The Gaza Genocide Narrative Suffers Another Major Deathblow
Former Rolling Stone Editor Picks Apart the Media's Latest Attempt to Gaslight Us
About Those Alleged Posts of Snipers on the Campuses of Indiana and Ohio...
Iran's Nightmares
The Problem Is Academia
Mounting Debt Accumulation Can’t Go On Forever. It Won’t.
Is Arizona Turning Blue? The Latest Voter Registration Numbers Tell a Different Story.
Washington Should Clip Qatar’s Media Wing
The Most Disturbing Part of It
Inept Microsoft is Compromising National Security
Leftist Activists Said 'Believe All Women' Didn’t Apply to Me
Biden Fails Moral Leadership Test in Handling Anti-Semitic Campus Protests
Sanctuary Cities Defund the Police to Pay for Illegal Immigration
The Election, the Debt, and our Future
Despite Plenty of Pitfalls, Biden Doubles Down on Off Shore Wind Farms
OPINION

Don’t Let Patty Murray’s Ads Fool You: She Opposed Popular, Bipartisan Rx Coverage for Seniors

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Haraz N. Ghanbari

In case you couldn’t tell by the influx of political advertisements blanketing television screens from coast to coast, campaign season is in full swing. And as Democrats face a tough midterm election cycle, it’s no surprise that many have resorted to a misleading, but predictable, campaign trope: scaring seniors about the ‘dangers’ of electing Republican candidates.

Advertisement

Across the country, Democratic candidates are criticizing their Republican opponents for wanting to destroy Social Security and Medicare. But voters, especially seniors, shouldn’t be fooled by these deceptive attacks.

In fact, Washington State’s Senior Senator, Democrat Patty Murray, recently earned Four Pinocchio’s from The Washington Post for her claim that “Republicans plan to end Social Security and Medicare if they take back the Senate.”

Now, Senator Murray is up on television claiming to be a champion for seniors and for lowering prescription drug costs in the popular Medicare Part D program. In reality, if Senator Murray had it her way, nearly 50 million American seniors would not receive Medicare Rx benefits.

In 2003, Patty Murray voted against the implementation of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 – which added a prescription drug benefit to Medicare known as Part D.

The legislation was widely recognized as a bipartisan win and had even earned the support of many Democrat Senators still serving today, including from Tom Carper (D-DE), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Ron Wyden (D-OR), making Patty Murray’s vote against the bill not only an outlier, but a slap in the face to American seniors.

Even more troubling, Murray described the legislation as ‘flawed,’ and a ‘failure,’ on the Senate floor. She even added that the cost of a Medicare prescription drug coverage bill was ‘far too high’ and ‘deficient.’

Advertisement

Today, Part D is popular and successful largely because of its market-based structure. Since it was first created, federal spending has come in 45 percent below projections – the CBO estimated in 2005 that Part D would cost $172 billion in 2015, but it has cost less than half that – just $75 billion. And monthly premiums continue to cost less than projected, with current projections at just $31.50. Meanwhile, according to recent polling, nearly 9 in 10 of senior enrollees are satisfied with their Part D coverage and the vast majority agree that their plan is a great value.

Given Medicare Part D’s obvious successes, it’s no wonder Sen. Patty Murray is trying to distance herself from her 2003 comments. But it should speak volumes to Senator Patty Murray’s record (or lack thereof) that the 30-year incumbent and Chair of the powerful Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, must resort to scare tactics and misleading claims aimed at our nation’s seniors.

In fact, it’s Democrats failed economic policies that have led to record inflation and put both Medicare and Social Security at greater risk. America’s seniors, many of whom are on fixed incomes are already struggling to make ends meet. With so much on the line, now is not the time to advocate for reckless government spending and the creation of new programs such as Medicare for All that would break our promise to America’s seniors by threatening the health care and social security benefits they have rightly earned. In fact, without change, studies show that Medicare funds will run out in 2028 and that Social Security will become insolvent in 2034.

Advertisement

Over Patty Murray’s 30-year career, she has done little – if anything – to address these very real concerns. Seniors deserve better. It’s time for change and that’s why the 60 Plus Association is proud to endorse Tiffany Smiley. As detailed in her Agenda for Recovery and Reform, Tiffany will fight for policy prescriptions that will get our economy back on track and protect Medicare and Social Security. Meanwhile, given Sen. Patty Murray’s lack of issues on her website and lackluster legislative record – only passing 9 bills over 30 years - it’s safe to say that a vote for Sen. Murray would be a vote for the same.

We look forward to working with Tiffany Smiley in the U.S. Senate to guarantee a more prosperous future for America’s seniors.

Saul Anuzis is president of 60 Plus Association.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos