Archive for February, 2010

We should thank Barack Obama. Just a year ago, he carried the under-30 crowd by more than a 2-1 margin. Now he’s a galvanizing force for the young conservative movement. As one College Republican chapter chair told me, “Barack Obama has been the greatest recruiting tool we’ve ever had.” The organizers of CPAC likely felt the same way. The record 10,000 people registered for the conference were mostly college students – a reflection of Obama’s ability to energize young people of all political stripes.

The College Republican National Committee sought to tap into the enthusiasm with events designed to educate and engage its members. On Friday we unveiled our 2010 political plan, highlighted by guest House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence.

Pence applauded the College Republicans fin the room for getting engaged at such an early age. “Thank you for having more sense in college than I did. Really, a lot of people don’t know this, but I was actually a Democrat when I got starting in politics,” Pence said. “I thank you for being ahead of the curve. I thank you for understanding at a very young time in your life what makes this country great.”

As was clear throughout the weekend, what makes this country great is not a government that controls the people, but a people that control the government. Pence mentioned an observation made by Margaret Thatcher who said, “’this young generation has seen too much national failure.’ I couldn’t help but think of a lot of you in that.” That failure was embodied most recently in President Obama’s trillion-dollar budget proposal with our generation footing the bill.

Put simply, our generation has grown up in tough times. Youth unemployment has reached its highest levels since the Great Depression. There is a backlog of college students who will face increased competition and a depressed job market upon graduation. Moreover, as Pence pointed out “I would imagine that if you people were paying attention, you’d be laying awake at night with the mountain range of debt we’re piling onto you and your families.”

Despite the unprecedented problems we face, the tone of the speech was not hopeless. Instead, the Congressman made clear that College Republicans are part of the solution. “This is a room full of elite leaders . . . Future leaders of this country,” he said.

We are future leaders, but we are also today’s volunteers and voters. Our work, knocking on doors, making phone calls, and getting out the vote has the ability to change the outlook for our generation. “We have to stay focused guys,” said Pence, “eye on the ball, the focus has to be 2010. We’re not going to have a better opportunity before you’re my age to take back the people’s House for the American people.”

Do you hear that President Obama? Are you listening Congressional Democrats? The people’s House. Our House. Young conservatives are on the rise and College Republicans will be there to lead the way.

By Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee

The rapidly expanding national debt is now a problem of colossal proportion, and it is only getting worse.  The US national debt now stands at 12.5 trillion (yes that’s correct, trillion with a T) dollars.  To put this number in perspective, if all the money owned by all American banks, businesses, and individuals were gathered up and sent to the US government, this still would not be enough to pay off the US national debt.  To put it another way, the United States government owes more dollars than actually exist.

While the number, 12.5 trillion dollars is very frightening, an even more alarming figure is that of 107.5 trillion dollars, and counting.  That is the amount the US owes in the form of unfunded liabilities, comprised of social security liability, prescription drug liability, and Medicare liability.

How did we get here?  Our financial system is based on fractional reserve banking.  This requires banks to keep $.10 of every dollar deposited into savings, allowing the loaning of the remaining $.90.  In addition to using deposited funds, banks can also borrow money to loan out and generate profit by charging interest on the loan.  This is the process by which dollars become available for our economy to function.  So long as all depositors and creditors do not run down to the bank and demand all their money at the same time, the system will keep working.  As wealth is generated through productivity, money is continuously deposited, and loaned out, with banks holding 10% of the principle.

The Federal Reserve Bank, the central bank of the United States, controls the money supply available to the banking borrow/lend cycle.  The Federal Reserve Bank can make money more or less available by the interest rate imposed upon dollars loaned to member banks.  As money is spent into circulation (loaned), the money supply expands. Each subsequent loan and redeposit results in an expansion of the monetary base.  Since the US moved off the gold standard in 1971, the assumption is that this money supply is backed by real assets or productivity.

The United States government has disrupted the market equilibrium of the banking system by creating (printing) dollars to deposit into the Federal Reserve Bank, money not backed by real assets or productivity, and then borrowing back those same dollars at the Federal Reserve’s interest rate to support government programs (runaway government spending).  This interference in the financial market has created colossal national debt without collateral to support the deposit/borrow/lend cycle.

This escalating debt is a formula for complete financial collapse. We all know that on a micro-scale, a household with debt payments (maxed out credit cards, loans, mortgage…) greater than income, will soon find themselves in home foreclosure and bankruptcy.  Although their pockets are much deeper, and their lenders more forgiving, the United States is not immune from the same fate. Given recent history you would think the United States would know the dangers of economic turmoil. In the 1980s the United States won the Cold War through economic warfare – by bankrupting the Communist Bloc – without ever having to fire a shot.  Now we are bankrupting ourselves, threatening to mortgage our future to our biggest lender – Communist China.

Fortunately, though the problem is terrifying the solutions are not. Three steps to curing our debt crisis:

1.)  Stop borrowing the money to run the US Government,

2.) Stop spending money you don’t have, and

3.)  Eliminate confiscatory taxation and allow the private sector to innovate, grow, and create jobs.

The American people are demonstrating that they understand the problem and are fed up with the libertine behavior of their elected representatives.  Now is the time to vote for fiscally responsible representatives who also understand the severity of the national debt, and advocate for real solutions to this crisis.

By Benjamin Mason

Mike Enzi (R-WY)

2:06: “Health savings account . . . [are] particularly good for the younger, healthier people.”

By not mandating that young adults sign up for expensive plans we don’t need, the Republican plan allows us the choice to sign up for coverage that suits our needs. Lower cost coverage will allow us to put more money into non-taxed health savings account which allow us flexibility in our health care choices.

Tom Harkin

2:11: “We spent one year considering a range of experts from a wide political spectrum. We held over 100 bipartisan meetings. . . 9 out of the 10 main issues from Republican bill is in our bill.”

2:12: “If we want insurance reforms we can only do that if everyone is in the pool. The only way everyone is in the pool is if you can make it affordable for middle class families.”

Again, the Democrats plan fails to bend the cost curve and actually raises the premiums of middle class families at a rate faster than the current market. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/02/a-health-care-summit-fact-check.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

2:14: “We don’t allow segregation in our country. . . And yet we still allow segregation on the basis of your health.”

Bringing up the segregation issue is an imperfect metaphor that threatens to cloud the issue. Though we agree that everyone regardless of race, creed, sex, etc deserves to be treated fairly in the heath care market – it is not fair to young adults to be forced to subsidize the health of older individuals. Pooling and competition are the best methods to ensure that everyone can be covered at the lowest rates – not passing the health care costs onto the people the most unable to afford it.

Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

2:32: “The ability of families to shop across state lines is to enable them to make those purchases. . . People are tired of paying for coverage they don’t want.”

Flexibility is the key. The Democrats’ plan by setting minimum federal standards eliminates low costs plans that may represent exactly what a particular buyer needs.

Barack Obama

2:39: “Cost shifting. Everyone here who has health insurance is paying for someone who doesn’t.”

The President is ignoring that his bill is still shifting costs. Who pays the subsidies that the Democrats propose for those with low incomes – everyone. Who ensures that health care costs stay low for older, sicker people – younger and healthier people.

Joe Biden

2:42: “I don’t know what the American people think.”

Well we do. Poll after poll has shown that the American public does not like the Democrats health care reform bill. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

2:45: “Whether you agree how it was arrived at CBO has gone out and scored whether or not it bends the cost curve.”

They did. And the results showed that the Senate health care bill would raise premium rates for most Americans http://blog.heritage.org/2009/12/03/cbo-report-shows-obamacare-raises-premiums/

Moreover  the chief actuary for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services would increase costs by an estimated $222 billion.

2:45: “We’re in trouble if we don’t reduce health care costs.”

The CBO Disagrees. In a report to Harry Reid the CBO said” under the legislation, federal outlays for health care would increase during the 2010–2019 period, as would the federal budgetary commitment to health care. The net increase in that commitment would be about $200 billion over that 10-year period, driven primarily by the gross cost of the coverage expansions (including increases in both outlays and tax credits)

2:47: Biden also claimed that the Democrats health care reform plan is the only way to make Medicare solvent.

But here is what the Chief Actuary of CMS had to say: “the estimated savings…may be unrealistic,” “we are not aware of any empirical evidence demonstrating the medical community’s ability to achieve productivity improvements equal to those of the overall economy,” which would ultimately “jeopardize access to care for beneficiaries.”

http://finance.senate.gov/press/Gpress/2009/prg110409a.pdf

Paul Ryan (R-WI)

2:50: “This bill does not control costs. It does not reduce deficits. It adds a new health care entitlement at a time when we don’t know how to pay for the entitlements we already have.”

2:52: “The bill has 10 years of tax increases, about 1/2 trillion dollars, the bill has 10 years of Medicare cuts, about 1/2 trillion dollars, but only 6 years of benefits.”

2:53: “When you strip out the double counting and gimmicks the full cost of the bill is $462 billion the first 10 years.”

More from the Cato Institute on the budgetary gimmicks in the Senate health care plan: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10944

2:54: “The chief actuary of Medicare believes we are bending it up by $254 billion dollars.”

Xavier Bacerra (D-CA)

3:05: “If we can’t work with CBO numbers we are lost. . . The referee has said the bills before us reduce the federal governments deficit by $100 billion the first 10 years.”

I though Paul Ryan was clear here – the CBO does an excellent job at accurately scoring what is put before them. That is not the problem. The problem is that the Democrats did not put an accurate bill before them that would score. Rather they presented a bill full of gimmicks and tricks that did not enable the CBO to provide an accurate score.

Here’s a few: (1) it excludes the doc fix which would have added $200 billion (2) it delays costly benefits while immediately implementing taxes (3) Medicare double count – it cuts $467 billion from Medicare while also claiming increased revenue flows

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm2756.cfm

3:14: “We have unrealistic cuts in here . . Do you think we’re going to sit around . . . and let hospitals close down? . . . When you put our health care delivery systems and institutions in jeopardy you are going to promise health care people can’t get.”

3:15: “The Congressional Budget Office, the referee, not political parties, the referee, said that these bills reduce the deficit in the succeeding years after the first ten years by over a trillion dollars.”

This is simply not true. In the words of the CBO: “A detailed year-by-year projection for years beyond 2019, like those that CBO prepares for the 10-year budget window, would not be meaningful because the uncertainties Involved Are Simply Too Great.”

John Boehner (R-OH)

3:25: “Our job is to listen. . . I can tell you the thing that I’ve heard more is that the American people want us to scrap this bill.”

New polls show: Rasmussen – 51% fear government more than private insurers. 56% oppose Obama’s health care plan while only 41% favor. Pew -50% oppose while only 38% favor.

3:26: “We have a new entitlement program that will bankrupt this country.”

3:28: “A lot of employers are going to look at this and decide to pay the tax rather than cover their employees.”

Employers have already indicated this will be true. Leading business groups say health care reform plans before Congress that are supposed to help more businesses and individuals secure health insurance may have the opposite effect, making it cheaper for companies and taxpayers to pay fines than to buy coverage.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2009/11/unintended_consequences_health.html

3:30: “For 30 years, we’ve had a federal law that says that we’re not going to have taxpayer funding of abortions . . . The House spoke. The House upheld the language we have had in law for 30 years . . . The bill that we have before us . . . begins for the first time in 30 years allows the taxpayer funding of abortion.”

Despite Democrats protestations to the contrary the bill funds abortions. As Democrat Bart Stupak said, “Unfortunately, the President’s proposal encompasses the Senate language allowing public funding of abortion. The Senate language is a significant departure from current law and is unacceptable.”  Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0210/Stupak_Unacceptable.html

Jim Cooper (D-TN)

3:33: “If you love Medicare you better act to save it fast. Every day matters.”

According to the chief actuary – the best way to help Medicare would be to make sure the Democrats health care plan doesn’t get passed. Rick Foster, actuary for CMS said the plans “to reduce payments to hospitals and other providers, to force them to adopt more efficient practices, could prove particularly problematic for institutions that serve large numbers of Medicare patients.” Those institutions could stop treating Medicare patients “possibly jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/11/AR2009121102792.html?hpid=topnews

Dick Durbin (D-IL)

3:44: “If we do believe the CBO…if we implement the Republican Plan. . .it will save $54 billion” which is only a small percentage of the overall deficit.

But shouldn’t we be looking to save as much money as we can?

3:47: “If I were sick, this is the country I would want to be in. . . But why do we continue to discriminate against people.”

What Durbin fails to understand is that our health care system is exceptional because of its capitalistic approach. If we move toward European systems which depend on rationing care so as to be able to increase the rolls of the insured – then you eliminate the incentive for innovation and the drive to deliver excellent coverage. If we have a plan that seeks to parallel those of Europe then don’t be surprised if the quality of our healthcare, which Durbin freely admits is the best in the world, falls to their level as well.

3:48: Durbin says that members of Congress have the best health insurance in the world and everyone should share in the benefits.

But what he fails to mention is that the Office of Personnel Management simply contract with private health plans who compete to offer insurance, and federal workers then can choose the plans that best suit them and their families.

John Barasso (R-WY)

3:53: “This discussion needs to be about all Americans, not just those that don’t have insurance.”

3:54: “When you go to the senior centers they know that $500 billion is being cut from Medicare.”

Henry Waxman (D-CA)

4:03: “We have to really look at holding down health care costs.”

But the proposed bills do not. According to the Office of the Actuary, the Senate bill would increase, not decrease, health care spending by $234 billion in the next decade.

4:04: “If you don’t have more people being covered. . . Under Republican proposal the people who get a break are the people who are healthy. The people who pay more are the people who are sick.”

But as FixHealthCarePolicy.com explains: According to the CBO report (Table 3), almost half of the reduction in the number of uninsured is accounted for by an increase in number covered by Medicaid. So in effect, they are saying we can obtain coverage for the uninsured by expanding Medicaid, and then pay for it by cutting Medicaid (and also by cutting Medicare). Somehow, providing health care to some poor people by taking it away from other poor people and the elderly is supposed to save money.

Peter Roskam (R-IL)

4:11: “This is a problem of message. Not a problem with the messenger.”

4:14: “One of the least effective programs in the history of health care is Medicaid.”

Everyone should agree that Medicaid isn’t working. Yet almost all the increased coverage that the Democrats constantly mention is through expanding Medicaid eligibility. Throwing more people into a broken system will lead to bad health care outcomes and further deficits paid for by America’s future.

Barack Obama

4:17: “The problem we have right now is that very poor people have coverage through Medicaid, it is somewhat flawed . . .the people who are really left in the cold are working families who make too much for Medicaid and don’t have anywhere to go.”

Somewhat flawed? A study by the National Cancer Institute found that women were three times more likely to die of breast cancer than others.  The quality of care on Medicaid is simply substandard – adding millions of people to its rolls will only make the situation worse.

Moreover, Medicaid is paid for in large part by states. Creating an unfunded mandate would crunch state budgets at a time when tax revenues are at an all time low. This would put public universities and education systems in a serious jam.

Read more: http://washingtonindependent.com/60433/medicaid-expansion-would-guarantee-coverage-not-care

Chris Dodd (D-CT)

4:23: “Coverage is the critical issue. . . The lynchpin that holds all of this together.”

Coverage without cost control is pointless. If people cannot afford the health care that you are mandating they buy then what? Subsidies are a big part of the Democrats’ plan. But subsidies do not grow on trees – they must be paid for, and they’re paid for by taxes on the majority of Americans.

Joe Barton (R-TX)

4:26: “If you allow small businesses to allow pools like we’ve talked about, premiums will not go up astronomically.”

The fact is, corporations and labor unions are already empowered to pool together to ensure that risk is pooled over a large number of people to ensure low costs for everyone. Allowing small businesses to do the same would be a much better answer than the Democrats plan of mandates and taxes.

Charlie Rangel (D-NY)

4:44: “This is the last year for a lot of people in the House of Reprentatives.”

Rangel fails to mention that this is the last year for many in large part because Americans are displeased with the Democrats’ policies.

4:46: “People aren’t concerned with the debate, they are concerned with what we produce.”

It is not that we must merely produce anything…we must produce a good bill that adequately addresses the problem. The Democrats bill simply does not do this.

John Dingell (D-MI)

4:48: “The reason people don’t have health insurance in this country is because they can’t afford it.”

Throughout the entire 7 hours of the summit Democrats have made it a point to talk about the need to address costs. Republicans whole heartedly agree which is why they have issued a 6-point plan designed to hold down costs. Democrats on the other hand have issued a plan centered around improving access rather than addressing costs.

4:52: “Here we have a chance to serve the people.”

So the least you could do is listen to them. Start over. Go incrementally. Focus on bringing down costs.

4:53: “I have people coming to me with tears in my eyes because they can’t get coverage.”

Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

4:55: “The public option is one way to increase competition . . . If you have a better way then put it on the table.”

The public has spoken clearly on this issue. Polls show they fear government control of health care more than private insurers. The fact is the public option is only one way to increase competition – one fraught with risks and hidden expenses hidden in government bureaucracy and red tape.

4:58: The bill will not decrease the quality of seniors care.

However the Democrat plan has an across the board cut of nearly $500 billion dollars to Medicare will have a dramatic effect on senior care. The proposed cuts in Medicare include $120 billion to Medicare Advantage, $150 to providers and $23 billion in unspecified cuts. To expect no cuts in quality is bold.

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

10:23: Lamar Alexander asks President Obama to refocus health care debate on lowering costs. Read more about how the Senate plan will increase premiums http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/liberals-last-stand-on-public-option/

10:26: It dumps 15 million Americans into Medicaid but 50% of doctors won’t take Medicaid patients. Read some anecdotal evidence here: http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2007/aug/28/30medicaid-patients-short-on-doctors/

10:27: Alexander says Republicans have come to the conclusion that “we don’t do comprehensive well.” And he is exactly right – our generation hasn’t seen a single big federal program to succeed. Between Medicaid, Medicare, Education, the Post Office, and Social Security – the government doesn’t do big well.

10:30: We’re picking the wrong enemy here. Awesome stat from Alexander: if you take all of the insurance company profits away that pays for two days of total health care costs.

10:33: “Having a bipartisan bill will not only help pass it, but will help the American people accept it.” We must not let Democrats frame Republican opposition as staunch partisanship – it is not that we don’t want health care reform, it is that we don’t want the Democrats bill.

Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

10:34: “Inaction and Incrementalism are simply unnacceptable.”

Problem is, polls shows that is exactly what the public wants. CNN polls shows 73% of Americans believe lawmakers should work on an entirely new bill. 79% of independents want Congress to “work on a new bill” or “stop all work.”

10:36: “There is a glimmer of bipartisanship in the Senate. Well I want you to know there is a blaze of bipartisanship in the House.”

This is exactly right and is further evidence that Republicans are willing to support good ideas. The health care bill is simply not one of them.

10:41: “We had a running start on expanding access and not only that but doing it in a way that is of the future. This is not about a health care for America, it is about a healthier America.”

But a healthier America can only come if people can afford health care. The Democrats’ plan expands access without tackling costs. Forcing people to buy health care they later will be unable to afford is simply bad business.

10:44: “And I want to say, because Medicare was mentioned, unless we pass this legislation, we cannot keep our promises on Medicare.”

What she failed to mention was that the Democrats plan makes $466.7 billion in Medicare cuts. Cuts which the CBO warns “will reduce access to care or diminish the quality of care.” http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10868/12-19-Reid_Letter_Managers_Correction_Noted.pdfhttp://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10868/12-19-Reid_Letter_Managers_Correction_Noted.pdf

Harry Reid (D-NV)

10:44: Another personal story about someone for whom the health care system failed.

Personal stories appeal to the heart and mind – but it cannot be used as representative of the whole. Part of the Republican plan also focuses on eliminating insurers ability to decline patients based on pre-existing conditions. This is something the parties agree on. When we start over and craft a bipartisan bill you can count on Republican support in this area.

10:46: “Since 1981 reconciliation has been used 21 times.”

This is not the concern. Reconciliation was designed for pure budgetary matters – it is not designed for major policy changes.

10:49: “80 percent of the people who file for bankruptcy do so because of health care costs.”

Unfortunately, the Democrats plan does little to bend the health care cost curve. Putting more people in expensive plans will only exacerbate the bankruptcy problem.

Barack Obama

10:52: “Part of the goal is to figure out the areas that we do agree on and the areas that we don’t agree. And then at the end of that process see if we can bridge those differences.”

If that was the goal why for the past two weeks have the Democrats been talking about moving forward with the Senate bill using reconciliation and the President surprising everyone by unveiling his own plan.

10:54: “It is absolutely true that if all we’re doing is adding people to a broken system then costs will continue to skyrocket.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself. So why do the Democrat plans continue to ignore this fact?

“It’s Not Factually Accurate. Here’s What The Congressional Budget Office Says. The Costs For Families For The Same Type Of Coverage As They’re Currently Receiving Would Go Down 14 To 20%.” Obama: “No, no, no. And this is an example of where we’ve got to get our facts straight.” Sen. Alexander: “That’s my point.” Obama: “Well, exactly. So let me respond to what you just Lamar, because it’s not factually accurate. Here’s what the Congressional Budget Office says. The costs for families for the same type of coverage as they’re currently receiving would go down 14 to 20%.”

The CBO does not support this claim: “Average Premiums Per Policy In The Nongroup Market In 2016 Would Be Roughly $5,800 For Single Policies And $15,200 For Family Policies Under The Proposal, Compared With Roughly $5,500 For Single Policies And $13,100 For Family Policies Under Current Law.” http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/107xx/doc10781/11-30-Premiums.pdf#page=7

Tom Coburn (R-OK)

11:04: I see us performing bad medicine. We get stuck in the idea of treating the symptom rather than the disease…Most of the mal-drivers come from government rules and regulation.”  Read more about the inefficiency of government run entitlements here: http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html

11:06: “20% of the costs of government run health care is fraud.”

Fraud, inefficiency, and waste have long plagued Medicare and other government run entitlements. If we don’t act soon, young adults will pay a lifetime of taxes to see reduced benefits. Read more: http://www.crnc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=npIUKWOrFkG&b=5794793&content_id={B6D4A7D2-84E9-4DE3-8097-778E8620E0C6}&notoc=1

Harry Reid (D-NV)

“…no one has said I read what the President has online, no one has talked about reconciliation, but that’s what you folks have talked about ever since that came out.”

That is simply not true. Read:  http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/23/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6235624.shtml

Steny Hoyer (D-MD)

11:15: “Increase competition. Have an open free market that is transparent…Where people can compare prices and what they’re going to get.”

Seriously? Even looking beyond the fact that the public option was an option on the table up until a few days ago – each of the Democrat plans offered so far are designed as a road to single-payor. A free market cannot include increasing the role of the federal government which has decided structural advantages in the marketplace over private firms.

Paul Ryan (R-WI)

11:42: “We want to decentralize the system. Give more power to small businesses. Give more power to individuals. Federalizing the system will not do this.”

Chuck Schumer (D-NY)

11:50: “If 1/3 of Medicare doesn’t go to patient care. You can’t just say we don’t want to cut anything out of Medicare.”

But what Sen. Schumer fails to mention is that the Democrat plan does not target the waste, fraud and abuse but attacks Medicare Part B.

Jon Kyl (R-AZ)

11:52: “There is so much in the bill that puts control in Washington.”

11:52: The bill is a “job killer.”

The bill raises taxes and premiums that would affect small businesses. By putting taxes on device manufacturers, drug manufacturers, and some health insurance plans: “Those fees would increase costs for the affected firms, which would be passed on to purchasers and would ultimately raise insurance premiums by a corresponding amount. According to JCT’s estimate, those fees would   add about 1 percent to the affected premiums.”

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=363

Barack Obama

11:57: Obama repeatedly suggests that this is not a government takeover of healthcare. Here is 159 reasons Republicans disagree:

http://docs.google.com/a/crnc.org/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=12706172e5fb79d9&mt=application%2Fpdf&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fa%2Fcrnc.org%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3Dab10d9604b%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12706172e5fb79d9%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbSrrgzDrsU3L26QpXc9qlrimW5Hhg

11:58: “Now, The, What We’ve Done Is We’ve Tried To Take Every Single Cost Containment Idea That’s Out There.  Every Proposal That Health Care Economists Say Will Reduce Health Care Costs, We’ve Tried To Adopt In The Various Proposals.”

But Obama’s health plan does not include tort reform which the CBO estimates would save as much as $54 billion over the next decade alone.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/09/AR2009100904271.html

11:59: “We agree with the idea that their should be more regional and national market. . . But the one difference is, we say there should be a minimum baseline benefit.”

James Clyburn (D-SC)

12:03: “No matter what kind of plan you develop, people will be left uncovered. I think we need some safety net.”

Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security were all designed as safety nets. The problem with government run safety nets is that it catches everyone – not just those that fall. The result? The public ends up paying more taxes for a broken system.

Barack Obama:

12:09: “We agree on the notion that you can’t drop someone for coverage . . .We agree on no annual or lifetime limits. . . We agree philosophically to end dropping because of preexisting conditions.”

In other words, we agree on a lot. So why are Democrats content to go it alone?

Charles Boustany (R-LA)

12:12: “How do you simplify, streamline, and standardize all the paperwork involved. As I know, it takes away from patient care.”

Government bureaucracy and red tape will only add to doctors woes.

12:14: “We had very limited choice and the costs kept going up. Small business help plans is one way to deal with this, with pooling.”

Small businesses agree that the Democrats’ health care plan, especially the employer mandate, will act as a penalty on small firms. http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm2753.cfm

12:17: “We have a duty to reform health care, but we have an obligation to get it right.”

George Miller (D-CA)

12:19: “Young people should be able to stay on their parents plan until 25.”

Young adults have not been a big enough part of this debate. Further this one sentence is less than we deserve. We applaud the Democrats for allowing young adults to stay on their parents plan. However, by mandating higher costs to insure young adults through an age ratio that discriminates against us – Democrats fail to grasp the fact that the cost will be passed on. Raising costs on young adults to fund an expansion of coverage is the wrong approach.

12:22: “To what extent can you rate based upon age.”

Translation: younger people, who are on par healthier and thus cheaper to insure, should pay the same as an older sicker person. Young adults, already the most underinsured age group, would be priced out of the market even more than they already are.

John McCain (R-AZ)

12:27: “What we got was a process, that you and I both said we would change in Washington.”

Between the Cornhusker kickback, the Louisiana purchase, the handouts to big labor – the public suffered while the special interests prospered.

Kathleen Sebelius (Secretary of HHS)

12:33: “The rules allow people to be locked out from the front end of preexisting conditions. . . Or to be priced out.”

Eric Cantor (R-VA)

12:40: “We were here a year ago right across the street. You began the health care summit by saying that ‘if you like your health care plan, you can keep it.”

Obama has been forced to backtrack on this claim. Over the past year ago the quote has changed to “When I say if you have your plan and you like it,…or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don’t have to change plans, what I’m saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform.” But by creating a disincentive for businesses to continue coverage – the large percentage of people who have employer-based coverage would lose it. Sneaky wording by the president.

Barack Obama:

12:48: “That is the concept of pooling. You get the healthy people, the young people. All the seniors are in the pool, all the young people are in the pool, and they end up paying cheaper rates.”

Hold on. Who ends up paying the cheaper rates? Certainly not the young adults who are in effect subsidizing the older populations. Let’s not pretend that it will be cheaper for everyone – young adults are the clear losers in this scenario.

Louise Slaughter (D-NY)

12:51: Argues we must have health care reform because a woman “wore her dead sister’s teeth.”

No comment.

12:53: “We need to think more about the economic benefits of doing this.”

There should be economic benefits. But the benefits come from lowering costs. The Chamber of Commerce who analyzed the bill outlined the ways the Senate bill will hurt small businesses:

http://www.uschamber.com/NR/rdonlyres/eqprwjh42brr3eh4q3hrpcdbmgenoau5j5gjgukd5anwl6r6j2m7c4vn47f4xl3aarhqajmd2ty7xpfr6zkwpblgd3h/110509SenateBillBadforSmallBusiness.pdf

Among the reasons: (1) small businesses are inordinately affected by the Cadillac tax (2) the new payroll surtax will hit small businesses (3) the employer mandate acts as a disincentive to hire more workers.

