Romney makes renewed Medicare push

(CBS News) After a week marked by controversy surrounding Mitt Romney's comment about the "47 percent," the Republican presidential candidate's campaign is making a renewed push on Medicare, reiterating Romney's message on the issue through a series of ads and public appearances while rehashing attacks on President Obama's plan.

In a new ad out Thursday morning, Romney supporter Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., tells voters that when it comes to Medicare, Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, "get it."

"Medicare is going broke," Rubio says in the ad. "That's not politics. It's math. Anyone who wants to leave Medicare like it is, is for letting it go bankrupt. My mother's 81 and depends on Medicare."

"We can save Medicare without changing hers," Rubio continues. "But only if younger Americans accept that our Medicare will be different than our parents,' when we retire in 30 years. But after all they did for us, isn't that the least we can do?"

Romney will continue to make this case at a rally in Sarasota Thursday, focusing on Medicare in his remarks about building a stronger middle class, and reiterating attacks on what the campaign is casting as Mr. Obama's government dependency.

Meanwhile, on Friday, Ryan will address the AARP - many of whose members likely have a direct interest in the issue.

And the campaign is pouncing on a new CBO report estimating that about six million people will be penalized for not buying insurance.

"President Obama robbed Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare, and with every passing day, more evidence mounts that Obamacare is a costly disaster," the Romney campaign said in a Thursday morning email blast. "Yesterday, the CBO informed us that even more of the middle-class families who President Obama promised would see no tax increase will in fact see a massive tax increase thanks to Obamacare."

The Obama campaign, however, is being equally aggressive in defense of its Medicare plan, airing television ads in a number of swing states, and sending surrogates like Bill Clinton out on the trail to hammer home their message.

Medicare has become a prominent source of debate on the campaign trail in recent weeks, as Democrats attempt to tie Romney to Ryan's controversial budget plan, which would overhaul the nation's Medicare program to a voucher program. Republicans, meanwhile, have targeted the president for having allegedly "robbed" Medicare of $716 billion dollars. Democrats deny this notion, and point out that Ryan's plan includes the same reductions. (CBS News' fact-check on the claim that Mr. Obama would "rob" Medicare can be found here.)

The issue is particularly important in Florida, a critical battleground state for Romney, which boasts the nation's largest proportion of residents over 65 years old.

According to recent polls, President Obama is so far leading Romney on Medicare in the polls: Fox News polls of Florida, Ohio, and Virginia, show the president leading Romney on the question of who would better protect Medicare by 13 percent, 14 percent and 12 percent respectively. Quinnipiac/CBS News/New York Times surveys out of Colorado, Virginia, and Wisconsin also showed Mr. Obama in the lead, by 5 points, 10 points, and 7 points respectively. A Washington Post poll of Virginia, similarly, showed Mr. Obama leading Romney 52 percent to 39 percent when asked who they trust to do a better job determining Medicare's future.

According to Mike Frank, vice president of government studies at the conservative Heritage Foundation, the Romney campaign has everything to gain from elucidating its position on Medicare in a clear and convincing fashion - especially since the issue is not going to go away, in this election or afterward.

"Making the case for Medicare reform is the communications challenge of our age," Frank told CBSNews.com. "You can't run away from it on a substantive level -- it's too big of an issue to avoid. And by choosing Ryan as your running mate, you're choosing to aggressively confront it."

Frank concedes that addressing Medicare has been politically "radioactive" for years, but that it could become less so if likeable politicians make it clear that they're not out to hurt seniors. A skilled speaker like Ryan, he argued, could be particularly impactful in delivering that kind of message, as could Romney if he adopts Ryan's rhetorical skills and political angles on the issue.

"The message is very important here," Frank said.

Even if people disagree with that message, Frank argues, Romney and Ryan should get credit "for being willing to tackle such an important issue in the context of a national election."

"If this issue is put forward in the campaign and proves to be radioactive again and the voters are willing to believe the incendiary charges being leveled against it, then what would happen to the country is horrific," he said.

[Carly_EngageAmerica]

Medicare "as we know it" cannot continue. Now that Congress did allow current law to be enacted as written, ratcheting down provider payment rates cannot be done without consequences for patients. The actuary states, 'In practice, providers could not sustain continuing negative margins and, absent legislative changes, would have to withdraw from providing services to Medicare beneficiaries, merge with other provider groups, or shift substantial portions of Medicare costs to their non-Medicare, non-Medicaid payers,' (http://******/KhlvrI)
There is another option. Moving Medicare to a premium support model, paired with other reforms, could solve the problems facing the program in a way that is affordable for taxpayers and preserves access to quality coverage for America's seniors.

[blackUSAguy]

Romney BUTTBOY

[nearl451]

There does need to be some frankdiscussion on ways to continue to make Medicare solvent.

The issue is that the average medicare recipient pays $170K into the program, but gets $350K out (or something close to that,that I have read). So either cost has to be contained for procedures and drugs OR people have to cut some benefits OR means testing must be used not pay people who have their own insurance or excessive wealth OR FICA rates have to go go. Of a combination thereof.

Voucher plans and exempting people over 55 years of age are truly not the solution. They don't do anything because there is little incentive for private industry to manage the system via that voucher sum effectivelty.

The reason that Medicare was instituted in the first place was because insurance companies would not insure old people as they wer to high a risk of money loss.

So instead of the pandering and phony charges on both sides......when can we have the real discussion?

[nygurl1]

Can't be ANY real discussion before an election and with reps stopping everything the dems try to do!
Solve that one genius and I might agree!

[rayward73446]

Romney and Ryan have no interest in trying to save medicare, or social security. Their plans to use vouchers instead of paying benefits will be the death of both programs for all generations to come. Those under 55 should be given the same opportunity as we who are already receiving benefits. To exclude them from any future benefits regarding both programs is a dire mistake. With the volatility of the stock market, the huge insurance lobby, the GOP will cave to their donors demands and privatize both programs. This increases the need for both programs to survive and provide real answers to those who retire. We lost thousands of dollars in our 401k's because of the financial meltdown, our retirement fund was depleted because of the greed and criminal acts of the big banks, unscrupulous mortgage lenders, and wall street. The GOP has stolen hundreds of millions of dollars from the social security fund, for their pet projects, and never repaid a dime. the GOP has been trying to destroy social security and medicare for decades. I see no change in their future actions, because their goals are still the same.
As for Romney and Ryan's plans to create jobs, they have nothing to share with us. This tells me that they have similar plans as Walker in Wisconsin, job creation plans that have failed miserably, and resulted in net job losses since he was elected. The GOP is pro business, not pro worker. If you have missed all the actions taken by the GOP to prove my point, you are just not paying attention or you are dead.

[realtimecoffee]

The GOP has stolen hundreds of millions of dollars from the social security fund, for their pet projects, and never repaid a dime.
---
And the Dems went along without a complaint. And it's a lot more than millions by the way.

[No-soup-for-you]

We protect other nations, rather than simply protecting the US. It has cost us more than anything else, especially considering the interest alone is approaching $1 trillion/year.

- Cut down the military to constitutional levels.
- Stop foreign aid of all types.
- Let other nations fend for themselves, and take care of their own problems.
- Get rid of tax credits and subsidies for ALL - people AND corporations.

Then we can pay down that debt.

[Jesus_to_ground_control]

"I believe in Joseph Smith" Mitt Romney

Again no specifics and full of lies. He brushes off gay rights, he doesn't care about the Palestinians' plight and now he only funds his dear wife's multiple sclerosis. This guy is a lying sob of a Mormon!

[inbethlehem]

Mitt. If the point of your little Medicare chart was to provide specifics about your plan, you need to make it 47% bigger. The "specifics" seem to have been cut off.

[RNPRN]

As a RN who has worked for both Medicare and Managed health care, private insurance, Medicare has the most bang for the buck. The administration fees are 2% compared to 20-30% for private insurance. Medicare is going broke because providers get richer for ordering more test, surgeries, office visits. My elderly aunt had cateract surgery, charges exceeded $10,000. Medicare paid $700, not bad for less than an hour of work. Medicare has payment schedules, adjused for geographical area costs. It is the MOST efficient form of health care payment insurance. Politicians take big donations from the insurance industry and are beholden to them. The Medicare advantage programs got reimbursed 15% more (managed Medicare), but their costs were much higher. Obama has cut this increased premium and that is what is going (760 billion) to cut Medicare expenses. No beneficiaries benefits will be cut. Medicare has an army of doctors and nurses that review provisions for payment. Very, very rarely is something turned down and the beneficiary penalized. My private health insurance, I have to call on every claim to get it paid. As an RN who has insurance experience, it is crazy to expect the elderly to shop for insurance. Romney and Ryan's vouchers are only a give away to insurance companies and to shift costs to seniors. And regarding the 47%, now that i am retired, I will no longer be paying federal tax or very little. But having worked 2 jobs most of my life I paid my fair share and earned my benefits the last 45 years. Tell that to Ryan that will get a fat pension and health care for life for his 12 years in congress. If you want to save money, cut the benefits for congress that works about 3 months a year.

[realtimecoffee]

I do hear more and more GP's are opting out of the system. That's a real problem. And I don't hear anyone taking about cutting benefits for current or soon to be retirees, so you should be fine as long as our Dem/Rep government doesn't find better things to spend the money on.

[arthanyel]

by realtimecoffee September 20, 2012 4:17 PM EDT
It will either be reformed or fail. And so far neither dominant party has offered anything more than bandaids. Today's young adults know MC and SS will not be there for them in any semblence to today's programs. The Ponzi alarm has gone off.

----- cut here -----

Mostly correct. 100% true neither party has offered any credible solutions. Social Security is actually not in that much trouble until we have a breakthrough in life extension (which we WILL at some point). Even though the program "goes bankrupt" on the current trajectory, it never goes that far negative and goes BACK to being positive when the baby boomers start to pass on. SS could be maintained with no changes and plugged for 8 to 12 years with additional spending (less costly than the wars) until it goes back to solvency.

Or we could lift the artificial limit on the amount of income subject to SS taxation (capped now at something like $106K) and that ALONE would make the program solvent.

As for Medicare, the problem with Medicare isn't Medicare - meaning, its not that we have a health care social program. The PROBLEM is that costs are rising at three times the rate of inflation, and unless we can cap it AT the rate of inflation eventually it ill overwhelm the entire budget.

Solving that problem isn't about reducing benefits, however - in fact, a 65 year old man on Medicare in Portland, OR costs the US Taxpayers ONE HALF the cost of the SAME man living in Miami Beach. and that is because in Portland Medicare is delivered via non-profit OHSU that focuses on proactive, preventive care and in Miami it is delivered through for-profit hospitals that make MORE PROFIT treating people in the ER than proactively.

So, bottom line, we can maintain Social Security an Medicare as they currently exist, without cutting benefits, IF we address the over-inflation rate of cost increase AND there is no major life-extension breakthrough.

[realtimecoffee]

There is also the problem of the empty SS trust fund. Paying that back will only get harder as the debt sevice costs rise. I do like the proactive stuff Portland is doing, but that doesn't do much for us downstate folks. And really I'm not saying SS and MC can't be fixed, I'm saying our two party system doesn't have the will to fix it. I mean they cut SS funding by a third for a political talking point.

[arthanyel]

realtimecoffee: Agree. The trust fund technically doesn't have to be replenished, but if it is not then the gap between revenue and payouts gets even larger and is a bigger problem. The fly in the ointment is that life extension treatements WILL HAPPEN. We don't know when, or how well they will work, but they are inevitable. And the longer life can bee extened, the less viable Social Security becomes.

And completely agree the current two party system where both parties are equally corrupt and inept will not solve these problems.

[YourRearViewMirror1]

by realtimecoffee September 20, 2012 5:26 PM EDT
When did the Democrat party not have 41 votes in the Senate hmmm? They could have stopped any of it if they cared to. They did not. In stead they just smiled and waved. That's the way the Dem/Rep scam works. Angry speeches and late night deals.

**************************************

Hey realtimecoffee,

Keep on believing as you do now. I am sure your beloved nation will benefit somedays. Like I said, I know its hard to admit mistakes but once you admit a mistake, you will feel free to move forward to help your nation prosper.

[realtimecoffee]

When did they not have the votes? If all these things were so terrible why did they allow it? Why do you support a party that allows terrible things?

[YourRearViewMirror1]

Hello,

Is there any conservative out there brave enough to rebuttal me?

Hello!

[realtimecoffee]

Rebuttal you? You are just playing the same old game for your own ego. To passionately support either dominant party is to support more of the same. To claim the Republicans did this or the Democrats did that is to ignore that they BOTH went along with all of it. If they didn't they would have stopped this Ponzi by government long ago.