McClintock defends vote
Reader Input
In a Nov. 8 letter, James Shaw of Rocklin calls me an “extremist” because I was one of 18 members of the House who voted “against stopping Medicare premium increases.” Here’s the rest of the story. Last year, the cost of living adjustment for Social Security did not rise as fast as the premium increase for Medicare part B. As a result, some Medicare beneficiaries (principally those individuals earning over $85,000 or couples earning over $170,000) will see Medicare cost rise between $6 and $16 per month. HR 3631 would reach into the pockets of working families (about $37 for an average family of four) to pay the difference for these high-income seniors. Among the 17 “extremists” who joined me in opposing the measure was Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), who pointed out that Ross Perot and members of Congress covered by Medicare would have their premiums protected at the expense of families struggling to get by. Tom McClintock, U.S. Representative, 4th District, California
|
Change Location:
|
Misinformation is rampant in this day and age. We resort to scare tactics and quoting out of context for character assasination. Both political parties and their followers are guilty of doing so.
Loomis: AMEN.
Mr. McClintock, thank you for responding to that particular post. I encourage you to contiue responding to both criticism and praise, with explanations of why you vote the way you do. Dr. Kirby, an Auburn City Council Member also responds here and it is also very much appreciated.
Thank you, Mr. McClintock for your explanation. I second the comment ccr1022 made above.
3rd too. A thoughtful explanation.
Where's CanyonRat and Fishdella on this issue? Probably can't stand a thoughtful explanation by Congressman McClintock.
I already answered this when Bill George commented earlier.
He's lying. Look at the text of the bill, not what he says about it.
So, CanyonR have you called Rep. Stoyer to gethis explanation?
Bill, Canyon will say that Stoyer voted against it because it did not raise taxes enough.
That takes the cake. Canyonrat is going to tell The Congressman that his reasoning is a lie. You may disagree with his reasoning, but to call him a liar is despicable. Canyonrat you are the lowest of all the bloggers here.
Thank You Mr. McClintok, your attention is much appreciated.
Mr. McClintock, where exactly does HR 3631 say "Last year, the cost of living adjustment for Social Security did not rise as fast as the premium increase for Medicare part B.
As a result, some Medicare beneficiaries (principally those individuals earning over $85,000 or couples earning over $170,000) will see Medicare cost rise between $6 and $16 per month.
HR 3631 would reach into the pockets of working families (about $37 for an average family of four) to pay the difference for these high-income seniors.
Sources please.
H.R. 3631 would prevent any Medicare beneficiary from receiving a Part B premium increase in 2010 in light of preliminary indications that seniors may not receive an annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in their Social Security benefits next year. The bill would make commensurate reallocations from the Medicare Improvement Fund to offset the higher federal share of Medicare spending.
This was taken from GOP.gov legislative digest
so it was about everyone not just the rich ones. That's how McClintock deals--by saying just enough but not all.
Mr. McClintock, Please provide your source for your statements below.
"Last year, the cost of living adjustment for Social Security did not rise as fast as the premium increase for Medicare part B."
"As a result, some Medicare beneficiaries (principally those individuals earning over $85,000 or couples earning over $170,000) will see Medicare cost rise between $6 and $16 per month."
"HR 3631 would reach into the pockets of working families (about $37 for an average family of four) to pay the difference for these high-income seniors."
It's "Hoyer" not "Stoyer."
CR, why did Steny Hoyer vote against the same bill? I'm asking you as you have sooo much insight.
Cost of health care has to go up when you add 40,000,000 more recipients that are required to be covered under the bill. The costs will rise or the care will be reduced or both which is what it appears is going to happen.
Those that have medicare now will see reductions in their benefits, this will allow the insurance companies to raise costs as there will be increased demand, that also will include all of us that have good insurance now, and don't want to depend on "basic" government controlled medical care. There are no vision or dental benefits in the house bill. No cost reductions, payment is dependent on taxing the rich at a higher rate, this will also cause higher taxes on those that Obama promised that they would never under his administration have a hike in their taxes.
My doctor is no longer a member of the AMA (supports Pelosi's Waterloo, it has +- 240,000 members) as he envisions only confusion and more paper work being generated due to more government involvement.
fourgen, can I borrow your crystal ball?