I am 61

[Racenut20]

And I sure as hell am not going to vote for "Hoover-Junior". But don't make me have to vote for Dr. Dean's Medicare Plan either.

[justinb3]

1. Dean's "Medicare Plan"

What, exactly, *is* Dean's "Medicare Plan"?

Maybe you're referring to the recent Gephardt nastiness?

-justinb

[Racenut20]

2. The "facts" I was hearing this morning.

Unfortunately I have to agree with Congressman Gephardt

[papau]

4. Gep wants massive Health Ins Company welfare - rather than a Gov program

It does provide Health care for all - but at what cost - and is giving the insurance companies a blank check the only way to get it passed (if it is I jump on the bandwagon).

Better is to treat the Insurance Companies as clerks - administrative services only - keeps everyone but the CEO and son working/happy, allows capital tied up in reserves/surplus to be moved to other parts of economy, and have a single payer at at an immediate 15% cost savings - and a likely 30% cost savings over time.

The 1995 Dean desire to slow down Health cost growth to 7% from the projected 10% growth - the savings - or cut if you like - of $270 B over time, was a suggestion that getting the 2nd opinion, standard Hosp stay rules, etc could reduce Hospitals being used as nursing homes. I do not see what was the problem. Granted time has shown that the rules can get silly - and mean spirited - and harmful to health of everyone - but at the time why not try the change?

[Nicholas_J]

Actually

I have been following Dean and all of the "morphing" of his health care plan for almost a year now. Deans plan started out by simply extending Medicaid to those younger than 55 (allowing them to buy into it), and allowing those older than that to buy into Medicare (You know that program he said was the worse federal program ever created). Nothing more. As the fiscal realiteis of this hit, and as other candidates started bringing out their plans, Deans and his campaign managers realized that he was actually going to have to come up with a real plan, rather than poorly constructed campaign hype, because if you examine the stats for Vermont, Dean did nothing in Vermont to provide health insurace to those without coverage, other than to do what changes in the Medicaid programs allowed him to do, using medicaid ss1115 exemptions. Other states did the same thing, and is is simply the fact that when Dean came to office as governor, Vermont already had one of the lowest rates of uninsured people in the nation. Not one Vermonter ever received health insurance by any decision or legislation proposed by Howard Dean.

If you take an average of the four years prior to Dean coming to office, the rates of uninsured were LOWER in Vermont before he became governor. For many years under Dean, the rate of uninsured was as much as 45 percent higher than it was in the best years prior to his becoming governor. One year the uninsured rate in Vermont, under Dean, was the highest in the years between 1987 and 2001, reaching 13 percent.

Dean actually seems to have had no plan, but by getting into the race early, and asserting that he actually did something in Vermont has simply made the lie true by repetition. Or at least many people actually assume he did something, when he did nothing at all.

All of the programs that exist in Vermont, Such as VSCRIPT, and Dr Dynasaur were created several years before Dean was elected, and actually provided higher levels of service than they had during much of Deans tenure as governor, as he was continually cutting the budget to these programs.

IN the end, Deans trying to create something out of temporary federal waivers ended in his sending a budget to the state that cut out:

The Dean budget for FY 2003 is $891 million in state spending, one percent more than the state expects to spend this fiscal year but nearly 3% less than the budget passed last year ($916 million). Revenues this year are expected to be $50 million below budget. Dean wants to use the "Rainy Day" fund to cover some of the $50 million shortfall but does not want to tap that fund for FY 2003. Next year’s budget is based on revenue estimates of $893 million.

If passed as presented, Dean’s budget would:

Eliminate the VScript Expanded Program.

Reduce the Vermont Health Access Plan pharmacy benefit.

Increase the co-pay up to $750/year for medicines under both the VScript and VHAP pharmacy programs. (Those eligible now pay only a few dollars for each filled prescription).

Eliminate the Medicaid dentures, chiropractic and podiatry programs.

Reduce the adult dental programs (cover pain and suffering only, not preventative care).

Add a 50% co-pay to adult vision programs.

Add a $250 co-pay per admission to VHAP inpatient hospital benefit.

Reduce the hospital outpatient payment by 10%.

Establish a hospital outpatient co-pay of $25.

These cuts would save about $27 million, $11 million in state money. Few advocates for the elderly are happy with the budget and have vowed to restore the money lost to these programs. A coalition of over a dozen advocacy groups held a rally and press conference at the Capitol building to denounce the budget cuts.

http://vnavt.com/vahhavoicewinter2002.htm


The Senate opposed Dean, and provided a budget that restored many of these programs. Dean was also offered an alternative that would raise taxes on the wealthiest Vermonters by about 2 percent ( of their income (after federal taxes and other deductions), in order to save all of the programs. But Dean sided with the Vermont House, dominated by Republicans, and insisted that the rich were already taxes too much.

[Rose Siding]

3. Sounds like you're convinced by what you heard

But you may want to consider that "facts" on the news are frequently distorted during a campaign.

You might also want to consider that while governor, Dean was able to make health care available to about 98% of all Vermonters.

Should you feel like learning more about what Dr Dean's overall health care plan entails as well as some improvements to medicare, he laid it out here:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_health_columbia

[Speck Tater]

5. I'm 58 and ...

... rather than be taken in by Gephardt's lies and distortions, I did the research. I'm 100% behind Dean.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

6. Please share your research. nt

[justinb3]

7. Dean, Medicare, and Gephardt

http://www.dickfacts.com/ pokes fun at Gephardt, and exposes his tactics. It's not very informative about Dean, though, and is mostly reactionary.

I'd say that http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/092103.htm#092603 is a good place to start. Sample :

Vermont's Democratic governor, Howard Dean, said the GOP budget cuts "absolutely stick it to the states" and could strip away the safety net for the poor in some states.

"It will just totally cripple our ability to manage," he said, "and it will essentially force a tax increase in most states. And Minnesota and Vermont are two of them."…

…"What they're interested in is cutting the budget and making sure that somebody else gets the blame," he said.

...

On health insurance, he was critical of Newt, in a 7/11//95 W. Post piece:

has implemented state reforms including the extension of Medicaid coverage to a broader range of poor children.

Dean has urged House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) to sacrifice $5 billion of the proposed GOP tax cut to implement a similar plan nationally.

"As you control costs you must expand coverage. We have expanded individuals covered as we have worked hard to restrain costs," Dean said.

"That is where the congressional plan falls apart.

"It helps to balance the budget but does nothing to move toward universal coverage in the private system. . . . The Republicans are missing a wonderful opportunity to expand coverage, not reduce it."


-justinb

[Sean Reynolds]

8. Thank you for that site.

:-)

[justinb3]

9. welcome

No sweat - Gephardt's tactics are really disgusting. Scaring people into voting against someone else is a GOP tactic, and he ought to be ashamed.

-justinb

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. Did you miss this in your research?

Here is Dean confirming that he still wants to cut Medicare's growth rate:

STEPHANOPOULOS: also says that in 1995, you specifically supported the 270 billion dollars or so in tax cuts that were called for by Newt Gingrich --

DEAN: I think that's very unlikely.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Here's the document…And it's pretty clear that you said you would accept a seven- to ten-percent cut in the rate of growth of Medicare, which is --

DEAN: Oh, a cutting the rate of growth is much different --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, except that the cut in growth rate in 1995 came to 270 billion dollars.

DEAN: I've got to find out…but I fully subscribe to the notion which is to reduce the Medicare growth rate to ten percent or less, I'm sure I said that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That's what Newt Gingrich was calling for in 1995.
http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm

It would be different if Dean were saying something like: "we need to take steps to cut costs, and once the rate of increase in health care costs is reduced, Medicare would be in a lot better shape". But that's not the approach Dean backed in '95 and still backs according to his own words. What the Republicans and Dean want is for funding to be reduced for Medicare FIRST - and let the chips fall where they may.

[justinb3]

13. Did you miss this in yours?

"As you control costs you must expand coverage. We have expanded individuals covered as we have worked hard to restrain costs," Dean said.

-justinb

[Feanorcurufinwe]

14. ???

"As you control costs you must expand coverage. We have expanded individuals covered as we have worked hard to restrain costs," Dean said.

I don't understand why you are posting this without a citation so that we can examine the context in which it was said. Was this in an interview? At a campaign rally? Did he whisper it at the breakfast table?

"As you control costs you must expand coverage. We have expanded individuals covered as we have worked hard to restrain costs," Dean said.

I take this to mean that Dean does not look at cost control as a means of lowering expenditures? It seems contradictory. On the one hand, Dean is saying he wants to limit the Medicare growth rate, but on the other hand, he is saying any success in cost control should be used to expand the number of individuals covered. Taken together, it sounds like less coverage for more people -- although only if the cuts he is advocating add up to less than the cost control benefit. If that condition is not met, it just means less coverage for fewer people.

[justinb3]

15. ??? (try reading upthread)

I don't understand why you are posting this without a citation so that we can examine the context in which it was said. Was this in an interview? At a campaign rally? Did he whisper it at the breakfast table?

Quit being so snide and try reading upthread to my original posting, or go directly to http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/092103.htm#092603

I'm not going to quote the whole analysis here, but I think it's quite rational - you ought to read it.

-justinb

[Feanorcurufinwe]

17. OK I see Dean is not actually talking about Medicare in this quote at all.

So why even bring it up? Just to confuse the issues?


But the fact that he is not talking about Medicare here answers the question I raised in post 14...

[justinb3]

23. read the rest ...

Read the rest of the analsys, where it does talk about Medicare.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

24. I've read it. What is your point?

In the quote you provided, Dean is not talking about Medicare. In that article you take to be such gospel, there is plenty of spin, but the facts remain the same.

[molly]

73. Today is Friday - got your research?

[dpbrown]

10. I don't want any candidate who doesn't want Universal Single-payer

So I'm against Dean's plan to bloat government and hand out more money to corrupt health insurance corporations, as well.

[Mairead]

41. Me too neither.

Dennis is the only guy on my dance card.

[dpbrown]

42. We must "get" that it's "big guvmint" to pay more for less health

And that all the other candidates offer a variation on the same, broken, theme. It's big government to pour more money into a system that's proven only that it's failed to cover all Americans.

Only Kucinich's plan will cover all Americans, will create one pool of insured, and won't result in diverting more money from other social programs to fund it.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Mairead]

72. I agree. 'Big Government' is the government of pork

Pork for politicians and bureaucrats, pork for business. But not much for the rest of us except bills.

[MercutioATC]

57. Show me how you're getting single-payer through Congress and I'll listen

Until then, expanding current plans to extend coverage is something that will face a lot less opposition.

THEN we can worry about single-payer.

[dpbrown]

62. Through popular and doctor support, and grassroots lobbying

Though not a sure-thing, not unlike the popular support that moved campaign finance, or thusfar kept ANWR from drilling, or encouraged Senators to filibuster, a lot of the grunt work will obviously be coming from us.

And the momentum has already begun to shift, with the 8000 doctors coming out in JAMA for UHC. So the situation is already different than it was when Clinton tried to move something through. I don't believe that now is the time we should be advised to "settle for less."

Realistically, the tendency to look the other way while insurance lobbyists have their way with the bill will have to be resisted, as well, since I've heard or read that one of the reasons Clinton's bill didn't get passed is because it became so topheavy with industry hogwash that it could never fly.

But looking for a guaranteed outcome is looking at the picture wrong, in my opinion. Instead of settling for a candidate who feeds me the "line" that "this" or "that" is all I can reasonably expect, and then expecting me to toe the line for that candidate, I am ready to believe only in a candidate who can lay out for me a vision of how the future can be, and then to provide the leadership that will inspire me and thousands of others to help this candidate once elected to achieve those goals for me and for others.

Dennis Kucinich lays out a future that looks fiscally responsible, telling me where the money is going to come from and what it's going to be used on. He doesn't talk about diverting money from Bush's tax cuts (money that was previously being used to fund some other social program or something) to grow government bigger, or to divert money to a sick, privatized system of health care, making CEOs richer and not making the system more efficient.

I find his kind of politicking very attractive. He inspires me by providing me with a goal that I believe he's interested in working toward together with me, and with the others who are working with us to create this better, more fiscally responsible system.

This, in turn, gives me hope that the groups that are now putting all their energy into fighting Bush's debacles, will themselves throw their political weight behind getting Kucinich's programs through Congress - MoveOn.org, ActforChange, PFAW, UnionVoice, etc., etc. I begin to imagine the progress we'll be able to make through these groups when we're not fighting disaster but instead we're creating the future.

Thus, the key in my mind is having the person at the helm that most inspires confidence that he's working for the best for all of us, not cautioning us to settle, because "that's as good as it's going to get." I believe that by electing someone who sets his, and our, sights higher, we're more likely to achieve the goals we're shooting for.

And that's how I think we are going to get Kucinich's plans through Congress. Not by handing everything off and expecting everything to happen, but by continuing to be inspired by the leadership shown and by working through all our networks to make sure we are able to create these positive changes together.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Feanorcurufinwe]

63. That's how alright.

It is going to be a long, long, hard struggle but eventually we will have single-payer.

[dpbrown]

64. It won't take that long

We've got the political infrastructure in place from our battles against Bush, and we've got momentum on our side and building starting with the doctors coming out for it in JAMA, rising health costs, a belt-tightening economy that makes this sort of fiscally responsible plan more attractive, and more people without health insurance coverage than ever before.

The only piece that's missing, then, is the leader who will inspire and motivate, instead of one who tells us to "settle."

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Feanorcurufinwe]

65. I hope you are right.

I don't think so, but I hope so.

[dpbrown]

66. We've been put in a position of static fear by trickle-down for too long

I'm convinced that the nation is ready to shrug off the mantle of the Reagan, Bush, and Bush years in a big way, and not only because we had a taste of what things could be like under Clinton.

We've been seriously introduced to how bad things can get under "Bush the Stunted".

Just wait, if we let a new day dawn by electing an inspiring candidate instead of one who wants us to "settle", we're going to work our asses off to create a better world - and we're going to get it, too.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[no name no slogan]

67. Business will be on board sooner than later

IMHO, we'll reach critical mass on this issue when business raises its voice about how much they have to pay for medical coverage for their workers. And that's already started to happen.

Currently we spend 13% of our annual GDP on healthcare-- more than any other industrialized nation. Under the Kucinich plan, our cost would be reduced to 7-8% of annual GDP.

In other words, it makes better fiscal sense to have a universal, single-payer system that covers EVERYONE-- not 90%, or 98%, but EVERYONE REGARDLESS OF WHO THEY ARE. Trying to fix our current system is like putting a band-aid on a severed limb-- it's too little to late.

[bread_and_roses]

69. You said it

amen.

[LWolf]

70. A related editorial in the NYTimes:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 — The number of people without health insurance shot up last year by 2.4 million, the largest increase in a decade, raising the total to 43.6 million, as health costs soared and many workers lost coverage provided by employers, the Census Bureau reported today. The increase brought the proportion of people who were uninsured to 15.2 percent, from 14.6 percent in 2001. The figure remained lower than the recent peak of 16.3 percent in 1998.

A continued erosion of employer-sponsored coverage was the main reason for the latest increase, the bureau said. Public programs, especially Medicaid, covered more people and cushioned the loss of employer-sponsored health insurance but "not enough to offset the decline in private coverage," the report said.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ronald F. Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a liberal-leaning consumer group, said: "It's hard to grasp the magnitude of the number of uninsured. It exceeds the aggregate population of 24 states."

The number of full-time workers without health insurance rose by 897,000 last year, to 19.9 million. Kate Sullivan, director of health care policy at the United States Chamber of Commerce, said the increase was alarming and predicted it would continue this year.
"Workplace coverage is becoming unaffordable for many employers and employees," Ms. Sullivan said.

This is a system that is broken beyond repair. Not only does DK offer a single-payer plan that covers every single American, no exception, he does it for the same money or less spent on for-profit insurance companies.

All the dems have a plan for health care; as they should. All but Dennis and CMB (Clark? I haven't heard)are tinkering with the existing broken system, and none are trying to cover 100% of American citizens.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/30/politics/30INSU.html?th

[genius]

12. Your right. Dean is horrible on Senior issues

The trouble is he's from Park Avenue and he will never have to worry about balancing food against medicine. My mom (who is a senior) would never forgive me if I voted for Dean.

[Egnever]

36. She has nothing to worry about

You clearly have never had any intention of voting for dean

[molly]

16. We people closer to retirement have a lot to consider

much-much-much more than young activists enamored by a bat or a phone conference. We care about issues that affect all of us - young and old. We need to back candidates whose issues contain substance .

[genius]

18. The rest of us should consider the elderly too.

We owe them everything. Yet, a lot of my generation is looking into voting, not for the best candidate who will help everyone, but into just going with the crowd so they can say they voted for someone popular. I can't help but wonder what has happened to my generation that they are not voting with their conscience. Perhaps it's the socialization thing the school has forced on children. They don't know how to think outside of a group consciousness when they grow up. Voting for a candidate like Dean, who will hurt your generation, is irresponsible.

[molly]

33. Nick's post above contains the truth about Dean in Vermont

so why does his campaign continue to tell lies about the wonderful things he did for health care in Vermont?

"If you take an average of the four years prior to Dean coming to office, the rates of uninsured were LOWER in Vermont before he became governor. For many years under Dean, the rate of uninsured was as much as 45 percent higher than it was in the best years prior to his becoming governor. One year the uninsured rate in Vermont, under Dean, was the highest in the years between 1987 and 2001, reaching 13 percent.

Dean actually seems to have had no plan, but by getting into the race early, and asserting that he actually did something in Vermont has simply made the lie true by repetition. Or at least many people actually assume he did something, when he did nothing at all."

[genius]

58. Dean's whole campaign is a lie

from the line he stole from Wellstone (who must be rolling over in his grave) to the claim that he was anti-war. He only wanted a 60 day delay.

[Nicholas_J]

82. Thanks Molly

Not to worry though.

Deans record is soon to be seen all about the U.S. on the major media.

[acerbic]

85. Is the Kerry lie campaign going to buy ads?

Deans record is soon to be seen all about the U.S. on the major media.

That and LiesMax.con and Faux News are the only ways your version of "Dean's record" is going to be published:

"Nicholas_J" "quotes":

He said reducing from ten to seven percent.

The Times Argus quoted Dean as saying, “I fully subscribe to the notion that we should reduce the Medicare growth rate from 7 to 10 percent.” According to a New York Times report, that was the amount the Domenici plan was proposing.
http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c4789004/22242325.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=108&topic_id=53755&mesg_id=53765&page=

...and here's the actual text from the article linked:
"I fully subscribe to the notion that we should reduce the Medicare growth rate from 10 percent to 7 percent,"

:eyes:

[LuminousX]

19. Out of Context

I think anyone concerned about this issue needs to read this whole thing:
http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/092103.htm#092603

instead of the selected clips put here. Obviously each side is trying to color the issue in their favor. The selection the link takes you to gives a great run down of the argument, the fair spots you can poke at Dean but also the miscategorization Gephardt has done in regarding to Dean.

In the end, you will have to vote how you feel, just don't make up your mind based on cherry-picked information.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

20. That site just shows different ways Dean disagreed with Gingrich but

just because Dean disagreed with Gingrich on issues A,B and C doesn't change the fact that Dean did and still does favor cutting the Medicare growth rate.

If the charge being levelled at Dean was 'you are just like Gingrich' then these arguments might be a good defense. But the charge against Dean is that he favored, and still favors, the Republican plan to cut the Medicare growth rate.

I've quoted http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm above and anyone who thinks I am quoting out of context is welcome to read it for themselves.

DEAN: I've got to find out…but I fully subscribe to the notion which is to reduce the Medicare growth rate to ten percent or less, I'm sure I said that.
http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm

Present tense. Dean is in favor of this now, just as he was in 1995.

[LuminousX]

21. Actually the site

CLEARLY says Dean supports limiting growth of Medicare. I thought you would enjoy reading that.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

22. lol that's what it says alright.

[Nicholas_J]

27. Yup:

In 1995, Dean agreed with Republican plans to cut Medicare by $270 billion

On May 17, 1995, one day before the Republican Congress voted to cut Medicare by $270 billion, Howard Dean delivered a speech praising the cuts.

"He (Dean) applauded the efforts of Senate Budget Committee chairman Pete Domenici, R-Nev., who presented his own balanced budget plan last week... Dean also said he could defend Domenici's approach to reducing Medicare costs. He said he supported more managed care for Medicare recipients and requiring some Medicare recipients to pay a greater share of the cost of their medical services…
"'I fully subscribe to the notion that we should reduce the Medicare growth rate from 10 percent to 7 percent, or less if possible,' Dean said."

The cuts Dean described - reducing the rate of growth to 7 percent - was exactly what Newt Gingrich and the Republican revolutionaries proposed. The Dallas Morning News noted that cutting Medicare's growth from 10 to 7 percent would cut $282 billion from Medicare: "Under the House and Senate plans, the annual rate of growth of Medicare spending would be cut from 10 percent to 7 percent... The Republicans say these changes would trim as much as $ 282 billion from Medicare.


Source: Montpelier Times-Argus, 5/18/95; Dallas Morning News, 5/15/95


http://www.deanfacts.com/plugin/template/gephardt/Dean+on+Medicare/*

[SEAburb]

25. Think about Dean and HMO Frist, senate majority leader,

teaming together to work out a healthcare plan.

[LuminousX]

26. Fear, yes, fear is a great tool

Imagine Dean building giant babykilling robot!

[genius]

28. An intelligent discussion requires looking at Dean's positions

not nonsense. Are the Dean people capable of intelligent dialogue? Answering questions about your candidate with nonsense about "babykilling robots" makes it look like you fear the truth and don't want anyone else thinking about the truth either.

If you support the guy, explain why Seniors have to sacrifice for his military budget. Maybe you'll convince somebody.

[Nicholas_J]

29. Not only that...

One must look at what Dean DID as governor when it came to health programs to the elderly and disabled.

In 2002 he sent a budget to the legislature recommending cutting virtually ALL health programs for these people.

There were two philosophie on how to do this. The Democratic party, even thouse who had supported Dean as governor, recommeded an increase in the income tax on the welathiest in the state. Dean rejected this stating that the highest bracket was already too high.

Dean and the Republican Senate backed cutting service, and making patients pay higher amounts for the services, whole resisting attempt after attempt to get deep discounts from pharmaceutical companies for prescription drugs. As Senator Pete Shumlin said:

I’ve become convinced that we have a philosophical difference between the governor, the Republican House and this Senate,” said Senate President Pro Tempore Peter Shumlin, D-Windham.

“The governor and the Republican House want to balance this budget on the backs of our most vulnerable Vermonters. The Senate wants to balance this budget on the backs of the pharmaceutical companies who are charging too much for drugs.”

http://timesargus.com/Legislature/Story/46513.html

Small wonder Dean opposed getting discounts fron the drug companies. Pharmaceutical companies bankrolled his campaigns. They provided more money alone than Deans opposition could raise entirely for their campaigns in Vermont.

[LuminousX]

30. I don't have to

I'm not an apologist for the Dean campaign.

I believe, as Dean does and Clinton sort of, medicare growth needs to be slowed and the savings from that can be put into a drug benefit program.

[Nicholas_J]

49. Slowing the program's

growth can only be accomplished by cutting back on benefits, or increasing the amount that beneficiaries must pick up as their co-pays, or greatly increase the monthly premium
Dena is dead wrong and this is a simply attempt on the part of Dean to again, balance the budget on the back of people with fixed incomes, rather than addressing the COST of medical care, as he refused to do as governor of Vermont, as indicated in Shumlins comments. Dean. as governor. allowed his largest campaign contributors, the health insurance industry, and the pharmaceutical industry to rape the state six ways from sunday, and there is no indication that he has changed his philosophy.

[genius]

55. People are dying. Why doesn't Dean care.

The payments are so low that doctors are making choices against their patients and they are not hiding the fact that the elderly patients are not getting equal treatment. Doctors talk about quality of life and how this person would no longer have to suffer if they were dead - even though they would fight to bring a younger patient back to a full recovery in the same situation. Because of the liability laws, they know they know no one will sue them for giving substandard care to an elderly patient who is not some super-star.

Dean's lack of concern for the people who gave him everything he has is disgusting.

[Nicholas_J]

68. Dean cut payments to doctors who offered to accept medicaid

Frequently increased the amount of money that recipients had to pay, refused to increase income taxes on the wealthy in order to avoid such cuts and increases to patients. At the same time he kept blocking all attempts to control costs, particularly for drugs, by requiring the pharmaceutical companies to give the deep discounts on drugs that other states negotiate.

Two Vermnt Senators had to actually start and become officers of a Vermont oraganization set up to garner public opinion to force such legislation because of the republican lock on the Vermont House, and Deans support of that part of the legislature on such issues.

[bread_and_roses]

71. How on earth

are we to slow the growth of Medicare with the baby-boomer generation reaching retirement? (in the spirit of full disclosure, I am a baby boomer). Even with the best efficiencies possible? For me, the problem is that I do not see Dean with a strong committment to providing health care for even seniors, much less for everyone. He sounds like an apologist for scarcity. And that he ever agreed with the Newt makes him look like an opportunist of the worst order to me, willing to sacrifice the elderly to political expediency.

[Nicholas_J]

83. This is the scuttlebutt going around elder advocacy organizations

About Dean, who are contacting thir local chapters to ask about Denas action as governor and the answers they are getting are definitely not PRO Dean.

Dean actually never fixed the budget deficit in Vermont that he inherited in 1991. This was addressed by his predecessor, and the programs to get rid of the deficit FIRMLY in place when Dean took office.

However when Dean rolled back Richard Snellings temporary tax increases on the wealthy, deficits started returning and Dean began cutting. He protected Dr Dynsaur, but everyone else was to be screwed under Deans vision:

The state was in a fiscal crisis at the time, working its way out of the biggest budget deficit in its history. Then-Gov. Richard Snelling had pushed a series of temporary tax increases and budget cuts through the Legislature and Dean took up that austerity plan as his own.

To the anger of more liberal members of his own party, he insisted that the tax increases be rolled back on schedule and then went on to work for additional tax cuts later in his tenure.

By the same token, though, he also supported raising taxes — as long as it wasn’t the income tax — when school funding crises and other issues arose that required it.

Throughout, he held a tight rein on state spending, repeatedly clashing with the Democrats who controlled the Legislature for most of his years as governor.

Dean trimmed spending or held down increases in areas held dear by the liberals. More than once, Dean went to battle over whether individual welfare benefits should rise under automatic cost of living adjustments. Liberals were particularly incensed when he tried that tactic on a program serving the blind, disabled and elderly, which he did several times.

http://premium1.fosters.com/2003/news/may%5F03/may%5F19/news/reg%5Fvt0519a.asp

Notice the wording, HELD DOWN INCREASES.

In 1995, Dean made statements about cutting back Medicare and Social Security Spending.

In June of 2003, on Meet the Press, he talked about HOLDING DOWN INCREASES, to Tim Russert:


Dean: $85,000, maybe you raise it to $100,000 or whatever the numbers are. We’ve got to look at the numbers to figure out what you do. You get the Social Security problem off the table first by fixing it and then not allowing the Congress to keep taking money out of the trust fund. The president’s financing his tax cuts by taking money out of the Social Security trust fund. That’s ridiculous—first. Secondly, what do you do about the budget? You restrain spending. You do not have to actually make cuts in things like Medicare or in things like Medicaid or even in Defense. What you have to do is restrain the increases in spending.
Russert: When the Republicans tried to limit the growth, the Democrats said that was an actual cut.
Dean: Well, they’re going to say what they’re going to say. All I...
Russert: You would be willing to limit the growth...
Dean: Absolutely.
Russert: ...in Defense, in Medicare and Social Security?
Dean: You have to do that. If you don’t go where the money is—Social Security, we’re going to fix differently. We’re not talking about Social Security. We’re talking about Medicare. We’re talking about Defense and we’re talking about all the other things the federal government does. But I want to put the tax cut back into that budget. They need it to balance the budget.
Russert: That’s raising taxes, though. Let’s be honest.

http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/912159.asp

Deans philosophy on this issue has not changed one iota. There is simply no way to have increaing numbers of people on Medicare, Hold back spending, and keep the same level of service, and not increase premiums and co-payments. Dean will have to increase the cost to somone. In the past this is how he proposed to do it for Medicaid, and drug benefits to the elderly:

Governor’s Budget Cuts Medicaid Programs

Governor Howard Dean, in his eleventh and last budget address, cut several Medicaid programs including prescription drugs, dental care and vision services. Dean told lawmakers times a tough and sacrifices had to be made.

The Dean budget for FY 2003 is $891 million in state spending, one percent more than the state expects to spend this fiscal year but nearly 3% less than the budget passed last year ($916 million). Revenues this year are expected to be $50 million below budget. Dean wants to use the "Rainy Day" fund to cover some of the $50 million shortfall but does not want to tap that fund for FY 2003. Next year’s budget is based on revenue estimates of $893 million.

If passed as presented, Dean’s budget would:

Eliminate the VScript Expanded Program.

Reduce the Vermont Health Access Plan pharmacy benefit.

Increase the co-pay up to $750/year for medicines under both the VScript and VHAP pharmacy programs. (Those eligible now pay only a few dollars for each filled prescription).

Eliminate the Medicaid dentures, chiropractic and podiatry programs.

Reduce the adult dental programs (cover pain and suffering only, not preventative care).

Add a 50% co-pay to adult vision programs.

Add a $250 co-pay per admission to VHAP inpatient hospital benefit.

Reduce the hospital outpatient payment by 10%.

Establish a hospital outpatient co-pay of $25.

These cuts would save about $27 million, $11 million in state money. Few advocates for the elderly are happy with the budget and have vowed to restore the money lost to these programs. A coalition of over a dozen advocacy groups held a rally and press conference at the Capitol building to denounce the budget cuts.

http://vnavt.com/vahhavoicewinter2002.htm

This is Denas historry, and in his 1995 and 2003 speeches reflect that his philosophy will simply result in raising costs to those who are least able to afford it, those on fixed incomes.


He did it before, and past behavior is the BEST and ONLY indicator of future performance.

Anyone older than fifty who supports Dean simply is supporting somone who does not have their best interests at heart, but the interests of the large health care industries and the pharmaceutical industries.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

31. At least you recognize that it is a scary prospect.

[LuminousX]

37. But there are so many scary prospects

I happen to trust Dean quite a bit so I'd be willing to let him play Daniel Webster and barter with ol' scratch himself for my soul. So while Frist is a scary person in and of himself, at least I know Dean is on my side.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

43. OK, you trust Dean. Now the rest of us are trying to decide if we should.

And all we have to go on, is his words and actions. What does he say about Medicare policy? What has he said in the past? What reason do we have to trust him?

There are ten Democratic candidates for President. Dean is the only one continually changing his positions and re-inventing his history. I'd love for him to come clean on all his flip-flops but I guess at this stage in the campaign it is almost too late -- he's locked into defensive mode.

If he does get the nod I just pray I'm wrong about him.

[indigo32]

44. Spin Spin Spin

keep it up
"the rest of us are trying to decide if we should"
I call BS...
YOU'VE already decided...
"Dean is the only one continually changing his positions and re-inventing his history"

He is not reinventing his history at all...I admit he made a mistake in one debate denying the age issue. Other than that he has never misrepresented himself. Flip-Flopping, reinventing himself? That is subjective... and some of us see it as him actually LISTENING to his supporters.

one example that you keep pointing out is the medicare issue
you point out the Stephinaupoulos interview. Where was he misrepresenting his position from 1995 or now there... where was the misrepresentation?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

46. I tried to make peace

and you just tell me it is BS. Just what do you think my motivation is here? Am I just evil? You really can't conceive of anyone having honest doubts about Dean?

"never misrepresented himself?" No flip flops?

"We have to stop terrorism before peace negotiations"
http://www.forward.com/issues/2002/02.11.22/news3.html

said he didn't "believe stopping the terror has to be a prerequisite for talking."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/10/elec04.prez.dean.mideast/

That's not a flip-flop? Not re-inventing himself?

Howard Dean committed Friday to taking taxpayer dollars to finance his presidential campaign while fellow Democrat John Kerry laid the groundwork to do the same with a letter to donors suggesting they could double their money by helping him qualify.

In fact, only donors’ first $250 gets matched by the government.

Like Dean, Al Sharpton, former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley Braun and Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich are committed to taking public financing and the spending limits that come with it, aides said. They are trying to raise the required amounts – $5,000 from each of 20 states in contributions of $250 or less – to qualify for the public money.

Former Vermont Gov. Dean said he has already met the requirement. He promised to make it an issue in the Democratic primaries if any of his rivals decide to skip public financing, as President Bush did en route to winning the Republican nomination in 2000.

“It will be a huge issue,” Dean said. “I think most Democrats believe in campaign finance reform.”
Dean commits to public financing for campaign



Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean backed away from his pledge to adhere to spending limits, saying some advisers want to explore opting out of the Watergate-era public financing system because of his sudden fund-raising success.
Dean said he still intends to accept taxpayer money and spending restraints, and suggested he has discouraged his staff from considering alternatives right now. But he left open the possibility of following President Bush's lead in rejecting public financing.
"Could we change our mind? Sure," he said. The rival campaign of Sen. John Kerry accused Dean of hypocrisy.
Just five months ago, Dean committed to accepting taxpayer money and vowed to attack any Democrat who didn't.
Dean backs away from pledge on campaign spending limits

Not a flip-flop? Well, maybe this is an isolated thing?

Howard Dean’s flirtation with foregoing spending limits for the Democratic presidential primaries is no surprise to the woman he beat in his last race for governor of Vermont.

In 2000, he not only flirted, he ended up rejecting the limits altogether and helped set what was, up to then, an all-time record level of spending on a governor’s race.
Dean has rejected spending limit before

Governor Howard Dean has proposed to permanently gut Vermont's campaign finance reform law eliminating our landmark public financing option for governor and lieutenant governor. VPIRG opposes removing any money from the Fund because it sets a dangerous precedent for undermining democracy in Vermont and limits the legislature's options to strengthen the law in the future.

The Governor's move will simply open another door for access by corporations and other wealthy donors seeking generous tax breaks, permission to pollute our air and water, boondoggle electric rate contracts and other special interest perks. As Lieutenant Governor Doug Racine said at a public forum on December 11th "I do believe money is corrupting the political process."
Governor Dean Proposes Gutting Campaign Finance Reform Law

No, not an isolated thing...

Look, there's more I could post but I didn't want to make this into an attack against Dean, in fact I attempted to do just the opposite in post 43. I'll say again what I said there: If he does get the nod I just pray I'm wrong about him.

Just saying I'm full of BS, and denying there have been any flip-flops is not helpful. Why can't we have some honest discussion of Dean's record and positions? Anytime anyone brings this stuff up they are just dismissed as a Dean-hater.

[indigo32]

48. You tried to make peace

sorry if I doubt your sincerity on that statement... it is based on many exchanges with you... not just that one. Do I think you are evil? Absolutely not, but you've pretty much spelled out your motivation and it isn't to discuss issues. Sorry, we've been around the block to many times. Maybe it's best if I just quit taking it up with you.

if you'd like me to present you with some samples here ya go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=38692

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=48527

BTW you've been known to call bullshit to.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=43467#43564

[Feanorcurufinwe]

51. By not answering the points I raised in my previous post

you are just continuing the same pattern.

You continue to malign me by saying my "motivation ... isn't to discuss issues".

But you avoid every issue I raise.

I care about America and I care about the Democratic party. I believe it is healthy for our party to hold our leaders to the highest standards of integrity. Avoiding questions about the candidates by questioning the motivations of the questioner doesn't help anybody.

Have I ever called a posting at DU bullshit? lol Yeah, read, that post. A Dean supporter posts a thread saying Kerry shouldn't be referred to by his own initials and then insists it has nothing to do with who they support. That is bullshit and anyone can see so. The whole thread was a totally silly non-issue and nothing but bullshit from top to bottom.

As for the other threads you posted, yes, they are critical of Dean. But there are no attacks without references, no mis-quoting, no quoting out of context. Just questions about Dean credibility that have so far gone mostly unanswered and a commentary about his debate tactic that is perfectly valid and referenced.

You say I am not evil, and you say my "motivation ... isn't to discuss issues". So just what do you think my motivation is?

on edit: rereading this, I see all I am doing is defending myself. So I guess you have successfully diverted the discussion from a discussion of the issues -- AGAIN.

[indigo32]

52. Well,see, as I said we are just gonna have to agree to disagree

on those issues. on the debate thread in particular I think we both pretty much said as much as we can say. You'll continue to maintain the issue hasn't been addressed and I won't see it that way. So be it.
On a couple of occasions you've said flat out Dean has done nothing good for VT at all, and I brought up some issues and you've not addressed them.

I think you are a biased Kerry supporter... that is all and that is OK. And once again I will repeat that I want the best candidate and president for our country and the world... just as much as you.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

54. False

"On a couple of occasions you've said flat out Dean has done nothing good for VT at all"

That is false. I never said any such thing. Show it.

[indigo32]

56. Here's an example

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=38692#38760

and you were kind enough to kick this thread up out of obscurity yesterday...

I don't have time at the moment to dig up the other example I'm thinking of.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

59. False

"On a couple of occasions you've said flat out Dean has done nothing good for VT at all"

I repeat, I said no such thing.

What did I say?

" What positives?

Let's hear 'em. Other than the facts that he is not Bush, puts a D next to his name, and is an effective campaigner I don't see anything positive about Dean. When you don't trust someone it makes everything about them that can be spun as positive seem suspect. Those three things would be enough for me to support him if he becomes the nominee, however."

that's what I said. I didn't say what you ascribed to me AT ALL.

I ASKED A QUESTION: What positives? And I pointed out the positives I saw.

SO JUST WHERE DID I say "flat out Dean has done nothing good for VT at all"?


I'd guess even the most evil Republican governor in the country has done something good for his state. I would never make such a ridiculous statement about anybody.

[indigo32]

60. Pointless

you completely ignore what you said right after that: "Other than the facts that he is not Bush, puts a D next to his name, and is an effective campaigner I don't see anything positive about Dean. "

you are on ignore now....

[Feanorcurufinwe]

61. Right, I said, what I said, not the words you put in my mouth.

Can you really not see the difference?


