You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to www.journalgazette.net/newsletter and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.

U.S.

  • Alaska pot backer ordered to comply with subpoena
    ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — A campaign-finance investigation is moving forward against an Alaska television reporter who quit her job on-air and vowed to work toward legalizing marijuana.
  • Ginsburg back at home, expected at court next week
    WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has returned home after undergoing an operation to implant a heart stent to clear a blocked artery and is expected to hear oral arguments on Monday.
  • Immigrants' chances tied to their state's polices
    PHOENIX (AP) — If Christian Avila lived a few hundred miles to the west, he would have a driver's license, qualify for in-state college tuition and a host of other opportunities available to young people granted legal status by President
Advertisement
Also
Romney campaign releases Ryan tax data
WASHINGTON – When it comes to their federal taxes in the last two years, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has paid a lower federal tax rate than his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan.
Ryan, R-Wis., paid an effective federal tax rate of 15.9 percent in 2010 and 20 percent in 2011, according to tax returns released by the Romney campaign Friday evening.
In 2010, Ryan and his wife reported an adjusted gross income of just over $215,000. Most of that came from Ryan’s congressional salary. They paid more than $34,000 in federal taxes on that income. They also paid $3,168 in employment taxes for a household worker.
In 2011, the couple reported an adjusted gross income of more than $323,000 and paid nearly $65,000 in federal taxes.
– Associated Press
Associated Press
Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan speaks to the crowd during a victory rally Saturday in The Villages, Fla.

Obama, Ryan focusing on Medicare

– Who loves Medicare more? President Obama and Mitt Romney’s running mate vied for that distinction Saturday as Medicare became the latest flashpoint in a presidential campaign of flying elbows.

The issue is dicey for both sides: Obama is steering billions from the entitlement to help pay for the expansion of coverage under his health care law; Paul Ryan is an advocate of overhauling Medicare to make the traditional program no longer the mainstay for tomorrow’s seniors – just one of many old-age health insurance choices.

But that didn’t stop them from going head on.

On a day Romney devoted to raising campaign cash in Massachusetts, Ryan accused Obama of raiding the Medicare “piggybank” to pay for his health care overhaul and he warned starkly that hospitals and nursing homes may close as a result. The Wisconsin congressman introduced his 78-year-old mother to an audience of seniors in Florida and passionately defended a program that has provided old-age security for two generations of his own family.

“She planned her retirement around this promise,” Ryan said as Betty Ryan Douglas looked on. “That’s a promise we have to keep.”

Campaigning in New Hampshire, Obama said it’s a promise that the Republican ticket would tear up.

“You would think they would avoid talking about Medicare, given the fact that both of them have proposed to voucherize the Medicare system,” he said in Windham. “But I guess they figure the best defense is to try to go on offense.

“So, New Hampshire, here is what you need to know: Since I have been in office, I have strengthened Medicare.”

He made a similar point later in the day while campaigning in Rochester, N.H.

Said Ryan in Florida: “You want to know what Medicare is saying about this? From Medicare officials themselves: One out of six of our hospitals and our nursing homes will go out of business as a result of this,” meaning Obama’s Medicare cuts.

That was a far from exact reference to a 2010 analysis by Medicare chief actuary Richard Foster. He said then that roughly 15 percent of hospitals and nursing homes that provide Medicare services could “become unprofitable” over a decade – not necessarily go out of business – thanks to cuts in payments from the government under the health care law.

But Foster’s analysis also said the law would improve key Medicare benefits, solve the “doughnut hole” gap in coverage for seniors, expand health insurance to millions more people, reduce the federal budget deficit and extend the solvency of the government’s hospital insurance trust fund by up to 12 years. Hospitals remain largely on board with the health care law, without apparent fear of closing.

Ryan, a deficit hawk and the House Republicans’ chief budget writer, has stood out in Washington for laying out tough spending choices that many lawmakers in both parties avoid. So it was almost inevitable that his selection as running mate would vault Medicare to the top of the campaign debate.

Democrats say it’s a debate they are glad to have because voters tend to trust them more than Republicans on the big social entitlements. But Obama has vulnerabilities, too, given the Medicare cuts he pushed to expand health insurance for the nation and to keep the costs of doing so in line.

The Obama campaign recognizes that Romney and Ryan have been pre-emptive and tried to neutralize the usual Democratic advantage on Medicare by striking first with a Medicare ad and with their criticism of Obama’s health law. “They are being dishonest about my plan because they can’t sell their plan,” Obama said.

Ryan’s proposal in Congress would encourage future retirees to consider private coverage that the government would help pay for through a voucher-like system, while keeping the traditional program as an option.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Medicare over time would spend thousands less per senior under the Ryan plan than under current policy. Critics say that would shift heavy costs to individual retirees. The government could always spend more than anticipated to meet changing realities, but at the cost of deeper deficits.

Advertisement