Democrats are distorting the fundamentals of a Republican plan to reshape
Medicare, falsely accusing the GOP of pushing a proposal that tells the elderly
“you’re on your own” with health care and that lets insurers deny coverage to
Medicare always pushes hot buttons with voters. Both parties know this and
spare no effort to exploit the issue, with truth as the frequent casualty.
That’s the case now as Democrats go after a far-reaching plan introduced by Rep.
Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and largely embraced by congressional Republicans.
The new chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Rep. Debbie
Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., led the charge this week in an appearance on CBS’
“Face the Nation.” The DNC and its Republican counterpart are the primary
money-raisers in politics and often temples of exaggeration as they convert
controversy into cash for the campaigns.
A look at Wasserman Schultz’s statements and how they compare with the
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: “They would take the people who are younger than 55 years
old today and tell them: ‘You know what, you’re on your own. Go and find private
health insurance in the health care insurance market; we’re going to throw you
to the wolves and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage and drop you
for pre-existing conditions. We’re going to give you X amount of dollars, and
you figure it out.'”
THE FACTS: First, the Ryan plan explicitly forbids insurance companies from
denying coverage to anyone who qualifies for Medicare, including those who have
pre-existing illnesses. Second, it does not merely send money to the elderly and
leave them to their own devices in arranging for medical care.
The plan calls for Medicare to stay the same for people 55 and older. But
starting in 2022, new beneficiaries would get their health insurance from
competing private insurers instead of from the government. The government would
offer subsidies to pay for the coverage and set standards that insurers must
follow. One condition, says the plan, is that participating insurers “agree to
offer insurance to all Medicare beneficiaries, to avoid cherry-picking and
ensure that Medicare’s sickest and highest-cost beneficiaries receive
Nor would the government merely send “X amount of dollars” to the elderly and
let them figure out whether they can afford coverage. The subsidies would go to
the plan selected by the beneficiary. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office, in analyzing the plan, said it would not let insurers charge more to
sick people. Premiums would be the same for everyone of the same age.
The Ryan plan raises plenty of questions about costs to the elderly over time
and the adequacy of care. The Congressional Budget Office said future retirees
would pay more under Ryan’s plan than if they went into traditional Medicare. By
2030, a typical 65-year-old would be paying two-thirds of his or her health
But Wasserman Schultz and some other Democrats who accuse the GOP of wanting
to “end Medicare” have skipped past the complicated crux of that debate, instead
attacking provisions that do not exist.
google.com/ By Calvin Woodward
As I watched this TSA terror video I saw a woman screaming she had been molested TSA style. The woman, very distraught yelled for POLICE who did not show up. This was no act or stagged event. This scene was being caught on video by a bystander waiting for his parents to get off a plane.
The citizen with the Video camera was told he had to LEAVE, HE COUDN’T tape, it was a special area. The video man claimed he was in a public area and was free to continue with his video. TSA argues with this man and then tries to find police to have him arrested.Near the end you will see again the woman who claimed she was molested and she is still in full battle with the TSA. The first thing our new president should do is immediately dissolve the TSA. SHAW
Even the New YorkTimes knows President Obama cannot be reelcted without a major change in the unemployment figures. The only news here is that The Times has finally stepped out shadows and publicly proclaimed what it has known for several years. I assume The Times did this to get the president’s attention. Here is a scoop for the Times:Obama Doesn’t Care About the American Economy. Obama wants America’s status lowered. It’s the left’s plan.SHAW
ARTICLE: Job Data May Be Key to the President’s Job
BY BINYAMIN APPELBAUM…. No American president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has won a second term in office when the unemployment rate on Election Day topped 7.2 percent.Seventeen months before the next election, it is increasingly clear that President Obamamust defy that trend to keep his job.
Seventeen months before the next election, it is increasingly clear that President Obamamust defy that trend to keep his job.
Roughly 9 percent of Americans who want to go to work cannot find an employer. Companies are firing fewer people, but hiring remains anemic. And the vast majority of economic forecasters, including the president’s own advisers, predict only modest progress by November 2012.
The latest job numbers, due Friday, are expected to provide new cause for concern. Other indicators suggest the pace of growth is flagging. Weak manufacturing data, a gloomy reading on jobs in advance of Friday’s report and a drop in auto sales led the markets to their worst close since August, and those declines carried over into Asia Thursday.
But the grim reality of widespread unemployment is drawing little response from Washington. The Federal Reserve says it is all but tapped out. There is even less reason to expect Congressional action. Both Democrats and Republicans see clear steps to create jobs, but they are trying to walk in opposite directions and are making little progress.
“The discussion really focused on the philosophical difference on whether Washington should continue to pump money into the economy or should we provide an incentive for entrepreneurs and small businesses to grow,” said Eric Cantor, the majority leader. “The president talked about a need for us to continue to quote-unquote invest from Washington’s standpoint, and for a lot of us that’s code for more Washington spending, something that we can’t afford right now.”
