Quote of the Day: The GOP's Love Affair with Medicare

| Tue Dec. 1, 2009 10:46 AM PST

From John McCain, explaining his undying opposition to proposed reductions in the growth of Medicare spending:

All of these are cuts in the obligations that we have assumed and are the rightful benefits that people have earned... I will eagerly look forward to hearing from the authors of this legislation as to how they can possibly achieve half a trillion dollars in cuts without impacting existing Medicare programs negatively and eventually lead to rationing of health care in this country.

On the big list of political sins, I generally think hypocrisy is overrated.  It's great gotcha material for Sunday morning talk shows, but in the end it's usually pretty trivial stuff.

But the Republican switcheroo on Medicare is really in a league of its own.  Here's a party that opposed Medicare viciously in the first place, routinely spoke out against it in the years that followed, was dedicated to gutting it in the 1990s, voted for major cuts in 1997, and has been using it as a cudgel ever since to get its base riled up over the future bankruptcy of America.  McCain himself proposed over a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts just 12 months ago.  But now?  Well, now it's 2003 all over again and there are elections to think of.  So now they're righteously opposed to cutting so much of a nickel out of Medicare spending, even if the cuts are aimed at waste, fraud, inefficient programs, and bad incentives.  It's just jaw droppingly mendacious.  More at the link.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Kevin Drum is a political blogger for Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Kevin, The GOP is clearly in

Kevin,

The GOP is clearly in favor of reducing spending on Medicare, but only as a means of reducing the overall federal deficit. Or did you forget this inconvenient fact.

Given the political grief that liberals like you and the Dems heap on them for this position, why should they support the Dems when they want to use any reducting in spending from one bankrupt government program to fund the creation of another government program that will bankrupt the country even faster?

Nice try

Nice try Chicounsel, except that is of course not McCain's argument. I suppose you can read:

All of these are cuts in the obligations that we have assumed and are the rightful benefits that people have earned... I will eagerly look forward to hearing from the authors of this legislation as to how they can possibly achieve half a trillion dollars in cuts without impacting existing Medicare programs negatively and eventually lead to rationing of health care in this country."

So when Democrats propose cuts, that leads to rationing, but when the Republicans do, it doesn't. And why, one wonders, is good old John making the rationing argument and isn't talking about his noble goal of 'reducing the deficit'? Could it be that is because it would not only not serve his intentions to scare the elderly, but would be counterproductive because it would disarm that rationing line of attack?

SRW1, I took Kevin's point

SRW1,

I took Kevin's point to be that it is somehow hypocritical for the GOP to oppose the Democrats' plan to cut Medicare spending to fund "health care reform" when they were in favor of cutting such spending in the past.

As I pointed out to him, the GOP wanted to cut Medicare spending in order to reduce the FEDERAL DEFICIT. And for that, liberals brandished them as wanting to kill the elderly and to force them into choosing between eating dog food or getting their medicines. If the Dems now want to reduce Medicare spending by half a trillion dollars (which will never happen anyway) in order to fund another government boondoggle, why shouldn't the GOP make the same argument against them in order to get to senior citizens to oppose "health care reform"?

Sure, if it's all just a

Sure, if it's all just a cynical game to you.

On the other hand, if one were not to accept your framing and were to think that the claim of 500 billion of wasteful spending might have a basis in reality, that the intention to cut that waste might be real, that health care reform might not be just a 'boondoggle', but a necessity because being the only industrialized country in which 15% of the population are not covered might be kind of a disgrace, if one were to think along those lines, then things might look slightly different.

And if one were to think that after after years, if not decades, of bullshitting on the deficit the Republicans have little credibility on that front either, one might probably be inclined not to take your position at all.

Like the return of Jesus,

Like the return of Jesus, Social Security and Medicare bankrupting America just never seems to happen.

Tax cuts and de-regulation on the other hand. . . .

SRW1, I took Kevin's point

SRW1,

I took Kevin's point to be that it is somehow hypocritical for the GOP to oppose the Democrats' plan to cut Medicare spending to fund "health care reform" when they were in favor of cutting such spending in the past.

As I pointed out to him, the GOP wanted to cut Medicare spending in order to reduce the FEDERAL DEFICIT. And for that, liberals brandished them as wanting to kill the elderly and to force them into choosing between eating dog food or getting their medicines. If the Dems now want to reduce Medicare spending by half a trillion dollars (which will never happen anyway) in order to fund another government boondoggle, why shouldn't the GOP make the same argument against them in order to get to senior citizens to oppose "health care reform"?

Isn't the charge of hypocrisy better leveled at the Dems who now want to take Medicare money away from senior citizens because they found a better use of the money than funding Grandma's hip replacement surgery or keeping her alive for a few more months? lol

Robin Hood

"Isn't the charge of hypocrisy better leveled at the Dems who now want to take Medicare money away from senior citizens because they found a better use of the money than funding Grandma's hip replacement surgery or keeping her alive for a few more months? lol"

Even if this were actually true, the use to which Dems want to put money is to fund Little Joe's getting to a pediatrician or Middle-Aged Sue's getting cancer treatment so she can live long enough to be a Grandma. The use to which Republicans want to put money is to fund more tax cuts for the wealthy. Little bit of a difference there.

Tempest in a teacup

Tempest in a teacup update:

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/head-of-climate-unit-steps-...

Phil Jones has resigned for the duration of the investigation by East Anglia
Michael Mann is under investigation from the University of Pennsylvania.

What do these institutions acknowledge that you're too afraid to see?

That their employees private

That their employees private records were improperly released to the public, and that deserves investigation, and that the released records imply that the employees didn't always act in good faith, which also merits investigation. Shocking, I know.

Doesn't say diddly-squat about the vast amount of evidence demonstrating anthropomorphic global warming, however.

Isn't Medicare socialized

Isn't Medicare socialized medicine, and therefore (for these guys) Nazi-communist-genocide? I don't understand.

John McCain's misrepresents the facts.

What the Democrats want to do is eliminate the overpayments that exist in the Advantage program which is a private insurance attachment to Medicare, charging seniors for "services" that many never even use and collecting tax money to feed their greedy profit margin. Private insurance companies have found a way to insinuate themselves into the Medicare program and earn a buck while overcharging the government. It needs to be reformed!

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

The chaos and humanity of war.
The craftspeople and musicians of Appalachia.
A selection of '70s ads depicting African-Americans.
As climate change melts the permafrost, native villages slip into the sea, taking a way of life with them.