"you are on ignore now...." I hope you are telling the truth on this one.

[Nicholas_J]

50. Dean has lied once (actually more, but who's counting)

During the debate on the age issue. Which is indicative that he can lie again, just more carefully.

[dpbrown]

45. I trust Dean less than several of the other candidates

No national voting record, a minimum of contested races, never unseating an incumbent, a less-than-satisfactory plan for health coverage, considering he's a doctor, a less-than-satisfactory relationship with the party machinery, a less-than-satisfactory relationship with the progressives, and plenty of position-shifting.

John Kerry is my second choice.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Nicholas_J]

84. New reinvent today: on international trade, adn labor standards

When Dean recently called for requiring other countries to meet U.S. labor standards, Lieberman said that would lead to a "Dean depression." Dean later backtracked and said he would push for International Labor Organization standards, which are broader than U.S. worker protections.

Dean said campaigning in the Midwest has changed his attitude toward trade.

http://www.dmregister.com/news/stories/c4789004/22427535.html

[RandomUser]

32. How do you feel about "Executive Fitness" healthcare? (Clark)

In the military, Clark says that they have so-called "Executive Fitness" programs. What that means is that people age 40 to 60 are required to have regular comprehenisve medical examinations and reviews every 5 yrs. And people over the age of 60 are required to do these comprehensive medical exams every year. The key is prevention, reasoning that it's cheaper to prevent cancer or diseases and catch them in their early stages rather than to treat them once they've developed.

Clark wants to take this concept of "executive fitness" from the military and modify it by adding personal history tailoring. Thus, if you have a family history of diabetes or cardiovascular disease, you would be subjected to these regular medical exams and preventative healthcare, along with people in certain age groups. Preventing disease cuts down the cost and saves lives, rather than the expensive treatments after a fullblown disease manifestation. So he wants to increase funding for preventive medicine.

Also, he doesn't believe that we should reduce services, but he acknowledges that healthcare costs are rising at astronomical rates, so he wants to reduce healthcare costs by doing two things:
1) systems analysis
2) information technology

He wants to apply systems analysis to the healthcare industry. Every other business institution conducts systems analysis to identify flaws and ways to modify, improve effectiveness, and cut waste. He believes that it's time healthcare did the same thing.

He wants to use information technology to cut costs in datamanagement and automate things like prescription drugs, in order to reduce overhead. In Kosovo, he used hi-tech computer mapping to convince Milosovic to agree to a border boundary during negotiations. And information technology has revolutionized the military's hi-tech operations, precision munitions, surveillance, etc. He wants to do the same to healthcare.

He touches on some of this during his NH townhall meeting.
http://video.c-span.org:8080/ramgen/idrive/project/c04/c04092603_clark.rm

[molly]

34. That sounds like a great plan

[indigo32]

35. Sounds like a very interesting approach to containing cost

all ideas are welcome. I'm not sure how well required medical exams would go over though...or am I reading that wrong.

[RandomUser]

38. I suspect

that in a civilian population, such services can't be mandated, but can be offered for citizens to avail themselves of it. He also mentions reforming the cost structure of pharmacuetical companies. Right now the economic structure for drug research is that the burden is passed disproportionately to American consumers and taxpayers, instead of spreading the cost worldwide. In otherwords, they're getting a free ride because we're paying for it. Under the current model, Canadians and Europeans are taking advantage of the American taxpayer.

I think we'll know more once he releases his healthcare plan.

[LuminousX]

39. So the Government is going to Dictate how I'm to live?

I'm a big supporter of preventative measures but they have to be voluntary. You cannot legislate that people go in for diabetes testing just because their medical history says they are susceptible.

I am assuming that is not what Clark really means, but then it becomes a matter of who is paying for these services and by what criteria do they really use to figure out their 'at risk' groups. I definately need more information to change my inertia on this topic.

[RandomUser]

40. Probably not

I think it would make no sense for it to be other than voluntary. (The military is obviously different, since soldiers need to be in top shape to fight a war.) But current healthcare plans don't offer much in the way of preventative medicine. I suspect he wants to increase coverage for preventative medicine. I doubt it will be mandatory to avail yourself of it. That doesn't make sense, and sounds unenforceable.

We'll know more when he releases his healthcare plan.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

47. Make it a condition

for receiving expanded healthcare benefits, or for buying into a particular healthcare plan - that seems sensible. If you don't want to follow the preventive health care plan, you'll have to pay higher rates...

[LuminousX]

53. Not good

That just won't fly. Sounds too totalitarian.

[deaniebopper]

74. Maybe you should've saved some money. Why should I have to pay

for your health care?

[genius]

75. Because you owe her as you owe all of our seniors

That is the most self-centered ungrateful response I've seen. We owe our senior citizens everything because they gave us all we have. I hope your kids treat you as badly as you seem to feel you can treat the seniors.

[JohnKleeb]

76. he got tombstoned genius

And I agree what a totally ungrateful thing to say. I would rather pay for someone else's health care and later my own than pay for military programs but shrug I am a leftist what do I know ;).

[indigo32]

77. "He got tombstoned"

thank goodness

[no name no slogan]

78. Hear Hear

He must have gotten DU confused with FreeRepublic again :eyes:

[JohnKleeb]

79. yes

Glad you are in agreement indigo, I saw his Kucinich bashing when I got home from my eye appointment. He also bashed Kerry and that last comment was just sick, it is a nations responsiblity to make sure her people have adaquate and affordable health care.

[RandomUser]

80. Good call by the Mods

and we finally agree on something, JohnKleeb, lol.

[JohnKleeb]

81. lol

Yeah it was.