, we are doomed like the Kilkenny cats were.

Maybe we could ask Paul Ryan to help pay back the money he helped steal from Social Security to pay for TWO unfunded wars and FOUR tax cuts for people in HIS tax bracket.

Republican policies have not either over the past two years. Washington is so damn deadlocked and all of the followers of either party can do is shout "facts" and attempt to place the blame (and yes, I'm as bad as any other democrat about doing this as well, I never said I wasn't part of the problem...but I'm working on it).

Until WE, both republicans and democrats, can start working together and stop being so polarized and focusing on who's getting what unfairly then we're not going to work.

I heard a similar comment earlier saying almost exactly what I'm saying but then the comment read, "Hopefully Romney and Ryan can bring us together as a nation." Here's the deal, NOBODY in Washington is going to bring us together as a nation as long as they profit from our division.

Now, here's the ONLY difference between the parties as far as I see it: The Democrats give you a reach around while they're destroying your colon and a mint afterwards. Republicans just leave you bleeding in a ditch with bad breath. Either way, America, we have been, are currently, and will continue, to be completely and totally fuc*ed.

Conservative policies did not cause the Great Recession. It was the mortgage crises and out of control banks.

I disagree. Republican policies DID cause the Great Recession.

It started immediately after George W. Bush's election to his first term. He started pushing his "American Dream Downpayment Initiative". His goal was to increase minority home ownership by decreasing the downpayment requirements to 3% (among other things - Google it) for first time minority home buyers on any GRE sponsored loan.

The bill introduced in the HR was pushed by Bush, sponsored by a Republican, co-sponsored only by other Republicans and approved by Republican majorities in both the House and Senate. On Dec 16, 2003, George W. Bush signed it into law.

At the same time George W. Bush directed GREs to invest $440B into the secondary mortgage market. You remember the secondary mortgage market, don't you? It was the secondary mortgage market that most economists blame for creating the housing bubble by removing mortgage lenders' concern for writing good loans by allowing them to sell off risky loans and let others pay the price.

No, I think the entire housing bubble and the Great Recession can be laid directly at the feet of George W. Bush and Republican majorities in the HR and Senate. And I don't think they should have another chance to do it again!

Reading these comments, I have noticed that if someone thinks the only reason liberals want to enact policies that help the majority of the American people is to secure their votes, there is nothing that can be said to change their minds. They don't seem to be capable of understanding that someone could actually care about other people.

Why do't conservatives want to enact policies that help the majority of the American people? And if they hate "big government" so much--why do they want to be elected to work for the "government?"

Amen Heartlight! I wish they were as smart as we were, wouldn't have to go thru all this to teach them! I have 6 kids, need all the help I can get!! ^&*$ dead beat daddies....

Obama/Biden - too bad it can only be 8 years!!

You would have had all those kids if you had any sense knowing full well that you or in your case the government had to support them because you surely knew that the dads were deadbeats. You should have learned that at least after the second go around.

More kids, more welfare...............

Lyin Ryan is stuck like glue to his horrendous budget proposal, Ayan Rand, "social Security is a Ponzi", "Agreeing with the "Stimulus in private", etc.

WILLARDO IS THE FLIP FLOPPER IN CHIEF AND LYIN RYAN IS FLIP FLOPPER JUNIOR!!!!

Neither has a snowball's chance in hell of winning this election!!!

Obama/Biden 2012!!!!!

Go USA: Hummm, you think it is OK for us to spend our tax dollars on killing people but not OK for us to save people?

Just want to get that Republican dogma clear.

Read the Constitution. Providing defense is the responsibility of the Federal Government. When attacked, an aggressive offense is a great defense.

EXCEPT, that REPUBLICANS forgot to pay for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They instead CUT Government INCOME after declaring TWO UNPAID for wars!!!!!!!

Yup, Abe Lincoln to fund the Civil War taxed people who owned gold watches as well as instituted a Federal Income Tax system. Abe Lincoln, one of the few Repuglican intelligent Presidents. Teddy Roosevelt, I guess was another. What did Bush do? Go off to 2 different wars while cutting taxes and he was an Economy major. Come on. It can't be.

How many times more, USA? According to this chart 20% of our budget goes towards DOD (we spend more on defense than the next 25 countries in the list...23 of whom are our allies) while 13% of our budget covers all of the safety net programs.

