BUSH-CHENEY AD FACT CHECK: “Medicare Hypocrisy”

Campaign events, speeches, issues, discussion

Moderator: Super Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Iris
Pirate
Posts: 13539
Joined: 01-01-2003 03:00 AM

BUSH-CHENEY AD FACT CHECK: “Medicare Hypocrisy”

Post by Iris » 09-20-2004 03:33 AM

George W. Bush just doesn’t get it. It doesn’t take much common sense to know his wrong choices have taken America in the wrong direction. We’ve lost nearly 2 million jobs, health care costs have jumped 64 percent and the deficit is sky high. John Kerry’s economic plan will cut taxes for 98 percent of the country and finally give the middle class some relief.

The Facts:

AD TITLE: “Medicare Hypocrisy”

DATE: 9/9/04

TYPE: 30sec TV

PAID FOR BY: Bush-Cheney ’04

BUSH-CHENEY CREDIBILITY GAP

VOICE OVER: “John Kerry... Attacking the President on Medicare.”

GEORGE BUSH’S RECORD OF FAILURE

The Day After His Convention, Bush Enacted the Largest Medicare Premium Increase on Seniors in History. One day after telling the nation, “I believe we have a moral responsibility to honor America's seniors -- so I brought Republicans and Democrats together to strengthen Medicare,” Bush enacted the largest premium hike in Medicare history. Health insurance premiums for senior citizens enrolled in Medicare will increase a record 17.5 percent in 2005, adding $140 to seniors’ yearly health care expenses. An estimated 38 million Medicare recipients will be affected. [Bush remarks to Republican National Convention, 9/2/04; Washington Post, 9/3/04; New York Times, 9/4/04; CMS, http://www.cms.hhs.gov/statistics/enrol ... t03all.asp]

Bush’s Medicare Administrator Admits New Medicare Law Partially Responsible for the Premium Hike. According to the Los Angeles Times, “McClellan cited three main reasons for the increases: higher payments largely because of extra costs under the modernization bill; extra benefits under the new Medicare Advantage program; and the need to increase reserves in program trust funds.” [Los Angeles Times, 9/4/04]

Before the Latest Hike, Bush Was Already On Pace to Have Increased Medicare Premiums At Twice the Rate of Clinton in Half the Time. Under Bill Clinton, Part B premiums increased from $36.60 in 1993 to $50 in 2001. Bush has raised them from $50 in 2001 to $78.20 in 2005. That’s more than twice the $13 increase under Clinton in half the time. [Joint Economic Committee, Democratic Staff, July 2004]

Rising Medicare Premiums Will Consume 25 Percent of Social Security Living Adjustments for 6.9 Million People by 2007, 22.2 Million by 2014. According to an analysis by the Democratic staff of the Joint Economic Committee, if Medicare premiums are continued to rise in conjunction with Bush’s new Medicare drug benefit by 2007 6.9 million of Medicare recipients (25 percent) will seen at least one-quarter of their Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) absorbed by the higher premiums. By 2014, 22.2 million Medicare recipients (64 percent) will lost at least 25 percent of their COLA to higher premiums. [Joint Economic Committee, Democratic Staff, July 2004]

BUSH-CHENEY CREDIBILITY GAP

VOICE OVER: “But it was Senator Kerry who voted five times to raise Medicare premiums.”

THE FACTS ON JOHN KERRY’S RECORD

John Kerry Voted Repeatedly for Lower Medicare Premiums. John Kerry voted at least five times to cut back on proposed Medicare premium hikes. [Vote #64, 5/9/85; Vote #66, 5/9/85; Vote #74, 5/9/85; Vote #292, 10/18/90; Vote #566, 11/9/95]

In the 1990s Kerry Fought Against the Gingrich-Led Effort to Increase Medicare Premiums. In the mid-1990s, Newt Gingrich wanted to raise Medicare Part B premiums that pay for doctors to 31.5 percent of the cost of Medicare and keep them there – substantially higher than the traditional standard that premiums should cover 25 percent of the costs. Kerry voted against the provision that would have continued to keep Medicare Part B premium at 31.5 percent of the program's cost – and instead supported lowering the premium to 25 percent, the historical standard. [Vote #566, 11/9/95]

John Kerry Fought Medicare Deductible Hikes. John Kerry voted to eliminate a proposed $92 increase in the deductible for Medicare hospital costs, and supported successful legislation calling for future deductible hikes to come more closely in line with increased Medicare payments to hospitals. Kerry also cosponsored an amendment to raise taxes on the wealthy to kill a plan to double the Medicare deductible for doctor’s visits and other health services, saying “we can’t sit back and let the elderly shoulder the burden of a deficit they did not create.” [Vote #74, 5/9/1985; SA 1002, Kerry original cosponsor 11/12/85; SA 3017, Kerry original cosponsor 10/18/90; Vote #280, 10/18/1990; Kerry statement, Congressional Record, 10/18/90]

BUSH-CHENEY CREDIBILITY GAP

BACKGROUND: Kerry Also Signed Letters Supporting Both Higher Payments To Physicians And Higher Medicare+Choice Payments, Which Accounted For Almost Half Of The Medicare Premium Increases. … Kerry Has Even Made A Statement In Support Of Higher Medicare+Choice Payments.

THE FACTS ON JOHN KERRY’S RECORD

John Kerry Pushed for Adequate Medicare+Choice Funding to Ensure Seniors Did Not Lose Coverage. Insufficient funding could force Medicare HMOs out of business, leaving millions of seniors – many of whom choose to join Medicare+Choice programs to get prescription drug coverage – without health insurance. John Kerry cosponsored a stopgap amendment to the Medicare prescription drug bill, supported by six other Senators including Republican Senators Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Norm Coleman (R-MN), to ensure that Medicare+Choice programs were adequately funded until Medicare prescription drug coverage came into effect. [SA 1040 to S 1, Kerry original cosponsor 6/25/03]

John Kerry Fought to Keep Medicare+Choice Payments Out of HMOs’ Hands. John Kerry voted and cosponsored legislation to make sure that Medicare payments for teaching hospitals, safety net hospitals, and nurse training programs go directly to hospitals, without having to go through the hands of a Medicare HMO. The Managed Care Fair Payment Act, the Nursing and Allied Health Payment Improvement Act, and other measures would “carve out” Medicare+Choice payments for graduate medical education, hospitals that serve a disproportionate number of Medicare beneficiaries, and nursing and allied health education programs, sending those funds directly to those facilities when they provided inpatient care to Medicare+Choice enrollees rather than reimbursing the plans first. [Vote #209, 7/31/97; S. 1024, Kerry original cosponsor 5/12/99; S. 1025, Kerry original cosponsor 5/12/99]

In January, Bush Enacted the Largest Increase in Medicare Payments to HMOs in History In Effort to Enroll 35 Percent of Seniors in HMOs. In January 2004, Bush enacted the largest increase in Medicare payments to HMOs and other private plans, “a record 10.6 percent in an effort to persuade them to enter the Medicare market and increase benefits for the elderly, administration officials say,” according to the New York Times. The payments amount to $46 billion in additional payments. The administration is trying to increase the percentage of Medicare recipients in HMOs for 11 percent to 35 percent by 2007. [New York Times, 1/20/04, 2/3/04, 3/20/04]

Bush Administration Using Premium Hikes to Induce Seniors to Switch to HMOs. In announcing the Medicare premium hike, Administrator Mark McClellan acknowledged that 15 percent of the hike would go directly to HMOs as a result of the higher payment levels. McClellan also advised seniors that they could avoid the hikes by enrolling in a managed care plan. “Retirees who choose a managed care plan, dubbed ‘Medicare Advantage,’ should see lower co-payments and more preventive services such as dental and vision care, [Medicare Administrator Mark] McClellan said,” reported the Washington Post. [New York Times, 9/4/04; Connolly, Washingtonpost.com, 9/3/04]

BUSH-CHENEY CREDIBILITY GAP

VOICE OVER: “Kerry voted to require premium increases... calling passage of the bill ‘a day of vindication.’”

BACKGROUND: Kerry Voted For Balanced Budget Act Of 1997 Conference Report. Balanced Budget Act Of 1997 Mandated Formula That Resulted In 17 Percent Increase In Medicare Premiums This Year. Kerry Praised The Balanced Budget Act Of 1997 As A "Day Of Vindication For Americans" On The Senate Floor.

THE FACTS ON JOHN KERRY’S RECORD

1997 Balanced Budget Act Enacted Kerry’s Bill Extending Health Insurance Coverage to Millions of Children. The 1997 Balanced Budget Act enacted the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), a five-year, $23.4 billion program that has helped states provide health insurance to 3.9 million more low-income children since its passage. Comprehensive legislation John Kerry wrote in 1996 helped serve as the foundation for SCHIP, which President Clinton called “the biggest increase in health care investment for children since Medicaid passed in 1965.” [S. 2186, Kerry introduced 10/1/96; S. 525 and S. 526, Kerry original cosponsor 4/8/97, Vote #209, 7/31/97; became PL 105-33 8/5/97; SCHIP Program Enrollment: December 2003 Update, Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, 7/04; Remarks of President Bill Clinton, 6/25/97]

Budget Bill Was Companion Legislation to “Largest Tax Cut Since 1981,” Which Kerry Also Supported. John Kerry also voted for a tax cut bill designed as a companion bill to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and which passed the same day. The bill, which the New York Times called “the largest tax cut since 1981,” provided $410 billion in tax relief including cuts in capital gains and estate taxes, the child tax credit, lifetime learning tax credit, HOPE tax credit, and the work opportunity credit. [Vote #211, 7/31/97; New York Times, 8/1/97; CQ Almanac 1997, p. 2-47-2-52]

Kerry Voted Against Earlier Budget Bill, Criticizing Deep Cuts in Medicare Intended to Pay for GOP Tax Cut for Wealthiest. When the 1997 budget bill first came up for a vote in the Senate, John Kerry voted against it, saying that the bill “cut far more deeply into critical programs like Medicare and Medicaid than was required to achieve necessary savings. And for what purpose? To provide the cushion enabling Republicans to increase the size of the tax cut to the wealthy by scores of billions of dollars.” That version of the bill would also have raised the Medicare retirement age, means-tested Medicare Part B premiums for high-income seniors, and imposed a $5 co-payment for home health services. [Vote #130, 6/25/97; Kerry statement, Congressional Record, 6/24/97]

BUSH-CHENEY CREDIBILITY GAP

VOICE OVER: “The same John Kerry who was absent for 36 of 38 Medicare votes last year ...even one giving seniors prescription drug coverage.”

BACKGROUND: Kerry Missed 36 of 38 Votes On Medicare Reform And Prescription Drug Benefit,

Including Final Passage Of Bill. … Kerry Was One Of Only Two Senators To Miss Final Vote On Conference Report.

THE FACTS ON JOHN KERRY’S RECORD

George Bush’s Prescription Drug Bill Was a Raw Deal for Seniors – and John Kerry Interrupted His Campaign to Vote Against It. John Kerry returned to the Senate to vote twice to block the Bush Medicare prescription drug bill, leaving Washington when after it became clear that the bill would pass regardless of his presence or absence. “‘There was no question about the passage,’ said Kerry, who was stumping in Iowa,” the Associated Press reported. “‘The vote was not going to make a difference in the outcome.’” He cast a proxy vote against the bill in the Senate Finance Committee, and twice went on record opposing the bill, which passed the Senate by a 55-vote margin. [Vote #457, 11/24/03; Vote #458, 11/24/03; Associated Press, 11/25/03; CQ Finance Committee Vote, S 1, 6/12/03; Vote #262, 6/27/03; Vote #459, 11/25/03]

John Kerry Fought for Real Prescription Drug Cost Relief for Seniors. A member of the prestigious Health Care Subcommittee, John Kerry has a long record in the Senate of making prescription drugs more affordable. Kerry voted for a Medicare prescription drug benefit as early as 1987, as part of the Medicare catastrophic insurance bill that would have covered 80% of drug costs. Since then he has supported a number of efforts to establish a prescription drug benefit under Medicare that would hold down out-of-pocket costs for beneficiaries while targeting aid to those who need help the most – including a 1999 vote to allow tobacco taxes to be spent on prescription drug coverage under Medicare. [Vote #350, 10/27/87; Vote #144, 6/22/00; Vote #186, 7/23/02; Vote #199, 7/31/02; Vote #76, 3/25/99]

John Kerry Voted to Allow Prescription Drug Reimportation to Cut Costs for Seniors. John Kerry voted again and again to permit licensed pharmacists or wholesalers to import prescription drugs from Canada to help cut down on prescription drug costs. “Importation is an appropriate response to the drug companies' cartel-like attitude toward affordable drug distribution in America,” Kerry said. [Vote #217, 7/19/00; Vote #200, 7/31/02; Vote #201, 7/31/02; Vote #232, 6/20/03; Washington Post, 10/8/03]

BUSH-CHENEY CREDIBILITY GAP

VO: “John Kerry...he actually voted for higher Medicare premiums...before he came out against them."

GEORGE BUSH’S RECORD OF FAILURE

Health Premium Increases Fastest on Record. A new study by the Kaiser Family Foundation revealed that family health care premiums have increased by more than $3,512 since 2000 - $900 in the last year alone. Families are paying 64 percent more in premiums. This increase is the fastest health care premium increase on record – and forty-one percent of firms say they are likely to increase premium for their employees in the next two years. [Kaiser Family Foundation, Employee Health Benefits Survey 2004]

AHPs Could Raise Premiums for 4 out of 5 Small Businesses. Studies show that AHPs will increase the cost of insurance for many small businesses and will increase the number of uninsured. The CBO estimated that AHPs could raise premiums for 4 out of 5 small businesses that keep traditional insurance. [CBO, "Increasing Small-Firm Health Insurance Coverage through Association Health Plans and HealthMarts," January 2000.]

Bush's HSA Proposal Will Raise Health Care Costs And Increase The Uninsured. As healthier people join HSAs, the people remaining in comprehensive coverage will be sicker and more expensive to insure, driving their premiums higher. Some employers will use HSAs to drop health insurance for their employees or reduce their contribution. Independent estimates suggest that Bush's HSA proposal would leave more than 1.4 million workers currently insured without coverage. [Journal of the American Medical Association, 6/5/96; Urban Institute, April 1996; American Academy of Actuaries, May 1995; Consumers Union, 8/10/00; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/10/04]
We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

User avatar
Iris
Pirate
Posts: 13539
Joined: 01-01-2003 03:00 AM

Post by Iris » 09-20-2004 03:34 AM

THE KERRY-EDWARDS PLAN: A NEW DIRECTION

John Kerry and John Edwards have a real plan to ensure reliable, high-quality care, as well as alleviate health care costs for America’s families and businesses. Their plan will:

Save workers up to $1,000 with premium relief. The Kerry-Edwards plan will provide relief for employers who do the right thing by offering their employees quality health care coverage with choices. Their plan will help make health care more affordable for all employers and employees by having the federal government pick up 75 percent of catastrophic costs – providing approximately 10 percent, or up to $1,000, in annual savings for America’s families.

Provide tax credits to make health insurance more affordable. The Kerry-Edwards plan will provide tax credits to make health insurance more affordable for small businesses, Americans between the ages of 55 to 64, and low to middle-income workers buying into the new Congressional Health Plan. These tax credits total $177 billion over ten years – more than twice as generous as the health care tax credits proposed by Bush.

Cut administrative costs by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. Approximately $350 billion is spent on non-medical costs – principally the costs of the paper work burden, including those costs associated with the preparation, submission, calculation and payment of bills. Kerry and Edwards will cut administrative costs by ensuring electronic paperless claims. They’ll also encourage greater use of technology to simplify and streamline paperwork so doctors can spend more time with patients and less time filling out forms. While cutting costs, Kerry and Edwards will improve the quality of care delivered by helping reduce medical errors and encourage greater disease management and prevention efforts.

Expand quality, reliable health care coverage. John Kerry and John Edwards’s plan will allow Americans to access the same range of affordable health care plans that members of Congress get today. Also, their health care plan will expand state-based programs to insure all children and millions of adults by picking up the full cost of more than 20 million children enrolled in Medicaid. In exchange, states would have to expand eligibility for children’s coverage, as well as expand coverage for families and adults.

Make prescription drugs more affordable. Prescription drug costs have increased by 17 percent in the last year alone. Kerry and Edwards will cut prescription drugs costs by allowing the federal government to negotiate better prices through the Medicare program; permitting the reimportation of safe, FDA-approved drugs; supporting incentives to allow generic drugs to get to market faster.

Push Congress to finally pass a real Patients’ Bill of Rights – one that allows Americans to hold HMOs accountable for decisions that harm patients by denying necessary medical care. Other critical patient protections Kerry and Edwards will support include (1) a right to see the specialists they need; (2) a right to real emergency protections; (3) a real external appeals process that allows patients to appeal a HMO decision; and (4) whistleblower protections that allow health care workers to report quality problems without fear of retaliation.

Reduce medical malpractice premiums. John Kerry and John Edwards oppose punitive damages – unless intentional misconduct, gross negligence, or reckless indifference to life can be established. Kerry and Edwards also support a series of reforms to get rid of the frivolous lawsuits clogging the health care system by (1) requiring a qualified specialist to certify that a case has merit before it can move forward; (2) working with states to ensure the availability of non-binding mediation in all malpractice claims before cases proceed trial; and (3) preventing and punishing frivolous lawsuits by putting in place tough, mandatory sanctions, including a “three strikes and you’re out” provision that forbids lawyers who file three frivolous cases from bringing another suit for the next 10 years.
We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

Cherry Kelly
Pirate
Posts: 12852
Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
Contact:

Post by Cherry Kelly » 09-20-2004 11:02 AM

Hate to say this - but

the cost to the AMerican public with the Kerry plan is something close to 650 billion compared to 105 billion for Bush plan. (my own estimates are somewhat less than those figures but the costs of K plan is far far higher for the average american in costs - ie read word TAXES...) and doesn't accomplish anything more...or provide more.

- - -
The BEST answer to BOTH plans is (my estimate) generic drugs... as a starting place - for those who need meds. and capping the charges put forth by med mfg places for common drugs.

IF people will note - the minute GW BUSH put forth the cheaper med cards -ones that cut out of pocket costs for mainly seniors - the med mfg raised their prices...

User avatar
Iris
Pirate
Posts: 13539
Joined: 01-01-2003 03:00 AM

Post by Iris » 09-20-2004 06:11 PM

Cherry, Kerry is saying that he can accomplish his medical plan, drop taxes on 90% of the middle classes, and on small businesses, AND cut the deficit in half. Sounds good to me.

You may not have noticed (I doubt you did), but Kerry also intends to make it legal for Americans to get prescription drugs from Canada. I very much agree with that. Our drug companies are way too big for their britches, and they deserve a little healthy competition. Perhaps if they start losing business, they'll lower their prices.
Last edited by Iris on 09-20-2004 08:28 PM, edited 1 time in total.
We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

mudwoman
Pirate
Posts: 9375
Joined: 05-17-2000 02:00 AM

Post by mudwoman » 09-20-2004 07:08 PM

Cherry Kelly wrote: IF people will note - the minute GW BUSH put forth the cheaper med cards -ones that cut out of pocket costs for mainly seniors - the med mfg raised their prices...


Well, who didn't see that coming? I did and so did many others. BushCo has a track record of charging along with ill conceived plans, consequences be damned! What a joke, but nobody is laughing except for the Pig corporations and stupes.

btw: I have not signed up for that Medicare Drug Card scam, and will continue to buy my medication from Mexico. My snail mail box is now stuffed with "offers" from insurance companies and related dren too.

User avatar
Iris
Pirate
Posts: 13539
Joined: 01-01-2003 03:00 AM

Post by Iris » 09-20-2004 08:24 PM

Cherry Kelly wrote: Hate to say this - but the cost to the AMerican public with the Kerry plan is something close to 650 billion compared to 105 billion for Bush plan.
By repealing the Bush tax cuts, we save enough annually that we can easily expand medicare to cover every single citizen that can't afford healthcare and still have a few billion left over.

