LA-Sen: Bill Cassidy (R) Bashes Medicare Cuts He Admits He Voted For

This guy's a fucking doofus:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/...

Louisiana GOP Senate candidate Bill Cassidy recently attacked Obamacare's Medicare provider cuts even though he admitted to voting for the same cuts.

"Among the things that the president's health care law does is it cuts Medicare Advantage. Now it would be one thing if the savings that were taking from Medicare Advantage were put back into the trust fund -- because as we mentioned, the trust fund is running out of money," the U.S. congressman told constituents at a town hall. "So if they take in the savings of that and put it back in the trust fund, I'm OK with that. Actually, I voted to do that at one point."

Cassidy's remarks were unusually honest in that he admitted he voted for the same Medicare Advantage cuts his own party leaders are attacking as deeply damaging to the one-third of Medicare beneficiaries the program covers. By contrast, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and a swath of other Republicans have been bashing those cuts even though nearly all GOP lawmakers voted to make the same cuts permanent in Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-WI) budgets proposals.

But Cassidy's related attack on the use of the savings reflects a common misunderstanding of how Medicare's trust fund actually works. "You've paid into the Medicare trust fund, the money should be for you," he said. "If there are savings to be achieved, put it back in to extend the life of the trust fund." - TPM, 3/18/14

Here's a little more info:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

"But if they, so if they are taking the savings of that and putting it back in the trust fund, I’m ok with that, actually I voted to do that at one point, because then you paid into the Medicare trust fund, the money should be through you, if there's savings to be achieved put it back in to extend the life of the trust fund."

Landrieu, who is considered one of the most vulnerable Democratic incumbents this election cycle, has already been hit by more than $1 million in ads as she defends her seat. At issue in the campaign and the broader 2014 midterm elections is the $716 billion in Medicare cost controls over a 10-year period ordered by the Affordable Care Act. The Congressional Budget Office says the savings -- which don't target benefits but instead reduce reimbursements to private insurers within the program -- extend Medicare's lifespan, while Republicans argue that the savings would reduce access to care.

Cassidy's campaign has sent emails to supporters decrying the Affordable Care Act's changes to the Medicare program, though House Budget Committee chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has proposed budgets which have included the same cuts, while also partially privatizing Medicare in order to reduce the deficit.

In March of 2013, Ryan told reporters that including the cut to Medicare "makes it easier" to balance the budget. His proposed 2013 budget, including the Medicare cuts, passed the Republican-led House.

Cassidy's communications director, John Cummins, says that Cassidy wasn't talking about his vote for the Ryan budget at the town hall, but instead other votes in the House to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act and restore the cuts to the Medicare Advantage program. "The legislation was embryonic, whereas Obamacare passed and came into law," Cummins told HuffPost, in reference to the Ryan budget, which he called a "blueprint."

Cummins also highlighted a bipartisan letter Cassidy signed last week asking the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services to keep Medicare Advantage payment rates flat.

The Kaiser Health Foundation wrote in 2012 that repealing the Affordable Care Act would "accelerate" the projected year of insolvency for the Medicare program. The Congressional Budget Office found, also in 2012, that repealing Obamacare "would have no retroactive effect on Medicare Advantage payments." - Huffington Post, 3/18/14

Yep, this is who Mary Landrieu (D. LA) is up against the Koch brothers have been spending big to help this moron defeat Landrieu.  But this race is far from over:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

The question is whether Landrieu will able to turn the race into a hyper-local campaign -- in the mold of Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) circa 2012 -- that pivots on Louisiana issues or whether the unpopularity of the Obama administration and the health-care law will weigh her down. Landrieu's very first TV ad touted her legislative effort to allow Americans losing their health-care coverage under Obamacare to stay on their plans, a clear sign she recognized how potent the issue promises to be in the campaign.

The Senate landscape has been looking up for Republicans lately. Capable candidates in lower tier pickup opportunities like New Hampshire and Colorado have stepped up to run there, giving the GOP more possible paths to winning the six seats they need to reclaim the majority this fall. Louisiana is one of four states in which elected Democratic incumbents are running for reelection and Mitt Romney won in 2012. North Carolina, Alaska and Arkansas are the other three. If Republicans can win three of those four in addition to their three best pickup opportunities overall (Montana, West Virginia and South Dakota) without surrendering any of their own seats, the majority will be theirs.

That's why what happens in Louisiana is so vital.

Landrieu has money to spend. She had stockpiled some $6.4 million at the end of 2013. So if she wants to go big with a Spring/Summer ad buy, she can afford to do so more than most incumbents. But as the Florida special election showed, candidate fundraising is only part of the battle. There, Democrat Alex Sink raised big bucks and zoomed past her Republican opponent in the money chase. But Republican groups rallied to the side of now-Rep. David Jolly (R), bridging the overall gap in Democratic versus Republican spending and delivering a win. - Washington Post, 3/17/14

But there's also a good chance the Koch brothers could end up helping landrieu than hurting her:

http://www.nola.com/...

The Americans for Prosperity ads, from a warchest that would make a Louisiana politician gag, relentlessly blame her for passage of the Affordable Care Act and everything that has gone wrong with it since.

Yet, for as much as Landrieu has been worked over by the outside group, she and her main challenger have remained neck-and-neck in several polls since the end of last year, which suggests that she has bottomed out. While Cassidy has yet to introduce himself to voters, the super PAC supporting the Democrats, the Senate Majority PAC, has just started defining the Baton Rouge doctor as bought-and-paid-for by the richest of the rich.

Also, despite the strong connection in the ads, Landrieu remains more popular than the federal healthcare law, which voters disapproved of by a 22-point margin in the VCR poll. If that's the case, Landrieu should think twice about trying to sell voters on the benefits of Obamacare or taking credit for it. There is a better way to use the issue by taking advantage of an opportunity, a weapon, actually, handed to her by none other than the brothers Koch.

Not content to play in the Senate race here, Americans for Prosperity have set up shop in the state and are beginning to press the Legislature on the issue of the expansion of Medicaid. That is the part of the Affordable Care Act that is not the law in Louisiana, because it is optional, and Gov. Bobby Jindal has refused to accept it.

The federal government would bear the full cost of expansion for the first three years, with the state's share gradually rising to 10 per cent by year ten. The governor says that would cost the state $1.5 billion over that time, but reputable authorities dispute his numbers. The non-partisan Public Affairs Research Council points out that the high estimate would hold only if the Legislature or Congress dramatically increases the Medicaid rates paid to doctors and hospitals, which is very unlikely for this Legislature or this Congress. With a more moderate increase, the costs would more likely wash out, according to a study by the state Department of Health and Hospitals. Numbers aside, expanding Medicaid would provide wider access to care and prescription drugs and lead to healthier outcomes for the unhealthiest population in the land. Is that worth something?

Democratic legislators are pushing a proposed constitutional amendment to require the expansion, but it has zero chance of winning the required two-thirds majority, given solid Republican opposition. - The Times-Picayune, 3/17/14

If you want to get involved or donate to Landrieu's campaign, you can do so here:
http://www.marylandrieu.com/