I did my homework and you aren't incorrect but this chart did not seperate Medicaid (entitlement) and Medicare (not an entitlement) so when you say, "many times more" you are wrong but it isn't clear how wrong you are.

So the 159 billion dollars that we are still spending in Afghanistan and Iraq are essential, constitutionally mandate because we are defending ourselves from...what? The millions of dollars of military equipment rusting in a New Mexican airfield is essential?

Also, say all you want about the constitutionality of entitlements but until corporate masters begin paying hard working people a living wage they are essential. What is wrong with you people that you would allow a fellow American to work at least 40 hours a week, pay them less than peanuts, and then call them lazy because they need government aid.

Maybe entitlements aren't constitutional but it takes a real fuc*ing douchebag to watch working Americans live in squalor.

Entitlement spending (Welfare, Healthcare and Pensions) account for 44% of spending. Defense: 11%

Source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/united_states_total_spending_pie_chart

FROM FORBES MAGAZINE:

Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Who knew?

Check out the chart –

Don't know if link will post--will try:

www . forbes. com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

At the same time that Paul Ryan was poo-pooing in the Stimulus Plan of President Obama, he was REQUESTING MONEY from the stimulus plan to create jobs in Wisconsin.

This is a double crosser, loud mouth arrogant Republican. He has a paper trail. FOLLOW IT. MAKE SURE THAT YOU FIND OUT HE IS NOT THE 'FISCAL REPONSIBLE DARLING'THAT HE MAKES HIMSELF TO BE.

Read the Constitution. Providing defense is the responsibility of the Federal Government. When attacked, an aggressive offense is a great defense.

I think our HAPPINESS is also, equally, included in the same sentence.

GO USA -- Just when did Iraq and Afghanistan attack us? Defense doesn't mean going halfway round the world to attack a country that insulted your father. I know al Qaeda was headquartered in Afghanistan but It has been eleven years now.

The Democratic Party is most definitely the party of the people. They have a long and distinguished history that no one can take away from them. Here is a good read that should make every Democrat proud of their party.

http://www.federalobserver.com/2011/09/14/blacks-file-class-action-racial-discrimination-suit-against-obama-democrats/

In reality being a senior citizen is the ultimate preexisting condition.

It's hard to get covered with pre-existing cancer with $10,000 worth of vouchers too!

If they are now senior citizens nothing changes. If they are yet to be senior citizens and have a current medical condition they are also likely to be insured. Once insured the insurance company cannot cut them off so the voucher would help.

There are many programs out there to help the poor. Some are government run and some are private. I prefer to donate time and money to the private since they are much more efficient at delivering services.

And the EMPLOYER no longer pays HIS part of the insurance. COBRA is a lot more expensive than the shared employer coverage. If the Republicans were successful in repealing AHC, the insurance companies go back to business as usual. You have cancer? You have Diabetes? You have Sickle Cell? You have a mental problem? Sorry, we can't cover you.

One thing that the repubs are not talking about is senior citizens with pre-existing conditions. So they voucherise medicare so that seniors can buy private insurance. Insurance companies will not insure people with pre-existing conditions. So what are people with pre-existing conditions like me supposed to do, die?

You didn't actuall READ the article. The Wyden-Ryan plan would allow people to stay (opt, if you will) in Medicare. It provides options for those who want private insurance. There is a reason that Politfacts named Ryan wants to end Medicare the lie of the year.

Yes, I read the article and do you really expect me to believe that medicare will be as we know it 2022, I don't think so. Medicare will become a voucher program and if you can't get insurance well, that is just tough luck.

Vote smart so that the Affordable Care Act continues because no one with pre-existing conditions is denied coverage in the country and that includes Medicare as long as President Obama and Democrats stay in power.

Death of medicare by allowing the healthier to get private coverage and let the sick be covered by medicare. How stupid are YOU (collective you) to believe that line, hook and sinker?

Q22 NO, some people don't read or listen. If you are over 55, everything remains as is. If you are under 55, you have CHOICES, you can opt to stay on the current Medicare plan or you can opt for premium supporter. Premium supporter is a fixed amount of money(I heard it will be about $15,000) to use to shop for your own coverage, if you find a cheaper plan, you keep the difference. If you find a plan for $10,000 you pocket $5,000. This would also help lower insurance costs because there will be more competition to get your business. Right now, there is no competition for medicare coverage.

