Why Mess With Medicare?

Republican Paul Ryan’s budget mark proposes deep cuts to Medicare, the popular government program that funds health care for seniors. Polls show Americans are overwhelmingly against cuts to entitlement programs generally, and Medicare in particular, and Ryan himself admits that he is handing Democrats a potential weapon. So why would the GOP risk Medicare reform?

To quantify the risk Ryan and the Republicans are taking it’s important to understand just how unpopular Medicare cuts are. A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found less than a quarter of Americans supported significant cuts to Medicare or Social Security to tackle the deficit. Even self-identifying “Tea Party” members opposed such cuts by a nearly 2-to-1 margin.

Similarly a March 2011 poll by the Pew Research Center found 65% of Americans oppose cuts in Social Security or Medicare to bring down the deficit. Independents, the key voting block in national elections, opposed such cuts 61% to 35%. The GOP doesn’t get much help when the numbers are broken out by age: Pew found last fall that elderly Americans, who are more likely to vote than younger ones and are a key GOP voting block, oppose replacing Medicare with a voucher system, as proposed by Ryan, by 69% to 14%.

Ryan argues no plan for balancing the budget is credible without addressing Medicare and he’s right: if you want to bring down deficits and deal with the debt, you can’t get around the massive growth in the cost of Medicare. So in one sense Ryan is being honest and makinga  play for credibility. As one advisor to the House GOP leadership puts it, “Governing is hard.” Ryan hopes to get some cover by arguing that his voucher plan is built on one he worked up with Alice Rivlin, Bill Clinton’s OMB director. And he says his proposal is just a start: that he’s open to other ideas as his plan moves through committees in Congress.

But that still leaves the problem of trying to sell the cuts to the public. Republicans will try and explain what the country will get in exchange for the cuts, says David Winston, a top GOP pollster and veteran of the Newt Gingrich era in the House. “One reason the GOP could do as well as we did was because we asked the question where are the jobs,” Winston said. “This budget addresses that question.”

Ryan’s plan cites Heritage Foundation numbers to argue he will get unemployment down to 4% by 2015, Winston says. “This is not just a deficit hawk argument in this budget, this is a Reagan era plan for spending restraint and ultimately a plan for economic growth that can get us out of this mess,” he says.

How that argument overcomes the country’s deep opposition to Medicare cuts is unclear. But even if it does, will the GOP get much credit for what they accomplish? Bill Clinton came out of the budget battles of the 1990s as a clear winner and there’s no reason to think Americans won’t attribute any eventual budget success to the President, not Congress. Which makes it even harder to understand why Ryan and the GOP are taking the risk.

Related Topics: Health Care
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • gysgt213

    Ryan argues no plan for balancing the budget is credible without addressing Medicare and he’s right: if you want to bring down deficits and deal with the debt, you can’t get around the massive growth in the cost of Medicare.
    .
    .
    Jesus H. Christ! Social Security is a fully funded paid for by tax payers with their social secuirty taxes. It can not contribute to the deficit because it can not by law spend a dime more than it takes in.
    .
    Medicare is paritially funded health care program that tax payers pay in with a medicare tax which does not over all the costs. But the problem with our deficits though is not with Medicare its with the rising costs of health care. Even if you do away with Medicare altogether it will do nothing about rising health costs and our deficits will still rise.

  • Ivy_B

    They think it is a good idea because journalists have repeated endlessly the GOP talking points that teh deficit is the worst possible thing and we will fall off the edge of the earth unless we do something about it right now (that is until we have a Republican president again and then it won’t matter.) Journalists have also treated (and repeat over and over) that Ryan is smart and serious and must be listened to.

    Momentomori posted part of Ryan’s appearance with Beck today in the previous post – Digby posted some more on her blog. After the “It’s a cancer” comment by Beck…

    PAUL RYAN: Exactly. Look, I come from ‑‑ I’m calling you from Janesville, Wisconsin where I’m born and raised.

    GLENN: Holy cow.

    PAUL RYAN: Where we raise our family, 35 miles from Madison. I grew up hearing about this stuff. This stuff came from these German intellectuals to Madison‑University of Wisconsin and sort of out there from the beginning of the last century. So this is something we are familiar with where I come from. It never sat right with me. And as I grew up, I learned more about the founders and reading the Austrians and others that this is really a cancer because it basically takes the notion that our rights come from God and nature and turns it on its head and says, no, no, no, no, no, they come from government, and we here in government are here to give you your rights and therefore ration, redistribute and regulate your rights. It’s a complete affront of the whole idea of this country and that is to me what we as conservatives, or classical liberals if you want to get technical.

    GLENN: Thank you.

    [Digby's comments]

    This is the serious, gutsy, courageous intellectual who has the fatuous gasbags drooling and genuflecting.

    Ryan is an “intellectual” the same way Beck is an “intellectual.http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif” They both believe that progressivism is a cancer that’s plaguing the country and that it’s really important to flush it out. I think he may have succeeded in doing that today. I’m just not so sure he’s going to succeed in killing it in the long run. It’s just possible that most people don’t see old age pensions and health care as being quite the disease on the body politic that Ryan does.

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2011/04/ryan-and-beck-bffs-from-way-back.html

  • perrywhite1

    Speaking of right-wing talking points the media keeps repeating, one is to call Ryan “courageous.” How much courage is required to take money from the poor, the sick and the elderly, while giving ginormous tax breaks to the rich? That’s not courage — that’s SOP for tyrants.

  • rhys6blue

    You say:

    “Ryan’s plan cites Heritage Foundation numbers to argue he will get unemployment down to 4% by 2015,”

    I find this prediction hard to believe. How accurate is this Heritage Foundations with its predictions anyway? Isn’t this the same group that predicted years of economic growth from Bush’s tax cuts?

    Why aren’t you and the rest of the media fact checking these things before reporting on them?

  • http://forgottenlord.livejournal.com forgottenlord

    It’s a gamble – either it’ll have sufficiently little backlash that they can push the Democrats right enough to get a mostly conservative budget passed…..or it’ll have a significant enough backlash that their boat is sunk.

  • gysgt213

    I don’t think Ryan wants this bill to pass anyway. He just put a bunch of crazy crap in it hoping the dems show some kind of spine.

  • http://reflectionephemeral.wordpress.com reflectionephemeral

    That’s a good point– some fact-checking of the reasonability of that claim would be very helpful.
    -
    It’s also false to say that this is a “Reaganite” plan.
    -
    The actual Reagan raised taxes repeatedly because he, unlike Paul Ryan, cared about the deficit. See: http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/1632/reagans-tax-increases Bruce Bartlett:

    It may come as a surprise to some people that once upon a time in the not-too-distant past Republicans actually cared enough about budget deficits that they thought raising taxes was necessary to bring them down. Today, Republicans believe that deficits are nothing more than something to ignore when they are in power and to bludgeon Democrats with when they are out of power.

    Ryan voted for the Bush Tax Deferrals, for Medicare Part D, and supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq. And he’d murder a litter of puppies on live television before he’d allow tax levels to revert to where they were last time we had a surplus.
    -
    Because this isn’t about the deficit, this is about his unpopular, delusional Randite philosophy.

  • http://milascurtains.wordpress.com milascurtains

    That cst grows NOT because of the cost of medical service, but the cost of Insurance Industry, that sits on the shoulders of healthcare Industry, collects funds, pays huge bonuses to CEOs with one and only goal – to fool American People and cut their abilities to afford medical service.

    It is a puzzle for me – why American People are stick to this Stupid scheme and fool themselves paying Useless Insrance Industry for ripping them off.

  • artraveler

    We finally get Palin’s Death Panels and the name is-Republican House Medicare Plan. Even they admit that their block grant to the states will cut a third from what the states get now plus there are no exceptions like flu, pandemics, hurricanes and other acts of nature. Just die if you don’t have the money since the states will run out fast. What we need is a giant East Coast hurricane hitting the red Gulf states to see whether this is just hatred for those not as fortunate as their rich friends or they really care about sticking it to the states, even their own.

    Nothing about increasing revenue just cutting to make the unemployment numbers even worse.

    It certainly reflects the anti-Christian nature of their actions. You can talk it anyway but the proof is in your actions and we see you as hypocrites andf suck-ups to the rich you are.

  • http://forgottenlord.livejournal.com forgottenlord

    So….you think that the risk of alienating people on Medicare will outweigh the benefit of being able to say that the Democrats shut down the government? Even if the Democrats replied that they shut down the government to protect seniors? That’s…strategically bold but I’d have a hard time seeing that work when many Republicans can’t even get behind this.

  • shepherdwong

    Why aren’t you and the rest of the media fact checking these things before reporting on them?
    .
    What do you think you’re dealing with here, journalists (don’t let the fact that you’re reading a blog fool you)? If it’s from inside the Beltway, it’s likely to be only a pale imitation of the craft.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Nothing more courageous in a democracy than ignoring what the (large majority) people want. With no personal risk of course.
    .
    Sure it sort of defeats the purpose of a democracy but darn if it isn’t brave.

  • acameronw

    I’m no economist (watch me try and balance a checkbook and you’ll agree with me in under a minute) but can someone explain to me how this plan boosts job creation? The theory is that large scale government borrowing makes available credit scarcer, putting upward pressure on interest rates. But the cost of borrowing is so low now it can’t be that difficult for businesses to borrow for expansion. Besides, a lot of big corporations are awash in cash already and seem to be more interested in paying dividends to stock holders (not a bad thing, to be sure) than hiring.

    And doesn’t the voucher plan create a form of individual mandate to buy coverage from a private insurance company? Sure, you’re not required to buy coverage but the alternatives are emergency room care, illness and death. (Now there’s a formula for deficit reduction!)

    And BTW, trimming defense by $7.8 billion per annum over 10 years from the biggest military budget in the world is either a joke or the ultimate triumph of the military industrial complex. Where, exactly are cuts that small going to come from? (First Lieutenant in the cafeteria at Fort Hood circa 2016: “Hey, you guys. No more seconds on the pecan pie.”)

    Mr. Ryan’s school project might in the long run prove to be the high water mark of the Tea Party. It’s fun to go to rallies and applaud cutting NPR and school lunches for poor kids. But when they take a cold hard look at how this plan takes benefits away from them, I’ll bet raising taxes on the wealthy isn’t going to look so bad.

  • perrywhite1

    “Mr. Ryan’s school project.” Bwa-ha-ha! Wish I’d said that!

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    “…he’s right: if you want to bring down deficits and deal with the debt, you can’t get around the massive growth in the cost of Medicare.”

    Wrong! You could increase Medicare benefits and deal with the deficit, if and only if, you deal with the root problem — inflation in the cost of health care. There are many ways that you could deal with that, including using he government’s pricing power when it comes to buying goods and services to force prices down, but Ryan opposes them all.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    The Republicans seem to hate America. They hate old people who need medical care. They hate poor people. They hate working class people. And they hate women, black people, Hispanics, and children. In fact, it seems as if the only thing the Republicans don’t hate are the wealthy mega-corporations. My question to the Regressives (I’m going to start calling them that from now on because their policies really are regressive, all the way back to the 1850′s), is once they’ve forced the majority of the populace into abject poverty, who do they think will purchase all the products from the mega-corporations? Most of us can hardly afford to purchase anything now, as the social safety nets disappear, we’ll be able to afford even less and less.
    .
    BTW, another corporation is preparing to leave our shores. Zippo, based in Butler County, PA, is going to be moving their manufacturing plant to a foreign country, though the company refuses to say what county at this time–my son actually called and asked out right where they are moving to and was told they are not permitted to say. Why would this be a deep dark secret? Everybody I know who lives in Butler has worked or has family who worked for Zippo, as they have been the major employer in that area of the state since before WWII. I plan on putting all the spare change I can find into buying Zippo lighters until the “made in America” lighters are out of stock. They will be worth a few more dollars than I paid for them in a few years.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Not once in the entire post did he mention the Affordable Care Act. The fact that the same person who’s allegedly being courageous in tackling Medicare wants to repeal the best effort to date for getting these costs under control reveals that yet another reporter either doesn’t know what he’s talking about or is uninterested in crossing his sources by pointing out their dishonesty.

  • 53_3

    Is there a funeral pyre that can shed light on Paul Ryan’s soapbox?

  • charlieromeobravo

    Krugman is ahead of everyone else on the fact checking:

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/ryan-the-ridiculous/

    When you look at the historical unemployment data, Ryan’s promises and the Heritage Foundation’s predictions look as ridiculous as they sound, and that’s just addressing the unemployment numbers. What his plan would do to healthcare in this country is unspeakable…

  • wagedronenumber9

    I learned more about the founders and reading the Austrians and others that this is really a cancer because it basically takes the notion that our rights come from God and nature and turns it on its head and says, no, no, no, no, no, they come from government, and we here in government are here to give you your rights and therefore ration, redistribute and regulate your rights. It’s a complete affront of the whole idea of this country and that is to me what we as conservatives, or classical liberals if you want to get technical.

    The Austrians are the uber-free market philosophers, they believe any government intervention is economically and socially destructive. So, it isn’t surprising to see Ryan’s budget lay waste to a government run program like Medicare. He views it as a something that in essence destroys America because it messes up the free market.

    Several commentators on this blog have mentioned that the GOP wants to take the country back to the oligarchy system of the late 1800s and early 1900s, and they state it correctly. The GOP, seeped in Austrian ideas about the economy, harken back to the era where government intervention was limited by philosophy.

    In theory a total free market philosophy is a good idea, but in reality it fails to take in account things like human avarice and greed and how some people are born to be failures in a competitive economy. The moral question becomes revolves on how to regulate these, which the free market system cannot do itself. The reason why communism and socialism (and Roosevelt’s New Deal) came into being was because the free market system failed millions upon millions of people.

    But these are right wing thinkers who can’t ever let reality get in the way of a good theory. Good Luck with your budget Paul Ryan!

  • allthingsinaname

    The CBO says his plan will raise the deficit.

  • jeriv

    4% unemployment is a red herring. Not only is it extremelly hard to attain even in the best economic conditions, inflation would skyrocket.

    It’s there just to make the largest and most audacious Republican attempt to deal a crippling blow and gut the government a reason for existing.

    They’re don’t deal with the problem. They’re handing it over to the States (Medicare), and to anyone under 55 (Medicare).

  • square1

    As others have noted, Medicare is the symptom of the problem — rising health care costs, particularly for the elderly — and not the problem itself.

    Why is Ryan doing this? Two reasons.

    First, right now, the rising cost of health care for the elderly is a problem for the government. By pushing the responsibility for paying health care costs back onto individual elderly people, the problem won’t be solved but it will no longer be a government problem.

    Second, Ryan is an ideologue. He is incapable of believing that a government program can be more efficient than individuals.

    Personally, I’m a pragmatist. If you can show me that health care costs will be lower if people purchase the services themselves, I say do it. Oh, and do it without bankrupting seniors and leaving them dying in the streets.

    However, both logic and empirical evidence clearly show that it is impossible for individual health care consumers to negotiate prices as well as the federal government. So, under Ryan’s plan, not only will seniors be forced to pay for their own health care, but they will have to pay more than what Medicare currently pays.

blog comments powered by Disqus