Michael Collins
(Washington, DC 3/22) Yesterday we found out that President Barack Obama put Medicare and Social Security in the budget deal mix; timely but not thoughtful. What a profile in cowardice. Maybe not. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that cutting these two programs is part of the Obama Money Party agenda. That's the elegant explanation and explained below.

Here's what Bloomberg reported (thanks to Lauren Hallahan's list for the tip):

"President Barack Obama told Senate Democrats that they should be open to changes in entitlement programs to achieve a long-term budget deal, according to several lawmakers who attended a meeting with him on Capitol Hill today." Bloomberg, March 21

Social Security does not contribute to the deficit. In fact, without the annual appropriation of Social Security funds , cash flow for the government would experience serious cash flow prolems. Each year, Treasury takes Social Security tax revenues to fund the general budget. Treasury leaves an IOU promising to repay beneficiaries down the road. The promise is guaranteed by the "full faith and credit of the United States of America." Who would take the word of the (s)elected "crooks and liars" given all the betrayals we see on a regular basis?

Paul Krugman called the process of cutting Social Security and Medicare an "austerity bomb."

"We're going to have substantial spending cuts, substantial tax increases at a time when the economy is still very weak. And, of course, that's a recipe for sliding back into recession/depression.

"So, we set ourselves up with the land mine in the road in front of our economy, which is not based on anything real. It's just based on our political mess." Paul Krugman, PBS, December 12

The Social Security program is secure. It doesn't need a backdoor fix like chained CPI which sneaks in cuts by redefining the consumer price index. It certainly didn't need Bailout Tim Geithner of Wall Street as Chairman of the Social Security and Medicare Board of Trustees during a critical period. Nor do those programs need the carefully crafted propaganda in Geithner's 2012 report from the trustees that justifies the Obama proposal. Obama referred to Geithner as "my good friend Tim" when he nominated him for Secretary of the Treasury. He should have called him "my good friend and future partner in crime."

Medicare is a victim of its success. People are living longer. As a result, the use benefits longer. Medicare costs are actually stabilizing as a portion of gross domestic product (GDP), based on data from the last five years. In an excellent article on future trends, Peter Orzag shows that a continuation of this trend puts Medicare at 3.8% of GDP by 2085 instead of the common projection of 6.7%. Medicare was 3.6% of GDP in 2011. The flat rate projection is not firm but, clearly, the near doubling of Medicare as a percent of GDP needs some serious revision.

A major program contributed to cost reduction. The federal government's Partnership for Patients developed and implemented successful efforts to reduce hospital re-admissions (within 30 days of discharge). It worked and the impact is substantial.

Two other actions would add a greater chance for Medicare's financial viability.

Allow Medicare to negotiate medication discounts with big pharma. Congress barred the program this logical form of cost reduction. The Veterans Administration achieved extraordinary savings with this tactic. Barring Medicare from the same negotiated deals is a subsidy for the pharmaceutical companies. It violates free market principles and hurts seniors. How can Republicans and Democrats allow this to stand? (That's an ironic, rhetorical question.)

Ed Silverman, February 15, 2013

In addition to cutting medicine costs, Medicare research could begin an intensive best practices program to prevent and mitigate two major conditions common among seniors; congestive heart failure and diabetes. The costs of these ailments could be reduced substantially with a highly focused approach.

President Obama was elected to deliver on more jobs and to protect Social Security and Medicare. We all know how well he's done on jobs. Now we see his approach to the two entitlement programs. God forbid, he should stop endless wars, military meddling, and cut back on the 1,000 U.S. military bases overseas. Saving mega contracts for the defense industry is clearly much more important than protecting two programs vital to the health and well being of citizens -- programs that can be optimized without needless benefit reductions.

Geithner's rhetoric as Chairman of the Social Security and Medicare Board of Trustees is the proof of Obama's alignment with The Money Party's position that the programs need serious cuts. He knows the story on his good friend Tim before he appointed him.

The president and Geithner don't care. They don't have to. Benefits, retirement, and an overly abundant lifestyle are guaranteed. All that's required is delivery on demand. His bosses need "change they can count on."

END

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article