>> the pressure is on medicaid, very severe. my heart is closer to medicaid and medicare. i've taken care of inner-city kids who depended heavily on medicaid support to get through illnesses. it is crucially important. the states are under enormous budgetary pressure right now. it is a very important area. we are as committed to improving the medicaid system as medicare. and the same kind of improvements in care that help reduce costs in medicare will do so and medicaid -- in factions in real admissions affect that as well. but the dual eligibles, eligible for both medicare and medicaid because they have chronic illnesses and behavioral disturbances that make them very vulnerable and very ill. $350 of expenditure goes into care of these 9.2 million people in our country. 40% of medicaid is for the dual eligibles. they get lost, too. if we could get that correct, states would save money, but that would save money, patients would save money, and health status would improve. there will be a tremendous amount of change. we're committed to partnership with the states. we have t

>> for medicaid or medicare? >> the health care law. >> when you are doing anything, we have this federal system where we try to create -- the try to create assistance for our countries and have options for flexibility and that is part of the laboratory of democracy in our country. people can apply for a 1115 wafers and that gets them the ability to experiment that we make sure when that is happening that it won't mean less coverage for poor people or things that are destructive. the fact the we have waivers, that kind of flexibility is a positive, not a negative. it shows we are not trying to do one size fits all. in the exchanges we said if the state will come forward with a different system they think is better and covers the same number of people they can do so which again shows this is about whether somebody has a better idea or whether they are deciding it is okay to cover thirty four million americans going forward and continue to have those costs shifted to hospitals, premiums. our status quo on health ca

medicaid is the problem in the same vein where providers are taking less medicaid patients because of reimbursement. under the program we are talking about we are not saying price control. we are saying choice and competition. providers are incentivized and rewarded for excelling and creating a better cost. we want to have the dr./patient relationship be the nucleus of the health care system. not government price controls system. i would argue providers are under more stress and strain under a price control system than a market-based system where the power goes to the person selecting competing providers for benefits. >> host: one more on the medicare plan. the cbo says your medicare plan will double seniors out of profit loss. is it realistic to assume most seniors would be able to afford the cost increases? >> that fails to take into consideration the extra $7,800 we are adding to low-income seniors benefits. what we are saying is protect those who are low-income by supplementing benefits. as people get sicker increase payments to stabilize premiums and people get wealthier don't su

in the medicaid program. that is going to dramatically affect your ability to get medicaid services. as to whether doctors in your area take medicare or medicaid, they are two different programs and i just don't know. by and large, most doctors take medicare. medicaid often is estate program, and this is a problem in california -- medicaid is operated a . [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] for instance, the report forum will ask what shift? that's entirely relevant. the controller in some instances reported simply rotation. didn't indicate which shift or which day in the 221 rotation. with better attention, we feel from management and a better list of questions to begin with, that will yield better data. better data with proper analysis will yield better corrective actions. >> thank you. chairman rockefeller? >> thank you, madam chair. mr. rinaldi, i think it is only fair that you get to talk. let me ask you a couple of questions. n

and it's medicare and medicaid and social security. and so in this debate on medicare, it's not just the medicare trust fund that we're talking about that will go bankrupt -- it will, because today and every day with no time out for holiday or weekends, 10,000 of our baby boomers retire and they stop paying into these funds and they start drawing from these funds and so as we debate the subject we need to remember that it's bigger than medicare. . even if you argue that medicare will somehow be solvent, it won't matter if the country has gone bankrupt, because it doesn't matter what you do if there's no government because it's gone bankrupt and that's where we're headed. it's a huge problem. we worked very hard to keep the promise made during the campaign of cutting $100 billion from spending this year. that's a lot of money to cut. but even if we cut $100 billion, that would have been 1/16th of the deficit. it turned out to be an amazing disappearing $100 billion. shrunk to $61 billion. then it is troung $38 billion. then when c.b.o.

