Medicare expert says he was told to hide estimates

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by IJ Reilly, Mar 12, 2004.

  1. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #1
    Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

    http://www1.venturacountystar.com/vcs/national/article/0,1375,VCS_123_2724218,00.html
     
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    maybe i was too kind when i said this administration is lousy at estimating -- they're good at it but lousy at telling the truth
     
  3. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #3
    I'm beginning to hope the Bush campaign presses Kerry on his "crooked Republicans" remark. If the man has any guts at all, he'll throw incidents like this right back in their faces, and let the American people decide if he's "going negative" or simply telling it like it is.
     
  4. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    Part II of the story nobody seems to care about.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-medicare14mar14,1,644044.story
     
  5. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #5
    I know that if the Clinton administration did this there would be immediate hearings in Congressional Government Oversight committees, along with calls for the firing of the officials involved. Come to think of it, that sounds like a pretty good course of action.
     
  6. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    This should be a major story, if not a scandal. Yet, it was buried in the back pages of my newspaper this morning. I don't watch much TV news but I haven't heard a peep about it anywhere else. And where are the Bush defenders on this board? Aren't they anxious to explain why the administration suppressed the true costs of a major government program?
     
  7. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #7
    i guess it's my turn... hold on....

    but bush is spending more of our money on healthcare! isn't that what you tax-happy liberals want?!??!??!??!??!?!???!????!??!????!?!!!?!?!?!??!
     
  8. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #8
    I really don't see how Bush can expect to get re-elected. This kind of stuff happens way too frequently. Myself, I would have told congress the truth and gotten fired. It's not so bad to get fired for telling the truth.

    I think democrats outside of the Kerry camp need to start shouting about stuff like this.
     
  9. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #9
    Forget proxy attacks -- I think Kerry needs to press these issues personally. The way I look at it, he's got essentially two choices: to allow the Bush campaign to characterize him and put him on the defensive, or to brush off the attacks and bring the fight directly to Bush on a whole litany of issues. The first way loses; the second way at least has a chance of winning.
     
  10. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #10
    Then they'll say he is negative (for pointing out the truth).

    No, I think it is up to the rest of us to do the dirty work. But I would love to see a debate where Kerry just asked questions of Bush:

    Who outed Plame?
    Why did your administration tell Richard S. Foster he would be fired for thelling the truth about the cost of the medicare bill?
    Why did your administration fire the person (I forget his name) who gave an honest estimate of the cost of the war in Iraq?
    Tenet told you that the intelligence about Iraq's WMDs was dubious. Why did you repeatedly proclaim false information to the American people?
    You promiced that your tax cut would bring jobs. Where are the jobs?
    Why does your administration muzzel science reports?
    Who was in on Dick Cheney's energy task force meetings?
    Who is responsible for breaking into the DNC computers?
    Where's Ossama?
    and finally Why did you hold up that stupid fake turkey in Iraq?

    He's got a lot to answer for actually.
     
  11. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #11
    i was thinking about that the other day. obviously, it was full of oil men. i'm wondering if medium to longterm research has indicated a substantial dropoff in production that would necessitate the US securing foreign fields. i've no proof, obviously, but it fits the pattern of a) not revealing what was said and b) some of the actions the administration has taken to putting troops in certain places
     
  12. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #12
    It was full of Enron people - Bush's biggest contributors.
     
  13. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    Just noting once again: this thread's been up for three days now, and not one Bush supporter has posted a comment, let alone made a stab at an explanation or a defense of the administration's behavior. What are we to make of this? Do they condone it, or just wish it would go away? Enquiring minds demand to know.
     
  14. 2jaded2care macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #14
    Sorry I'm late... :)

    Actually, I can't defend this either, even if it was truly a joke which was misinterpreted (highly unlikely). Even if it was, you don't make jokes like that, and if you do, you make it clear immediately that it is. If you don't, you should be called on it and disciplined. (Maybe Mr. Scully's current employer will consider his "cavalier" attitude when raise-time comes around.)

    Even though this appears to have been an underhanded political dirty trick, I'd think it would be hard for Dems to complain too much, since I was under the impression they were arguing all along that the program didn't go far enough (IOW, spend more money). The real offended parties are the Reps who went along reluctantly, only to find out that they were likely duped.

    It's a shame, but maybe Congress needs to make these experts testify what the likely cost will be. Regardless of who's POTUS.
     
  15. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    Thanks for the comment. Leaving aside the political questions for the time being, I'm wondering whether stunts like this have any impact on your opinion of the Bush administration. Not to try to spin your answer before you offer it, but there's little question but that they were determined to deliberately mislead both Congress and the American people about this cost of this major program. Is this a betrayal of trust in your eyes, or just a minor matter?
     
  16. 2jaded2care macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #16
    Well, if I were to trust any politician, I guess I'd consider being misled a betrayal of that trust...

    It does suggest a certain "cavalier attitude" toward the truth by this administration. As opposed to, maybe, the Carter administration.

    I don't think we can expect much different nowadays. Why, yes, I am somewhat cynical. Why do you ask?
     
  17. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #17
    if you expect it and accept it, then it's probably not going to change.

    i submit that the willful intention of this administration to mislead the public, through use of false evidence and numbers, doublespeak and lack of accountability is far worse than any administration before it. on sunday, i'll say it's worse than all previous administrations combined.
     
  18. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #18
    This is a variation on the "they all do it" rationalization. Even if this was true, it would not function as an excuse. No need to go back to Carter -- go back to Clinton, who was excoriated by his opposition and impeached for lying about his sex life. Surely you think what Bush has done is at least a serious a breach of the public trust?
     
  19. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #19
    First of all if they lie and get away with it because you are "cynical" we might as well just give up on ever having a responsible government.

    And Dems are not against the bill because they "want to spend even more money". We are against the bill because it is a give-away to drug companies. Do you realize that it is now illegal for states to bargain with drug companies to get a better price? It is also illegal to buy the same drug from Canada where the price is a lot less. What kind of crap is that? Anti-consumer Anti-competitive crap. They would not even let the democrats participate in the committees that wrote the legislation.

    Did you know that the guy who wrote most of this legislation is about to get a cushy job in the drug industry with a big pay boost?

    In short, we were sold out. They lied about the cost. They gave away our tax dollars. They benefit personally from the give-away. That's why I don't like the bill.
     
  20. 2jaded2care macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #20
    "The Democratic plan would cost an estimated $700 billion to $900 billion, more expensive than the $400 billion Bush has vowed to commit to overhauling Medicare." link: http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/04/bush.medicare/

    Granted, Bush was wrong/inaccurate/misleading/mistaken/lyingthroughhisteeth with the estimate.

    Yes, definitely, I think that we should throw out every politician who's ever misled anyone. I assume we'll all be voting for Nader.

    It seems a bit disingenuous to call it anti-competitive to bar drugs from Canada. I thought the gov't there dictated the prices they would like to pay to drug companies. Plus, everything there is priced lower, even taking the exchange rate into account, because they just plain don't have as much money as we do. I read somewhere (mainstream news source, I'll try to look it up) that the car manufacturers must price cars lower in Canada just to sell to the av'g Canadian. I thought that seemed unfair, but it is the way competition works, I guess.

    I could probably be talked into some form of restrictions on advertising by drug companies. That consumers have to pay for this nonstop "ask your doctor if Norflamitrocitrinocor is right for you" blather is outrageous.
     
  21. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #21
    I'm sorry, but this is at least a partially disingenuous answer. What the Democrats may or may not propose is completely irrelevant to the issue of the Bush administration deliberately withholding the true costs of the program they proposed. Where is the outrage, I wonder?
     
  22. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #22
    Update: Secrecy Probed in Medicare Plan Cost Estimates

    I suppose so long as this story remains buried in the back pages of the newspaper, it isn't a real scandal. I especially liked Scully's explanation that the threat of termination ("the consequences for insubordination are extremely severe"), was made "in jest." What a comedian.

     
  23. 2jaded2care macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #23
    My quote about the Dems' proposal costing more was in reference to my earliest post about the real offended parties being the Reps who were suckered, more so than the Dems who would've spent more. I thought it seemed relevant to that point. You probably disagree, it's only my opinion.

    Unfortunately, politics being what they are, it's even more disappointing that it's only Dems who are questioning the information provided to Congress. I mentioned making people testify about these things to Congress, but to tell you the truth I thought it was already a crime to intentionally provide false information (lie) to Congress...

    Now that I think about this issue, I would be pretty upset if, say, I agreed to have a house built based on someone's "good faith" estimate of the costs, and I found out later that the estimate was intentionally misleading. Maybe if people looked at it like that -- even fellow Reps who are so fond of saying "it's our money" -- then things might change. But then we tolerate porkbarrel spending every year too, right? :(
     
  24. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #24
    but is it a fair comparison if the plans have differing features?
     
  25. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #25
    I think this misses the point completely. The Democratic plan never had a chance. The issue is that the administration lied to both the Congress and the American public about the costs of the plan. It is not relevant whether this plan had a better chance of passing than another plan. They lied.

    This is the same BS reasoning I'm hearing about Iraq. Yes, the Bush administration lied about WMDs and Saddam's connections with Al Qaeda, but isn't it a good thing Saddam's gone? They lied.

    A lie is a lie is a lie.
     

Share This Page