Radio America Online News Bureau

medicare

Simple Solution to Save Medicare, Social Security

by

Social Security and Medicare are on the path to insolvency sooner than previously thought, and Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., is frustrated that Congress won’t act to stave off fiscal disaster when the solution seems obvious to him.

On Tuesday, the government announced that on their present courses, Medicare will become insolvent in 2026 and Social Security faces the same fate in 2034.  The Medicare projection moves the insolvency date three year’s closer than the government estimated just last year.

And it’s not just the warnings of impending fiscal chaos.  Brat says mandatory entitlement spending once consumed 25 percent of the budget and 75 percent was spent on defense and other domestic spending.  Now, he says entitlements gobble up 75 percent of the budget and it already has some people feeling the pain, since far less money is available for other priorities.

“People are starting to feel that and states are starting to feel that and localities, because the same money is not getting down to them,” said Brat, always ready with an example of the red ink engulfing the U.S. to the tune of $21 trillion and another $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

“In ten years or so, they’re saying the interest payment alone on the debt will be bigger than the defense budget,” said Brat.

He’s also keeping a close eye on Wall Street.

“The bond market is the ultimate arbiter here.  They will send the signal on what is too much debt.  The unfunded liabilities fit into that indirectly.  They put (on) pressure.  You’re getting a lot of new concerns from the market itself.

“That is unfortunately what it will take.  As soon as the bond market has a hiccup, then everyone’s going to get way more responsive,” said Brat.

The trillions of dollars in debt the nation faces is hard for anyone to fully comprehend, but Brat says there is a simple approach to restoring solid footing to Medicare and Social Security.

He says those programs began when the life expectancy in the U.S. was 65, so the government made money on the people who aid into the system but didn’t reach retirement age and had enough resources to provide assistance for those that lived longer.

That has changed.

“The programs still kick in at 65 but the average death age is now 83.  So you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what the answer is.  But that’s politically explosive to rearrange these programs and reform them so that has to be bipartisan and it has to be done within an election cycle,” said Brat.

Brat suspects the Democrats will continue to argue that tax hikes on “the rich” will shore up the systems for the long haul.  Brat says that would barely make a dent.

“If I told you how much you would have to raise taxes to make these programs solvent, you wouldn’t believe it.  It’s through the roof.  Those aren’t politically palatable and if you put those tax increases in, you’d bring the economy to a halt.  You’d have zero growth or recession immediately,” said Brat.

“The Democrats don’t like spinach.  They’re more on the spending side.  They’re not trying to trim and save money over the long run.  They want to expand all of government,” said Brat.

Democrats strongly dispute the diagnosis for the encroaching insolvency.  Many politicians on the left and some policy experts contend the $1.5 trillion Republican tax cuts are the driving force behind the revised estimates on Medicare.

Brat pushes back strongly against that analysis.

“That’s just pure politics.  The tax cuts are $150 billion a year (over ten years) and if you grow at three percent they’re paid for.  The left said you’ll never get three percent and we’re at three percent,” said Brat.

He says reckless spending like the Democrats forced into the recent omnibus that also boosted military spending is how we got to this point.

“What they won’t tell you is that to get nine Democrat Senate votes at the end of the budget debate, we had to plus up the budget $400 billion – the tax cuts were $150 billion – to go sign a budget,” said Brat.

Brat says Congress must get it’s act together but shows no interest in doing so.

“No. Nothing. No response.  That’s what’s stunning.  People have internalized the politics and realized what it would take to achieve that change,” said Brat.  “We should be dealing with it right now if we’re rational and foresighted.”

He says the inaction leaves an unfair burden on upcoming generations.

“The only substantial power group that doesn’t have a lobbyist up here is the kids, and if you’re not represented, you don’t get attention,” said Brat

Standard Podcast [ 10:46 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Ellison’s Exit, Entitlements Implode & America Yawns, Obama’s New Iran Lie

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America welcome the news that outspoken liberal Rep. Keith Ellison is leaving the House of Representatives to run for statewide office in Minnesota, a venture they sincerely hope ends in failure.  They also lament that Medicare and Social Security are getting closer to insolvency and neither lawmakers nor most Americans seem all that concerned about it.  They also highlight yet another lie perpetrated by the Obama administration in getting the Iran nuclear deal done, this time allowing Iran access to U.S. banks while adamantly telling lawmakers it would not do so.

Share

Runaway Spending Will Engulf U.S. Soon

by

Earlier this year, a $1.3 trillion dollar omnibus spending bill left many fiscal conservatives wretching over the rise in domestic spending, but Hillsdale College Prof. Gary Wolfram says mandatory spending is real emergency and we’ve got less than a decade to do something before it gobbles up all of our revenue.

Wolfram teaches economics and public policy at Hillsdale.  He also served as chief of staff to former Rep. Nick Smith, R-Mich, in the mid-1990’s and on the Michigan State Board of Education.

The omnibus controversy arose when President Trump and Republican congressional leaders agreed to huge increases in domestic spending in exchange for lifting the spending caps on national defense spending.

In a recent column, Wolfram explains that mandatory spending – Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid – is the much greater threat.  What makes it mandatory is specific congressional acts dictating how much is spent on those programs.

In our interview, he discussed how much federal revenue goes towards mandatory spending now and what it will look like in a few years if the problem is not addressed.

“If you look at mandatory spending plus interest on the debt, in 2019 it’s going to be 70 percent of the budget outlays and 89 percent of the revenue.  So if Congress didn;t enact anything, 89 percent of the revenue’s going out the door already with mandatory spending.

“If you get to 2028, according to the Congressional Budget Office, 98.5 percent of all the revenue that comes into the federal government is going to be spent already, either through Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and some other items that are already mandated, plus net interest,” said Wolfram.

“So if you do not do something about Social Security and Medicare, which between them are almost two trillion dollars in 2019 and are going to be $3.3 trillion in 2028, you’re not going to do anything about the deficit,” said Wolfram.

While Wolfram believes each mandatory program must be reformed, his first recommendation is to change the appropriations process.  In Wolfram’s home state of Michigan, the legislature determined how much is spent on each program every year, regardless of what is mandated in statute.  He says the same principle should be applied in Washington.

“Let’s say Social Security is supposed to spend $1.043 trillion in 2019.  If this were the way the Constitution worked in the federal government, Congress appropriates a trillion dollars.  Everybody gets their proportionate share of the trillion dollars.  I think that’s the type of thing we’ve got to be looking at,” said Wolfram.

Wolfram says Congress won’t get serious about reforming programs until members are faced with passing a massive hike on Medicare and Social Security taxes.

He ought to know.  When serving for Rep. Smith, Wolfram pushed legislation that would allow taxpayers to set aside a portion of the their Social Security tax payments into a private account in exchange for receiving smaller checks when they retire.  Only one other members showed up at the press conference announcing the bill.

But he says there are still measures that could do some good.

He says keeping the system in place for Americans 55 years and older is doable if younger people are told they won’t get Social Security benefits until they are 70 or 75.  However, he believes Medicare needs a far more drastic overhaul.

“With Medicare, you’ve got to change the way the system works.  You’ve got to make it like health savings accounts are in the private sector, where it’s a high deductible policy where you get so much and then you ask the question, ‘How much does it cost when you go to get your blood test?'” said Wolfram.

He says there are simple ways to drastically reduce Medicaid costs as well.

“Think of what the incentives are in Medicare or Medicaid.  It’s to produce something that the government will pay for, even if it’s inordinately expensive, because the person buying it  is not the person receiving it,” he said.

Wolfram says the health savings account approach works well on Medicaid as well.

“If you apply that to Medicare and Medicaid, it’ll change the whole incentives of the system.  I’ll be Walmart or Walgreens and I’ll have a nurse practitioner there, charge you ten bucks to tell you your kid’s got pink eye and then provide you with a prescription,” said Wolfram.

Congress refuses to deal with the problem, but Wolfram still holds out hope that lawmakers will do the right thing when they have no other choice.

“I believe at some point things are going to get bad enough that they’re going to have to deal with it,” said Wolfram.

Standard Podcast [ 11:04 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘It’s Whack Job Economics’

by

Five Senate Democrats are now publicly endorsing a government-run, single-payer health care system in a sign the party is quickly rallying to that goal, however the idea promises to be a financial and regulatory nightmare that should compel Republicans to revisit the issue and get it right before the 2018 elections.

On Tuesday, Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Oregon, announced he would support the “Medicare for All” legislation sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont.

“It’s time to simplify health care and lower patients’ costs, and embrace Medicare for All,” said Merkley, who is now the fifth Senate Democrat to join the cause publicly.  In addition to Sanders, Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., are all co-sponsoring the bill.

In addition, roughly half the House Democrats are on board with the idea.

Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Robert Moffit says the Democrats are making their moves now because Republicans failed to get their health care reforms passed in the Senate.

“The immediate reason is the abject failure of Senate Republicans – and it’s the Senate’s fault here – to enact a health care reform bill to repeal and at least partially replace Obamacare,” said Moffit.

“It has created a major health policy vacuum, so the liberals in Congress and elsewhere are ready to fill it, and they’re preparing now for a total government takeover of health care, which is a single-payer system,” said Moffit.

But while touting “Medicare for All” and health care as a right, Moffit says Americans should not miss what is really at stake here.

“What they are proposing is nothing short of a government monopoly over the financing and the delivery of health care,” said Moffit.  “Ultimately what this means is that politicians will be in direct charge of health policy.”

He says Democrats in 2017 are making the exact opposite promise that President Obama made in 2009 and 2010, only this time they would actually keep it.

“When Obama promised he would not take away your plan, that turned out to be false, especially if you were in the individual market.  Here the Democrats in the Senate – Warren, Sanders, Sen. Merkley, John Conyers in the House – they are telling you they are going to take away your health plan,” said Moffit.

With Medicare already in deep debt and staring at $33-44 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities, Moffit says adding the rest of the nation to the program would require a major wallop to the wallets of taxpayers.

He says California is an important test case.  The state senate there has approved a single-payer plan that would result in a a spending hike of anywhere from 53-110 percent.

“Frankly, it’s whack job economics.  The Senate legislative analysts themselves say that this will require a 15 percent payroll tax,” said Moffit.

Moffit also took aim at Merkley’s assertion that having Medicare for everyone would somehow simplify the health care system.  He says the story of Medicare shows exactly the opposite.

“I think that Merkley is living in an alternative universe.  Anyone who has had to deal with Medicare, members of the medical profession are very familiar with it.  Medicare today is governed by tens of thousands of pages of rules, regulations, and guidelines and medical paperwork is eating up more and more of the time and energy and effort of physicians,” said Moffit.

“If you think that Medicare is a model of administrative efficiency or that Medicare is somehow simple, you’ve got to have rocks in your head.  you’re living on another planet.  Medicare is the Godzilla of government regulation,” said Moffit.

“It imposes enormous administrative costs on doctors, hospitals, clinics, and home health agencies, who have to bear the real costs of complying with Medicare’s regulatory systems,” said Moffit.

Moffit says this is also another clear signal of how far Democrats have moved to the left.

“They’re consumed by identity politics.  They’re eager to impose political correctness as part of an aggressive, counter-cultural agenda.  Now their economic agenda boils down to heavier taxation, higher spending, larger government programs, and even greater government control over our personal lives.  Frankly, if they want to have that debate, I’m ready to go,” said Moffit.

He says the key to foiling a complete government takeover of health care is for Republicans to roll up their sleeves and do health care legislation right this time.  He says failure is not an option.

“This is not an optional matter.  The individual market in the United States is in crisis.  They have no options here.  It’s not a question of what the hell they want to do, pardon me.  They have got to do their job.  If they don’t do their job, millions of Americans get hurt, especially the millions of middle class Americans who today do not get any subsidies whatsoever,” said Moffit.

“Congress has got to get its act together.  They have no choice,” he added.

Standard Podcast [ 12:34 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘They Know It’s in Trouble’

by

Health care expert Grace-Marie Turner says Bill Clinton’s public criticism of Obamacare and obvious infighting within Obama’s own administration proves the U.S. health care system is in big trouble on its current course.

The former president made headlines Monday, when he discussed the big problems created by President Obama’s signature domestic legislation.

“The people that are getting killed on this deal are small business people and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies.  Why?  Because they’re not organized.  They don’t have any bargaining power with insurance companies.  They’re getting whacked,” said Clinton.

“So you’ve got this crazy system where suddenly 25 million more people have health care and the people busting it sometimes 60 hours a week wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half.  It’s the craziest thing in the world,” said Clinton.

Turner, who actively fought Clinton’s health care reform in the 1990s and the push for Obamacare says, Clinton is on the right track – but only to a point.

“He’s got the diagnosis right.  People are very unhappy with this law.  The longer it’s in place, the more unhappy they are.  He’s clearly hearing from small businesses.  He’s hearing from families who cannot afford their premiums,” said Turner.

However, Turner suspects Clinton’s solution to the problem will only create more problems.

“What he’s doing I fear is teeing up, if Hillary is elected president, even more government control over the health sector.  The American people know the problem is too much government control over health care,” said Turner.

She also says his characterization of what those millions of new people with health care coverage are receiving is badly misleading.

“He’s saying people have health care.  No, they have health insurance.  Ask people how hard it is to find a doctor to see them.  People on Medicaid still have to go to hospital emergency rooms, particularly if they need specialty care,” said Turner.

Turner says the reasons for Obamacare’s failures are obvious.

“The health insurance companies are absolutely in straitjackets.  The American people are being told the kind of health insurance they must buy, soup to nuts and absolutely everything anybody could think of, instead of actually having a policy that may work for them and their families that they may be able to afford.  That’s not a choice they have right now,” said said Turner.

She fears a Hillary Clinton presidency would look to add a public option or some other way to increase government control of the health care system.  Bill Clinton hinted similarly by suggesting those not qualifying for subsidies should be able to buy in to Medicare or Medicaid at a cost that’s comfortable for them, even if they don’t qualify for them.

Turner says that’s a recipe for disaster.  She says the average senior citizen couple pays about $160,000 into the Medicare system but ends up needing more than $400,000 in care.  She says the math of stuffing more people into that system should be clear to everyone.

“The system is not sustainable.  It will go broke.  It will go broke even faster if you put more people on it,” said Turner.

The Obama administration is also reportedly split on what do about insurance companies dropping out of the exchanges and demanding reimbursement in the billions of dollars.  Some in the administration are apparently trying to work around existing law that forbids insurance company bailouts to keep the system alive.

At the same, the Justice Department is also fighting back against court challenges from insurance companies to pay them overdue subsidies.

Turner says this contradiction shows a fierce debate playing out within the administration.

“You have a big disagreement between the political people who want to do everything they can to rescue Obamacare and the civil servants who understand that these payments are illegal.  Congress has passed very specific legislation forbidding any more corporate welfare,” said Turner.

Turner says this public infighting, plus the Clinton comments prove this administration understands the perilous state of our health care system.

“They know it’s in trouble.  We have been talking since the beginning, since before this law passed, about the problems with this law.  It was totally predictable that this was going to happen.  Finally the supporters are saying it has problems.  I think it is a whole other level when former President Bill Clinton basically says the law is a mess and a crazy scheme,” said Turner.

She says it will be difficult to fix the law because the Democrats are only interested in spending more money in a bad direction and Republicans want nothing to do with that.  Turner says real negotiation will have to take place since Republicans will have to be part of the discussions, unlike 2010 when the law passed with support only from Democrats.

But Turner isn’t interested in tinkering with what she sees as a failure.  She wants to return to healthy competition in the health care sector.

“Give consumers choices.  They’re happy with the product.  They’re engaged in helping to make sure that they spend their health care dollars wisely.  And they see the savings when they make smart decisions,” said Turner.

“That’s what we need more of, not more government spending and government control, thinking that somehow we’re going to be able to spend enoughto that everybody can have all the health care they want all the time without any strings attached.  That’s not possible,” said Turner.

 

Standard Podcast [ 11:51 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

McCain vs. Obama on Health Care

by

John McCain and Barack Obama slugged it out over health care reform on Tuesday night, but which one has a better plan?  Is McCain on the right track by pushing $5000 tax credits so families can buy coverage?  What exactly is Obama’s plan and does it equal government-run care?  And does either candidate have a real plan to reform Medicare?  That’s what we ask health care expert Grace-Marie Turner, President of the Galen Institute

Standard Podcast [ 7:49 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share