Paul Ryan is well respected on both sides of the aisle, he is down to earth midwesterner and when he says he wants the middle class to flourish, I believe him. Take the blinders off, put the koolaid down and listen to him. If you don't like what he says, fine. Don't let the media make your decision. Whether it be FOX, NBC, CNN, CBS etc.

Paul Ryan also announced he will eliminate the tax loopholes for the rich. Something you will not hear on lame stream media.

I have a advantage living in Wisconsin, I have had the pleasure to be able to listen to him speak. He is a regular guy, he is easy to listen to, he talks with/at you and not down to you. He is very much in touch with peoples problems and hardships. He genuine cares about people.

To disreguard a canidate because of the letter in front of his name is doing yourself an injustice. I think Obama is a good guy, I don't think his policies are helping our country to head in the right direction.

People need to think for themselves, screw the media! Fox leans right, the rest leans left. Open your minds, god gave most of us a brain, use it! If you can't be civil, keep it to yourself!

Just keep drinking that kool-aid

nola girl,

I don't do koolaid, the left cornered the market on that product!

I know the man, do you? Vote for Obama and Medicare is gone in 10-12 years and that's a fact. 716 billion taken/stolen to flip part of the bill for Obamacare, do some research. At least someone is trying to solve/save it and it's not the Pres.

Badger1#6.9: How much did he charge you to listen to Him? Ryan the weasel is an "insurance salesman".

Mac Forrester you have no clue, just like Obama.

Badger1#6.11: That 716 billion did not come out of medicare or social security. It does not reduce benefits to the elderly. Fact it provides more benefits. That money came from the insurance carriers managing "medicare advantage". They will now have much more to manage. It's called volume selling. They'll still make plenty of profit, just not as much individual profit. This ties in with the new ACA. Ryan and Romney are as full of Sh^t as a pair of constipated elephants, as apparently are you.

to Near the Sea, volunteering is great. But Medicare is far more efficient at delivering health care at an affordable price than any charity or nonprofit. Many nonprofits spend more money raising money and on administration than they do on delivering services. Medicare, I believe is at 95% of revenues going to delivered services. Private health insurance is now mandated to deliver 80% of revenues in services.

Look at the obese states, from down South. The Repuglican South, that's where the money to fund health care is going. Yet they vote Repuglican. I saw a historical show on TV the other day where years ago, Southerners would not accept the fact that their diet was causing Pellagra which was killing them because the idea came from a Northern Government Jewish Doctor and Southerners didn't like anything about that background. Today Southerners still deny global warming. As the Peter Paul and Mary song goes "When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn"?

Not all of us down here in the South are that ignorant, but there are sure a whole lot of Fox watching nitwits and morons who do populate the South and vote for terrible governors who do great harm and I do mean great harm.

@ludvig#7.1: In all seriousness I agree with you. I was born and raised in Georgia. Still live here. The states of the old confederacy and several western states are becoming nothing more than a carbuncle on the ass of the nations ignorance and poverty levels. I'll venture, at least a 3ed of the white population in these states are, or working to become, certified as disabled, in order to gain SS disability benefits. Due to obesity, high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, and little to do, and even less motivation to do anything, most spend their time finding reasons to hate Hispanics and Blacks. It's much like the late New York Congressman "Rosco Conklin" during the late 19th century who only had to wave the bloody shirt, representing the continued "Southern Threat" that He repeatedly used to keep Northern republicans in line. These Southerners, and several westerners get all up in arms with the mention of Hispanics and Blacks. With waaay too many, the ignorance is appalling.

Speak for yourself Mac. I too live in Georgia and proud of it, but I sure do not fit your discription.

TGMcCallie-3141305#7.4: Did not say, or imply, all Georgians are as I described many of them to be. There are many, good, decent people in My state who do not subscribe to my particular political stance due to reasons relative to their own considered judgements. Otherwise though, I stand by my statement. Regards

Ron, you sound disgruntled. Solutions to problems can only be achieved when we know the facts or put another way the reality of the problem.

For example, welfare reform in late 90's involved solving the problem that faced welfare recipients, many single mothers with children. Clinton and his "liberal" allies in Congress passed a tax reform bill in 1993 that increased taxes on the rich and used that revenue to strengthen the ladder to the middle class by increasing the earned income tax credit and tax breaks for child care. This aided the poor to find it economically advantageous to take that minimum wage job. Their taxes were reduced and they could better afford the child care they needed to work.

