Newt Blinks: Apologizes to Paul Ryan

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55171.html

After delving into it more this week, it's clear that Newt got of to nothing short of a disasterous start. It's gonna be hard to start fresh as he has already alienated so many conservative voters.

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich apologized in a telephone call to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Tuesday afternoon for his remarks on “Meet the Press,” where the presidential candidate referred to Ryan’s Medicare proposal as “radical change.”

“Newt apologized,” said Rick Tyler, his press secretary and longtime aide. “The call went very well.”

Gingrich, his nascent campaign in jeopardy, has shifted into fervent damage control following a furious conservative reaction to his comments — and is even expressing a rare bit of contrition.

[Deleted]

I dunno. Just heard him on Greta. He did explain, in a way that kind of made sense, and also apologized that his words did not match his intent, something like that. Sounded a bit weak to me, but I'm not really a fan any way. Whatever he meant-- he's going to have to be quicker on his feet than that to take the primary. Still early.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I think he suffered shell shock from the 1995 budget battle (in which he caved in) and he never quite got over it. As such, I think the Paul Ryan plan scares the sh** out of him politically. It's odd that he hasn't figured out that the circumstances have changed. In 1995, they were attempting to reform the program but default seemed a long way off. Currently, Social Security and Medicare are broke. Oh, I know they are still 'projecting' it at some far off point, but let's be real-- the programs are broke NOW. We are borrowing $1.6 trillion a year. That is not sustainable. The mood of the public has changed.

[ugonow]

I think the GOP is tightening up the ranks and circleing the wagons. They will pounce any member that does not toe the party line. Even the republicans that have supported cutting some of the oil companies tax incentives/subsidies in the past few years are now defending them.

[ugonow]

As such, I think the Paul Ryan plan scares the sh** out of him politically.

So you don't think he really believes it would be less radical to give people a choice to stay in their current plan and not force seniors to buy private insurance ?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 18, 2011 7:49:53 GMT -5 ugonow said:

As such, I think the Paul Ryan plan scares the sh** out of him politically.

So you don't think he really believes it would be less radical to give people a choice to stay in their current plan and not force seniors to buy private insurance ?

This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the Paul Ryan plan. Under the plan NOTHING changes for seniors.

[ugonow]

So they are not given a voucher to buy private insurance? The original plan was to offer a choice of staying in the current medicare system, or accepting a subsidy to buy your own.Ryan changed it to forcing everyone to be in his voucher plan.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 18, 2011 7:55:02 GMT -5 ugonow said:

So they are not given a voucher to buy private insurance? The original plan was to offer a choice of staying in the current medicare system, or accepting a subsidy to buy your own.Ryan changed it to forcing everyone to be in his voucher plan.

The Paul Ryan plan NEVER touched Medicare for seniors. The voucher plan comes into play for younger workers ten years out.

I don't know how many times it has to be said-- apparently a LOT-- but there are NO changes for current retirees.

[ugonow]

But they WILL be seniors when the plan kicks in.Semantics .

[cme1201]

May 18, 2011 8:14:30 GMT -5 ugonow said:

But they WILL be seniors when the plan kicks in.Semantics .

Wow. Really? Just Wow.

This is why nothing will ever get done, I am entitled to what I want whether now or at some imaginary point in the future.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

www.ontheissues.org/House/Paul_Ryan_Health_Care.htm

Under the Road Map plan for Medicare, there would be no changes for current retirees and those who are fifty-five and older. Those younger than 55, upon reaching the age of 65, would receive a standard payment of $9,500 a year to pay for their private health insurance plan. This is the average amount Medicare currently spends per beneficiary. The amount would be inflation adjusted, and high-risk seniors could apply for additional risk-adjusted payments. Low-income seniors can also establish a Medical Savings Account to pay for other medical expenses. This is a freedom solution because future retirees would be free to own and control their health insurance.

[ugonow]

And as far as no change?I wouldn't count on that.Ryans subsidy only rises with the CPI.I doubt insurance companies will be taking the massive influx of high risk boomer flood of seniors at constant affordable prices.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 18, 2011 8:14:30 GMT -5 ugonow said:

But they WILL be seniors when the plan kicks in.Semantics .

Really? C'mon.

[ugonow]

Wanna bet America does not go for it?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

I guess you could say that the Obama plan cuts Medicare 100% for seniors. On its current path, Medicare is insolvent, the country defaults on its debt, and the entire economy collapses. I'm gonna go with b) The Paul Ryan solution-- at least until there's c) a realistic sustainable idea from Democrats.

[ugonow]

But they WILL be seniors when the plan kicks in.Semantics .



Really? C'mon.

You realize you are playing a semantics game,but continue to argue it won't affect seniors?

[ugonow]

There is no savings in privitazation even if the subsidy is 100 percent,which it won't be..The savings will come in the form of cuts to benefits.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 18, 2011 8:24:47 GMT -5 ugonow said:

There is no savings in privitazation even if the subsidy is 100 percent,which it won't be..The savings will come in the form of cuts to benefits.

In ObamaCare- yes. You're correct. The current Obama plan, which is now law, cut half a trillion from Medicare and will in fact result in cuts in benefits.

Already the nations largest medical group said they will not participate, and more than 1,300 companies have received waivers for more than 3.1 million workers.

Vouchers will result in lower costs because the money follows the consumer, giving consumers an incentive to economize and giving providers something ObamaCare does not: COMPETITION.

Competition is already proven to improve products and services and lower costs. Why some think health care is "special" and the laws of economics somehow don't apply is beyond me.

[ugonow]

I am surprised no insurance companies have weighed in on it. The number of high exposure claims that will be dumped on them will be staggering.

[EVT1]

It's the screw everyone under 55 bill. The boomers make sure they get their health care, meanwhile, the rest of us that paid into it all our lives won't be getting the same benefits. Screw that- another reason we need single payer yesterday.

[ugonow]

Competition is already proven to improve products and services and lower costs. Why some think health care is "special" and the laws of economics somehow don't apply is beyond me.

Competition between insurance companies does not equate to lower provider costs. The right has complained insurance companies are operating on a slim 3 percent margin. What do you think they will cut if that is indeed a fact?Profits or benefits? We have the right to choose insurance companies already and costs are high

[EVT1]

May 18, 2011 8:31:52 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

"Already the nations largest medical group said they will not participate"

100% false and you know it.

"Vouchers will result in lower costs because the money follows the consumer, giving consumers an incentive to economize"

I.E. skip unaffordable treatment, skip unaffordable medication

"and giving providers something ObamaCare does not: COMPETITION."

I can just see the enormous competition from insurance companies wanting high risk customers with medical problems
Medicare EXISTS because private insurance failed seniors.

"Competition is already proven to improve products and services and lower costs. Why some think health care is "special" and the laws of economics somehow don't apply is beyond me."

Obviously it is beyond you. A skateboard or a car wash is not equatable with human life. Some of believe everyone in this country deserves basic medical care- and we have the numbers. You can't stop it- we will get to UHC one way or another. For profit health insurance companies better get it while they can.

[EVT1]

May 18, 2011 8:38:36 GMT -5 ugonow said:

Competition between insurance companies does not equate to lower provider costs. The right has complained insurance companies are operating on a slim 3 percent margin. What do you think they will cut if that is indeed a fact?Profits or benefits? We have the right to choose insurance companies already and costs are high

They can claim 3% PROFIT margin all day, but they are running around 25% administration costs-none of which involve any type of health care-as opposed to Medicare which runs close to that 3% administrative cost.