Medicare: Romney Trails Obama On Key Issue In Swing States

Medicare Polls: Romney Trails Obama On Key Issue In Swing States

WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate brought Medicare to the forefront of the presidential campaign, as Democrats tried to tie Romney to Ryan's proposal to redesign the health insurance program. Since the Ryan pick, the two campaigns have traded barbs and attack ads attempting to portray the other as undermining Medicare. Surveys released this week in several swing states suggest that President Barack Obama has strengthened his lead on the issue, which could be a problem for Romney in key states like Florida and Ohio.

According to Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation polls conducted in Florida, Ohio and Virginia and released Thursday, registered voters trust Obama over Romney to handle Medicare by wide margins. Respondents preferred Obama on the issue by 53 percent to 38 percent in Florida, 56 percent to 37 percent in Ohio and 52 percent to 39 percent in Virginia. More than 70 percent of voters in each state said they consider Medicare either "very" or "extremely" important to their vote.

Similarly, CBS/New York Times/Quinnipiac surveys in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania found that likely voters think Obama would do a better job than Romney on handling Medicare: 55 percent to 40 percent in Florida, 55 percent to 39 percent in Ohio and 55 percent to 39 percent in Pennsylvania.

A USA Today/Gallup poll in 12 swing states found a smaller advantage for Obama: 50 percent to 44 percent. The Gallup poll pooled registered voters in the 12 states and did not break results out for individual states.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/2 ... f=politics

Imagine my surprise... They hung Paul Ryan and his budget like an albatross around RMoney's neck...And then Lyin'-Ryan went in front of the AARP and tried to sell the the "Push Granny Off The Cliff" program to them...(with predictable results). So, the one program that seniors universally like and DON'T want touched, is being "spun" to them as: "Here...Take this voucher, and see what you can buy in the free market--at the age of 65+...And by the way, it's going to cost you roughly $6,500/year more..."

Jus' keep doin' what yer doin'....

Oh, and here's the place to insert the "It's going broke" talking points: __

Economic realities? Nope lets keep adding one trillion in debt every six months. What is that? One Iraq war?

When you get right down to the brass tacks of it the AARP isn't anything more or less than another special interest group looking to gain benefits for their constituency at the expense of the taxpayer. We know that the so called Ryan Plan wouldn't alter a single thing for current retirees or even future ones who believe that the current benefit structure is in their own best interest. What no "progressive" has yet been able to explain in any rational way is why more choices for our elderly population is a bad thing.

Pledging to "strengthen, protect and preserve medicare as we know it" is about the smartest political campaign pledge you can make. Doesn't matter that there is no serious practical plan to actually do it.

Can anyone remind me just what are Obama's and the Democrat's plan to make Medicare fiscally sound?

Ohh... LOL beat me to it... lol

PrintSmith wrote: What no "progressive" has yet been able to explain in any rational way is why more choices for our elderly population is a bad thing.

Take a look at Medicare Part D. When Part D was given to the the insurance companies to administer it became a nightmare for most seniors. Yes, it is great to have Rx coverage, but each insurance company has their own pricing structure for different levels of drugs, and different premium levels for different levels of coverage.....trying to compare one company to another is difficult at best....and if you aren't computer savvy, nearly impossible. You have to investigate every year to find out which of the many plans from the many different companies might be best for you because each insurance company changes what their plans cover and for how much. OK, your average baby boomer can probably figure this out.....especially if they are computer savvy, but someone like my 95 yr old mother doesn't have a clue.

One example....I started on a new heart drug this year....my current insurance company for Part D has a $90 co-pay for this drug, even though the drugs total cost is only $96. It just happens to be a tier 4 drug for them. Doing some research I found that another company has it as a preferred tier 3 drug, and it would only cost $27/year. But their premium is higher per month.....so now I have to compute if the lower cost of the drug is worth the rise in premium.....but wait....there are other medications I take, so I have to factor in the cost of those drugs too. And yes, if a senior wants to get the best coverage and lowest cost they get to do this little exercise every year.

If it is this confusing just for a drug plan....I can't even imagine how confusing it will be when every senior has to decide on what plan from what insurance company, with what coverage, and what cost, will be...and you can be sure they will have to do it every year. Medicare works, and it works well....I would much rather we strengthen medicare and work out the economics of one plan, then give the insurance companies the opportunity to totally muddy the waters and screw seniors some more.

archer wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: What no "progressive" has yet been able to explain in any rational way is why more choices for our elderly population is a bad thing.

Take a look at Medicare Part D. When Part D was given to the the insurance companies to administer it became a nightmare for most seniors. Yes, it is great to have Rx coverage, but each insurance company has their own pricing structure for different levels of drugs, and different premium levels for different levels of coverage.....trying to compare one company to another is difficult at best....and if you aren't computer savvy, nearly impossible. You have to investigate every year to find out which of the many plans from the many different companies might be best for you because each insurance company changes what their plans cover and for how much. OK, your average baby boomer can probably figure this out.....especially if the are computer savvy, but someone like my 95 yr old mother doesn't have a clue.

One example....I started on a new heart drug this year....my current insurance company for Part D has a $90 co-pay for this drug, even though the drugs total cost is only $96. It just happens to be a tier 4 drug for them. Doing some research I found that another company has it as a preferred tier 3 drug, and it would only cost &27/year. But their premium is higher per month.....so now I have to compute if the lower cost of the drug is worth the rise in premium.....but wait....there are other medications I take, so I have to factor in the cost of those drugs too. And yes, if a senior wants to get the best coverage and lowest cost they get to do this little exercise every year.

If it is this confusing just for a drug plan....I can't even imagine how confusing it will be when every senior has to decide on what plan from what insurance company, with what coverage, and what cost, will be...and you can be sure they will have to do it every year. Medicare works, and it works well....I would much rather we strengthen medicare and work out the economics of one plan, then give the insurance companies the opportunity to totally muddy the waters and screw seniors some more.

And all of THAT is because those swell folks in the GOTP made sure to eliminate a provision for their pharma buddies that would have allowed Medicare to negotiate a best-price from the industry--like the military does. Can you spell: "C-R-O-N-Y C-A-P-I-T-A-L-I-S-M"?

____________

And to answer the other question: Handing a senior a voucher and telling them to go find coverage for people after age-65, when pre-existing conditions, and likelihood of geriatric diseases sends the coverages costs sky-high; telling them it's going to cost them an estimated $6,500/year more..That is not a "choice" any rational human being would choose. No, it takes a Randroid sociopath, "let the 47% hurry up and die" type of teabagger to come up with that.

Just curious. Is Medicare Part D any more complicated than Medicare Advantage which was created in 1997 under a different administration (called Medicare+Choice at the time)? So far as I know you have to select among private plans that best fit your needs with both programs. And this should save costs and reduce premiums vs. having an all encompassing single plan for all, should it not?

I get the part about not all seniors being able to use a computer to research the best choice. But plenty of seniors can. And don't local senior centers offer free services as well to assist (call or visit them, tell them your needs, and they make a suggestion)? I assume Medicare can send out a list of choices as well, not that it could cover every single detail.

Not debating, just asking...

The private plans' drug prices are still controlled by big pharma. If Medicare was allowed to negotiate drug prices, the costs would be reduced by 50-60%.

Isn't it wonderful what price-protection, and cozy relationships between the GOTP and the pharma industry can do...? I guess that ol' "free market" isn't worth a crap when you have one party propping up the prices and FIXING them.

pineinthegrass wrote: Just curious. Is Medicare Part D any more complicated than Medicare Advantage which was created in 1997 under a different administration (called Medicare+Choice at the time)? So far as I know you have to select among private plans that best fit your needs with both programs. And this should save costs and reduce premiums vs. having an all encompassing single plan for all, should it not?

I get the part about not all seniors being able to use a computer to research the best choice. But plenty of seniors can. And don't local senior centers offer free services as well to assist (call or visit them, tell them your needs, and they make a suggestion)? I assume Medicare can send out a list of choices as well, not that it could cover every single detail.

Not debating, just asking...

Medicare Advantage plans usually include Part D....so yeah, they can be as confusing as Part D . It's all about adding insurance companies into the mix....I would like to see advantage plans eliminated, and Part D put under the Medicare umbrella. There have been a lot of abuses in the Advantage plans......Medicare pays more per senior to the insurance companies than their average per senior cost with straight medicare. Yet seniors do not get a lot of extra benefits from those plans and the insurance companies get an automatic part D client. Anytime you ask a client to figure out what plan is best from different companies with differing plans at different cost there is not only room for confusion but room for abuse.

I have never understood why medicare doesn't regulate the Part D and advantage plans like they do Medicare Supplement plans......there are several differing levels of supplement plans, and they are the SAME for any insurance company that wants to provide them. So the only difference for the consumer is price, and area of coverage. Some may add extra benefits, but the basic plans are the same.