FactCheck.org: Obama Misrepresents Ryan Plan

[alp227]

President Barack Obama has been hammering away at Rep. Paul Ryan’s Medicare proposal, misrepresenting what it would mean for seniors.

Since his deficit speech April 13, Obama has continued to claim that the Republican plan would throw Medicare beneficiaries to the open insurance market. But, as we said last week, the plan would create a new Medicare exchange, with rules for participating insurance companies.

Obama, April 20, Facebook town hall: And if the health insurance companies don’t sell a policy that covers your illnesses, you’re out of luck. … ou, a Medicare recipient, will go out and you’ll shop for the best insurance that you’ve got — that you can find. …

Obama, April 21, Democratic National Committee event: Or do we end up balancing our budget and reducing our deficit by fundamentally reworking our social compact … so that we say to our seniors Medicare is no longer a guarantee that you will have health care when you are older — here’s a voucher; we’re going to shift the costs on to you, and if you can’t get the health care that you need on the open market, then tough luck?

Ryan’s plan would shift future beneficiaries to private insurance plans, but it doesn’t call for seniors to find their own plans “on the open market.” Instead, it sets up a Medicare exchange. Obama ignores certain provisions of the proposal.

Full story: http://factcheck.org/2011/04/obama-misrepresents-ryan-plan/

[shraby]

1. And a medicare exchange is better, how? I'm a senior and

I like it the way it is. At 65 and over, thinking becomes a tad bit harder and comparing plans like insurance is nigh unto impossible even if a person is sharp. Forget it, it's a non starter. Bad enough we have to pick a Plan D company and not get ripped off with it.

[inademv]

2. Factcheck misrepresents Obama's characterization

-The president implies that seniors could be rejected by insurance companies when he says that “if you can’t get the health care that you need on the open market, then tough luck.” But the Medicare plans would have to accept them.

Unless the specific coverage that said senior needs is not included in the, what is sure to be an extremely limited, list of minimum coverage required by the so called exchange.

-As we said, seniors would buy through a Medicare exchange. They’d get $8,000 on average in 2022, not “$6,000 or $7,000.”

Key word being "average." Simple to overlook and mischaracterize but I would expect more from Factcheck.

[MiniMe]

3. The problem I have with it is that I am 53 now

Ryan is talking about 10 years from now, and as proposed we would get a voucher. I have pre-existing conditions, and I'm sure the voucher wouldn't cover the expense of that. This plan scares me to death.

[JDPriestly]

4. It is still a very bad idea.

Keep the program as it is. I have an inexpensive Medicare advantage plan. In LA where many doctors don't accept Medicare patients, that is a good idea. I don't have to choose a specialist. My insurance company does that for me. Also a good idea in LA where there are so many specialists and it is difficult to find out about their reputations.

Let people choose whether to stay on the current Medicare coverage or change to some other kind of coverage.

I would stay with what I have.

It is not a good idea to ask people over 65 to make a lot of financial decisions about how to invest their money or which insurance plan to choose. Don't expect us to continue to have internet access as we age or to learn new technologies. Some of us will. Many of us will not be able to do that.

The Ryan plan is not good for seniors. It will not work for seniors. It is too complicated and involves too many decisions. No. No. No.

My mother has a hard time understanding what is going on with her insurance as it is, and she is an extremely intelligent woman who has not lost a bit of her memory as far as I can tell. She is lucky. Many seniors have very forgetful periods. The Ryan plan is not appropriate for seniors.

[Johnny Morales]

5. Non=partisan does NOT mean the same thing as Impartial

NON-PARTISAN is a TAX CODE DESIGNATION.

It has very little value beyond giving organizations a tax exempt status as long as they do not tell anyone who to vote for.

They can SAY whatever they want, no matter how ridiculous or stupid for one side, and save all the nice and intelligent words for the other.

In this case Factcheck calls Obama for not being truthful, and infers Ryan's plan is better than he says = leaving those unfamiliar with the sitiuation with a negative feeling re: Obama and a good one re: Ryan.

This is a more subtle type of manipulation than we are used to, but it is still manipulation of the many who only read headlines.

[pansypoo53219]

6. indeed.

i have smelled some bias on them.

[HankyDubs]

7. don't attack factcheck

Just because they get the facts right. Obama did oversimplify the Ryan plan. Fact Check does reveal the critical point, though:

Obama is correct, however, in saying seniors would pay more under this proposal than they would under the current Medicare system, and the CBO estimated seniors’ costs in 2022 would be twice as much as they would be under traditional Medicare.

[Enthusiast]

8. Blah blah blah

It doesn't matter if FactCheck gets it party right.

Wouldn't it just be better to improve the medicare we have now? Shouldn't we first start to negotiate drug prices or allow re-importation? Shouldn't we allocate more law enforcement resources to investigate fraud on the the part of unscrupulous doctors and medical care corporations that are responsible for the soaring costs? This would save billions of dollars.

There is no way things will improve under a voucher program. Come on, people.

[Raster]

9. Simply changing the law to allow the government to negotiate for bulk purchases of drugs....

...and services - as done in Canada -- would save billions. All the voucher system does is allow the same rotten system to stay in place, only making the persons that use medicare pick up more of the tab, while allowing the drug companies and for-profit providers to continue fleecing the American public.

[yurbud]

10. Someone else figured out that Ryan's Medicare proposals make both parties look like hypocrites

It makes the GOP look like hypocrites for calling Obama's exchanges the rest of us socialism and it makes Obama look like a hypocrite for saying exchanges are great for the rest of us but not for seniors.

More cynically, it looks like both parties are carrying the water of the insurance industry at different times, and when they aren't, they're trying to make the other guy drop the bucket.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Fact check is off base on this one...

At this time, there are no products that would suit such an exchange, so they are talking about products that do not exist, on an exchange that does not exist, with premiums which no one can predict, and yet they have a figure for that voucher to buy the unpriced nonexistent products from the non existent exchange.
Unless fact check and Ryan can tell me specifically how the 'exchange' would differ from the 'open market' considering they both would sell for profit products from the same companies.
Where is the aspect of Ryan's plan that demands such products be made available for this 'exchange'? To me, saying 'if not on the open market, there will be an exchange' is like saying 'if they can not find it at the mall, they can shop on the internet' but it does not address the cost nor the source of those products. If you seek the Grail, you can go to the mall, the internet, the open market, the exchange and guess what? No Grail. Because it does not exist, much like the 'plans on the exchange'.
Any 'place' where I have to purchase a profit based product from a set of choices is the open market, no matter what you call it. Factcheck is splitting hairs to favor Ryan not over Obama, but over seniors and future seniors.

[plumbob]

12. Very well said.

Thank you.