Palin Ripped by D.N.C. for Proposing to Voucherize Medicare
Sarah Palin may have handed her opponents a big weapon on Wednesday when she proposed voucherizing Medicare in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. My colleague, Teddy Davis has more: Sarah Palin came under fire from national Democrats on Wednesday for proposing to convert Medicare from an open-ended entitlement that guarantees seniors almost unlimited access to care into a voucher system that provides retirees only a fixed sum of money to purchase private health insurance. "It would end Medicare as we know it," said DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse on a conference call with reporters. "To say that we're going to do away with Medicare and go to a voucher system where seniors would be depending on the very insurers who today are discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions is scurrilous, it's risky, it's scary, and it has no place in this debate." Palin opened herself up to the Medicare attack by floating the voucher proposal in an op-ed she wrote for Wednesday's Wall Street Journal. Replacing traditional Medicare with vouchers is one of several market-oriented ideas that Palin would like to see implemented. "Instead of poll-driven 'solutions,' let's talk about real health-care reform: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven," wrote Palin. "As the Cato Institute's Michael Cannon and others have argued, such policies include giving all individuals the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers; providing Medicare recipients with vouchers that allow them to purchase their own coverage; reforming tort laws to potentially save billions each years in wasteful spending; and changing costly state regulations to allow people to buy insurance across state lines." Cannon, the Cato expert referenced by Palin, has not had any direct contact with the former Alaska governor or any of her advisers. He did, however, come to her defense on the Medicare issue. "Vouchers would not make seniors less secure, it would make them more secure," Cannon told ABC News. "Everyone agrees that Medicare cannot go on spending as much money as it does now. The voucher idea allows individual consumers to make their own decisions about what they need and what they don't need." "Giving Medicare seniors a voucher is the most rational, the most humane way to contain Medicare spending," he added. Asked about the DNC's charge that Palin's proposal would leave seniors with pre-existing conditions vulnerable, Cannon, the director of health policy studies at Cato, called it "pure uninformed demagoguery." Cannon says that under proposals he has developed, bigger vouchers would be given to people with pre-existing conditions as well as to people with low incomes. Since Palin has only floated the voucher idea and has not unveiled a detailed proposal, it is impossible to assess exactly how seniors with pre-existing conditions would fare under it. Palin is not alone among Republicans in wanting to save federal money by voucherizing Medicare. As National Journal's Ron Brownstein has reported, four-fifths of House Republicans voted to voucherize Medicare for all Americans younger than 55 on April 2 as part of the GOP's alternative budget plan. Hoping to regain the offensive in the health-care debate, the DNC launched a six-figure television ad buy on Tuesday targeting 10 House Republicans on this issue. The 10 House Republicans targeted by the DNC on Medicare are: House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio, House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Rep. Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota, Rep. Lee Terry of Nebraska, Rep. Patrick Tiberi of Ohio, Rep. Mary Bono Mack of California, Rep. Don Young of Alaska, Rep. Jean Schmidt of Ohio, and Rep. Erik Paulsen of Minnesota. Watch the national cable version of the DNC's ad HERE. The war between the parties over Medicare was ignited last month when Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele unveiled a "seniors' bill of rights" while appearing on ABC's "Good Morning America." Republicans saw an opening on Medicare, an issue which has traditionally favored Democrats, because Democrats on Capitol Hill have proposed funding part of their health-care overhaul with reductions in Medicare spending. Palin aide Pam Pryor did not have an immediate response to the Democratic criticism.
Email
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Voucherizing medicare, is that the republican death panels coming into play? Sorry grandma, you don’t have the right number of stamps to earn you that hip replacement this year. Better save up for next year and hope you don’t have glaucoma, diabetes, or alzheimers to eat away at the available vouchers.
Posted by: Coracii | September 9, 2009, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm
How is this not rationing? This is what angers most thinking people. The republicans throw around all these accusations, but when further examination is done you see the contradition. Say a senior purchases the health plan he/she can afford with this voucher and something happens that is not covered based on the plan. What is that senior to do? Let me guess, stand before the voucher death panel. Right?
Posted by: Ken in Atlanta | September 9, 2009, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
All Republican health care initiatives are nothing more than attempts to channel public money into the coffers of profit motivated health care providers.
I want to see health-for-profit destroyed in this country.
Posted by: Leonard Smith | September 9, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
More than 20 million folks unemployed. Tent Cities all over the land. People sleeping on the street in the cracks of cardboard boxes. Food banks operating at an all time high. The school year just started and Mary, James, Hakeem, Suzy, et at are late for the 1st period ’cause they are in the cafeteria eating their government-provided breakfast. Ain’t no book stores in Detroit, where only 23% of this year’s high school students will graduate. However, keep right on telling me what Sarah Palin, Levy, Rush and Glen Beck said and everything will be alright.
Posted by: Percy | September 9, 2009, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
And yet, this Congress is cutting off oxygen for Medicare beneficiaries, because apparently THAT’S a good way to save money. Survival of the fittest?
Posted by: Deanna Nielson | September 9, 2009, 8:20 pm 8:20 pm
Why is what S. Palin thinks of any import to anyone out there? She is a resigned Governor with NO political standing, known for her wacky, inflammatory, nonsensical posturing!
Posted by: C.S. | September 9, 2009, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm
No one is talking about lowering the costs at the real source. The Avg. CEO of a hospital system (most are non -profits) Ranges from 500k to 2 Million per year. This is public record. The top 4 execs at South Jersey Hospital system are paid Approx 1.5 Million a year. Also the profits at the end of the year MUST be spent as they are non-for-profit. Now multiply that figures by US Census data of 51,000 major non profits, including mental health and social service Organizations is in excess of $50 Billion dollars/Yr. I worked for 3 non profits. I know how the money was divided at the Fiscal tear end, including new cars, staff bonuses and outrageous pays. The President stopped outrageous pays at AIG and auto makers, when are we going to address health care. PLEASE get this into the discussion.
Posted by: Michael Stein | September 10, 2009, 12:14 am 12:14 am
If private insurance-centered health care is passed without a broad and robust (mini-Medicare) public option, the losers will be the Democrats. Why? When people find out that health insurance companies charge three times what employer provided insurance costs, and the insurers increase prices to cover preexisting conditions and so on, no one will be able to afford health insurance without a public option.
Posted by: steven, henderson NV | September 10, 2009, 3:10 am 3:10 am
Why is it we criticize a plan that would incentivize people to buy health insurance while advocating a plan that would penalize people for not buying health insurance (people will pay big fines for not having health insurance once this thing passes). The answer is simple, and it explains why Obama believes health care reform will not add to the deficit … democrats know that a good portion of people without health insurance are uninsured by choice (statistically, it makes sense for some to pay doctors as you go and contribute to a HSA). Democrats are banking (literally) on the fact that the fines people will be forced to pay will cover the costs of health care. Ironically, no one cares. No one is talking about that aspect of the plan. They’re too busy criticizing others.
Posted by: Miss M | September 10, 2009, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Lets have the people in the congress and senate have to use the same plan they produce. I think we would start to get some cross talking on how to fix the problem. Also why is Sarah Palin throwing out ideas? I personally dont care what she thinks anymore. Kind of like Joe the plummer, only I am 59 and downsized and has a wife that is a 11 years survivor of stage 4 lung cancer. What do you think the chances of us getting even good insurance when I obtain a new position ?
Posted by: Bob Bowman | September 10, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm
The republicans are the all time greatest at projection. They always falsely accuse democrats of things that they are planning. Talk about rationing care and the government getting between you and your doctor.
Posted by: Jerry | September 10, 2009, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm
Maybe if we all ignore her she will go away
Posted by: xmarks | September 10, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
seniors making their own choices with a voucher to escape the government control, we can not allow this to happen. they need big government or they will die under the weight of their on freedom.
-note to libs, sarcasm
Posted by: antiDave | September 12, 2009, 7:28 am 7:28 am
Evidently no one has checked on what Seniors are now paying outf or Medicare premiums,copays & Medicare Supplement Plans. You go to the Doctor, they submit the claim to Medicare-Medicare approves a very small percentage of the doctor’s claim-and then they pay 80% of what they allow. Your claim is then sent on to the Supplement Insurer (if you have one) and they pay the balance (or less-depending on your plan). By the time I pay my medicare & medicare RX premiums,copays & and pay for my medicare supplement–they (Government &/Or Social Security get back 1/2 of my SS check. Also, many doctors no longer take Medicare even if you have the best supplement.
Posted by: Francis Dassler | September 12, 2009, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
Palin needs to rethink her plan of Vouchers–This would end up exactly like the “Death Panels”. What happens when you need more care (say, added illness-accidents, or whatever for the Seniors & they are out of vouchers for the month)?? Also, the doctors probably would only take a limited number of Vouchers each month since Medicare, even now, is not accepted by many doctors. Of course in some cases, if they find out that you have a good supplement, your bill is upped considerably. I have seen this many times in trying to help friends and family decipher their billings.
Posted by: Reddok | September 12, 2009, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
Medical providers all know the place where costs need to be cut Seniors—and I am a 68 y/o paramedic—who do not know where they are, who they are, an who you are are taken in for procedures surgeries. Why? My spouse and I have signed letters for one another and our children. When we are no longer know our name, our loved one’s face and cannot comprehend where the heck we are, we wish only comfort care. Got cancer? Pile on the morphine. No radiation; no chemo. The billions spent continuing aggressive care beyond the point where it makes sense is what has driven costs out of control. Write your own simple letter today. “Give me comfort care—feed me, clean me, make sure I’m not in pain—and let me die.” Sounds like a national agenda to me.
Posted by: loie | September 13, 2009, 5:35 am 5:35 am
She’s a fool.
Posted by: Pam | September 14, 2009, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm