Coburn, Lieberman seek to raise Medicare age to 67

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP-NY Times

By DAVID ESPO

WASHINGTON (AP) - Two Senate rebels jumped into Congress' cut-the-deficit competition on Tuesday, proposing to raise the age of Medicare eligibility to 67 and increase monthly premiums for millions of current beneficiaries.

"We can't save Medicare as we know it," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., who authored the plan with Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. "We can only save Medicare if we change it," he added in an apparent jab at President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats.

Democrats reacted with criticism of the proposal, which Coburn said was designed to rescue the financially imperiled program and help the nation confront a "wall of debt." Republicans betrayed no sign of support either.

If nothing else, the response underscored the difficulty of legislative free-lancing at a time the Obama administration and congressional leaders are struggling to negotiate a compromise that cuts future deficits and clears the way for an increase in the nation's $14.3 trillion debt.

Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20110628/D9O55TH02.html

---

In this June 14, 2011 file photo, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., talks with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington. Taking aim at huge federal deficits, two Senate rebels outline a plan to raise the age of eligibility for Medicare from 65 to 67 and to charge wealthier seniors more for their care. The proposal by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and Coburn, come as budget negotiators face an early August deadline to reach a deal to raise the debt limit.(AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

[Journeyman]

1. Pikers! Set the eligibility date 6 months after death! Show some resolve, you vacillators!. . .

[indepat]

2. LIEberman will joyously join pubs in fu*king over we the people in almost every

way possible. :patriot:

[Walk away]

3. I guess it's OK to raise the limit of Americans who die for lack of medical care!

We should make these two assholes go without health care for two years. Maybe they'll make it and maybe they won't.

[awoke_in_2003]

4. They are rich enough...

to buy their own.

[Unadammit]

22. With their pensions

Lieberman will be collecting his in less than 2 years.

[awoke_in_2003]

33. we can only hope he leaves

when his term is over

[CTyankee]

36. He said he would be. I can't wait to have him gone...

[awoke_in_2003]

37. I wouldn't believe Lieberman...

if he said the sky was blue.

[CTyankee]

39. well, he had a press conference and made a big deal out of it...

also, why should he work so hard? Surely, he's lined up some cushy job as a lobbyist. I think that was the point of his being in the Senate for years now...

[awoke_in_2003]

40. He also likes being...

a pain in the ass- yes, I really think he enjoys it. I just don't put anything by that slippery bastard.

[anamandujano]

34. Cut their pensions. They all end up as lobbyists with

larger salaries anyway.

Why do all these deadbeats at best/troublemakers at worst get treated as royalty?

[Historic NY]

5. Unfortunately those that will need it the most will never see age 67....

poor diet, overweight, type 2 diabetics, low to middle income, smokers....you know the 40 yr old types that look like they are 55. I know and see some all the time. They don't invest in health care until its too late. I agree the wealthiers seniors should pay more, that makes sense. There doesn't seem to be a big push toward the premptive benefits of medicare wellness programs.

[loyalsister]

43. That was the whole point of health care reform

Everyone shares the cost- just in case rather than the invincible life approach that costs us all money.
That is also why preventative care is\was a key factor driving the legislation.
The health reform will bring down Medicare costs for that very reason.

[lumpy]

6. Of course raise the Medicare retirement age and the financial

coffers will increase denying thousands that will die before benefits are dispersed. Makes sense doesn't it? Yes, lay the responsibility on the backs of the elderly who will lose and die because no medical help is available. Coburn and Lieberman, the two bastardly fuckups, should be run out of town.

[OwnedByFerrets]

7. Fuck you, you traitors...God, I hate you fucks

:mad:

[Dutchmaster]

8. In order to save this village, we had to destroy it.

[SoapBox]

9. Frack'n Dirt BAGS...

Flithy, stinking rich...and they try to kill off Americans.

Remember, the Party of Thug / GOBP / RushThug / T.HATEbaggers, want you to DIE QUICKLY.

...traitors.

[groundloop]

10. Let ALL Americans purchase Medicare for a fair price - end of crisis!!!

That's just too damned simple and makes too much sense for Congress to ever accept. I'm sure some smart person could figure out what it would cost the Medicare system to insure Americans of any age. Then give us all the option of purchasing Medicare at a small markup, and voila, the Medicare "crisis" is solved.

Oh wait, that would be too much like socialized medicine and might cut into big insurance profits. Never mind.

[defendandprotect]

19. Obama could simply open up Medicare to all --

[Lasher]

26. That is inconsistent with the insurance industry's business model.

How could you suggest such a thing?

[defendandprotect]

32. And, sadly ....

it seems inconsistent with Obama's "business model" --

:evilgrin:

[Yo_Mama]

48. I don't think you know what you are talking about

The current premiums for Medicare Part A & Part B are $450 + $110 (or $115 for new retirees). That's $560 a month per person.
https://questions.medicare.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/2305/~/medicare-premiums-and-coinsurance-rates-for-2011

But that gets you 80/20 coverage without drug coverage. Depending on the part D plan you choose (which is subsidized), it's going to run you $50-$80 a month for drug coverage. Without the subsidy it would be more; actual premiums charged to buy-ins would be more.

Most Medigap policies that cover the 20% and doughnut holes are over $100 a month. So if a couple wanted to buy into Medicare currently, it would cost a minimum of $1,120 a month for no drug coverage and a 20% copay, or somewhere around $1,400 a month for more comprehensive coverage such as most workers covered through employment are accustomed to.

Now that is unaffordable for most couples and would not solve the problem. If you wait until you qualify for retirement by amassing the necessary quarters, you don't have to pay the $450 portion, just the rest of it, and Part D is subsidized also.

But there's more. Even if we subsidized a buy-in for younger people (no idea how we could possibly afford it!!!), those Medicare costs actually are not the "full" cost. Medicare payments are maintained at an artificially low rate by the government setting prices. CMS tells hospitals & doctors what it will pay. This is why most doctors try to restrict the number of Medicare beneficiaries in their practices.

Many of the payments Medicare makes do not cover the cost of the service. So what really happens is that the cost of providing service is shifted to the private insurance sector, which pays more for each service than Medicare does. Medicare is not actually more efficient than the private insurance companies.

Now if everyone were to pay only the Medicare rate, a lot of hospitals would not be able to provide service and a lot of doctors would not accept Medicare patients.

[JAnthony]

11. LUCKY ME!!! I already have my Medicare card... got last month...so

Republicans want to take that away from me now?

Or from my spouse 8 years younger?

I spend $5,000 a year on insurance, medical care, prescriptions,

Medicare will reduce that to half that cost in the first year.

What about when I turn 66, 67, 68


Old people are expendable, if they are not rich, (like me).

[The Wizard]

12. It will increase unemployment

It means job openings will be delayed. Just a dumb idea. Soon the Republicans will propose something like Soylent Green.

[arcane1]

13. "We can't save Medicare as we know it" MY ASS!!!!!

Increase by 5% the taxes on the top 1%. Divert .7 percent of the military budget towards Medicare. Deficit neutral.

So, how much more money do we need now?

[and-justice-for-all]

14. What fucking dick heads..nt

[JDPriestly]

15. Hope Connecticut Democrats are happy now.

They could have voted for a much better Democrat than Lieberman, but . . . . too late now.

[TomCADem]

20. You Do Know That Lieberman Lost The Conn Democratic Primary...

...which is why he ran as an independent?

I am not sure why we are rushing to blame Democrats when the facts show that Connecticut Democrats did about as much as you can expect to get rid of him, since he was successfully primaried.

[No Elephants]

24. Yes, he did, despite the best efforts of the Democratic Party,

which did its best to tear down his opponent in the Democratic primary, then did not support the winner of the Democratic primary perceptibly. And the Republicans nominated a clown, then also did not support their own nominee in the general election.


You're right. Connecticut Democratic voters are not responsible for Lieberman's victory. The national--and perhaps local? powers that be in both the Republican and the Democratic Parties were responsible for Lieberman's victory the last time he ran, or should I say the
the Demlican and the Republicrat Parties?

Reminds me of when both Democrats and Republicans joined hands to try to defeat now Senator Senators when he ran for re-election as Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, both endorsing the same candidate running against Sanders. (I don't know what Party, if any, Sanders' opponent belonged to, but it's a safe bet s/he was less liberal than Sanders. Then people wonder why the nation seems to be trending to the right.)

Then, Lieberman campaigned for McCain against Obama, so at least the Republicans got their money's worth for helping him defeat the Democratic nominee in the general election. Not sure what the Democrats got.

Funny thing is, Lieberman's Democratic opponent was not even all that liberal, although compared to Lieberman, he probably was. I really do wonder what the Democrats got from Lieberman's victory.

[JDPriestly]

27. Who elected him? Connecticut Democrats who voted independent is my guess.

[No Elephants]

35. My guess is both Republicans and Democrats who voted independent.

Niether the Republicans nor the Democrats supported their nominee and the Republicans nominated a clown who, IMO, they intended to lose to Joe.

Remember the Bush-Lieberman kiss? That probably lost Joe the Democratic primary, but won hin Republican support.

[LeftishBrit]

41. Probably a lot of it was Connecticut Republicans who voted independent

The Republican candidate was IIRC essentially abandoned by his party, and ended up with something like 10 per cent of the vote; presumably many who would normally have voted GOP went for Lieberman.

[Honeycombe8]

16. They're trying to end retirement is what I think. You can't retire if you can't get healthcare.

For someone 65 years old to buy healthcare on the open market would cost a fortune that millions won't have.

That's sounds all dandy to wealthy congress people....but in the real world, sometimes companies don't WANT senior citizens working until they drop dead. They lay them off and hire younger people. Then what do the seniors do? They won't have a job or healthcare.

This is so sick, what has happened in the last decade.

I expect the Democrats to stand up and do something about this. I'm in Texas, so I'm stuck with Republican representatives, except locally. But I hope Democrats all over the country show up for future elections and vote Democratic. I do.

[susu369]

30. Excellent point.

*nt*

[Unvanguard]

17. Anything beginning with "Coburn, Lieberman" is a bad idea. n/t

[defendandprotect]

18. Criminals running government -- we should be extending Medicare to 55 year olds ... even younger ...

and children --

[democratinnashville]

21. Lieberman has to go

Surely next time he's up for election Democrats can run a candidate that is stronger than this Repug thug that gets ditched in a Democratic primary then runs as an "Independent". Please, CT....get rid of this idiot once and for all.

[No Elephants]

25. I don't think Lieberman will run again. Also, please see Reply 24.

[No Elephants]

23. Lame duck Lieberman needs to shut up and sit down already.

[lunatica]

28. I feel so much safer when Lieberman and Coburn make decisions for my welfare

Ya just know they have our best interests at heart.

[Kolesar]

29. It's $150 Billion/year in war operations that we cannot afford

For that matter, the other $500+ billion in military spending ...

[sarcasmo]

45. +1

[Vinca]

31. This must be known as the insurance shill/hatemonger policy.

[flamingdem]

38. REBELS???!! How about paid off insurance company marionettes??

grrr. Complicit, compliant, on crack. Our media.

[BigDemVoter]

42. God I HATE Joe Lieberman

And that Tom Coburn is just a plain ass wipe. How do these people get into the Senate?

[sarcasmo]

44. Plenty of money to keep blowing shit up and rebuilding it in other countries,

No money for our seniors, the morals of these rich douche bag politicians makes me vomit.

[unkachuck]

46. "We can only save Medicare if we change it,"

....when you've taxed the wealthy and gates and buffet are penniless, when we've ended corporate war, closed our 1000 bases and the pentagons' budget is less than 50 billion a year, when the wall street casino bosses and the banksters are executed or sent to prison for life, when corporations and their crooked politicians have been cleansed from our government and democracy, when government, once again, becomes the employer of last resort...

...THEN comes see us about changing Medicare, you slimy, worthless piece of shit....

[mvd]

47. Unfortunately, Lieberman has a lot more in common with Coburn..

than most Democrats. Now that he's not running again, he's sold his soul even more.

[Yo_Mama]

49. With full SS benefits already delayed until 67

Virtually no one can afford to pay for health insurance in their early 60s. If they lose employer-provided insurance, they're up the creek without a paddle.

I only wish that our elected representatives knew more about those they purport to represent.

[JCMach1]

50. How about the trillions in unecessary wars...???