Bill Cassidy

I see that you are pivoting here.

I actually see that what we are really doing is effectively denying access.

It may be access on paper but it is not access in power.

We put them back into Medicare as opposed to spending them on another entitlement, and I think that is the difference between the two of us.

I have to say, with Obamacare, it is like deja vu all over again. Medicare is going bankrupt.

That is frightening. There just seems there should be some sort of proactiveness involved.

So just for a specific example, if you can use your Medicare dollar to get a personal attendant for a patient who is pre-nursing home, if you will, then that can save money on the Medicaid side, which would be a much greater expense, by…

And again, that is why it just seems like managed care would be custom made, that this is where it would integrate and bring things together.

So that is a third category, if you will, combined?

Unfortunately, under the current situation, Medicare provides incentives to treat patients in one way and it provides Medicare incentives to treat patients in another way.

We have also put forward a plan to save Medicare from bankruptcy, to preserve Medicare as it has been known for those who are on it, and to preserve it for those who will be on it.

Now, Republican have proposed freeing States from the rigid Medicaid rules, which make it difficult to coordinate benefits between Medicaid and Medicare.

Medicaid is bankrupting States, and this was before the Obamacare mandates that usurp States' rights.

Medicare and Medicaid are important programs that are unfortunately unsustainable in their current form.

Medicare, per the actuaries who run the program, is going bankrupt in 10 years hastened by $500 billion extracted from it by Obamacare.

As the risk of losing my Christmas presents, I will say, though, that it almost seems that if you have one with credit card numbers and Socials and medical, you know, military identification numbers, that clearly should be in its own silo.

Now, are we going to restrict the ability of someone to know what census track I live in?

In your opinion, do the actions of the chairman indicate that he has been fair and objective regarding the Yucca Mountain issue?

Does this person have a motivation to not recall or is there, on the other side, such motivation?

Was he within the spirit of the law in terms of communication with his fellow commissioners?

Now, again, is that within the spirit of the law as originally--I mean, I can imagine somebody writing the law way back when.

It was just the way this chairman has elected to do business.

So the constraint would have come from the chairman.

Massachusetts appears to be the prequel or beta version of Obamacare.

It has always been my observation that politicians overpromise and underfund.