This reform allowed welfare rules to be tightened with 2 year max and work requirements which conservatives supported. Yet, they did not support the earned income tax credit which made the transition from the welfare to work feasible. Many liberals did not support the rules tightening.

Liberals and conservatives can provide solutions to our problems, if first and foremost, an honest assessment of our situation is honored, not lied about. I think Obama has the integrity and honesty necessary to do this. I think Romney has shown he is willing to say or lie about anything to please the Tea Party.

shaak322#7.6: I agree with you. Appreciate your thoughtful comment. Regards

True. Also true is insurance is not health care. It is a method of paying for health care and they drive down what they will pay the provider while driving up what they charge the customer. Nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is the same procedure or test costing vastly different amounts from one place to another and if you have insurance or don't. Part of the plan is making the pricing available to the consumer. That will help control costs.

Why? For working with the Republicans instead of standing united with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid in oppisition?

Sounds like Tom actually read the article unlike most of the people posting here.

Near ... Spot on.

I really thought he was a good guy and I'm not giving up on Wyden at the point. Hopefully he has more regrets than he expressed because there is no excuse for thinking privatizing or vouchering Medicare is a good idea.

Ryan and Wyden leading by reaching across the aisle. That, President Obama, is what we call leadership. You should take some lessons from those two in your soon to be next career.

Time for the adults to take over.

Yes Tom did read the article and so did I. It is troubling about Wyden because he seems a good person who does care about the elderly and does not want to harm the poor and elderly the way the GOP does.

Ryan is absolutely NOT going to be reaching across any aisle. Ryan is about as right as Ayn Rand thought she was.

victorkingdom, those adults were at the helm just 3.5 years ago. Do you have selective amnesia?

NiteOwl,

Both need to work together like Ryan and Wyden are doing. Obama has been the most divisive POTUS of our time. This country can't afford four more years of his childish act. We need adults in the mix and Obama/Biden do not qualify (liars need not apply). There are some good people on both sides of the aisle need to work together to fix it. Ryan and Wyden a very good start.

The big thing is that Obama needs to go as he has proven to be an inflexible demogouge. If he was smart he would have reached across the aisle on ObamaCare. He blew through all of his political capital with his unseemly back room deals and lies to the public. That monstrosity passed with exactly zero Republican votes....what a joke.

We need some level of bi-partisanship and it needs to start with voting this failed, closed minded President out of office. He lacks the maturity to handle the position as he has clearly demonstrated by his failed record.

Sorry, man. But that is the reality.

Why should he? Just because he is trying to help solve the problem. Sound like you think this way just because he is trying to work with someone who is not a democrat.

TGM,

You are spot on. These guys need to work together regardless of party. I never understood why a person would vote only with the "party line". That is, only vote for Dems or Repubs. Shortsighted...

I applaud Wyden for his open-mindedness. I also want to point out that he voted against the Ryan budget passed by the House which does not include his idea of preserving the Medicare option for those under 55.

Both need to work together like Ryan and Wyden are doing. Obama has been the most divisive POTUS of our time. This country can't afford four more years of his childish act. We need adults in the mix and Obama/Biden do not qualify (liars need not apply). There are some good people on both sides of the aisle need to work together to fix it. Ryan and Wyden a very good start.

The big thing is that Obama needs to go as he has proven to be an inflexible demogouge. If he was smart he would have reached across the aisle on ObamaCare. He blew through all of his political capital with his unseemly back room deals and lies to the public. That monstrosity passed with exactly zero Republican votes....what a joke.

What is a joke are the UNSUBSTANTIATED accusations against President Obama and your failure to acknowledge our do-NOTHING congress that has a war against America by obstructing this duly elected President.

If you failed to pay attention to the time leading up the the passing of the ACA, you would find that Republicans played a MAJOR part in watering down the bill with HUNDREDS of amendment requests, with many passing and being in the final bill, just to see them vote against their own amended bill.

The divisiveness in the country is driven by the Republicans who ONLY want this President to fail ALONG WITH THE REST OF AMERICA who want leaders, not obstruction to solutions.

Niteowl,

I agree with you that the Senate has served to obstructed the POTUS ability to get things done. The House is proposing solutions left and right while the Senate does nothing (nice budget proposal Harry Reid....errr....I guess the last one was three years ago). So yes, if I was Obama I would be very frustrated with the Senate as we all are. No leadership in the Senate.

In terms of Obamacare, the facts are the facts. It was passed with exaclty zero Republican votes. Multiple Dems were in effect institutionally bribed to get their votes, and Obama flat out lied to the American people in regard to it being a tax.