on medicaid, he decided to block grant medicaid to the states under the belief that you will give more governor's flexibility, they will be able to operate it more it efficiently and effectively, cover the same number of people at a much lower cost, and he says about $750 billion by doing that. on medicare, he did what a lot of your company's head-on -- he turned it from a defined benefit plan, to a defined contribution plan, and he did that for all people less than 54 years old. that, principally, is what his plan does, and how he gets to $4 trillion in savings. the president came out with a budget in february, and i think it is fair to say that budget was not taken very seriously by anyone. subsequently, he has come up with a budget framework which allen was referring to a couple of weeks ago, and that is basically compared to congressman ryan's budget, more like an outline. the best part is he did say the words four trillion. that is a substantial step forward. it is, however, over 12 years, and back-end loaded, so when you compare it to the ryan plan and the commission's plan, it i

medicaid, is one of those. so poor people have much better healthcare then they would on their own income. but many programs like medicaid are in severe trouble right, now financial trouble, states are cutting them. the fact is that americans are finding that their access is being cut their benefits are being cut, part of the reason is that there are so many people in that system and a lot of them are people we imported. >> so, tara, what are the most recent data how the country is lit on immigration reform what some people cl amnesty or path to legalization how would that change if they knew that people here illegally at this point in time would be getting, starting in 2014, almost 5,000 a year in tax subsidies to buy health insurance? >> i think that's part of the reason why you don't see immigration, comprehensive immigration reform or amnesty being discussed at one of the top three issues here in the country. because when americans say, okay, look, there are people here, they beat the system and they have b

the president wants to add 18 million more people to medicaid, and the people that are already on medicaid find they can't get a doctor because docks won't take them. that's going to be an increasing problem under this system, and we know the congressional budget office has shown that about 23 million people will still be uninsured in 2019 when, you know, the obamacare really becomes effective in 2014. that's when the big cost driver comes in expanding medicaid and state-based changes come into being. >> next question from texas. you're on the air. >> caller: hello, you talked about the one thing utah going to talk about with cutting back half a trillion dollars and forcing rationing. was the intention of the obamacare program was to eventually so staid l the insurance companies they can no longer to make a profit and forced into single payer? also, if we are forced into rationing, is it something like the british program, the nice prm -- program where they determine how much care you get based on your age and ability to contribute to society. thank you. >> those are two very, very good qu

medicaid is a problem in the same vain where providers take less and less medicaid parents because of under reimbursements. under this program, we're not saying price control, but choice and competition. providers are rewarded for exkeeling, innovating, and creating a better service at a lower cost. we want to have the patient-doctor relationship be the driver of the health care system, not a government price control system. i argue that providers are under more stress and more strain under a price-controlled system than under a market based system where the power goes to the person to select among competing providers for their benefits. >> moving on to tax reform and social security, but one more question. the medicare plan could more than double the out-of-pocket costs. it is reasonable to assume seniors can afford the cost increases? >> a couple things. it fails to take into consideration the extra $7800 we're talking about adding to low income seniors' benefits. we're saying protect those who are low income by covering the out-of-pocket cost. as people get sicker, increase the pay

one the things is about 14 million are eligible for medicaid and haven't signed up. the president wants to add 18 million. and the people on medicaid find they can't get a doctor because the doctors are reimbursed. that is going to become an increasing problem under this system. and we know the congressional budget office has shown that about 23 million people will still be uninsured in 2019 when, you know, obamacare really becomes effect i have -- effective in 2014, that's when the state based exchanges come into being. >> host: questions from san antonio. caller you are on the air. go ahead please. >> caller: hello, ma'am. you already talked about the one thing that i was going to bring up about bringing back half a trillion dollars and eventually enforcing rationing. i wanted to ask if you thought the intention of the obamacare program was to eventually so straddle the insurance companies they can no longer make a profit and were forced into single payer. also if we are portioned into rationing, do you think it'll be something like the british program, the n.i.c.e

and those who receive medicaid not want cuts in that either. there are a majority opposing cuts in all of those things. so, why do you think you're right on the? >> because it's a math problem. it just doesn't add up. you can't have both. you n't say on the one hand you want to fiscal responsibility in america, at the same time not being willing to have reductions in entitlement spending. i just go back to my own experience, when we say we're going to have to make major cuts in k-12 education, i don't know if you remember that the teachers union said if we make these cuts we will lay off 30,000 teachers. there will be little kids that are not going to be able to be learning in a good public school building. and we heard all the -- guess what, it didn't happen. a year later those things, i think there were less than 1000 teachers that actually got laid off. that we have reassessed that most of hem are back, and why? because we instructed people throughout the education system, our administrators, school board and others, make good decisions, set

medicaid comes in for brutal treatment as well. by converting to it a block grant, they would be throwing as many as 44 million americans off the insurance rolls, eliminating coverage for the poorest people, most nursing home residents and people with disabilities. my friends on the other side of the aisle who say we have to do this to blaps the budget, they know they're wrong. i say they're dead wrong. we do not need to put seniors and low income americans on an austerity program in order to rein in the deficit. we do not need to shred the social safety net or squeeze the middle class in order to get our fiscal house in order. in fact, we can save taxpayers $68 billion over seven years and expand the menu of health care choices by instituting a public option. if you ask the american people, they'd rather see some shared sacrifice in cutting spending. they'd rather see us eliminate tax breaks for c.e.o.'s who have no idea what it's like to choose between taking their medication or eating their next meal. madam chairwoman, i'll vote

from defense to medicare and medicaid and they should be balanced by changes in revenue. it should include a mix of specific savings for mandatary programs and commitment to lower future discretiory spending. the more specific the reforms, the more believable and credible will be the framework. these sings would b complemented by an overall cap on future debt and deficits. a strong enforcement mechanism to force action that would deliver the remaining savings. at the beginning of 2013, and every year after that, we will assess the magnitude of additional deficit reduction requiring necessary to bring down the debts over the following fi years. congress would have roughly nine months to enact legislation that would meet that target. if congress cannot agree, automatic cuts in spending would go into effect for the following year. but put us on a path to a meeting that fiscal target. the size would depend significantly on the future of the bush tax cuts. but they will expire at the end of 2012. the president has proposed to extend the tax cuts to benefit the middle class. al

for medicaid.r state and i you this most states need because we know what we need in our state. we can spend the money better. >> sounds to me like you are not endorsing that part of the ryan plan, though. >> well, i -- i -- first off with medicaid we need to absolutely get block grants. we have to do those for the -- for our state. with regard to medicare, we have -- i think -- he has a plan we have to review. our -- senior citizens care about making sure they have health care for the rest of their life. they paid into this program. so i think it is very important to have this debate. and make sure we fix it long term. not short term. >> because your formerly in the health care industry and know a lot more about this than most people. i guess the question is how much would a $6,000 voycher get you? which is sort of part of the -- ryan plan, right? >> well -- i think -- here is what people -- want to make sure. then want to make sure that they pay into the plan and make sure they continue to be abl

against women like mandatory reproductive screening for planned parenthood patients who rely on medicaid so what's the fate of needy women who should stay. here longer cayman islands united states is the world's biggest offshore tax haven that's right even though the i.r.s. is looking for tax dodging billionaires have stashed their cash in offshore bank accounts the truth is america is actually home to some of the biggest tax free offshore bank accounts in the world a department of commerce study revealed that the u.s. banks are holding three point six trillion dollars belonging to foreign appositive that's because under u.s. law and nine u.s. citizens can deposit as much money into banks as they'd like with out paying taxes and without having to read. their deposits revealed to their home countries canada is the only exception is really a better actor the united states so kind of foreign money is holed up in u.s. banks and what effect is our tax haven policy having around the world here offer some answers on this issue is michael hudson staff writer at the center for public integrity an

to do that, we need to talk about medicaid and medicare. by cutting them by 43% bloc granting the state 50 laboratories of ibovation, all out and the notion of best practices, would dwef best practices for the delivery of health care to the poor and those over 65. if we don't, we will find ourselves bankrupt, which is where we are finding ourselves n. new mexico, as governor, medicaid was fee-for-service. i changed that to managed care. it was a 25% savings. if i would get medicare, i could have implemented that same 25%, federal government do away with the mandates and 43% do-able. >> thank you, sir. >> governor, we promise -- we will be fair and balanced with the questions. >> fair and balanced. that's what i was thinking. >> shannon breen has the next round. >> mr. cain, you have said that sometimes states should be empowered to enforce laws and the federal government will not. in sb-1070, congressman paul has said laws like that can be harmful and even dangerous to innocent americans. did arizona go too far? >> i don't believe arizona w

for medicaid.hich is what we need in our state and i you this most states need because we know what we need in our state. we can spend the money better. >> sounds to me like you are not endorsing that part of the ryan plan, though. >> well, i -- i -- first off with medicaid we need to absolutely get block grants. we have to do those for the -- for our state. with regard to medicare, we have -- i think -- he has a plan we have to review. our -- senior citizens care about making sure they have health care for the rest of their life. they paid into this program. so i think it is very important to have this debate. and make sure we fix it long term. not short term. >> because your formerly in the health care industry and know a lot more about this than most people. i guess the question is how much would a $6,000 voycher get you? which is sort of part of the -- ryan plan, right? >> well -- i think -- here is what people -- want to make sure. then want to make sure that they pay into the plan and make su

medicaid ceases being an open checkbook for states to say i'm going to expand more people on medicaid because the federal government picks up half the bill. and there will be greater competition across state lines as people are able to buy insurance from other places and join into purchasing alliances. let me note that there is more to come, that there are additional specifics that you expect from me and they'll be coming. i also note that there's going to be a lot that you're going to expect from me on medicare reforms and that's a big part of healthcare and will have an enormous impact on the overall system. let me make a couple of points. one is, i applaud the fact that representative ryan put forward a plan to keep medicare solvent. that's got to be our primary objective, and to keep our country fiscally solvent, as well. and he's also added choice to his plan and inserted market dynamics, and i'll note that while i haven't introduced my own plan today, will in the future, it's not going to be the ryan plan, but it shares many of the same objectives. let me conclude by summarizing

nearly 20 states already have something similar to the medicaid lock-in program. south carolina's medicaid pilot program targeted high use beneficiaries then subverted for 3% decrease in the total number of prescribed prescription pain medications. consider side of the county on the ohio river in southern ohio. and the rivertown prescription drugs cause nine of every 10 fatal drug overdoses. nearly two-thirds of these cases the individuals involved did not have prescriptions themselves come indicating of course they obtained all likelihood obtained the drugs illegally. an investigation by the gao which audited the medicaid program in the five largest states found 65,000 cases in which medicaid beneficiaries visited six or more doctors and up to 46 different pharmacies to acquire these prescriptions. this same report found approximately 800 prescription written for patients and 1200 prescriptions written by dead physicians. under the medicaid lock-in program states that if i high-risk richardson users those receiving sets of amounts of prescription drugs and those

that is so low that that always qualifies them for medicaid.re asking me that how is it that somebody on supplemental security income is eligible for medicaid and gets it quickly, i believe that is the answer. host: i have kind of a blunt tweet -- can you speak to the cost? guest: that is an enormously important question. as listeners know, we have a very polarized debate on health reform involving all this discussion about death panels, which was absurd -- there were not any death panels in the health reform bill. at the end of the health reform legislation, i was able to get something into the bill that i think finally responds to what the caller is talking about, and that is for the first time under the legislation i was able to get in, in a number of states, it would be possible for someone in those last days to be eligible for the hospice benefits, but also not have to give up the prospect of charity care. now, we know that most of those individuals are not going to be seeking purity of that care. they're interested in comfort care, they w

by saying spending, you're saying you want to whack medicare and medicaid only. with the spending side. again, the bipartisan groups that have looked at this, every one of them said any credible plan requires both. that's what we're saying. >> so, i can't promise the debate won't continue during the commercial, but we're going to take one. when we come back, i want to talk more about the politics, specifically the fallout for newt gingrich on this very rough week, that as we pointed out, started with his comments on this program last week. more with the roundtable right after this. [ male announcer ] your hard work has paid off. and you want to pass along as much as possible to future generations. at northern trust, we know what works and what doesn't. as one of the nation's largest wealth managers, we can help you manage the complexities of transferring wealth. seeking to minimize taxes while helping maximize what's passed along. because you just never know how big those future generations might be. ♪ expertise matters. find it at northern trust. two of the most

for medicaid to continue. we already have in place, as i mentioned in the beginning of this debate, many of the positive aspects of the affordable care act, all those things that ealmost nate discrimination, let you put your children on your policy, start to plug up the doughnut hole for prescription drugs for seniors. this is working. this is legislation that's working and making the difference for the american people and making it possible now with the state exchanges once they're up and running with the tax credits that are available for even those other 32 million or 30 million to 40 million americans that don't have health insurance now to finally have it. now, why do the republicans want to eliminate this? i listened to dr. burgess. he says it costs too much. well, the fact of the matter is the c.b.o. said the affordable care act was going to save money, reduce the deficit over 10 years. i know they only like to look at the c.b.o. numbers when they think they're beneficial to their point of view but the

>> medicaid or medicare? >> the healthcare law. >> when you are doing these things, we've always had a federal system more retry to create a system for our country. this is part of the laboratory of democracy. in medicate people can apply for waivers that can give them the ability to experiment. we make sure that is not going to mean less coverage for a very poor people or things that are destructive. the fact that we have waivers and that kind of flexibility is a positive and not a negative. we are not trying to do one- size-fits-all. we said if they stay could come forward with a different system that they think is better they can do so. that shows that this is about whether someone has a better idea of whether they are deciding it is ok not to cover americans going forward. they can have this class shifted to hospitals. our status quo on health care is not acceptable. that is why the affordable care act is the right thing to do. our goal is not to have every single thing exactly as we designed it the momen

medicaid comes in for brutal treatment as well. by converting to it a block grant, they would be throwing as many as 44 million americans off the insurance rolls, eliminating coverage for the poorest people, most nursing home residents and people with disabilities. my friends on the other side of the aisle who say we have to do this to blaps the budget, they know they're wrong. i say they're dead wrong. we do not need to put seniors and low income americans onn austerity program in order to rein in the deficit. we do not need to shred the social safety net or squeeze the middle class in order to get our fiscal house in order. in fact, we can save taxpayers $68 billion over seven years and expand the menu of health care choices by instituting a public option. if you ask the american people, they'd rather see some shared sacrifice in cutting spending. they'd rather see us eliminate tax breaks for c.e.o.'s who have no idea what it's like to choose between taking their medication or eating their next meal. madam chairwoman, i'll vote n

on medicaid, he decided to block grant medicaid to the states under the belief that you will give moreovernor's flexibility, they will be able to operate it more it efficiently and effectively, cover the same number of people at a much lowerost, and he says about $750 billion by doing that. on medicare, he did what a lot of your company's head-on -- he turned it from a defined benefit plan, to a defined contribution plan, and he did that for all people less than 54 years old. that, principally, is what his plan does, and how he gets to $4 trillion in savings. the presidt came out with a budget in february, and i think it is fair to say that budget was not taken very seriously by anyone. subsequently, he has come up with a budget framework which allen was referring to a couple of weeks ago, and that is basically compared to congressman ryan's budget, more like an outline. the best part is he did say the words four trillion. that is a substantial step forward. it is, however, over 12 years, and back-end loaded, so when you compare it to the ryan plan and the commission's plan, it is prob

in the medicaid program.t is going to dramatically affect your ability to get medicaid services. as to whether doctors in your area take medicare or medicaid, they are two different programs and i just don't know. by and large, most doctors take medicare. medicaid often is estate program, and this is a problem in california -- medicaid is operated at a lower rate and many doctors refuse to take medical or medicaid program. it is a different program from medicare. host: congressman, thank you for being here. guest: good to be with you. host: we will give you a news update, and then when we come back, we will turn your attention to this column written in "the washington post" recently. kathy deveny is the life and money editor for the fiscal times on your screen right now. >> british prime minister david cameron is supporting an alliance with pakistan amid questions about how osama bin laden lived so long there before he was killed by u.s. troops. in a news conference with president obama with london, which has

more and more doctors will not take medicaid. with every person who walks into the door with that kind of insurance, they lose money. will help shore -- it will help fuel inflation. doctors have to overcharged everybody else with private insurance who are under 65. that fuels health inflation. not only do i think this is going to fail to reduce health inflation, i think it will exacerbated. it will lower the quality of medicare for current seniors. i do not think it is necessary to do that, to create some kind of price control board. the choice and competition has worked well. there are many areas where we can improve this. tom coburn and i have had this bill. that is the way to go. we believe, do not break the promise to come and seniors. cannot stick it to the next generation or have some board of bureaucrats make these decisions. the point we are making here is that we are not at the debt crisis stage yet. we are not where europe is where the bond market has turned on us and we are raising taxes. shared sacrifice is what you d

--las bajas tarifas que paga medicaid, y la burocrcia ....teres del dentista. take vo --por otra parte. --las mujeres que suben de peso entre el primer y segundo embarazo, incrementan el riesgo de desarrollar diabtes. --de acuerdo a un estudio de "kaiser permanente" mas de 22 mil mujeres que habian subido de 12 a 17 libras entre embarazos tuvieron 2 veces mas, posibilidad de tener diabetes durante la gestacion. --si la mujer sube 18 o mas libras entonces tendria 3 veces mas probabilidades de tener esta enfermedad. cu blanca -hoy a las 11 ---y solo resta decirle que esta noche le espero a las once. ---le tengo informacion sobre un evento completamente gratuito, para mover las caderas, pasarsela bien, y a la vez - hacer ejercicio y conocer nuevos amigos. ---ademas: por que exhumaron en chile, el cuerpo del ex presidente socialista salvador allende. ---y se registran explosiones en bancos -si, bancos- en la ciudad de mexico. anchor gracias por acompanarnos , a nombre de cesar bayona, el titular de este noticiero, los dejo con el noticiero nacion

keep putting this graph up on this program. 80% of the american people do not want medicare and medicaid changed. so i think this is a victory for the people. and a victory for the democrats. congressman adam smith of washington and adam schiff from california, great to have both of you with us on the "ed show." >> remember to answer tonight's question. i want to know what you think. will we have more? we will have more on the president -- president obama's controversial decision not to release the death photo of osama bin laden. that's coming up later. >>> and also, president obama wants to honor the victims of 9/11 at this national place of honor down at ground zero. he will be here later this week. but of course, he is under attack for his decision to go to ground zero tomorrow. stay with us. what are you looking at? logistics. ben? the ups guy? no, you see ben, i see logistics. logistics? think--ben is new markets. ben is global access-- china and beyond. ben is a smarter supply chain. ben is higher margins. happier customers... everybody wins. logistics. exactly. see you guys tomorr

we have the unfunded liabilities, $50 trillion in medicare, medicaid, social security.resident's own cabinet member said a week ago, both social security and medicare were in trouble. medicare sooner. we've got to act. we've got to act now. the time to do it, the opportunity to do it is in connection with the debt ceiling. the fact they only dempt with peripheral matters in the discussions right now doesn't mean that's where it will end up. this will have to be a significant and credible deficit reduction effort. standard & poor's is going to have to look at it and say well, these guys are going to take us in a different direction to in order to get the votes to raise the debt ceiling. >> chris: you basically said what the democrats have to give in this. they have to agree, this is politically tough for them to substantial cuts in domestic spending programs, including entitlements which they have resisted over the years. what are republicans going to have to give? i think you would agree to get a big agreement to avoid going into default it's going have to be a bipartis

because this category of drugs is a substantial expense for the medicaid program. >> what's the cost between haldol and the new drug that came out? >> it's a difference between haldol and a entire category, the a typical antisigh cotics. it's a many expense. that doesn't mean haldol is the right drug for every patient but what this study demonstrate said when you look at a large population, for a substantial number of patients, the older now available as a generic drug, is in fact more effective at controlling symptoms than the newer category of drugs. so it just speaks to the issue of first of all, the treatment needs to be at a lord to the individual and that if -- tailored -- we need to enter into the prescribing process with an open mind whether in fact this new drug offers any advantage whatsoever to our patients. >> the cost of the treatment will drop by as much as 80%. >> correct. >> and you get the same effect right? >> correct. >> that's really quite dramatic. in fact, it led an editorial writer for the british study, his name is jeffrey lieberman, a researcher in the trial,

they will reimburse doctors less for medicare than the arabian burt -- reimburse them for medicaid. it seniors think they want to reimburse their providers at a lower rate than medicaid, they will accept the argument that there will be those who will take less. allowing access for health care. >> we can give you credit for working out the plan and being part of the gang of 6, but it seems clear that the leadership of your party in the democratic party in the senate is not very eager to take on the sort of big issues right now as we're gearing up towards the presidential campaign. you wrote a rather scathing editorial in the newspaper which basically says whistling past the graveyard, and it sounded like you were almost throwing up your hands. >> how do you change things in america? one of the ways to change things in america is make sure that the american people see it. when you do not have a debate, you do not inform the public, and a great thing about our founders of the senate is that they had great debates about the issues of our data are important to everybody, and now, with c-

unless you are willing to address medicare changes or social security changes or medicaid changes whichrth 78% of our money, you cannot fix the problem. >> when you're on the fiscal commission and you said this does not have everything i like and i want to do more, the problem is so bad now -- >> why are we putting the fiscal commission buildup in four amendments? we're not doing that either. why has the president not embrace the fiscal commission? we need to do something. what i felt like we were going for was not going to accomplish that. rather than do that, i am 63 years of age. when i beat my head up been urged against the wall for a certain amount of time, i think will go do something else for a while. these guys negotiated in good faith. i don't care what the politics are any more. i have been vocal supporter and revenue increases after left the commission as i was before. i'm not opposed to that because i think that the only way we solve our problems and build a consensus in the senate to get some changes. i will not go for revenue increases if we're not going to fix the problem

they ranked the concern with criminal manipulation of the medicaid program.ore than $820 million on prescription drug medicines. most are used as prescribed and are valuable. some criminals defraud the medicaid system and fleece taxpayers by acquiring multiple prescriptions and filling the multiple pharmacies. the case of criminals defrauding taxpayers in the medicaid system to sell and avert prescription drugs becomes a punch in the stomach to the system. last month, i introduced the "stop trafficking of pills" act that would establish a medicaid block in program for ohio and nationwide to crack down on this. the bill will prevent prescription drug abusers from requiring access prescription drugs that they may abuse or illegally resolell. bars them from visiting multiple doctors and pharmacies. other states have something similar. the south carolina public park. -- project spurred a 40% decrease in the number of prescribed pain medications. consider scioto county in southern ohio, prescription drugs caused nine out of every 10 fatal drug of roses. nearly 2/3

transplant patients and two of them have died since they were thrown off medicaid rolls you know they talked about death panels these folks about the national health care program they're the death panel this legislature and and governor brewer and in finally all of our very very vitriolic unconstitutional basically bordering on racist anti immigration legislation along with federal now with the cation statutes that basically would say that the fake could follow whatever federal laws it wants basically kind of seceding from the country and ignore other other laws yeah yeah and as a result you know we kind of felt we wanted to say in a country we felt we down in southern arizona we have a long history the spanish colonialism and mexican the heritage our hispanic heritage here we we celebrate we don't denigrate down in southern arizona and so for our own economic future in our kids' future we felt we had to do something to push back against all this are there other arizona isn't the only state that's basically been taken over by right wing crazies are there other similar movements spring

medicaid was supposed to be for the elderly and our welfare people on it and children. these definitely have to be taken care of right away. it cannot be delayed. thanks for listening. host: tina sent this tweet. another story from capitol hill newspapers. there is another story suggesting delays. next is a call from ohio. caller: good morning. this is exactly 30 days. i don't normally get in at 30 days, but here i am. i have a comment on seniors on social security and medicare. if you vote republican, they are going to take a where medicaid -- they are going to take away medicare and social security. i have a son at 35 and i would like to see him get something i am getting now. i would like to have seniors give up your medicare and your social security, because otherwise you are hypocrites. host: let's listen to what happened in the briefing yesterday of bloomberg reporters. we will share a few more of the common ground bullet points that seemed to be beginning to emerge. next, a telephone call from georgia. statesboro is on the air, good morning, shelby. caller: i don

with respect to medicaid, there are also proposals there, and the thought is that medicaid is just a program for sort of poor americans, but, frankly, if you look at the statistics, there are 26,000 seniors in my state that are on medicaid because -- principally because of nursing home care. and we have to ask ourselves if these plans to provide block grants to states are enacted under the republican proposal, whether those seniors still can maintain themselves in these nursing facilities, whether the costs will be so great on the states that they'll be unable to keep up the level of effort, the level of support they are today. what seems to be inherent in all these proposals is not saving but shifting costs, not reforming the system to be more efficient and more effective but simply shifting the cost on to seniors, shifting the cost on to particularly middle-income americans. and so, mr. president, i would urge, as we review these proposals, that we would not accept as we've been asked to the kind of proposals that we've seen in republican budgets with respect to medicare and medica

, payingrivate health plans instead of reimbursing doctors and hospitals directly and converting medicaido block grants, giving states less money but more flexibility in caring for the poor and disabled. though republicans are aware senate democrats are certain to block the ryan plan from moving forward, speaker boehner stood his ground. >> when it comes to increasing debt limit and the need to have reductions in spending, nothing is off the table except raising taxes. >> brown: but ryan himself sounded less hopeful that his more ambitious goals will be met, saying today that republicans are, quote, "not under any illusion that we are going to get any grand slam agreement." this morning's meeting came as congress prepares to consider raising the 14.3 trillion debt ceiling-- the amount the federal government can legally borrow. amid concerns of a default on u.s. debt, treasury secretary timothy geithner has given lawmakers more time to negotiate. in a letter to congress monday, he extended the default deadline from may 16 to august 2. exiting today's budget session, biden told reporters pr

this issue did arise in an audit, other federal encies that already use taxpayer dollars such as medicaid and the federal employee health benefit program -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. brady: i yield the gentlelady 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. black: have no problem distinguishing between abortion for rape or incest or those that are elective. they ask the provider, basically a doctor's te. that doesn't mean this is not a difficult situation for that small group of women and i understand it is incredibly difficult and my heart gos out to them but if we claim a tax benefit for a medical procedure like an abortion and you get audited you can either choose to forgo the tax benefit or ask the provider to verify that tax benefit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's my pleasure to yield the balance of our time to mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. crowley: i thank the speaker fer yielding me the time and the gentleman from m

is that the middle class is dying and they are very sure about secure jobs they care about their medicaid is so security when they retire that they don't know if they don't we're going to have this large you know we know you have a small number of policy wonks here in washington who knows the books well but doesn't know the i think the way that this impacts sort of the man on the street is that this is a distraction that this is the only thing congress is dealing with when there are other things that we should be addressing and immigration reform is an important one what are we going to do about housing we need to address fannie mae and freddie mac. we need to address housing finance system there are major coup or sort of policy structural things that need to be done. with have to be dealt with on a federal level and congress that are being paid attention to because all the bickering is about what kind of political posturing can i in value can i get to where i'm going to stay out of the debt ceiling or not or what i'm going to say about the budget but i'm not going to have a real conversa

fourth amendment governor mitch daniels is taking poor women out at the knees by borrowing state medicaid funds and going to planned parenthood meanwhile all across the nation is the working class suffers gangsters are enjoying their bailouts and bonuses with a historically low tax rate oil barons are swimming in their billion dollar tax subsidies and health insurance companies are just as profitable as ever screwing over six people people but that's how right wingers balanced budgets nowadays target the most vulnerable people who are also least likely to make campaign contributions so how do we put an end to this and force lawmakers to stand up for the working. and there are good you are here to offer their takes on this issue was a blow to your campaign manager of the half in ten campaign the center for american progress and dr lawrence michel congressman president of the economic policy institute welcome to you both thanks for having her ok i get it ok. well this is since when did going after the most vulnerable in american society become the american way the sad thing is it's not just