Showing posts with label Medicare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Medicare. Show all posts

Thursday, October 25, 2012

FORTY LIES IN 40 DAYS: #29 Annie Will Protect Your Healthcare

If Annie returns to Congress, with some thoughtful help from her town hall sidekick Ursula, she promises to continue to try to dismantle not only Obamacare but Medicare. 

Promises to "seniors" aside, she would put the healthcare of this nation in a more precarious position than it is now. She thinks everyone who deserves healthcare already has it. And she thinks there are some people who are getting it who don't deserve it.

She inscrutably and conveniently forgets that we all pay, or are "taxed", if you will, for the healthcare of those who do not have it.

She also forgets that health care is a right of all people in a civilized nation.

She forgets that she is covered, now and for life.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Another Ann Marie Buerkle Stunt: Medicare and Hospitals

For Immediate Release   
Date: December 14, 2011
Contact: Liza Lowery
(315)559-9388
Rep. Buerkle Introduces Legislation
to Help Hospitals
Washington, DC - Today, Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle (NY-25) introduced the Help 
Our Hospitals Act of 2011, which repeals a section of the President’s Health Care Law that cuts 
Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments to hospitals. ...

This is a legislative stunt. It is another Ann Marie Buerkle/Tea Party/Republican attempt to gut the 2010 Health Care Law and nothing more. Since the Health Care bill passed, Republicans have been intent upon defeating any comprehensive health care laws and with defeating President Obama with a crudeness that feels racist.

Our gal Buerkle is congenitally incapable of posing both sides of any complicated issue. In this instance, a Google search shows that the primary web sites concerned with this issue of Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) payments to hospitals are large corporate law firms who represent hospitals.

The truth is that at this time no one can say with assurance what the total effect will be upon hospitals receiving DSH payments. Shifts in how care presently being paid for by Medicare are assured in 2014. The Health Care Law has the means to make up the difference to hospitals in other ways using more direct and simplified formulas. Buerkle is unwilling to recognize this publicly or to discuss it.

For a enlightening discussion of the effects of redistribution of risk that changes in health care will make upon hospitals receiving DSH funds, see this Brookings Institute paper.


Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Ann Marie Buerkle: She's Disgusted ... Call a Waaaambulance

Waaaa...Ann Marie is disgusted. (See bottom of blog for coverage of Ann Marie's disgust.) Join the club. Blueskygirl has been disgusted since November.

Buerkle cries foul and claims the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee puts politics above people. 

Hmmmm...Blueskygirl sits sipping her coffee this morning and wondering how that argument squares with Buerkle's having done not one damn thing to create jobs? Her denial of global warming and all its implications? Her blithe answers to questions about energy policy? Her incessant push to destroy Planned Parenthood? Her wicked support by silence for wars that have cost this country 1.2 Trillion (that's not a typo) dollars and the lives of thousands of soldiers, not to mention the costs to whole civilian populations of Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Yeah, Ann Marie, you sure show us every day how you put people above politics. Boy, is Blueskygirl chastened!
  
So, what, exactly, about the robo calls isn't true, Ann Marie? Because you do support tax breaks for millionaires and corporations.

You do continue to support a Medicare voucher system that will quickly become unaffordable for many seniors. 

You do keep pushing the idea that Medicare won't change for people over 55. That is, Blueskygirl admits, consistent with your narrow view of your job when it comes to serving the people in your district. Let younger people deal with the massive problems you and your miserable excuse for parties, Republican and Tea, are fighting to create. 

Blueskygirl gets the distinct feeling that what really disgusts Buerkle is having to face real music. Her constituents are upset, and they should be upset. Buerkle is a foot soldier for politicians who intend to continue to gut programs that help people with reduced and limited resources while pandering to corporations and the wealthy. 

Buerkle is at her best not having to actually listen to real people with real concerns. She's got all the answers, supplied to her by daily Republican and Teaparty briefings on how to handle the folks back home.

That's why Paul Singer and company, (see Blueskygirl's blogs here,)  love people like dilettante politician Buerkle.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman explains how the Republicans and the Teaparty plan to destroy Medicare: 

Between an aging population and rising health costs, then, preserving anything like the programs for seniors we now have will require a significant increase in spending on these programs as a percentage of G.D.P. And unless we offset that rise with drastic cuts in defense spending — which Republicans, needless to say, oppose — this means a substantial rise in overall spending, which we can afford only if taxes rise.

So when people like Mr. Boehner reject out of hand any increase in taxes, they are, in effect, declaring that they won’t preserve programs benefiting older Americans in anything like their current form. It’s just a matter of arithmetic.

Which brings me back to those Republican freshmen. Last year, older voters, who split their vote almost evenly between the parties in 2008, swung overwhelmingly to the G.O.P., as Republicans posed successfully as defenders of Medicare. Now Democrats are pointing out that the G.O.P., far from defending Medicare, is actually trying to dismantle the program. So you can see why those Republican freshmen are nervous.

But the Democrats aren’t engaging in scare tactics, they’re simply telling the truth. Policy details aside, the G.O.P.’s rigid anti-tax position also makes it, necessarily, the enemy of the senior-oriented programs that account for much of federal spending. And that’s something voters ought to know. 


Krugman's complete and excellent article is here.

Here is the "disgusted" article from Human Events, 6/14/11, by John Gizzi

'Disgusted' Rep. Buerkle Fires Back at DCCC 'Mediscare' Calls

“Disgusted” is how a freshman Republican House member told HUMAN EVENTS she felt after a day of her office answering telephone calls generated by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that led to tearful constituents asking whether the GOP lawmaker wanted to “end Medicare.” 

“Some of my constituents were in tears and probably can’t sleep tonight because robocalls from the DCCC told them that the [House Republican] budget will get rid of their Medicare,” an outraged Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle (R.-N.Y.) told us.  “Those kind of tactics are mean-spirited and they lack integrity.

“I’m disgusted at the DCCC because, clearly, they put politics above people.”

A clearly angry Buerkle contacted HUMAN EVENTS last Thursday evening, after her district office was deluged with what she said were “at least one hundred telephone calls from constituents generated by robocalls from the DCCC claiming that I was supporting a ‘plan to end Medicare’ that increases the debt because of ‘more tax breaks for millionaires and corporations.’ ”

“Finally, after our staff left in the early evening, I began answering some of the calls myself,” recalled Buerkle, one of three former nurses elected to the House in the Republican sweep last fall and a strong supporter of the Medicare reform plan in the GOP budget.  “Some of my constituents were in tears, and asked me why Republicans wanted to get rid of their Medicare.  I explained—to several callers, in fact—that the Republican plan does not ‘get rid of Medicare,’ that it doesn’t even affect anyone over 54, and preserves health care for the next generation of senior citizens.”

The Syracuse-area lawmaker also told HUMAN EVENTS that the technology in the robocalls “apparently permitted the person receiving them to just press a number and be connected to my office.  And they were urged to protest what the Democrats claimed was the Republican position on Medicare.  This is something we’re going to have to face and deal with.” 

Buerkle wasn’t the only House member getting “Mediscare” calls.  Her office told me that she was one of 13 House Republicans on a DCCC “target list” for robocalls that refer to them as backers of a “plan to end Medicare.”  (
Politico later published the list of “Targeted Members,” which includes 12 freshman Republicans and six-term Rep. Steve King of Iowa.  All are considered vulnerable to a Democratic assault next year.)

Last month, Democrat Kathy Hochul won a nationally watched special election for the House seat in a Buffalo, N.Y., area district that had been in Republican hands for four decades.  Because her campaign was based in part on charges that her opponent wanted to “end Medicare,” it was widely expected that Democrats would expand this kind of broadside nationwide and especially at GOP lawmakers in marginal districts.

However, by upsetting senior citizens to the point of tears in some cases, Buerkle charges, Democrats “have gone too far—and I’m disgusted.” 

TARGETED REPUBLICAN MEMBERS:

“Arizona Rep. Ben Quayle, Florida Rep. Dan Webster, Iowa Rep. Steve King, Illinois Rep. Bobby Schilling, New Hampshire Rep. Charlie Bass, Nevada Rep. Joe Heck, New Jersey Rep. Jon Runyan, New York Representatives Nan Hayworth and Ann Marie Buerkle, Ohio Rep. Steve Chabot, Pennsylvania Rep. Lou Barletta, South Dakota Rep. Kristi Noem and Virginia Rep. Scott Rigell.” (Alex Burns and James Hohmann, “Medicare Wars,”
Politico Morning Score, 06/09/11)

Monday, May 16, 2011

Don't Worry, Be Happy


In Cato at the Town Hall Meeting last month, Ann Marie Buerkle dismissed a couple of serious concerns and the audience never got to ask followup questions.

  • Asked about hydrofracking, Buerkle extolled the virtues of natural gas, like how it will solve all our energy problems forever. She explained with great authority that "someone" at ESF,  SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry in Syracuse, said that hydrofracking was safe and, anyway, the gas is too deep to be reached economically up here in Central New York. If development goes forward in NY, it will be where the gas is close to the surface down by Elmira and Corning. 
            So long, Elmira and Corning.
  • Asked to explain vouchers in Medicare reform, she told us that it wasn't a voucher system. A couple minutes later she called it a voucher system but  said that no one over 55, which was a large percentage of the audience that evening, would not see any change in their Medicare and so not to worry. 
            So long, under-55s.

Buerkle's assumption that everyone in the audience is happy to be self-serving doesn't, fortunately, apply to everyone. Virtually half of the voters back in November, the people who didn't vote for her, are concerned about issues that affect more than just themselves and their own back yards.




Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Social Security Works Presents:


REP. ANN MARIE BUERKLE
Wants Us to Work ’Til We Die

  • Wants to cut our Social Security benefits and raise the retirement age 
  • Wants to take away Medicare as we know it
  • Wants to slash Medicaid―that’s health care for seniors, women, children and people with disabilities 
  • Wants to give wealthy Americans a huge tax cut
  
REP. BUERKLE’S DANGEROUS RECORD
Voted to create a “fast track” in Congress to cut Social Security benefits and raise the retirement age to 69 or more.  Voted to cut the Social Security Administration by $1.7 billion. 

(Voted YES on H.Con.Res 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml
   (Voted YES on H.R. 1, Feb. 19, 2011; http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll147.xml)

Voted to take away Medicare as we know it and leave us at the mercy of insurance companies.  Voted to double seniors’ costs and to raise the age of eligibility for Medicare from 65 to 67.
(Voted YES on H.Con.Res. 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml

Voted to slash $1.4 trillion from Medicaid – the health care program for seniors, women, children and people with disabilities. 
(Voted YES on H.Con.Res. 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml

Voted to give a $1.1 trillion tax cut to the richest Americans and to cut their tax rate and the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. 
 (Voted YES on H.Con.Res. 34, the House Budget Resolution, April 15, 2011) http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll277.xml


TELL REP. BUERKLE:

Hands Off Social Security, Medicare, 

and Medicaid!




Explanation of Votes in Congress
The House Republican Budget Resolution (H.Con.Res. 34) sets forth the congressional budget for the federal government for Fiscal Year 2012, including the appropriate budgetary levels for FY2013-FY2021.  It was approved 235 to 193 on April 15, 2011 (Roll Call Vote 277).  It would drastically restructure the Medicare and Medicaid programs while implementing a “fast track” procedure for cutting Social Security benefits. Specifically it would:

Voted to create a “fast track” procedure to force action on Social Security. This likely would result in significant benefit cuts, including an increase in the retirement age to 69 or more. It would require the President and Congress to take up Social Security reform under “expedited procedures” whenever there is a projected shortfall (there is currently a shortfall projected in 2037). The Republican budget endorses deep cuts to Social Security benefits, as described by Rep. Paul Ryan in “The Path to Prosperity.

Voted to take away Medicare as we know it – the traditional Medicare program. Beginning in 2022, new Medicare enrollees would have to buy coverage through a private insurance company.  Medicare would provide seniors with a subsidy to purchase coverage, but it would not keep pace with rising medical costs. By 2022 a 65-year-old’s average share of costs would be nearly $7,000 higher than under the current system, $12,500 rather than $5,630.  This increase would consume nearly 50 percent of their Social Security benefits. The increase in the Medicare eligibility age to 67, from 65, represents even further benefit cuts.

Voted to slash $1.4 trillion from Medicaid. This would be achieved by converting the program into a block-grant to states and repealing the Affordable Care Act health care reform. A block-grant will cap the amount payable to states, which will respond by reducing eligibility and services and increasing cost sharing. Repealing the Affordable Care Act will eliminate 16 million new people estimated to get Medicaid coverage. 

Voted give a $1.1 trillion tax cut to the richest Americans and to cut their tax rate and the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. The Republican budget extended all of President Bush’s tax cuts, which would cut taxes by $700 billion over 10 years for the richest 2 percent of Americans. It also would cut taxes by $371.4 billion for the richest Americans by repealing the surtax on investment income and additional Hospital Insurance tax contained in the Affordable Care Act. The Republican budget also would cut the top marginal tax rate for individuals from 35 percent to 25 percent and reduce the corporate tax rate by the same amount. (No estimates are available about how much more that would save individuals and corporations in taxes.)   

Voted to cut the Social Security Administration by $1.7 billion, H.R. 1: This was a House Republican proposal to fund the government through the end of Fiscal Year 2011. It was approved 239 to 189 on February 19, 2011 (Roll Call Vote 147). Among its $61 billion in cuts from President Obama’s budget was a $1.7 billion cut to the Social Security Administration (SSA) below the level needed to provide promised service levels and to fund current projects. It was estimated that H.R. 1 would have the following effects: SSA would have had to furlough its workers for up to one month by the end of 2011; up to 400,000 people would have had their retirement, survivors, and Medicare applications significantly delayed, becoming part of a large and growing backlog; and up to 290,000 people would have had their disability benefit applications delayed.


Notes:

Paul Ryan, “Advancing Social Security Reforms,” in Path to Prosperity, April 2011, p. 48. Available at http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf

Kaiser Family Foundation, “Proposed Changes to Medicare in ‘Path to Prosperity,’” April 2011. Available at http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/8179.pdf

Kaiser Family Foundation, “Medicaid and the Uninsured: Implications of a Federal Block Grant for Medicaid,” April 2011. Available at http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/8173.pdf 

Center on Budget & Policy Priorities, “Statement of Robert Greenstein, President, on Chairman Ryan’s Budget Plan,” April 20, 2011, available at http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3452; Tax Policy Center, “Reduce Corporate Income Tax Rate and Repeal Various Income Tax and Payroll Tax Provisions: Impact on Tax Revenue vs. Current Policy Baseline, 2012-2021,” April 7, 2011, available at http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/PDF/T11-0088.pdf.

Ibid, Path to Prosperity, p. 6. Available at  http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf  


House Ways and Means Committee Democratic Staff, “Ways and Means Democrats Blast Republican Plan to Shut Down Social Security Administration,” February 15, 2011. Available at http://democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=11465