Granderson: Gruber Critics Were Silent When Bush Misled On Medicare Part D
During a heated CNN Sunday panel discussion on how to reform health care, liberal commentator Granderson asked his conservative co-panelists S.E. Cupp and Mercedes Schlapp: “Where was all this investigation ten years ago when Bush had his health care reform?”
Miffed by that suggestion, both Cupp and Schlapp attempted to interrupt, but Granderson pressed on:
This is important because some of the same voices who are now going after the Affordable Care Act were the same voices who were silent when Bush lied to the American people how much it was going to cost on Schedule D for Medicare…. You’re saying that the American people are so upset about this, but even when the Democrats tried to introduce a bill to repeal that law [Medicare Part D], the Republicans still fought that in 2007. Let’s not pretend this isn’t partisan politics.
…nearly everyone who’s attacking Gruber as if he were a White House political employee or a Democratic senator is simultaneously trying to require the Congressional Budget Office to say that tax cuts pay for themselves. The people who brought you the phony arithmetic of the Bush tax cuts and Medicare Part D and the self-financing Iraq war are upset about the ACA, which is genuinely fiscally sound.
By any reasonable standard, ACA respected budgetary constraints much better than most other laws. That the authors took pains to meet concrete budgetary goals actually underscores the point that they took CBO, and budgetary questions in general, very seriously.
And Beutler reminds us that the Bush administration threatened to fire the chief Medicare actuary if the numbers came out higher than what the White House was predicting.
Click here for reuse options!An internal investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services confirms that the top Medicare official threatened to fire the program’s chief actuary if he told Congress that drug benefits would probably cost much more than the White House acknowledged.
A report on the investigation, issued Tuesday, says the administrator of Medicare, Thomas A. Scully, issued the threat to Richard S. Foster while lawmakers were considering huge changes in the program last year. As a result, Mr. Foster’s cost estimate did not become known until after the legislation was enacted.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
30 responses to Granderson: Gruber Critics Were Silent When Bush Misled On Medicare Part D
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Wayout November 16th, 2014 at 19:39
The Bush administration didn’t run around pledging “transparency” like Obama and his crew. Jonathan Gruber admitted that the ACA bill was written “in a tortured manner” so the public could never figure it out. Lies, lies, and more lies is all we get from this regime.
OldLefty November 16th, 2014 at 20:04
Yes they did.
Bush said, he would bring “Integrity back to Washington”, even as they were planning Iraq.
Meanwhile, the administration never hid the distributional consequences of the ACA.
A large insurer opposed to health-care reform released a study, widely covered by the press, showing that, under the ACA, “prices would trend much higher for healthy people,” particularly for younger customers, but that “[o]lder, sicker individuals would tend to see cost decreases.” … (As is the case for ALL insurance…. nothing new here).
And members of Congress hotly debated the fairness of community rating on the floor of both the House and Senate.
And the day after President Obama signed the ACA, the New York Times ran a front-page story declaring it “the federal government’s biggest attack on economic inequality since inequality began rising more than three decades ago.” If the ACA’s distributional effects were hidden, they were not hidden well.
I don’t think that people that are yammering now, even know what these two guys were talking about.
Do you even know what they mean by, “in a tortured manner”?
Hint; they did not think it was a tax, although THEY wanted a tax.
Do you know the “tortured manner” in which Medicare Part D was crafted?
The Ethics Committee admonishments?
The threats to Richard Foster AND Rep Nick Smith?
Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care.
Tim Coolio November 16th, 2014 at 20:04
Another Obama complaint!
No wars for oil barrons?
No wars for crony contractors?
No white man in 1600 Pennsylvania avenue?
No way con-servatives would ever think
President Obama is a vast improvement on
the last occupant of 1600!
tiredoftea November 16th, 2014 at 20:09
As if any other bill doesn’t have the same issues that the ACA had in going through Congress. You are just too ignorant (thank’s Gruber!!) to know that.
BTW: We’re still waiting for the WMD’s that W and the rest of his war criminal administration promised us!
Allan Kim Harrison November 17th, 2014 at 08:13
In other words you’re saying …….Yeah but, but.. Oh look a squirrel!
Wayout November 16th, 2014 at 20:39
The Bush administration didn’t run around pledging “transparency” like Obama and his crew. Jonathan Gruber admitted that the ACA bill was written “in a tortured manner” so the public could never figure it out. Lies, lies, and more lies is all we get from this regime.
OldLefty November 16th, 2014 at 21:04
Yes they did.
Bush said, he would bring “Integrity back to Washington”, even as they were planning Iraq.
Meanwhile, the administration never hid the distributional consequences of the ACA.
A large insurer opposed to health-care reform released a study, widely covered by the press, showing that, under the ACA, “prices would trend much higher for healthy people,” particularly for younger customers, but that “[o]lder, sicker individuals would tend to see cost decreases.” … (As is the case for ALL insurance…. nothing new here).
And members of Congress hotly debated the fairness of community rating on the floor of both the House and Senate.
And the day after President Obama signed the ACA, the New York Times ran a front-page story declaring it “the federal government’s biggest attack on economic inequality since inequality began rising more than three decades ago.” If the ACA’s distributional effects were hidden, they were not hidden well.
