Richmond, VA - Today, Tim Kaine released a new radio ad contrasting his commitment to strengthen Social Security and Medicare that are key to a secure retirement with George Allen’s record of voting to partially privatize Social Security, and his proposals that would raise the eligibility age and increase health care costs for seniors. The ad, "It's Simple," follows a strong debate performance from Tim Kaine where he made the choice for current and future retirees very clear for Virginia voters.
The sixty-second spot features two seniors discussing the differences between the two candidates on programs important to their health and economic stability. When asked about Allen’s voting record, a senior in the ad says “In the Senate, Allen voted to partially privatize Social Security and he voted to cut Medicare…And Allen now favors a plan that would increase costs for seniors, and the middle class, by thousands of dollars a year.”
“Social Security and Medicare are programs that must be protected and strengthened for future generations because they ensure a secure and stable retirement for our seniors,” said Kaine. “I will reject risky privatization schemes that would put hard earned Social Security savings into a volatile stock market, jeopardize money Virginians have paid into the system for years, and threaten the integrity of the program. I will also oppose attempts, like the Ryan budget, to shift health care costs onto seniors by turning Medicare into a voucher program. We can reduce costs by pursuing strategies like allowing Medicare to negotiate cheaper drug prices, but it’s wrong to cut them to the core and shift costs to our seniors just to make our balance sheet look better.”
Throughout this campaign, Kaine has met with groups of seniors across the state at nearly ten town hall and roundtable events. “It’s Simple” is the fifth radio ad released by Tim Kaine following “Economic Issues,” “Clock,” “Family Issues” that features his wife, Anne Holton, and the Spanish-language ad “Valores.”
Radio :60 - It's Simple
| Claim | Fact |
|
Female: “With all the political commercials and debates, how do we figure out what’s fact and what’s fiction when it comes down to what’s best for us?” Male: “Well, for me, it’s about who will protect Social Security and Medicare. It’s just that simple.” |
|
|
Female: “Okay. Between Tim Kaine and George Allen, what’s the difference?” Male: “Well, Allen has a terrible record on this, and I really trust Kaine to protect Social Security and Medicare for all our families.” |
|
|
Female: “What’s so bad about Allen’s record?” Male: “Well, in the Senate Allen voted to partially privatize Social Security, and he voted to cut Medicare.” |
ALLEN VOTED TO PARTIALLY PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY Allen Voted For An Amendment Designed To Divert Social Security Funds Into Private Accounts. In 2006, Allen voted for an amendment sponsored by Senator DeMint (S.Amdt. 3087) that would have diverted Social Security’s annual surpluses into a reserve fund, which would have been used to set up private accounts. [Vote 68; 3/16/06]
AS SENATOR, ALLEN VOTED FOR “DEEP CUTS” TO MEDICARE SPENDING George Allen Voted To Cut Billions In Medicare Spending. George Allen voted for the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which cut billions in Medicare spending, along with cuts to Medicaid and student loans. The bill passed 50-50 with Vice President Cheney casting the tie-breaking vote. [Senate Vote 363, 12/21/05; CQ Floor Votes; 2005 Congressional Quarterly Almanac]
|
|
Female: “Really?” Male: “Yeah, really. And Allen now favors a plan that would increase costs for seniors, and the middle class, by thousands of dollars a year.” Female: “Well why in the world would we send him back to the Senate?” Male: “Exactly. |
IF ELECTED, ALLEN HAS PROMISED TO REPEAL THE HEALTH CARE LAW, WHICH CLOSED THE “DOUGHNUT HOLE” Allen Regularly Says He Wants To Be The Deciding Vote To Repeal The Affordable Care Act. In an interview in July 2012, Allen said, “I want your listeners to know I hope to be the deciding vote to repeal Obamacare.” [Allen Interview, 105.5 FM, “The Sheep,” 7/13/12] Repealing Health Care Will Bring Back The “Infamous Doughnut Hole In Medicare’s Prescription Drug Benefit.” In an op-ed in the Roanoke Times, Dan Radmacher wrote, “Keep in mind what reforms Republicans will be voting to repeal. . . . tax breaks to small businesses who provide health care for their workers, a ban on refusing to cover pre-existing conditions for children, closing of the infamous doughnut hole in Medicare's prescription drug benefit and coverage for adult children up to age 26 on their parents' policies” [Op-Ed, Dan Radmacher, Roanoke Times, 1/9/11] By Closing The “Donut Hole,” The Affordable Care Act “Will Lower Costs For Beneficiaries Who Otherwise Would Have Been Required To Spend Thousands Of Dollars” On Prescription Drugs. According to Healthcare.gov, “The Affordable Care Act makes many changes to strengthen Medicare and provide stronger benefits to seniors, while slowing cost growth. . . . [C]losing the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap, often called the ‘donut hole,’ will lower costs for beneficiaries who otherwise would have been required to spend thousands of dollars out of their own pocket for their prescription drugs.” [Healthcare.gov, Accessed 9/26/12] AS SENATOR, ALLEN VOTED AGAINST ELIMINATING THE “DOUGHNUT HOLE” 2003: Allen Voted Against $60 Billion To Eliminate The “Doughnut Hole” Gap In Coverage. Allen voted against an “amendment that would extend prescription drug cost sharing between Medicare and beneficiaries up to $5,800, when full catastrophic coverage would take over.” The AP reported that “Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., led the fight to eliminate a feature of the bill that would deny coverage for drug costs between $4,500 and $5,800 annually. ‘We should not have a plan that stops and starts,’ she said, advocating an extra $60 billion to close the gap.” [Vote 236, 6/24/03; CQ Floor Votes; AP, 6/24/03] ALLEN VOTED AGAINST HELPING THOSE IN THE “DOUGHNUT HOLE” 2003: Allen Voted Against Reducing Prescription Drug Premium For Seniors In The “Doughnut Hole.” Allen voted against the “Graham, D-Fla., amendment that would stipulate that eligible beneficiaries would pay reduced premiums if they are beyond the cost limit for sharing drug expense with Medicare but are not yet eligible for catastrophic coverage.” [Vote 244, 6/25/03; CQ Floor Votes] ALLEN VOTED AGAINST PROVIDING DRUG COVERAGE TO BENEFICIARIES WITH CANCER WHO FALL INTO THE “DOUGHNUT HOLE” 2003: Allen Voted Against Preventing Beneficiaries With Cancer From Losing Drug Coverage Due To The “Doughnut Hole.” Allen voted against an “amendment that would prevent any loss of drug coverage for beneficiaries with cancer before catastrophic care begins.” [Vote 250, 6/26/03; CQ Floor Votes] ALLEN HAS COMMENDED THE RYAN BUDGET AS A “CONSTRUCTIVE PLAN” AND A “WORTHWHILE” APPROACH “Allen Praised Ryan’s Budget… Calling It A ‘Constructive Plan’ In 2011 And A ‘Worthwhile’ Approach This Year.” The Washington Post wrote, “Allen praised Ryan’s budget enough — calling it a ‘constructive plan’ in 2011 and a ‘worthwhile’ approach this year — that the Kaine campaign has already sought to link Allen to the proposals.” [Washington Post, 6/24/12] THE RYAN BUDGET “WOULD ESSENTIALLY END MEDICARE” Wall Street Journal: “The [Ryan] Plan Would Essentially End Medicare.” The Wall Street Journal reported, “Republicans will present this week a 2012 budget proposal that would cut more than $4 trillion from federal spending projected over the next decade and transform the Medicare health program for the elderly. . . . The budget has been prepared by Rep. Paul Ryan. . . . The plan would essentially end Medicare, which now pays most of the health-care bills for 48 million elderly and disabled Americans, as a program that directly pays those bills.” [Wall Street Journal, 4/4/11] The Ryan Plan Would Force Over 1.2 Million Virginia Seniors Onto Vouchers When They Retire. According to the DPCC, “Starting in 2023, all Virginia seniors will receive a voucher to purchase either private insurance or traditional Medicare. There are more than 1,214,000 near-elderly Virginians who are now ages 47-56 who, instead of getting Medicare as we know it when they retire, would only get a voucher to purchase their insurance. Private insurance plans will aggressively pursue the healthiest, least expensive enrollees, thereby allowing Medicare – currently the lifeline for 1,155,428 Virginia seniors – to ‘wither on the vine.’” [CBPP 3/20/12, Census, accessed on 3/20/12; CBPP 12/21/11; KFF, accessed on 3/21/12; NCPSSM, 3/20/12; DPCC] According To The CBO, The Ryan Plan Could Increase Out Of Pocket Health Care Costs For Virginia Seniors By As Much As $5,900 Per Person. According to the DPCC, “The Republican budget would cap these vouchers for individuals at growth levels that are lower than the existing increases in health care costs. In other words, seniors could be forced to pay higher premiums in order to access the same benefits they would receive under the current system. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the plan could increase out of pocket costs by $5,900 and lead to diminished access to quality care.” [CBPP, 12/21/11; CAP, 3/20/12; DPCC] ALLEN FULLY SUPPORTS PAUL RYAN’S DRAMATIC CUTS TO MEDICAID Allen Has Fully Embraced Paul Ryan’s Proposal To Convert Medicaid Into A Voucher Program Run By The States. In May 2011, the Washington Examiner reported that “Virginia Democrats have been pressuring Allen to take a firm stand on the budget proposal created by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan. . . . He’s embracing only select parts of the Ryan plan, including tax cuts, dramatic reductions in federal spending and Ryan’s proposal to convert Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income residents, to a voucher program run by the states.” [Washington Examiner, 5/25/11] RYAN’S BUDGET WOULD END MEDICAID AS AN ENTITLEMENT FOR ELDERLY AMERICANS IN NURSING HOMES Under The Ryan And Allen Approach, Medicaid Would No Longer Be An Entitlement For Elderly Americans In Nursing Homes. Politico reported, “Block grants would give states vast freedom on how to spend the Medicaid money, without the current federal rules about who gets covered and what coverage they get. Medicaid would no longer be an entitlement for poor children, pregnant women, low-income disabled and elderly Americans in nursing homes.” [Politico, 8/16/12] Ryan Plan Cuts Medicaid – Which Covers Long-Term Care For Seniors – By A Third. The Seattle Times reported, “The biggest single source of savings in Ryan's budget would come from cutting Medicaid. . . . Much of the spending on the program goes to long-term care for seniors, largely in nursing homes, which Medicare does not cover. Under the Ryan plan, funding would be cut by one-third, according to the CBO.” [Seattle Times, 8/15/12] The Ryan Allen Approach Would “Bulldoze” Medicaid; Most Medicaid “Funding Goes To The Old And Disabled” And “A Large Chunk Is Devoted To Long-Term Care, Such As Nursing Homes.” The Atlantic reported, “In the most recent budget proposal, Ryan pledged to cut Medicaid spending by $810 billion dollars over ten years. But forget the precise dollar figures for a moment. Romney's new running-mate doesn't just want to trim the program. He wants to bulldoze the whole thing, then build a more modest replacement in its place. . . . Currently, it covers more than 62 million people, the majority of whom are either children or parents, although most of its funding goes to the old and disabled. In 2010, the price tag was roughly $263 billion for the feds and $125 billion for the states. Much of that spending pays for basic services such as drugs and doctor's visits, but a large chunk is devoted to long-term care, such as nursing homes for the elderly poor.” [The Atlantic, 8/14/12] |
|
Tim Kaine: “I’m Tim Kaine, candidate for U.S. Senate, and I approve this message because protecting Social Security and Medicare is the right thing to do and the fiscally responsible thing to do.” Tim Kaine: “Paid for by Kaine for Virginia.” |