In addition, the plans Bush and Kerry are proposing are not comparable:

~~~~

Bush has grand health plans; some are skeptical

By Ceci Connolly, Washington Post | August 29, 2004

WASHINGTON -- If Congress enacted President Bush's entire health care agenda, campaign aides have asserted, as many as 10 million people who lack health insurance would be covered, at a cost of $102 billion over the next decade.

But when the Bush-Cheney team was asked to provide documentation, the data seemed to show that far fewer people would be supported, according to several independent analyses.

Projections by the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, academics, and the campaign's website suggest that under the best circumstances, Bush's plans would extend coverage to no more than 6 million people over the next decade, and perhaps as few as 2 million.

''There's little reason to expect that there would be any reduction in the overall numbers of Americans without health insurance," said a Brookings Institution health policy specialist, Henry J. Aaron. ''We're swimming against a rather swift current in our efforts to reduce the number of uninsured, and the power of President Bush's proposals to move against that current is, it seems to me, very, very limited."

In his campaign for a second term, Bush is reprising much of the health care agenda he proposed in 2000, including tax credits for individuals who purchase insurance, and the formation of new, largely unregulated, purchasing pools for small businesses called association health plans.

Senator John F. Kerry has released a health care proposal that is more ambitious and more expensive, with plans to expand government health programs, to offer tax credits similar to Bush's, and to reimburse businesses for some of their most costly cases.

Kerry estimates that his health care proposals would cover 27 million people at a 10-year cost of $653 billion. But that assumes $300 billion in ''savings" that the Bush plan says might prove elusive. Without the savings, the cost of the Kerry package jumps to nearly $1 trillion.

Specialists inside and out of the administration say many of the assertions Bush makes about his first-term health care record and his health proposals for a second term are exaggerated, incomplete or contrary to widely accepted analyses.

On the campaign trail, the president trumpets the enactment last year of a Medicare prescription drug package as his signature health achievement. In monetary terms, the policy -- estimated to cost $564 billion over 10 years -- goes far beyond the $158 billion proposal Bush made as a candidate in 2000.

''When we came to office, too many older Americans could not afford prescription drugs. Medicare didn't pay for them," he said last month. ''Leaders in both political parties had promised prescription drug coverage for years. We got it done. More than 4 million seniors have signed up for drug discount cards that provide real savings."

Left unsaid is that 2.9 million of them had no choice; they were enrolled automatically. And the drug benefits will not be fully instituted until 2006.

Since Bush took office, the number of Americans without health insurance has climbed by 4 million, to nearly 44 million. On its website and at news briefings, the Bush campaign says that through its actions overseeing Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program, the administration has ''expanded eligibility to more than 2.6 million people."

The statement gives the impression that ''they have extended coverage to 2.6 million more, and that is not really true," said Diane Rowland, executive director of the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. ''In reality, only 200,000 of them got coverage," because of Bush administration efforts.

Megan Hauck, deputy policy director for health care of the Bush campaign, did not have figures but said she thought the Kaiser data were ''awfully low."

Enrollment in the two government health programs rose during Bush's tenure -- by about 7.5 million. But for the vast majority, coverage was required by law, not the result of a policy change.

''Part of the reason more people were covered is the economy got so bad that people lost income," Rowland said. ''There were more low-income people under Bush than previously, so they became eligible for public programs."

Although Hauck generally touts the campaign's projection that the Bush proposals would expand coverage to 10 million Americans, she said it could be as few as 6 million. Of the 10 million, half will use the proposed $1,000 tax credit ($3,000 for families) to buy insurance. The estimate comes from testimony by a Treasury Department official who speculated that the 10-year, $70 billion proposal could result in coverage for 4 million to 5 million people.

One year earlier, the Bush budget set aside $89 billion for the same credit, saying it would cover 4 million. Analysts say it is impossible to see how spending $20 billion less, at a time when premiums are much higher, could achieve the same level of coverage.

If the tax credit were passed, Jonathan Gruber, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, predicts some businesses will drop health insurance. If just 1 percent of people who receive coverage from an employer bought individual insurance instead, the Bush policy would result in 1.8 million newly insured, according to Gruber's analysis.

The next-largest element in the Bush agenda is a proposal to allow small businesses to band together to purchase insurance through new association health plans. Hauck said 2 million people would be covered if this were enacted. That figure came from a January 2000 Congressional Budget Office report in which the nonpartisan agency said 10,000 to 2 million people might join association health plans.

But in its July 2003 analysis of the Republican bill, the office concluded that 600,000 Americans probably would buy into the pools, at a cost of $254 million. Even the Bush campaign website reports that ''600,000 would be newly insured," or 1.4 million fewer than Hauck's tally. And a recent study by Mercer Risk, Finance and Insurance Consulting found the proposal could result in a decline of 1 million insured, because small-business insurance premiums would be likely to rise.

Finally, the Bush campaign projects that 3 million people would be covered through new health savings accounts, which allow people to save money tax-free for out-of-pocket medical expenses. The new accounts, purchased in combination with high-deductible, catastrophic insurance, were created as part of last year's Medicare prescription drug package.

Hauck said an ''internal estimate" by the campaign indicates that the provision would extend insurance to 1.1 million people; she did not provide supporting material. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated the proposal would cost $6.7 billion, but officials there declined to say how many people that figure was based on.

MIT's Gruber and Paul Ginsburg, president of the Center for Studying Health System Change, said the impact would be minimal, because some people likely to purchase the new accounts are currently insured. Democrats say it is unfair for the Bush campaign to include the provision at all, since it is current law, not a proposal.

Bush wants to expand use of health savings accounts by also making the premiums tax-deductible, a proposal Gruber said would increase the number of uninsured by 350,000.

But Hauck said the campaign assumes that making the premiums deductible will result in coverage for an additional 1.9 million people. That figure is based on an article by Dan Perrin and Richard Nadler at the HSA Coalition, a group that has worked for the past decade to pass medical savings account legislation, according to its website.

The coalition includes conservative members such as the Christian Coalition, the 60 Plus Association and the Small Business Survival Committee.
© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

User avatar
Iris
Pirate
Posts: 13539
Joined: 01-01-2003 03:00 AM

Post by Iris » 09-20-2004 08:26 PM

KerryEdwards: Bush's Health Care Claims Are 'Exaggerated, Incomplete or Contrary To Widely Accepted Analyses'

8/22/2004 9:01:00 PM

WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a fact sheet from Kerry-Edwards 2004:

"Health experts inside and out of the Administration say many of the assertions Bush makes about his first-term health care record and his health proposals for a second term are exaggerated, incomplete or contrary to widely accepted analyses." -- Bush Health Care Plan Seems to Fall Short," Washington Post, 8/22/04

George Bush has recycled old, bad health plans that would not even provide health insurance for the 3.7 million more Americans that have lost their coverage under his watch and would raise the cost of health care for millions of Americans. Instead of real solutions, the Bush campaign has provided false claims its health plan would expand coverage for an additional 10 million people. They have provided no documentation of this misleading promise and, in fact, the Bush Administration's own Treasury Department contradicts this claim.

This is only the latest misleading promise from George Bush. In 2002, he said his economic plans would create 6 million new jobs. Instead we've lost more than a million jobs - putting America 7 million jobs short of Bush's prediction. And he promised that his Social Security plan would save Social Security. Instead, according to his own Council of Economic Advisers it adds $2 trillion in debt over the next decade and according to CBO it increases the deficit for 50 years and would cut total benefits by nearly 50 percent.

BUSH'S MISLEADING PROMISE: The Bush health plan would cover 10 million people.

REALITY: The Bush plan would not even reverse the increase in the uninsured under his watch.

-- 3.7 million more Americans uninsured under Bush's watch. In 2000, 39.8 million people were uninsured. In 2002, there were 43.6 million uninsured - a 3.7 million increase. (Census)

-- Independent estimates show that Bush's plan would cover 1.3 to 2.4 million people - not nearly enough to make up for the increase in the uninsured under Bush. Independent experts have looked at the Bush proposals and found that they would not even undo the increase in the uninsured we have seen during his term:

o Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that 1.3 million more people will be insured. "Overall, this analysis finds that the President's tax credit and tax deduction proposals for non-group health insurance, when fully implemented, would increase the number of people with health insurance by almost 1.3 million, at a cost of more than $4700 per newly insured person." (Kaiser Family Foundation, "Coverage and Cost Impacts of the President's Health Insurance Tax Credit and Tax Deduction Proposals," March 2004)

o Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that the Bush plan will cause 6.25 million to lose their employer-sponsored health insurance. "As discussed in more detail below, while the net change in the number of people with insurance is relatively small, these policies would result in a substantial movement of individuals away from employer-based coverage and into the non- group market, or in some cases, into being uninsured." In total, 6.25 million people will lose employer-sponsored health insurance:

o Emory Professor Kenneth Thorpe estimates that the Bush plan would cover 2.1 to 2.4 million people. "the plan totals $90 Billion from 2005-2014 and would extend coverage to (depending on the year) 2.1 to 2.4 million otherwise uninsured individuals. The number of uninsured covered under the Bush plan would, however, decline over time." (Kenneth Thorpe, "Federal Costs and Newly Insured under President Bush's Health Insurance Proposals," 5/5/2004)

o Even the Bush administration disputes the Bush campaign's claim. The Bush campaign claims that its plan would cover 10 million people, but "Projections by the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, academics and the campaign's Web site suggest that under the best circumstances, Bush's plans for health care would extend coverage to no more than 6 million people over the next decade and possibly as few as 2 million." (Ceci Connolly, "Bush Health Care Plan Seems to Fall Short," Washington Post, 8/22/04)

BUSH'S TAX CREDIT PROPOSAL: A PLAN THAT KEEPS GETTING WORSE

George Bush's tax credits proposal gets worse and worse every year. Although health costs have increased by nearly 50 percent since Bush took office, he won't increase his tax credit. No wonder independent experts say it will not undo the increase in uninsured under his watch.

Under the Bush plan, low-income families would have to pay more than $7,000 for health insurance - 50 percent more than when Bush first proposed his plan. In February 2002 George Bush first proposed a $3,000 health insurance tax credit for families making up to $25,000. In February 2004, George Bush proposed the same exact plan - even though the cost of health insurance continues to grow by 10 percent every year. As a result, low-income families have to pay more than twice as much under the Bush plan.

2002: Insurance Premium: $7,961; Bush Tax Credit: $3,000; Cost for Low-Income Family: $4,961

2003: Insurance Premium: $9,068; Bush Tax Credit: $3,000; Cost for Low-Income Family: $6,068

2004: Insurance Premium: $9,793; Bush Tax Credit: $3,000; Cost for Low-Income Family: $6,793

2005: Insurance Premium: $10,577; Bush Tax Credit: $3,000; Cost for Low-Income Family: $7,577

