Roy Blunt Weighs In On Kill-Medicare Budget Plan

I want to mention Missouri Senator Roy Blunt’s comment on the Paul Ryan/Republican Party throw-Medicare-from-the-train budget proposal, as well as his comment on Newt Gingrich’s assessment of the “radical” GOP budget plan.

Here’s what Blunt said to ABC News on Tuesday:

I don’t think it’s an extreme proposal at all….It’s not a radical idea. It’s one of many ideas we ought to be looking at…

Newt is an ideas guy…I didn’t understand the radical, right-wing social engineering comment and I suspect he wishes he hadn’t described it that way.  It would be a change but not a dramatic change. It’s just a different way of looking at how we provide choices for health care for people—you get competition and you get transparency as part of the process and when you have choice and transparency you wind up with better price and better quality and that’s one of the things we need to look at…

First, Blunt is lying through his Baptist teeth when he says he doesn’t understand Newt’s “radical, right-wing engineering comment.”  Of course he understands it; that’s why he suggests Newt should change it.

Second, that stuff about “choice and transparency” leading to “better price and better quality” has been contradicted by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which estimated that the Ryan-Republican plan would cost those who reach 65 in ten years much more money, upwards of $12,500, or 61% of the cost of the average private plan.

Two more things from the ABC interview: Blunt irresponsibly threatened to not vote for an increase in the debt ceiling (the President, Blunt said, is “clearly gonna have to make some structural change decisions“) and he indicated he would vote against an effort in the Senate to cut off some of the subsidies oil companies are getting from taxpayers.  Wow. What a shocker.

For the record, last year Blunt was, according to OpenSecrets, in “the all-time top 10” for BP oil money in the House and was a major recipient of oil and gas money last year. 

(H/T, FiredUp!Missouri.)




  1. A lucrative connection to the oil industry is indicative of one of many of Roy Blunts many hidden (self-serving) agenda items.


  2. OMG, Duane,

    I caught myself having a frisson of liking for old Newt here. He’s a little like myself, I think, I being the nut case who recommends the Variable Gasoline Tax as a radical cure for Energy Dependence on OPEC. Clearly, Newt is not afraid of thinking outside the box, but also clearly, he is a pretty loose cannon.

    IMO, both parties are dancing around the root cause of the problem with Medicare, which of course is out-of-control costs. The president’s “solution”, which is no solution at all, is to appoint a COMMITTEE of medical people to figure out how to reduce the income of their own Medical Industrial Complex. Here’s the way he put it:

    “We will change the way we pay for health care -– not by the procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results,” Obama said. “And we will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services that seniors need.”

    If history is any guide, the Medical Industry is NOT going to let anyone on that committee who will curtail profits or cause business to shrink in volume, but that’s exactly what needs to happen. Too many unnecessary tests, too many prescriptions for “new” meds that are no better than the old ones but 10 times as expensive, too few GP’s, too many Dermatologists.

    The GOP “solution” is simply to crank down on the money valve and then let the Industry and the customers sort it out. I am thinking that while this is a messy way to do it, at least it’s better than kicking the can down the road with a committee. It just might motivate the Healthcare industry to consider changing how they do business, such as Concierge practices. But I’m not sanguine about it’s effectiveness. I would much rather see government step in more aggressively as I advocate in my post on the subject, A Medical Hobson’s Choice. Link:



    • Jim,

      I am at present studying the problem with Medicare and some ideas on how to fix it. But in the meantime, I like your idea, expressed in your informative blog, of reforming medical education along the lines you advocate. I urge all to read your post, which, again, is found here.

      Good stuff.


%d bloggers like this: