It is a simple question: Can you trust any organization to provide you with legislative advice on taxation or healthcare knowing that a significant portion of their revenue is derived from licensing their name to one of the largest insurers in the country – and who urged its members to vote for Obamacare knowing that it took $700 BILLION from Medicare coffers to fund this failed initiative?
Here is the type of “spin” that was used to sell the Affordable Care Act – which turns out to be an unaffordable disaster for millions of people.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) enacted savings estimated at that time of $716 billion to the Medicare program over ten years (now estimated at $800 billion), which was used to pay for some of the cost of the new law under pay-as-you-go budget scoring conventions. However, there was no reduction in the amount of money going towards paying for Medicare; rather, the law reduced the amount that Medicare spends. In fact, Medicare payroll tax revenues increased, increasing the amount that could be spent. Partially as a result these changes, the Medicare Trust Fund is expected to be solvent through 2030, 13 years longer than projected before the 2010 law was passed. <Source>
Any way you spin it, that is $700 BILLION not spent on Medicare services for seniors. Additionally, when Medicare cuts spending, they merely change which medical procedures are covered and the reimbursement rates to physicians and facilities – forcing both physicians and facilities to abandon patients on Medicare. Then there was that slight-of-hand explanation about the additional millions of people covered by the ACA – never mentioning that these people were added to Medicaid, a welfare program, not to privately-funded programs. Meanwhile, the waste, fraud, and abuse continue unabated by the legislators who will not fully fund fraud detection personnel and programs.
Pretty much why I am pissed off when I get emails urging me to contact my legislators or who try to put a progressive socialist democrat “spin” on their advocacy.
AARP Opposes Senate Tax Bill: Older filers would get few if any tax breaks — and millions would likely see their taxes increase
Under the proposed legislation, more than 5 million taxpayers over 65 would get no tax break whatsoever in 2019, and 5.6 million would not see their taxes decrease by 2027.
AARP announced Thursday that it does not support the current Senate plan to overhaul the U.S. tax code. In a letter to senators ahead of a key vote on the measure, AARP Chief Executive Officer Jo Ann Jenkins said the massive deficit projected over the next decade under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would prompt significant cuts to programs vital to older populations, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Moreover, millions of older Americans would see tax increases or no tax relief at all, and millions more could see their health care premiums soar.
A new analysis by AARP’s Public Policy Institute finds that Americans 65 and older would be hard hit, with 1.2 million of them paying higher taxes in 2019, and 5.2 million facing increases by 2027. More than 5 million taxpayers over 65 would get no tax break whatever in 2019, and 5.6 million would not see their taxes decrease by 2027.
AARP is also against the portion of the tax bill that would repeal the Affordable Care Act requirement that most Americans have health insurance. Eliminating the mandate would leave 13 million additional Americans without health coverage over the next decade, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates. Repealing the mandate would also drive up premiums by roughly 10 percent in the health insurance marketplace; 64-year-olds could see their tabs jump by an average of $1,490 a year.
“We urge Congress to work in a bipartisan manner to enact tax legislation that better meets the needs of older Americans and the nation, and we stand ready to work with you toward that end,’’ Jenkins says in the letter.<Source>
Bottom line …
People are already paying outrageous premiums with crazy deductibles. The system is imploding, and insurers are withdrawing from many markets that are left with zero competition and perhaps one or two providers Unless insurers can get back on the gravy train by obtaining government guarantees and subsidies, there will be fewer multi-million dollar executive bonuses in coming years.
We are so screwed.
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius