The utter and total ignorance and excuses given around here lately to deny the damage of means testing or income relating (Barack Obama's definition of means testing) has done to Medicare and will do in the future is utterly astounding. It’s astoundingly ignorant to make this excuse when Medicare did not have income relating until the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 set it for 2007. I have actually had kossacks tell me, that supposedly “Income relation won’t lead to more privatization because it’s already there, so there!”
Well funny story, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 substantially did partially privatize Medicare opening up the door for even more rising medical inflation and higher administrative costs (9% higher than your grandfather’s Medicare). Where do you think the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan and Medicare Advantage came from? This fully completed the transition to private insurance companies getting their tentacles in Medicare that started with the passage of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (stuck in as a concession after the government shutdown fight in the 90s was over) that gave Medicare beneficiaries the option to receive their Medicare benefits through private health insurance plans, instead of through the original Medicare plan parts A and B. These programs were known as Medicare+Choice or Part C plans.
http://www.kff.org/...
4. Until recently, all beneficiaries paid the same monthly Part B premium amount; however, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 established an income-related Part B premium that took effect in 2007, requiring higher-income Medicare beneficiaries to pay a greater share of average Part B costs (35 percent to 80 percent, depending on their income).
snip
However, there is some concern that these new policies could erode support for Medicare among middle income and higher-income beneficiaries, particularly as a growing share of beneficiaries become subject to the higher income-related premiums over time. An additional concern is that the income thresholds that trigger the imposition of the higher income-related premiums for Medicare beneficiaries ($85,000/individual, $170,000/couple) are substantially lower than the thresholds often used to define higher-income individuals in other policy discussions ($200,000/individual, $250,000/couple). Amid rising health care costs, economic instability, and increasing financial vulnerability for aging Americans, these new higher premiums for Medicare Part B and Part D may represent an additional burden on a growing share of seniors over time.
When desperately scrambling to defend the idea of means testing or income relating obviously because it's part of the Gang of Six plan and some want to defend everything a politician does, it helps to look at these facts. The income threshold I laid out makes this even worse. So why not perchance to dream, go the full Monty, and pretend Medicare can be just like a progressive income tax system?
Call it a failure of definition and application of the needed principles to keep political support for these precious New Deal and Great Society programs alive. welfare programs are means tested and because they are they are politically vulnerable to cuts. It sadly now doesn't matter who is in power as the Obama administration has put Medicaid up on the chopping block (one of the only truly effective parts of the ACA via Medicaid expansion) in the debt ceiling debacle going on right now proving the point (yes reducing benefits is cutting the program, lovers of knee jerk semantic defenses).
One might say, how do you know political support is hinging? Why is it so important? Why don't you believe in magical 11th dimensional "buy into Republican and Neoliberal deficit nonsense and their utter stupidity about the federal budget" chess? Don't you think it's brilliant to adopt Republican and Neoliberal frames? Well, the problem with that is I know my history, and I predicted this would happen while many kossacks still deny what's happening.
It's also not healthy to have a delusional Independents Deficit Disorder that throws seniors to the wolves because you, "took John Boehner at his word that he won't allow a default" in order to make us "eat our pees" or destroy Medicare or SS. Too bad "learn monetary policy and fiscal policy and how it really works" is not on the agenda for this president. It would also help if more people demanded this of this president and Congress in general.
Deficit errorism turns into deficit terrorism and it's going to terrorize seniors, the 99ers, and everyone suffering from all of this dumbass austerity BS. The only thing we need to eat is full employment, not budgetary and monetary stupidity whether supported or enabled by people that are supposed to be Democrats.
Means testing or income relating is stupid, it threatens the New Deal and Great Society, it's not going to work and gain support like a progressive tax system so stop defending it.