A ‘radical’ proposal

Thursday, May 26, 2011 | 2:01 a.m.

Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich ran into trouble with his colleagues recently after he disparaged the GOP plan to gut Medicare and take away the guarantee of medical insurance for seniors.

Speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press” this month, the Republican candidate for president said the plan, pushed by House GOP budget chief Rep. Paul Ryan, was “too big a jump.”

“I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering,” Gingrich said. “I don’t think that imposing radical change from the right or left is any way for a free society to operate.”

Gingrich was quickly slammed by conservatives because the Medicare proposal is a crucial part of the Republican effort to slash government. Gingrich tried to minimize his comments, telling conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh that he wasn’t referring to the Ryan plan, even though it was clear he was. He apologized to Ryan, and told Fox News that his words were “inaccurate and unfortunate.” He even said he would vote for the plan if he was still in Congress.

Nevada’s Republicans have also supported the plan. Rep. Joe Heck voted for it, as did former Rep. Dean Heller, who has since been appointed to the Senate. Heller told the Associated Press that he was “proud to be the only member of Congress who will get to vote for it twice.”

That is too bad. Gingrich was correct the first time — the Republican budget plan is radical, right-wing social engineering. If it passed, it would leave people under 55 years old without the guarantee of Medicare in their senior years. Instead, when they reach retirement age, they would get a voucher to pay for private health insurance. Studies of the proposal show the vouchers wouldn’t cover the full cost of insurance. As a result, seniors would see their costs for medical care skyrocket.

Republicans don’t seem fazed by this. It’s just a part of their attempt to use the nation’s economic downturn to try to advance their agenda, which would hurt seniors, families and the middle class.

Before the Senate rejected the Ryan plan on Wednesday, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Medicare would be a “defining issue” for the 2012 election.

A special election Tuesday in New York for the House of Representatives may be an indication of how that could play out. The Democratic candidate made her opponent’s support of the Ryan plan and the privatization of Medicare key issues, and she won. It’s a big blow for Republicans, who have held the seat for 40 years. Democrat Kathy Hochul’s victory by 4 percentage points may seem small, but in context, it’s major. As Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson noted, Republican Chris Lee, who resigned this year amid a scandal, won last fall’s election with 74 percent of the vote.

Instead of backing off the foolish plan, Republicans have tried to spin the issue. They astoundingly have argued that the Democrats are the ones cutting Medicare, pointing to a 2010 budget vote in which Democrats acted to reduce expenses. Correcting the course of the program, as the Democrats have done, is a far cry from the Republican effort to destroy a program that millions of Americans depend on.

Republicans have tried to make it appear that Medicare needs to be drastically changed, saying that Democrats should offer a different plan if they don’t like the Ryan proposal. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi responded simply, “We have a plan. It’s called Medicare.”

Indeed.

That doesn’t suggest Medicare is perfect. Congress needs to make changes to continue the vitality of the program, but that doesn’t mean dismantling Medicare and taking away the guarantee of health insurance for the nation’s seniors. The Republicans in Congress who push the plan are doing so at their own risk. Perhaps they’ve been too busy with their social engineering to notice Americans don’t support it.