I don’t think that people that are yammering now, even know what these two guys were talking about.
Do you even know what they mean by, “in a tortured manner”?
Hint; they did not think it was a tax, although THEY wanted a tax.
Do you know the “tortured manner” in which Medicare Part D was crafted?
The Ethics Committee admonishments?
The threats to Richard Foster AND Rep Nick Smith?
Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care.
Tim Coolio November 16th, 2014 at 21:04
Another Obama complaint!
No wars for oil barrons?
No wars for crony contractors?
No white man in 1600 Pennsylvania avenue?
No way con-servatives would ever think
President Obama is a vast improvement on
the last occupant of 1600!
tiredoftea November 16th, 2014 at 21:09
As if any other bill doesn’t have the same issues that the ACA had in going through Congress. You are just too ignorant (thank’s Gruber!!) to know that.
BTW: We’re still waiting for the WMD’s that W and the rest of his war criminal administration promised us!
Ed Hamilton November 17th, 2014 at 09:13
In other words you’re saying …….Yeah but, but.. Oh look a squirrel!
Denise November 16th, 2014 at 19:51
selective amnesia. the gop hate the aha because they aren’t profiting from it. boehner and company only like the free market/capitalism when it benefits them and their corporate pimps. that’s called fascism. they all profited from Medicare part d, and still do.
Tim Coolio November 16th, 2014 at 19:59
We need a single-payer universal system that’s
run by Medicare and reduce the for-profit
insurance companies to providing coverage for
the 20% of costs that Medicare does not cover!
Denise November 16th, 2014 at 20:51
selective amnesia. the gop hate the aha because they aren’t profiting from it. boehner and company only like the free market/capitalism when it benefits them and their corporate pimps. that’s called fascism. they all profited from Medicare part d, and still do.
Tim Coolio November 16th, 2014 at 20:59
We need a single-payer universal system that’s
run by Medicare and reduce the for-profit
insurance companies to providing coverage for
the 20% of costs that Medicare does not cover!
Suzanne McFly November 16th, 2014 at 19:52
We have extremely short memories, it is up to the press to constantly remind us of the situations we have experienced before to make the problems we are currently facing seem reasonable.
Suzanne McFly November 16th, 2014 at 20:52
We have extremely short memories, it is up to the press to constantly remind us of the situations we have experienced before to make the problems we are currently facing seem reasonable.
Red Eye Robot November 16th, 2014 at 20:37
One little problem, Medicare part D came in under projected numbers just like Bush said it would. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/15/rick-santorum/did-medicare-part-d-come-40-percent-under-budget-b/
Also it had bipartisan support, nobody is forced to participate, there are no IRS penalties if you don’t participate,Nobody is forced to pay for coverage they don’t need like men paying for maternity coverage. Bush never had to change or bypass parts of the law by executive order. bush didn’t have to exempt his friends and big donors from the law with waivers And let’s not forget the website. All the author comes up with is that the Bush Administration threatened to fire Foster if he “Grubered” …Lied to congress
tracey marie November 16th, 2014 at 22:43
no it did not, it was also 6 months behind because…wait for it, the site did not work. It eventually cost 785 billion
rg9rts November 17th, 2014 at 04:16
Go get the moron…TM ….LOL TAG
tracey marie November 17th, 2014 at 06:36
damn cat
Joseph Miceli November 17th, 2014 at 13:19
I see you have created your own “facts.” Others would call that lying, but I call that typical conservative rhetoric.
Red Eye Robot November 16th, 2014 at 21:37
One little problem, Medicare part D came in under projected numbers just like Bush said it would. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/15/rick-santorum/did-medicare-part-d-come-40-percent-under-budget-b/
Also it had bipartisan support, nobody is forced to participate, there are no IRS penalties if you don’t participate,Nobody is forced to pay for coverage they don’t need like men paying for maternity coverage. Bush never had to change or bypass parts of the law by executive order. bush didn’t have to exempt his friends and big donors from the law with waivers And let’s not forget the website. All the author comes up with is that the Bush Administration threatened to fire Foster if he “Grubered” …Lied to congress
tracey marie November 16th, 2014 at 23:43
no it did not, it was also 6 months behind because…wait for it, the site did not work. It eventually cost 785 billion
rg9rts November 17th, 2014 at 05:16
Go get the moron…TM ….LOL TAG
tracey marie November 17th, 2014 at 07:36
damn cat
Joseph Miceli November 17th, 2014 at 14:19
I see you have created your own “facts.” Others would call that lying, but I call that typical conservative rhetoric.
Ron Jackson November 16th, 2014 at 22:43
The bottom line is that so long as there is a black man as president, that’s not handpicked by the leaders in the right wing white nationalist movement, the sub humans on the right will hate him
rg9rts November 17th, 2014 at 04:15
And he is a moderate republican too
Ron Jackson November 16th, 2014 at 23:43
The bottom line is, so long as there is a black man as president, that’s not been handpicked by the leaders in the right wing white nationalist movement to help push their agenda of white nationalism, the sub humans on the right will always hate black people.
rg9rts November 17th, 2014 at 05:15
And he is a moderate republican too