#ryan plan

[justinspoliticalcorner]

We shouldn't weaken Social Security and Medicare, we should strengthen them.

President Barack Obama, rebutting the Ryan Plan at SOTU (01.12.2016).

[ncpssm]

Ryan’s ‘New’ Plan Is Same Old

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) keeps trotting out the same old plans to shred the U.S. safety net but calls it something else. His most recent scheme to cut anti-poverty programs comes with buzzwords like “innovation,” “flexibility” and “individualized services,” but it’s the same tired ideas.

Further reading: The House GOP/Ryan Budget and Its Effect on Seniors.

[ncpssm]

Ryan Plan: Social Safety Net Beneficiaries Must Sign "Contracts".

via Media Matters.

[liberalsarecool]

Failure on repeat. Obama-era Republicans are the worst.

[robotpirateninja]

Congress Passes Budget Deal

“We’re in for a little bit longer of a whole lot of do-nothing Congress,” said Chuck Cushman, a senior fellow at Georgetown’s Government Affairs Institute. “Not enough will have changed for some dramatic explosion of legislative success to occur. It’s not…

View Post

[lilsanies]

"We don’t need to look far for examples of a debt crisis in action. There are examples in the United States, where municipalities have gone bankrupt and been unable to provide basic services. In Central Falls, Rhode Island, for instance, retirees’ pensions have been slashed by up to 55 percent. In Stockton, California, the city has laid off 25 percent of its police force in the face of increasing pension costs.

Millions of Americans—the elderly, the poor—depend on assistance from the federal government. If we had a debt crisis, we wouldn’t be able to keep our promises to these families. We can’t let that happen. We still have time to avert this crisis, but we need to get serious about spending—now. That’s why this budget achieves balance within the next ten years. It protects and strengthens the safety net and our entitlement programs, so we can keep our word to the most vulnerable. And most importantly, it expands opportunity, because the strongest safety net is a vibrant economy."

So I am definitely not going to read all 91 pages of the proposed House budget -- but these paragraphs jumped out at me and I think that they show the big difference in progressives and people who think that the "debt crisis" is actually a thing. Here they reference "In Stockton, California, the city has laid off 25 percent of its police force in the face of increasing pension costs" and somehow their solution is to further cut spending that funds things like police departments instead of increasing government support for this vital service. Cutting spending and restricting benefits (or what ever other other work around language people use to reference cuts) is exactly how "we wouldn’t be able to keep our promises to these families." So, please, stop being such an ass.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

n his first interview since losing the election, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) wouldn’t admit that voters rejected his economic vision and instead chalked up President Obama’s victory to a large turnout of the “urban vote.” “I don’t think we lost it on those budget issues, especially on Medicare, we clearly didn’t lose it on those issues,” Ryan to local station WISC-TV. “I think the surprise was some of the turnout, some of the turnout especially in urban areas, which gave President Obama the big margin to win this race.”

But Ryan’s post-election analysis contrasts sharply with his view of the race before Election Day. Throughout the campaign, Ryan — who was selected for the ticket because of his budget plan — insisted that the race presented voters with a “choice” between two different economic paths for the nation and repeatedly tried to sell the merits of his proposal on the stump. Republican lawmakers bragged that should the GOP ticket win, “they can justly claim a mandate” to push through Ryan’s initiatives.

h/t: Igor Volsky at Think Progress

[justinspoliticalcorner]

The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation said Monday that a year-long study has found that Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) plan to turn Medicare into a privatized “premium support” coupon program will result in higher costs for six out of every 10 beneficiaries just to maintain their current levels of service.

Kaiser’s study (PDF) found that his plan to partially privatize Medicare would result in wild variations in policy costs across the country, with some states set to be hit much worse than others, confirming in greater detail earlier studies that found Ryan’s plan would result insignificantly higher costs for most seniors.

In particular, Kaiser notes that the crucial swing state of Florida — where former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney currently enjoys a slight lead in the polls over President Barack Obama — would see the worst fallout, with about 77 percent of Medicare beneficiaries expected to pay $200 or more per month under the Republican’s coupon program.

It would be especially expensive in areas with the highest concentration of Medicare enrollees, like Miami-Dade County, where nearly all seniors face paying nearly $500 more per month, or Palm Beach County, where 99 percent of plans would go up by more than $370 a month. Kaiser added that Los Angeles County and Orange County in California also face some of the worst price hikes under the Ryan coupon plan, where 99 percent of seniors face paying an additional $$216-$260 more per month.

Overall, seniors would face increased costs of about $720 per year on average across the country under Ryan’s proposed plan, Kaiser added.

“That means that under Romney’s plan, millions of people—especially those with complicated health needs who see a lot of different doctors—would have to give up their doctors or pay extra to maintain access to their choices,” a prepared statement from the Obama campaign claimed. “Even worse, this study is just examining the impact of their plan in a single year. It ignores the role of adverse selection against traditional Medicare—which would drive costs higher and force more people to give up their choice of doctor. It also doesn’t factor in the impact of the cap Romney would place on the growth rate of the vouchers, which results in seniors paying thousands of dollars more every year regardless of which plan they choose.”

Both Romney and Ryan have campaigned on the claim that 7.4 million seniors will lose their access to Medicare due to cuts in Obama’s health reforms, but many fact checkers have refuted that representation of the law. The Affordable Care Act does not cut Medicare benefits, but instead aims to find billions in savings in the Medicare Advantage program, which officials say is unnecessarily costly. The 7.4 million figure cited by both conservative candidates is actually the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of how many more people would be covered under traditional Medicare plans that cost beneficiaries less. Additionally, Ryan’s budget includes the same provision, and most Republicans in Congress have voted for it twice.

h/t: Stephen C. Webster at The Raw Story