Obama must sell reform to the elderly

posted at 7:59 am on August 11, 2009 by Pundette
[ Healthcare ]    printer-friendly

The abortion issue could be the undoing of ObamaCare. But even more potentially lethal, perhaps, is what the Democrats are planning to do to Medicare: cut it. Once upon a time, talk of slowing the rate of growth of Medicare was a political third rail. From Byron York:

Back in 1994 and 1995, the newly elected Republican majority in Congress concluded that Medicare’s costs were spiraling out of control. Then-Speaker Newt Gingrich and then-Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole proposed to slow the rate of growth of Medicare expenditures — not cut them, just reduce the speed at which costs were rising.

Democrats, from President Bill Clinton down, beat the hell of out them for it. From mid-1995 through the 1996 presidential election, hardly a day went by without some Democrat accusing Gingrich, Dole, and the Republican Congress of plotting to slash Medicare benefits and throw America’s seniors on the streets.

But times have changed. Now this is all hunky dory with the Dems, who are salivating at the prospect of getting their hands on one-sixth of the economy.

And yet now, here is Obama, proposing to squeeze hundreds of billions of dollars out of Medicare, and Democrats who were apoplectic in 1995 are strangely quiet. “When we proposed it, it was called a ‘draconian cut,’” recalls one veteran Republican Hill aide. “Now, it’s called ‘savings.’”

Obama’s proposal — no details yet on precisely how he’ll find all those “savings” and “efficiencies” — is even more striking when you consider that during the campaign he attacked Sen. John McCain for allegedly planning reductions in Medicare spending. One Obama commercial dramatically concluded, “Cutting Medicare –we can’t afford John McCain.”

One of his juicier lies. Turns out the exact reverse was true: McCain did not propose cutting Medicare, but Obama does plan to make cuts (er, that is, “find savings” in these programs) to pay for his ‘Medicare-on-steroids’ plan. But the lie worked well enough to scare the elderly into giving him their vote.

And if you swallowed that one, why not have another?

What’s more, the president insists his plan won’t hurt a bit. At his July 23 news conference, Obama was asked, “Specifically, what kind of pain, what kind of sacrifice, are you calling on beneficiaries to make?”

“No, no,” the president answered. He would not reduce anyone’s Medicare benefits, Obama promised, but rather “change how those benefits are delivered so that they’re more efficient.”

Be very, very skeptical. “It’s not going to be painless,” says Sen. Tom Coburn, the Oklahoma Republican who is also a family-practice physician. “You can’t say there’s not going to be an impact from taking a half-trillion dollars out of Medicare in the next ten years, when large numbers of doctors won’t take new Medicare patients and we’re going to have the retirement of the baby boomers.”

Dick Morris writes that ObamaCare will mean less and inferior care for the elderly and will, in effect, repeal Medicare. Click here to watch a 30-second ad on how elderly healthcare will be effected. It’s not mere propaganda: each claim is documented with a source and can be easily verified.

I’ve noticed a lot of older people at the townhalls. Polls show they aren’t wild about ObamaCare. (And they’re less than thrilled with AARP’s sellout.) This isn’t lost on the Obama administration, which is now stepping up efforts to lull older Americans into believing that their medical care will be the same, only better, under ObamaCare. Why should we trust him?

Add the “advance care planning consultation” controversy into the mix, and it’s a very hard sell which will require some extreme tactics.

Cross-posted here.

Blowback