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government. – Thomas Jefferson

The political paths of young adults are often guided by the environment they were raised in. The “Roaring Twenties,” with Presidents Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover, created a conservative voting bloc that remained staunchly Republican. Franklin Roosevelt’s charisma and plan during the Great Depression created a group of lifelong Democrats. The Reagan Revolution built a nationalistic excitement based in unprecedented prosperity…and produced a new batch of Republicans along with it. The Bush years (the only president on the list whose era lacked a catchy nickname) left many young adults disenchanted with the perceived tone deafness of the executive branch and threatened to lose a generation of potential Republicans.

It is clear that the economic environment and the president’s response have a direct effect on the political ties of an entire generation. Obama should consider himself warned. A new Rasmussen poll shows that a vast majority of young adults aged 18-29 believe the nation is headed in the wrong direction. By a 68% to 23% margin young adults believe the United States is on the wrong track rather than the right direction – the highest margin of any age group polled.

During the campaign Barack Obama appeared as if he was going to capture the hearts of a generation. Hope and change resonated with young adults who were completely fed up a Washington removed from their cares and concerns. But President Obama is not the same as Campaign Obama and Republicans stand ready to reap the rewards.

Democrats failed to understand that they were elected to change Washington. Well young adults have now given up on changing government and simply want to minimize its role in their lives. A straw poll, taken at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference with 56% of respondents being 25 years of age or younger, confirmed this desire. When asked for the top two issues that matter to you personally reducing the size of the federal government and reducing government spending were far and away the top two choices.

Somewhat surprisingly young conservatives are willing to overlook things that will benefit them immediately – stimulating the economy and lowering taxes – because of a greater understanding of the long term threats of the deficit. President Obama, by focusing on big government initiatives such as health care and big ticket items like the stimulus, is losing the support of young adults.

Millennials have very few examples of government success in our lifetimes. Medicare is heading in to the red. We don’t believe we’re going to see a dime of Social Security benefits. The list goes on. Medicaid, the Post Office, the response to Katrina – simply put, we have been presented with little evidence that the government is equipped to handle our problems. The natural reaction to a federal government headed in the wrong direction? Make it smaller and have it spend less.

Listen up Republicans. Our generation is not lost to the pretty sounding words of a charismatic president. In fact, if new polls are any indication, we’re trending conservative. And we represent the next generation of the Republican party, the foundation of the conservative movement going forward.  The boots on the ground today, and the votes in the ballot box tomorrow. But you must understand what President Obama clearly doesn’t – we’re not willing to mortgage our future for a slight benefit today, we don’t believe the government is the answer to our problems, and we are legitimately scared by the ballooning debt. Do this right and Milllennials will become your biggest ally.\

- Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee

Young Conservatives need a better publicist, or should I say a better blogger? For far too long the political parties have taken us for granted. Most assume we won’t vote, and even if we did, we’re sure to be Democrats. Republicans seemed content to win older demographics and hope that we would see the red-tinged light as we aged.

After years of being the red-headed step child of politics 2008 was our coming out party. Unfortunately, Republicans had very little to celebrate. The first to truly capture the importance of Twitter, Facebook, and iPhones, the Obama campaign created an excitement amongst Millennials. Again, the Republican Party seemed willing to play the waiting game, confident they would win young adults’ hearts and minds as they grew older.

After a weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference it was clear Republicans have seen the light on the importance of young adults. As one regular CPAC attendee said,

“I’ve been coming to these for years. This used to be a convention of blue hairs; now it has youthful energy.”

But CPAC is merely the latest symptom of a viral growth in youth support for the conservative movement. Just two years ago, at the height of Obama’s popularity, the Democratic advantage in party affiliation among young voters reached 62% to 30%. This 32% margin was reflective of Obama margin of victory in the 2008 presidential election in which he defeated John McCain amongst young adults by a whopping 68% to 30% margin.

But the tides are turning. A recent Pew Research study found that,

“The “Millennial Generation” of young voters played a big role in the resurgence of the Democratic Party in the 2006 and 2008 elections, but their attachment to the Democratic Party weakened markedly over the course of 2009.”

Beyond the short term benefit of picking up votes in the crucial 2010 midterm elections, the shift represents the ability for Republicans to grow the next generation of conservatives. Contrary to the “wait till their older” approach, studies show that a person’s party identification, once formed, remains remarkably stable. As the influential study “The American Voter” found,

“Persons who identify with one of the parties typically have held the same partisan tie for all or most of their adults lives.”

This surprising truth bears out in the course of history. For instance as political scientist Norman Orstein writes,

“All the research done on the dramatic Democratic realignment of the 1930s shows that the key was young voters, coming of age as the Depression hit, influenced deeply by the contrast between Hoover and Roosevelt . . . those voters became lifelong Democrats.”

A similar trend happened in the 1980s when Ronald Reagan captured the hearts of young adults with a patriotic excitement that extolled American exceptionalism. Those same voters played an enormous part in the Republican Revolution of 1994 and remain the Republican party’s strongest age cohort.

The stability of young voter’s ideology combined with Obama’s landslide victory should have spelled long term trouble for the Republican brand. But we’ve bounced back. As the Pew Research study shows,

29 percent of Millennials describe themselves as liberals, 28 percent say they are conservatives and 40 percent identify themselves as moderates.