The White House, its possibilities constrained by the gridlock, has offered no new grand plans. After agreeing to extend the Bush-era tax cuts and reducing the payroll tax last December, the administration has focused on smaller ideas, like streamlining corporate taxation and increasing American exports to Asia and Latin America.
“It’s a very tough predicament,” said Jared Bernstein, who until April was economic policy adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. “Is there any political appetite for something that would resemble another large Keynesian stimulus? Obviously no. You can say that’s what we should do and you’d probably be right, but that’s pretty academic.”
—Official time is a federal term for the hours spent by union officials employed by the government conducting union business. The officials are paid their normal government salaries for this work on behalf of the unions.
ARTICLE: Union Price Tag Grows at a Cost to U.S. Taxpayer
By Molly Henneberg…..Union behavior and their bargaining power has been of intense interest in many states. As the country continues to work its way out of a recession and the unemployment level is still hovering at a high 9 percent, the additional costs of unions are again being scrutinized in Washington.
Unlike state government worker unions, federal employees of unionized agencies are not required to join the union or pay mandatory dues. Wisconsin lawmakers sought to abridge that power, sending the nation into a frenzy.
Of specific interest on Capitol Hill Wednesday was something known as official time. Official time is a federal term for the hours spent by union officials employed by the government conducting union business. The officials are paid their normal government salaries for this work on behalf of the unions.
Official time is seen by supporters as compensation for the fact that unions are required to handle labor issues related to all employees, not just union members. When union officials negotiate with federal managers over work rules, like appropriate attire and other human resource requirements, those functions are carried out under official time.
That’s about three million hours of official time.
The provision was included in a law passed by Congress in 1978, signed by President Jimmy Carter. The law stipulated time on the clock could be used as long as that time is negotiated with management and is agreed “to be reasonable, necessary, and in the public interest.”
But conservatives in Congress say it isn’t reasonable anymore and have railed against what they claim are inordinately high government pay rates that are being used as a negotiating tactic by unions.
Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma this week highlighted a report from the Congressional Research Service, first reported by the Washington Times, which found 77,000 federal employees earn a higher salary than their respective governors. A union representing federal employees said the bigger problem is payments to contractors, not government workers.
Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., thinks Republicans are targeting unions and argues official time is fair. “This is absurd. Give me a break. “
Union leaders say official time makes the government run more efficiently, and ultimately saves money.
John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said at the House hearing Wednesday, “If workers and managements are really communicating, work place problems that would otherwise escalate into costly litigation can be dealt with promptly and more informally.”
For now, Republicans aren’t buying that argument. Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., has proposed a bill called the Federal Employee Accountability Act of 2011, which would repeal parts of the 1978 law, and limit how and when federal employees could use official time.
This is a frightening video. Due to declining fertility rates mentioned, The European population will be overtaken by a rising Muslim fertility rate and by Muslim immigration. There will soon be 30 million Muslims living in America. The Muslim religion is quickly replacing other religions in Europe. SHAW
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
|Submit your waiver!
Please take a moment and add your
You must be 18 years of age or older to sign this petition.
Bottom of Form
When I first read the story and saw the picture about Anthony Weiner I thought this story won’t stand up, it will be a one day story.But, here we are a week later and everyone on TV and Twitter are still talking Weiner. I am going to try to cover this story from every angle.
It was alleged that NY Rep. Anthony Weiner took a picture of himself in his underwear while in an excited state. Weiner sent this photo to a college girl he knew on Twitter. Everyone on the internet has now seen this picture.
This story wouldn’t have gone anywhere if his name hadn’t been Weiner and the picture was about wiener.PLUS Anthony Weiner is a pushy, obnoxiou, “I’m a big -shot ass.”NY politician. A politician who holds himself..high above the masses. How could that picture of the guy in the underwear be Anthony Weiner? Impossible? I think it’s possible, I saw the picture and there wasn’t much… in the underwear. The underwear looked empty. That would be about right for Weiner. I was surprised the underwear weren’t “tighty whities” or maybe with a Winnie the Poo logo on them.
This story has everyone on Twitter giggling like little girls about the word ‘weiner.’ Hell get over it, a weiner isn’t something to take lightly, it’s a great word plus its weiner season-4 th July cook outs and such. As I remember weiners are also refered to as “Tube Steak.” The word weiner is also used to describe a male who is WEAK or a wimp, such as “that Anthony is such a weiner! “
I think this story would have been put to bed sooner if Weiner was such a show off. I went by his place the other day. and this was parked outside.
Kinda showing off. And driving the Weinermobile to colleges and scarring the coeds he finds on Twitter is very nasty.
There is more funny stuff this story brought out. One blogger asked me why parents don’t name their boys DICK anymore?I think the last kids named Dick were named in the 40’s.I don’t know why Dick stopped a favorite. Of course there have been some good Dicks, like Dick Van Dyke, Dick Tracy, Dick Cheney, but politically speaking there will always be just one “Big Dick”. I refere to Dick Nixon of course, althought the old Chgo mayor Dick Daily is a close runner up. Dick is a strong, firm name and I hope parents start using it again.
I think I have said all that can be said about the Weiner Story. I hope it will wilt away soon. SHAW