Let’s see, was the Columbian story concerning Herrera Beutler’s flier an editorial masquerading as a news story or just a news story? (“Herrera Beutler Medicare flier’s claims challenged,” April 20). In any event the story is misleading and, in some cases, incorrect.
For instance, last month the trustees of Medicaid and Medicare issued a report stating Medicaid funds would run dry in 2016, and similarly Medicare would run dry in 2033. Apparently the “fact checkers” quoted in the story object to bankrupt. What adjective do the fact checkers want, unfortunate?
The story also disagrees with the terms rationing or cutbacks. Well, recommendations to reduce spending, forwarded by the advisory board mentioned in the story, have to be approved by Congress or Congress has 2 months to recommend its own “cutbacks” or savings. I guess sending recommendations to Congress eliminates the term rationing.
If the law states the board’s recommendations can’t ration, cut benefits, or shift costs, then the correct term to use regarding benefit adjustments must be elimination.
Incidentally, the Independent Payment Advisory Board was created in the American Affordability Health Care Act, not the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Finally, the costs for Congresswoman Herrera Beutler’s flier come from her approved congressional budget.
R. Edwin Maul