This snapshot ignores the momentum that is definitely on the side of conservatives. By focusing on issues that resonate with younger adults – small government and lower spending – Republicans have a chance to create a base of support for years to come. The enthusiasm is there. Spending a day walking the halls of CPAC would tell you that. More importantly, walking the halls of a college campus would tell you that. College Republicans have seen an enormous uptick and support. As a College Republican leader told me this past week, “Barack Obama has been the best thing for recruitment we’ve seen.” Beyond being a divisive figure, Obama has engaged young people in a way other presidents haven’t. But political engagement is only half the equation and College Republicans have cultivated that newfound interest into conservative momentum. We are not only the voice of young conservatives…we are future of the party.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee

Like most young conservatives in the United States I spent the past weekend at CPAC. Nearly every booth had some great handout, from key chains, to bottle openers, to books, but my favorite – a stress ball in the shape of the Capitol dome. One can’t help but look at the Capitol and be filled with a patriotic pride. A sense of awe at the stunning symbol of Democracy. Even in the shape of a foam-rubber mold it was still impressive. Then I turned it over and on a little gold sticker saw the word: CHINA.

Sadly, it is a perfect metaphor for America’s growing dependence on our primary creditor – China. President Obama’s recently released budget plan presented a bleak fiscal future. $1.6 trillion deficit this year, $1.3 trillion next year, $9.3 trillion in the next decade. According to the CBO, the debt held by the public will rise from 41% of gross domestic product in 2008 to 82% by 2019. This year each American will chip in more than $800 of their hard earned cash just to pay interest on the debt we’ve accumulated. It’s easy to see that this is a huge domestic problem. Huge deficits lead to higher interest rates on credit cards, mortgages, and loans which lowers demand for goods, and eventually slows economic growth. That’s the bad news.

The very bad news is that the huge debt sum must also be viewed as a threat to our global role and national security. After all, China’s political mentality and philosophy are far removed from the United States; as a business partner this may not be a concern, but as our banker, it presents unique problems.

Unfortunately, the president’s budget does little to curb our recent spending binge causing our fiscal dependency to grow by the day. The U.S. government will borrow 42 cents for every dollar it spends this year. China and Japan are the puppeteers manipulating the trillion dollar strings holding up our nation’s economy. But their willingness to lend us money will not last forever. As Congressman Mark Kirk said after visiting China,

“But privately, the key concern is, Should we buy any more U.S. debt? And over time, what’s happening is China is beginning to cancel Congress’s credit card, doesn’t want to lend much more money to the United States, and especially is worried about the Fed’s policy of printing money to buy new debt.”

The growing anxiety over the U.S. government’s fiscal largesse has already manifested itself in national policy. For instance, taxpayers now guarantee up to $5 trillion in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt because of demands by Japanese and Chinese lenders. As Richard Haass, president of the council on Foreign Relations, says

“We’ve reached a point now where there’s an intimate link between our solvency and our national security.”

This is especially true in a politically charged atmosphere in which the U.S.-China relationship is being put to the test. Beyond the growing concern about our ability to repay the debt are worries over recent arms sales to Taiwan, increasing Chinese military build-up, and threats of a trade war over import tariffs. A China controls more of our debt they also gain a greater say over the price of our dollar. A decision to dump its foreign dollar reserves would lead to massive inflation and directly impact our ability to quickly respond to a crisis. Hard to fight a war when your checks bounce and your credit card gets declined.

The problem is not without a solution. We must stop denying that the national debt is a priority. We must get our fiscal house in order before someone comes in and cleans it for us. The blame for our current deficit does not fall solely on create a budget that tacitly accepts debts and deficits as the new baseline reality, Obama must reevaluate his spending plans. The three year discretionary spending freeze, which now looks like nothing more than a good sound bite, should have been the starting point for this fiscal discipline. Now we must go further. The Democrats’ health care reform and any other bill that dips heavily into the well of red ink should be voted down. Finally, we must get serious about entitlement reform. As the Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl notes, the U.S. will spend $26 trillion over the next 10 years on entitlement spending and interest payments alone!

We are the greatest nation in the world. It is time our balance sheet reflects this fact. If not, I wouldn’t be surprised if I’m left squeezing my stress ball while looking out my office window to see a Capitol Dome with the word “CHINA” in big bold letters.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee (hat tip to Amy Burggraf)

One of the most exciting events at CPAC was on the first day when the two republicans from Massachusetts addressed the audience. Scott Brown is still very popular in conservative circles, even though he has not voted on very much legislation. He came out to loud cheers and a long, standing ovation. He went on to say that he was encouraged to run for US Senate from only his family and former Governor Mitt Romney. Romney was one of the few people that thought Brown not only had the credentials to run, but also that he could win.

Brown went on to tout Governor Romney’s business, political, and family credentials and then introduced him. Romney, an annual CPAC favorite son, came out to a very warm crowd. He made a crack about the teleprompters that were there in a reference to poke fun at President Obama. His critique of the current administration focused mainly on healthcare, where he seemed to try to separate himself from the stigma of state-run healthcare

The other main focus of his speech was to talk about the economy. He told the crowd that if he were running the country it would operating more efficiently. He said he knows how to turn something into a profit because he has been doing that his whole private-sector career. He told the crowd that Obama’s tax hikes have happened to all of Americans and that no one should ever raise taxes during a recession.

I thought Romney gave the best speech of the whole conference. It was so refreshing to hear a politician talk about what we can do to actually help our country. Romney seems to be the only republican that has the know-how to fix our economy and I hope to see him get the nomination in 2012. We need a president with experience in the private sector. The idea of a “community organizer” having the ability to fix our broken country is not funny, it is insulting. Romney made me feel, for the first time in a while, good about the future.

Daniel Brennan, USC 2010

It is an unfortunate rule of politics that you must always watch what they do, not what they say. Words are simply pawns in a much larger chess game. Actions are the queens that go in for the checkmate. Under this logic it is easy to see why President Obama has recently played the health care game of talking up a bipartisan health care summit while simultaneously threatening a public option and reconciliation.

His words tell the story of bipartisanship, appealing to the majority of voters who are weary of partisan gridlock. In an interview during the Super Bowl pre-game show Obama said,

“I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans and Democrats, to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward . . .How do you guys want to lower costs? How do you guys intend to reform the insurance market so people with preexisting conditions, for example, can get health care? How do you want to make sure that the 30 million people who don’t have insurance can get it?”

Music to the ears of the masses – congressmen from both parties getting together to hammer out their differences and finally get something done. They may even sing kum-ba-ya. This only works if each side comes with an open mind and willing to give more than lip service to the ideas of the other side.

Despite these protestations of bipartisanship, there has been little done to assuage the fears of many Republicans that this summit is little more than a political charade. As Time Magazine writes,

It’s a delicate strategy that calls for Obama to reposition himself as a bipartisan outsider fighting to change Washington even as his aides increasingly play the sharply partisan inside game.

It comes as little surprise then that while the President focuses on the health care summit many Senate Democrats have signed on to a petition to resurrect the most divisive partisan issue of all – the public option. So far 20 Democrats from the Senate and 119 from the House have signed on to the letter urging Harry Reid to hold a vote on the public option under reconciliation. Far from tossing the letter aside, or at least waiting until after the bipartisan summit, Senator Reid signaled his qualified support, saying

“If a decision is made to use reconciliation to advance health care, Senator Reid will work with the White House, the House and members of his caucus in an effort to craft a public option that can overcome procedural obstacles and secure enough votes.”

Nancy Pelosi is also working in the shadows of the public health care summit to pass the Democrats’ health care reform plan. Nancy Pelosi’s top health care aide Wendell Primus admitted that Democrats plan to use reconciliation to pass health care, saying

“There’s a certain skill, there’s a certain trick, but I think we’ll get it done.”

But, but, but what about what President Obama said? What happened to the health care summit? What about bipartisanship? It’s all a carefully crafted publicity stunt. A diversionary tactic meant to provide political cover for a renewed push for a bill the American people have already rejected.

We need real bipartisanship. This works both ways. Republican’s must attend the summit ready to give a little. It may be unrealistic to expect Democrats to walk into the room with a clean sheet of paper but they should at least come with a bottle of white out and a red pen. Barack Obama has said all the right things, now it is time for him to emerge from behind the curtain of his words and follow through. The summit is a great idea, but only if each side is willing to genuinely listen to the ideas of the other. Unfortunately, those ideas are hard to hear amongst the whispered threats of reconciliation and the public option.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee

Over the next five weeks the CRNC will be looking into the growing entitlements that left unreformed will doom this country’s fiscal future. We must realize that government is not the solution to the problem…it IS the problem.

This Week’s Theme: Medicare

The Promise: “What we have done is kicked this can down the road. We are now at the end of the road and are not in a position to kick it any further,” he said. “We have to signal seriousness in this by making sure some of the hard decisions are made under my watch, not someone else’s.”

The Reality:  We’re kicking the can down the road. Obama’s budget does nothing to reform a Medicare entitlement that will create huge deficits for the foreseeable future. Rather than seek fundamental reforms the White House budget proposal actually proposes major increases in Medicare spending. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html

Fact 1: Medicare Entitlement Spending Threatens to Bankrupt Our Generation

Currently the federal government spends 21.7% of the national budget on two major health entitlements, Medicare and Medicaid, which represents 15.2% of the nation’s GDP. If the status quo continues unaltered, these two programs will consume 20% of GDP by 2016.

When President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare into law has said,

“No longer will young families see their own incomes, and their own hopes, eaten away simply because they are carrying out deep moral obligations to their parents.”

But as Congressman Paul Ryan wrote,

“Absent reform, the program will end up delivering exactly what it was created to avoid: it will consume the prosperity of today’s younger generation to finance an unsustainable path of spending”

Read More: http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/plan/challenges.htm

Fact 2: What’s Worse? Insolvency Looms

The Medicare program is simply going bankrupt. Trustees for Social Security and Medicare, the government’s two biggest benefit programs, have issued a new report saying that the Medicare will pay out more benefits than it collects and will be insolvent by 2017. That’s only 7 years from now. The reason (in addition to waste and fraud) has been Medicare’s inability to control costs. A 2007 report by the Congressional Budget Office found that total spending per Medicare enrollee grew at 10.6% annually while the privately insured grew at 7.7%. Moreover the report predicts,

“In the absence of an unprecedented change in the long term trends, national spending on health care will grow substantially over the coming decades.”

Democrats so far have proposed nothing resembling fundamental change. Rather than focus on the spending side of the equation, to reign in bloated government programs. they have emphasized the tax side of the formula by letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Eventually we will come to a point where increasing taxes simply is not an option. What then Mr. President?

Fact 3: Our Generation is Resigned to Failure

A recent Zogby poll which asked whether people believe Medicare will be there for you or your children found that:

Unsurprisingly, a minority of young adults believe that Medicare will survive long enough for them to receive benefits.  The minority grows even smaller, a mere 20%, who believe that their children will ever be able to receive Medicare’s assistance. Young adults have lost faith in one of government’s key programs and one of the closest analogues we have to what government health care will look like. How, given the government’s track record, could we expect different results!

Bottom Line: The federal government is simply not equipped to handle huge entitlement programs without unacceptable levels of waste, fraud, and inefficiency. Reforms are necessary. But more important is a fundamental change in the role of government. These entitlements must return to their initial mission – safety nets meant to catch those who fall, not anyone who chooses to jump.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director of the College Republican National Committee