Former Rep. Dan Maffei wants his old job back, so he’s following President Obama’s lead and attacking his Republican opponent, Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle, with lies and misinformation. He wants to scare senior citizens into thinking Buerkle wants to end Medicare. He wrote an editorial that appeared in the Syracuse Post Standard and the very first sentence is a lie.
Last year, Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle voted for legislation that, according to the Wall Street Journal, ”would essentially end Medicare.”
So, is that what the Wall Street Journal said? Well, yes, but he forgot to finish the sentence. Here’s the complete quote from the WSJ on 4/4/11.
The plan would essentially end Medicare, which now pays most of the health-care bills for 48 million elderly and disabled Americans, as a program that directly pays those bills. Mr. Ryan and other conservatives say this is necessary because of the program’s soaring costs. Medicare cost $396.5 billion in 2010 and is projected to rise to $502.8 billion in 2016. At that pace, spending on the program would have doubled between 2002 and 2016.
What a difference context makes. The article goes on to make Ryan’s plan sound pretty reasonable.
Mr. Ryan’s proposal would apply to those currently under the age of 55, and for those Americans would convert Medicare into a “premium support” system. Participants from that group would choose from an array of private insurance plans when they reach 65 and become eligible, and the government would pay about the first $15,000 in premiums. Those who are poorer or less healthy would receive bigger payments than others. (Read More)
Dan Maffei is another typical big spending Democrat who voted for the wildly unpopular and unconstitutional ObamaCare, stimulus and everything else Pelosi told him to do.
The Republicans are trying to keep Medicare from going broke, they aren’t trying to do away with it.
Oh, and if Dan Maffei cared so much about senior citizens, why did he challenge the absentee ballot of an 80 year old disabled veteran?
Why can’t the dems just taut their own plan and let the American people decide instead of continually bashing the republican plans?
1. They don’t have a plan that is constitutional, that they would be willing to let the people see before having it rammed down our throats.
2. It would require them to actually work with republicans to get a bill passed for the sake of the American people. They’d rather attempt to turn our country to socialism then work with fellow elected representatives. Oh wait a minute…
Like or Dislike:
2
[...] his job back. He penned an attack letter that appeared in the local newspaper over the weekend that began with a lie. Buerkle was asked about the letter during an interview with YNN’s Liz Benjamin, and this is [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
The GOP has been criticized for their threats to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), with opponents arguing that congressional Republicans would scrap one health care reform plan when they have no better ideas. However, the GOP has produced a far-more-radical plan that will exceed the illusory benefits of the ACA. In addressing these problems and attempting to establish a more equitable system whereby all workers would have a realistic chance at financing health care coverage, Republican leadership established each of these provisions as a feasible step forward:
• A tax credit of $2,500 per person or $8,000 for a family of four should be provided universally for the purchase of health insurance.
• The subsidy would be refundable — everyone gets it even if he does not owe any income taxes.
• Families can obtain the subsidy in the year in which the insurance is purchased and would not have to wait until April 15 the following year to get their credit.
• Insurance companies and other intermediaries would be able to help families obtain their credit and apply it directly to the health insurance premiums.
Such a plan would provide tax relief to everyone equally. Furthermore, because the new plan would cover the basics of health care without the superfluous components, wasteful spending could be limited (http://bit.ly/HhOaYS).
Like or Dislike:
3