Many spending hawks in Washington had hoped that Mitt Romney’s
selection of leading deficit warrior Paul Ryan as his running mate would open a
more candid and sober debate about cutting federal spending.
But the tone of the campaign rhetoric on Medicare — with each party
accusing the other of working to destroy the program — has raised concern among
longtime deficit-reduction advocates that neither party is preparing the public
for what they see as the demographic imperative of curbing Medicare spending.
On Wednesday, Romney accused President Obama of siphoning Medicare
dollars to fund his 2010 health-care law, and he promised to restore that money
if elected.
Obama countered that he has strengthened the Medicare program and
that his Republican challenger would end it.
The back-and-forth worried Robert Bixby, executive director of the
Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that seeks an end to deficit spending.
He said both candidates are undermining efforts to convince the public of the
long-term need for Medicare reductions.
“I don’t
think it’s off to a very good start, if what we’re looking for is a good,
substantive debate on deficit reduction,” he said of the Ryan phase of the campaign.
“There are good, legitimate debates we could have about the best way to control
Medicare spending. But it quickly descends into charges of robbery and murder.”
Budget experts expect Medicare spending to balloon in the coming
decades, as 10,000 baby boomers will turn 65 and become eligible for benefits
each day for the next 20 years. The program’s rapid growth is a leading driver
behind the growth of the federal deficit.
A complex debate has been underway about how to provide seniors the
care they need at a cost the government can afford.
But several deficit experts said they worry that the escalating
campaign rhetoric about which side is seeking Medicare cuts will damage both
parties’ ability to come up with a compromise to reduce costs.
“Everyone knows
that Medicare in its current state is unsustainable. There’s not a serious
person out there who argues otherwise,” said Steve Bell, economic policy
director at the Bipartisan Policy Center. “And we are now starting to have an
emotional, distorted, propagandistic debate about it.”
Cost-cutting measures
The Democrats’ health-care law aims to curb Medicare spending by
reducing payments to hospitals and other providers — not beneficiaries — in
part as a trade for reducing hospitals’ costs by cutting millions from the
ranks of the uninsured.
In the spending plan he authored as chairman of the House Budget
Committee, Ryan proposed to end the health-care law. But he assumed the same
cost reductions in Medicare spending as a way to reduce the deficit.
On Wednesday, Romney promised that if elected, he would restore the
money to the program as a way to bolster it for current retirees.
“My
commitment is, if I become president, I’m going to restore that $716 billion to
the Medicare trust fund so that current seniors can know that trust fund is not
being raided,” Romney said on CBS News’s “This Morning.”
“And we’re
going to make sure and get Medicare on track to be solvent long-term, on a
permanent basis.”
Those comments came after Republican National Committee Chairman
Reince Priebus said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that if anyone has “blood
on their hands” in the Medicare debate, it is Obama. “He’s the one that’s
destroying Medicare,” he said.
Bixby said Ryan’s budget position is “defensible,” plowing cuts from
Medicare into deficit reduction.
But speaking on conservative radio host Sean Hannity’s show on
Wednesday, the Wisconsin congressman joined the chorus in pledging to fight the
cuts.
“We’re going
to have this debate, and we’re going to win this debate,” Ryan said. “It’s the
president who took $716 billion . . . from the Medicare program to spend on
Obamacare. That’s cuts to current seniors that will lead to less services for
current seniors. We don’t do that. We actually say end the raid and restore
that, so that those seniors get the benefits today that they organize their
lives around.”
Bixby said Romney has muddied efforts to curb red ink with his
promise to restore the money. “I’m trying to figure out how you reduce Medicare
spending without reducing Medicare spending,” he said.
Many Republicans think cutting payments to providers will succeed
only in making it unaffordable for doctors to treat Medicare patients,
resulting in fewer medical outlets willing to accept the federal health
insurance.
In a statement, Romney campaign spokesman Andrea Saul said that
“twisting the screws on providers won’t hold down costs, it just jeopardizes
seniors’ access to care and threatens their benefits.”
Instead of relying on “on administrative price controls,” she said,
Romney will “introduce choice and competition in the system.”
Attack, counterattack
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget
Office and adviser to 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain, said
Romney and Ryan must make a compelling case for the need to reduce Medicare
spending for future seniors. But first, he said, they must neutralize the
Democratic attacks on Ryan’s plan as one that will throw seniors off Medicare
rolls.
Obama pressed that assault Wednesday in a speech in Dubuque, Iowa.
His own reforms, he said, will strengthen Medicare by reducing “wasteful
spending”; benefits for seniors are not cut “by a dime.” However, he said, a
proposal in Ryan’s budget plan — which would offer future retirees a capped
payment to purchase private insurance — “ends Medicare as we know it.”
The Bipartisan Policy Center’s Bell, a former staff director for the
Senate Budget Committee under Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), said he fears
that Obama will win by demonizing efforts to curb Medicare growth, making it
harder to find common ground on the issue in a second term.
“My sense is
that this is going to be a referendum, all right. But for people like me, who
are really concerned about debt trends, the outcome will be a step backwards,”
he said.
Adam Fletcher, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, said that the
health-care law added eight years to the solvency of Medicare and that further
cuts proposed by Obama in this year’s budget would add two more.
“The
president has done a lot more than just talk about making Medicare more
sustainable,” he said.
Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), who has been warning of the dangers of a
rising tide of debt for years, said the modern political process makes it
nearly impossible for politicians to have a rational policy debate in the
heated final weeks of a national campaign.
“We’re trying
to solve some of the most complex policy dilemmas in history with an
increasingly ADD nation,” he said. “It’s an in¬cred¬ibly tough challenge.”
But he said both parties should strive for a do-no-harm approach, in
which they don’t allow their rhetoric to be so strident that they cannot make
tough choices after the election.
Cooper said the current campaign is “not just worrying” him on the
do-no-harm measure.
“It’s
terrifying me,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment