Often lost in the Medicare debate is that the existing system requires seniors to purchase wrap around insurance policies that cover the cost of catastrophic care. Ninety percent of Medicare enrollees purchase this private insurance option; and ironically, AARP sells many of those plans. Seniors are also forced to navigate Medicare’s numerous programmatic parts, which is no small task.
Under a premium support system, the plethora of programs would be consolidated and there would be no need for an add-on insurance policy. Equally as important is that seniors could choose from a variety of insurance plans, including plans that cost less than the premium support provided to them.
The choice is clear: an antiquated and convoluted system designed by Lyndon Johnson or a modern system that allows seniors to choose the plan that works best for them.
From the failure of Solyndra to the obstruction of the Keystone XL Pipeline, no single issue captures President Obama’s policy failures more clearly than that of energy. The challenge for conservatives is to explain how their policies would make things better because the American people have become accustom to government boondoggles and high gas prices. Job creation in western Pennsylvania and places like North Dakota show the economic potential associated with domestic energy production (something folks in Texas have known for a long time).
America is not destined to suffer through a painful slow decline, but to reverse the trend, conservative solutions have to be explained in a way that resonates with the American people and make them understand a new normal is not inevitable.