Democrats put together an analysis of the Ryan-Romney Medicare plan by congressional district back in 2011.
This is what my district looks like under Romney-Ryan (pdf):
This analysis shows the immediate and long-term impacts of these changes in the 5th Congressional District in Ohio, which is represented by Rep. Robert E. Latta.
The Republican proposal would have adverse impacts on seniors and disabled individuals in the district who are currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:
• Increase prescription drug costs for 8,300 Medicare beneficiaries in the district who enter the Part D donut hole, forcing them to pay an extra $81 million for drugs over the next decade.
• Eliminate new preventive care benefits for 98,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district.
The Republican proposal would have even greater impacts on individuals in the district age 54 and younger who are not currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:
• Deny 460,000 individuals age 54 and younger in the district access to Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.
• Increase the out-of-pocket costs of health coverage by over $6,000 per year in 2022 and by almost $12,000 per year in 2032 for the 104,000 individuals in the district who are between the ages of 44 and 54.
• Require the 104,000 individuals in the district between the ages of 44 and 54 to save an additional $24.3 billion for their retirement – an average of $182,000 to $287,000 per individual – to pay for the increased cost of health coverage over their lifetimes. Younger residents of the district will have to save even higher amounts to cover their additional medical costs.
• Raise the Medicare eligibility age by at least one year to age 66 or more for 55,000 individuals in the district who are age 44 to 49 and by two years to age 67 for 354,000 individuals in the district who are age 43 or younger.
It goes on from there, but you get the general idea. Anyway, use it if you can.
PurpleGirl
I checked the impacts on Medicaid funding for my district. As I thought there would be huge affects on seniors who are dual-eligible (using Medicaid to cover Medicare costs).
kay
@PurpleGirl:
Yeah, I saw the Medicaid map, but I’m getting questions from people in their fifties who paid in and want Medicare, so that will be my focus here.
The Mediciad piece is huge though.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
I was shocked — shocked, I say — when I saw this NYT editorial calling out a lying ad.
Ruckus
I still don’t see any upside for conservatives in ending Medicare, especially this way. Will they be able to
tap intosteal the 30 year surplus? Will their tax rates go down? I don’t see any call for the Medicare tax rates to be lowered, so it would have to be general tax rates.What’s the upside other than conservatives just being craven assholes? Or is that enough for them?
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
@Ruckus: Profit for the private insurers, or so they seem to think. Possibly raiding the Medicare money after the old folks can’t get anyone to take the vouchers.
Svensker
@Ruckus:
Well, see, if we don’t “fix” Medicare then it will blow up the entire budget and there won’t be money for anything (especially more bombs!) and it will wreck the economy totally and usher in communism. This I have been told. So, what’s in it for them is Saving The American Republic. Again!
PeakVT
It’s such a brazenly cynical plan.
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: Love the nym.
PurpleGirl
@kay: I looked at the Medicare report and it’s in line with what your example showed. I know people who are whining now about their benefits. They really think the Republicans are going to help them.
One thing that amazes me are the projections of how much people are supposed to save throughout their working lives for medical costs after they retire — in both cases (Medicare and Medicaid) we are expected to save anywhere from $187,000 to $250,000. That’s in addition to daily living money. WTF. Who has the type of jobs where they can save money like that.
General Stuck
Next they’ll be selling lakefront property on Mars, with a lifetime supply of Mister Mitt’s Magic Elixer. Never need to see a doctor. Cures everything from Laryngitis to Lumbago.
jl
@Ruckus:
Looks to me like the GOP is relying on pure bamboozlement.
Saving money by cutting waste fraud and abuse has been a conservative theme for years. But now they have to pretend that they do not understand that concept, and any reduction in funding or reimbursement is a cut in benefits.
The lie is so obvious and patent, if you bother to actually read anything about the contrasting approaches of Mitt and Obama, and look at the data, that I think, and hope that more teevee news people will revolt, as has O’Brien. But I don’t hold out much hope that hacks like Schieffer or Gregory will give a shit.
Not sure that the con can go the whole campaign distance, since enough elderly have experience with the Medicare Advantage plans, and understand the BS that comes along with ‘choice’.
Gaming public and private reimbursement systems has been a big part of ‘innovation’ and ‘entrepreneurial policy’ medical care.
The idea that you would give a premium to private Medicare contractors and they would be so much more efficient that there would be an overall savings from more efficient provision of care has been a huge policy failure. The GOP is flim flamming, conning, and now outright lying in order to hide that, and trying to confuse people about the difference between benefit cuts, and eliminating subsidies to an a failed and inefficient program.
I think the GOP has convinced itself that it can sell anything, but they have to be able to keep up this nonsense for another 10 weeks, through the presidential and veep debates.
There are similar scams throughout the US medical care system. One of the reasons for the rise of doctor owned specialty hospitals and ambulatory care clinics is that they usually get same reimbursement for services as general acute care license facilities, but specialty facilities have much lower costs. Getting rid of that kind of problem is a big key to reducing the outrageously high health care costs in the US.
The GOP has to go way out into patent and obvious nonsense land to sell the con. I hope more media people will follow O’Brien’s lead, since she showed how easy it is the debunk the lies and BS.
Ruckus
@jl:
I really do get that conservatives are full of shit, lying assholes. I’m trying to figure if there is a actual upside for them other than this wet dream they seem to be having. Cause I don’t see it. I see a couple of angles they think they might be able to take advantage of but they have been trying to get rid of Medicare for decades and I just don’t have a clue what the fuck is wrong with them. I’ve of course heard of the studies that conservative and liberal brains are wired differently but this is just ludicrous. What do they expect to happen when the old farts who are asleep, wake up and figure out that they fucked themselves. That will be the effective end of republicans. Can’t come soon enough to these brain dead idiots.
Nancy Irving
So the under-55 folks are gonna have to save an extra two hundred grand or so just to stay even with their healthcare expenses under Romney-Ryan.
And those same folks are not going to complain about paying to keep their elders fat and happy on traditional Medicare?
Tell me another.