Note: Assumes a family of four making up to $25,000. Premiums for 2002 and 2003 are based on Kaiser data. The 2004 and 2005 premiums are projected using the conservative assumption that health insurance costs increase by 8 percent per year, well below the average annual increase of 12 percent from 2000 to 2003.

Bush has no plan to provide health insurance options for families. John Kerry offers families the option of buying into the same health plan as members of Congress. George Bush throws families on the individual market where premiums are higher, coverage is lower-quality, and families may not even be able to find health insurance.

BUSH'S HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS DRIVE UP COSTS FOR FAMILIES AND REDUCE COVERAGE

Health Premiums For Traditional Coverage Would Significantly Rise. HSAs will cause the risk pool to fragment with healthy, affluent workers choosing HSAs while sicker workers remaining in comprehensive coverage. The people remaining in comprehensive coverage thus become sicker on average, and hence more expensive to insure, which drives up premiums for comprehensive coverage, making health care harder to afford. (Journal of the American Medical Association, 6/5/96; Urban Institute, April 1996; American Academy of Actuaries, May 1995; Consumers Union, 8/10/00)

Approximately 1.4 Million People Currently With Health Insurance Would Become Uninsured. Some employers may decide to no longer offer health insurance to their employees, since their workers can now take advantage of both the tax benefits of existing HSAs and the new premium deduction to purchase coverage on their own in the individual market. As a result of these factors, it is projected that more than 1.4 million workers with health insurance now would lose their employer-based coverage and become uninsured. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 4/10/04)

HSAs Offer Lucrative And Unprecedented Tax Shelter Benefits To The Wealthy. Funds held in HSA accounts are not taxed at any point. This constitutes a tax benefit never previously allowed in the U.S. tax code for other tax-advantaged savings accounts such as IRAs and 401(k) plans. There are also no income limits on HSA participants, so wealthy individuals can use them to supplement their existing retirement accounts. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/1/03)

BUSH'S ASSOCIATION HEALTH PLANS BENEFIT THE WEALTHY AND RAISE COSTS FOR MILLIONS

CBO Estimates Associated Health Plans Could Raise Premiums for 4 out of 5 Small Businesses. Studies show that AHPs will increase the cost of insurance for many small businesses and will increase the number of uninsured. The CBO estimated that AHPs could raise premiums for 4 out of 5 small businesses that keep traditional insurance. (CBO, "Increasing Small-Firm Health Insurance Coverage through Association Health Plans and HealthMarts," January 2000.)

Health Premiums And The Number Of Uninsured Would Rise. An independent study released in June 2003 found that insurance costs would increase by an average of 6 percent in the small- business market and that the number of uninsured would increase by over 1 million. William Lindsay, Chair of National Small Business Association, said, "We have no doubt that AHP proponents sincerely want to help small firms, but the unintended consequences would be catastrophic." (Mercer Risk, Finance, and Insurance, "Impact of Association Health Plan Legislation on Premiums and Coverage for Small Employers," 6/10/03; National Small Business Association, "Press Release: Uninsured would increase by over 1 million under Association Health Plan legislation,"6/10/03)

Governors, Insurance Commissioners, Consumers and Chambers of Commerce all Oppose AHPs. AHPs are opposed by a bi-partisan group of Americans. The National Governors Association said they would raise health care premiums. The insurance commissioners said that AHPs are fine as long as no one gets sick and the Consumers Union argued that they would harm the health care system. (NGA, 4/1/04; National Association of Insurance Commissioners, 4/1/04; Consumers Union, 1/26/04; Coalition Opposed to AHP Legislation, 2/23/04)
We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

spiritme
Pirate
Posts: 1820
Joined: 04-11-2004 08:01 PM

Post by spiritme » 09-20-2004 09:27 PM

http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/article ... 6_n8_1.cfm
hope that this is not a double post....just found this also!
spiritme:rolleyes:

User avatar
tiffany
Pirate
Posts: 18974
Joined: 06-28-2003 02:25 PM

Post by tiffany » 09-20-2004 10:47 PM

The new Medicare Prescription drug plan is a scam. It does not cut out of pocket costs for Seniors. 90% of Seniors have pension plans that allow them prescriptions at a reduced rate. Mine is 60 to 80% they pay.

What Medicare is doing is bribing the Corporations now with big bucks to not drop the millions of retirees on prescription benefits promised at time of retirement.

If you are really very low income then you do get a break. That's what it should be. But if you have coverage through a company pension look out cuz they are looking to drop you and say, well you can get coverage now through Medicare so bye. They were going to give it to just very low income and the Corporations said no. We'll drop our retirees and you'll be stuck with millions of people because we don't want to pay the rising costs. So a deal was made to give them a payback for keeping their retirees which is what they are supposed to be doing. It is part of the benefits package when you retire. Of course this is an assumption because IBM said in a letter that they were for the new Medicare prescription plan. Why would they unless they were going to drop their retirees into the Medicare drug system. That's what's going to happen I conclude.

Only thing is if you are not very low income you have to pay 50 to 80% for your drugs. You can only get them at this lousy savings till you reach something like $1,500 or so, after that you have to pay all of it till $4,000 then they will pay 80%. I know I may not have the stats right. But it is a rip off and gives the insurance companies and Corporations billions of dollars. The deal with giving money to the Corporations as a bribe is they are supposed to use that money to help with costs of drugs. But we all know the money will go into the top execs pockets and the share holders will think there company is being profitable. Instead it's all a lie. They are slashing pensions now and saying to shareholders look we have a profit this year. At the expense of the retirees. Disgusting. Bush is going to make us suffer much more if he is re-elected.
Last edited by tiffany on 09-20-2004 10:56 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply

Return to “Bush/Cheney '04 Campaign”