Sorry dude, but we need real leaders in Washington. Obama does not cut it and our position in the world has been downgraded (along with our credit rating).

Time to bring in the adults to take action in solving our problems. As I said, Ryan/Wyden is a good start and Ryan clearly knows how to work across the aisle.

Spot on, Bluecat 55! The rightwing supporters may not think things through and need to be reminded of what they are actually supporting with the current crop of GOP in office and running for office.

with the taxpayers footing the bill for the sickest and oldest retired folks.

...ummm, your statement implies that the sickest and oldest aren't ALREADY on Medicare.

That is our current system. The insurance industry covers you when you are younger and once the risk becomes too high as you age they transfer you to medicare. The insurance industry has made a lot of money with this model. Why would they want it to change?

Matt, we do indeed currently pay for this. But helping to offset these costs are the deductions from social security seniors pay. Under Ryan's plan this deduction from social security relating to medicare would go to insurance companies plus additional voucher payments for the healthy retired folks instead of helping to offset the traditional medicare costs of the sicker folks. So, from a taxpayer perspective it is the worst of both worlds.

versas what, the taxpayer pays now. And as far as pre existing conditions, there is no "insurance " in the world that will survive if they have to cover pre existing conditions. By definition thats not even insurance, insurance is for unforseen issues.

the only coverage for pre existing would have to be a universal health care funded by all and including all. Try getting your car or house insured after they're damaged and get the insurance co. to pay. anyone with half a brain should be able to see that.

bluecat, seniors dont pay SS, unless they are working. The fundamental difference is that insurance companies are a for profit organization, if you force a private business to accept pre existing conditions, when their business model is accepting risk for profit, then they can no longer be a private business since there is no risk, they pay no matter what. so why would they do that? The govt. has no business forcing a private company to accept people who already have a condition that will require more money than they would ever put in. What is required is universal health care funded by a universal tax on everyone. if you want to make it for catasrophic illness/ injury or for all health care is irrelevant . BUt dont call it insurance because it is not. and the supreme court agrees

DanO. you are making an argument for universal single payer. The Democrats tried to bring it into the picture but the Republicans wanted no part of it. Insurance companies want their unequal hands in our pie.

"Our pie" ? This is not a cooking class Niteowlet.

Obama cut deals with the insurance companies to insure their "buying-in" to Obamacare. He also cut deals with big pharma to exclude Canadian drugs, and with AARP to allow them to sell drugs ..... all part of the meetings NOT TELEVISED on C-Span.

The part that I have never seen mentioned anywhere is that Seniors not only paid into Medicare their entire working lives, but they also pay into it after they start receiving benefits. Money is taken out of every monthly Social Security check I receive to pay a Medicare Premium. I presume that is true for everyone on Medicare. Plus, I still pay Medicare tax on income from my part time small business. Medicare is not the free ride everyone seems to think it is. We Seniors are still contributing to it.

Dano, you didn't read/understand my post. I was referring to the Medicare Part B premium deducted FROM social security payments received by seniors in retirement. If they enroll in Medicare at 65 and are not yet taking social security, then they pay this premium themselves, ie not deducted from ss.

well what you may have meant has nothing to do with what you wrote"But helping to offset these costs are the deductions from social security seniors pay."

owlette, you say that republicans want no part of it, Im a republican and I do, but it has to be a tax not the insurance companies forced to cover pre existing, as I stated earlier pre existing is not insurance so why even bring the insurance cos. into it. we need a new tax that is only for pre existing and catastrophic uninsured .

the major difference is republicans want people to be responsible for their own actions as much as they can.

democrats want everyone equal no matter how lazy or irresponsible they are

Republicans dont mind helping out the truly needy but dont want to help out the lazy and irresponsible.

I cannot fight the UNINTELLIGENT in this mix, who do not WANT to learn about the facts and be a PART OF THE UNITED STATES, not try to make us a Plutocracy of corporate interests over our own people's survival.

Shooting oneself in the foot seems to be the cause celebre' by GOP supporters and I want no part of this discussion when ignorance is acceptable over intelligent debate.

Huge Democratic mistake. One in 6 jobs are in health care and this is a discussion long overdue. The fear mongering of the Democrats will not win this debate.

Huge Democratic mistake. One in 6 jobs are in health care and this is a discussion long overdue. The fear mongering of the Democrats will not win this debate.

Single payer or ACA, this does not equate to LESS healthcare related jobs but MORE, far more, when 30 million MORE people will be covered by insurance.

People surely need to learn about what they are posting before they are posting and make the country lose out in good plans by believing what the Republicans are touting to the sole benefit of the wealthy and corporate interests in this country instead of the 99% who are left out of their discussions.

owlette, you would be more convincing if you left out the left wing talking points and quit blaming everything on the republicans. Obama hasnt done s*it, except ram a bill through congress ( democratically controlled at the time) without anyone being able to read it. and pander to any and everyone who might vote for him.

wonder why the great majority of exemptions to Obamacare are for his supporters

Speaking of slanted talking points. Perhaps you could start by setting a good example.

They knew what was in the bill, but they wanted you to think that they didn't!

It seems to have worked.

For either party to admit they knew everything in the bill would be political suicide.

Politicians play the ignorant card to keep their job!

A Ponzi scheme is one where someone takes someones money in the promise of a return later. However, they don't put the money where it's supposed to go. Instead to "create" a return, they have to get more and more people to supply money to be able to fund the fake returns of other investors should they withdraw.

Tell me how that isn't our current system and tell me how that privitizing will some how create a Ponzi scheme (if one doesn't already exist).

You don't have to agree with privitization, but don't lie/be ignorant about the results of such a system.

People buy insurance, claims are denied, simple. Kinda like what we have now from the private sector. And if what they say is true about keeping traditional medicare, private companies will drop high risk patients because the government program is available. Forcing the traditonal medicare to still fail, PRESTO, everyone is vulnerable to the whims of the private sector!

My Bernie Madoff analogy speaks to the intent to take advantage of people. Sorry, I've dealt with insurance companies. Jackals to the last!

PROFIT....that is a difference. Another difference is the 30% cost, private, 3% cost government single payer.

Enough said, Matt ???

Enough said, Matt ???

It's not really enough said because you write in half sentences and you include numbers without much of a reference to what the heck you're talking about. 30% and 3% are percentages of what??

3% is the overall admin rate for medicare, meaning 97% goes toward patient care. Not sure about the accuracy of the 30% figure for private insurers, but it includes the admin portion, advertising, salaries for CEOs etc, and of course "profit".

I have no idea what the real figures are but as a government employee I can assure you that it cost much more than 3% to administer medicare (and every other government program or agency)

Sounds like it's just a "feeling" that you have near the sea. Not quite empirical. Hope you aren't one of those disgruntled postal workers.

Revenues, Matt. Cost of Revenues to administer. Private insurance carriers do it for about 30% and our public plan, Medicare, does it for 3%. Profit being the deciding factor.

I would like to see any govt.administered program that only costs 3% to run

proof please, not left wing talking points

DanO; YOU need to educate yourself. Try the CBO on for size as your first stop.

Under the Ryan plan, Mitt Romney would actually have zero tax liability

Tell me how this is true. Perhaps you're right. Maybe I've missed something, but the burden of proof is on you.

Matt, Ryan's budget sets the capital gains/dividend tax to 0%. Although Romney says he wants to maintain it at 15%. Of course, Romney also has said he would sign the Ryan budget as President, so once agian who knows what he actually believes.

Bluecat, Ryan's plan sets the capital gains tax at zero for those famlies earning less than $250,000. Romeny would still have quite a tax liability on his capital gains. I would have no tax liability on mine and therefore have more money to spend in our consumer driven economy.

Romney has very little income above the capital gains he makes. He may be taxed at 0%. Perhaps if we knew a little more about his tax situation by his releasing more tax returns, we could make a better assessment of his tax philosophy.

We need Ryan's plan so the 13.9% Romney pays so his tax will drop to 3.9% after the 10% cut in capital gains tax. Poor Romney needs an increase in income

No change for seniors.

Do seniors ten years later have better health than those proceeding seniors? Our senior years are nothing but warding off death and disability at the highest cost we will ever face. Giving old folks a voucher to deal with their own care is hardly what will work in the real world.

Giving old folks a voucher to deal with their own care is hardly what will work in the real world.

Not to worry on Kolob you will be taken care of... you do carry American Express I hope?

What about for people who will be seniors in 10 years?

I voted for Obama in 08 and plan to do so again this November.

Reagan was WRONG. Liberals are ignorant.

And "death panels" is what they are. How do you suppose the DR's get around the hippocratic oath?
Why not also take on the lawyers? Why do you think the Dr's perform all of these "un-needed" tests and so forth?
Tort Reform?

Tort reform is a less than .01% cost factor and the rest of your post is nonsense and comes under the fear mongering column. The ACA addresses test duplication and NOWHERE are death panels in the picture.

Ignorance is no excuse for repeating debunked myths, over and over, ad nauseum.

Son, you are correct. Reagan was wrong about a lot of things, glad we agree on that. Tort reform is absolutely needed. But so too is reform addressing doctors owning labs, diagnostic services etc that they self refer patients too.

As to "death panels", you are an ignorant imbecile. "Do no harm" is the first and formost aspect of the oath. If you are going directly against a persons wishes, and causing them to live in agony, guess what, that's the worst harm I can imagine.

We would never have known who you voted for in the past and who you will vote form your posts now would we?

Bluecat, don't you dare give that treasonous POS Ryan one single ounce of credit, he isn't due a single shred!

Hey Near, lots of issues in this election, not just those that I have posted on. I used to vote mostly as a pro choice, pro environment Republican until they took in their welcome mat. Reality is Romney and Ryan's positions on environmental and social issues are much more frightening to me than their medicare stance.

Handing over the keys to the errant teenage driver, of our medicare system by privatizing our medicare dollars is giving seniors a death sentence as equal as an environmental death sentence given our children. Those left untreated or left to figure out how to get treated in their less cognitive years is unconscionable.

Geez Nigthie, You just make up $hit as you go ! You pull numbers out your a$$ with no links, no references and therefore NO CREDIBILITY !

Our government has not run Medicare or Social Security wisely. So you think we need to reward their incompetence by putting them in charge of 1/6 of our nation's economy.

jeez Jim, just not true. Medicare has the lowest admin rate around. Frankly, the admin costs should be higher with more auditors and better fraud prevention/detection systems. But this costs money and results in more government employees, so the Republicans always object.

TRUTH, they want no STINKIN' TRUTH. They want back into our pocketbooks AGAIN and think we have forgotten so quickly how we got into this fiscal mess.

Those liberal states you tout are actually the POPULATION BASE OF 80% of our citizens.

Should we exclude statistics of 80% of our population in order to satisfy the 20% of states who do take more tax dollars than they contribute....FACT.

A very simple reform long over-due to SS, is increasing the wage limit upon which is subject to tax of 6.40%. The limit was changed to keep up with inflation and stopped a number of years ago, by the GOP I would imagine so that any failure would be brought to bear sooner so that they could justify robbing us of the funds that private industry would waste and in the end, we would be holding the bag on our senior futures once again.

Your post makes no sense at all. As a response to #24 above, it does not follow !

REFORM, not repeal, not privatize.

Bingo!!

ObamaDontCare cuts $$700 Billion from Medicare!!! he wants to kill Granma!! And is still the largest TAX increase in World History!! obama want to KILL the MIDDLE CLASS!!!

Another Limbaugh ditto head from White Trash Nation. You sir are living proof that H.L. Mencken was right. "Nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American people"! All you people who hate America and our government, get the hell out! Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, you might damage what little brains you have!

borderjoe: Try some research! You are factless!

it is funny reading these posts, I have come to realize that everyone reads the scripted talking points and post what the talking heads say... then insult people to try and make themselves feel smarter. Like someone said Obama cut medicare by 500 billion was a lie and they were right, Obama said he cut it by 700 billion and will veto any bill to restore it. Others claim that the Ryan plan will kill grandma... I wonder would grandma like medicare or the plan that the Federal workers get if they were asked. Because the NY Times.. you know that Right leaning paper, stated the Ryan plan is the Fed plan with some minor differences.

The real difference is in the methods employed by the two sides. Obama's plan cuts off the money fountain to the Big Pharmaceutical and Insurance companies. the Ryan method piles additional cost onto the very people who can't afford to pay more, the seniors themselves.

In truth the comparison (and the choice by extension) is between cutting the funding to the needy, the elderly, the infirm, or cutting the money to the Corporate insurance companies, drug companies and corporate medical groups.

This isn't smoke and mirrors, it's a fundamental conflict between those who would rob the poor the elderly and working classes to the benefit of the super wealthy, and those who would say these greed driven oligarchs "ENOUGH! NO MORE"

That's basically it, and fortunately there are a LOT more of US than there are of YOU...so eat it.