panels and independent panel advisory board. it s a big one. the advisory board will not receive what health care you receive. that true or false? that s true. you hear a lot about this leveled ration care. it says in the text of the law the payment board cannot ration care, can t cut benefits for medicare or change eligibility for medicare. it s really restricted. its goal is to reduce the spending growth in medicare, supposed to save money but can t do it by rationing care no death panels. no death panels. the health care law will add to the deficit in the long run, that has been an argument being made? that s because it is an expensive law, it cost a lot of money but also has a lot of savings provisions. the congress at budget office finds this law will save $210 billion over the next ten years. it actually saves money and reduces the deficit over the
beneficiaries have. it comes from provides and other things like that. it s not that your medicare is get being slashed by the law. many senior citizens watching that one. president obama has made this point several times, millions of americans will receive rebate checks from their insurance company this summer. that would be really nice, we would like to see checks in the mail and also unfortunately a fiction. there are 13 million americans who are going to get some sort ofรง rebate from she s insuranc companies but for a lot of us, that s not us, but our employers. they might pass it on to you or might invest it some other way. you may not get the check but have it applied for future premiums. so don t stand by your mailbox and wait for that check quite yet. i won t do that then. we ve heard this too, there s a lot of threats coming from conservatives about the death
what s the verdict? complete fiction. the only people paying a tax under this law are the people who don t have health insurance, even then not all of them, some who are the poorest who don t qualify or have low income, they won t be paying the tax either. if you have health insurance, you re good. in addition to this, we ve hea heard, we ve been making this point several times that the health care law will take $500 billion out of the medicare budget. we hear that a lot from republican, both mitt romney and republicans in congress. that s also a fiction. the $500 billion figure is a decrease in future medicaid spending growth. it s going to rise by less than it was without this law. the $500 billion is really in future spending that we haven t seen yet and it dont come from benefits that medicare
other indication that s people really were concerned about the court s legitimacy, its ability to call balls and strikes. kenji, was he able to restore or maintain the neutrality of the court? did he accomplish that? i think he did. i don t think it was just him. one of the hidden issues here is that justice briar and kagan broke ranks with the liberals. they drifted to the right. he drifted to the left. i think it s very good to have a supreme court where you can t point to a particular justice and say i know exactly how the justice is going to rule. justice kennedy is no longer always a swing vote in these cases and justice roberts is reclaiming the court for himself. put this in context for us, lisa, let s think back to lbj in 1965 and medicare and what pete williams said, this could be one
that are dealing with budget shortfalls. if the argument is about math, if you are chris christie and go across jersey and say, here s the deal. we have public employees that are paying zero percent or 2% in their retirement, we can t afford that. we have to make them pay 5%, 6%, 7%, like you, people understand that. scott walker s mistake was he didn t just talk about math. he brought in collective bargaining. which of course had worked in other states too. but in wisconsin, that was ideological. it wasn t about math. it was about an ideological battle. that s where he lost it. if you as a politician say, hey, i m just looking at the numbers here. the numbers don t lie. nobody can accuse you of being overtly ideological. he reached a bit too far. it happened with paul ryan last year in the medicare budget. you can say medicare can only grow at 2%. and fight that battle on math. but if you completely change the nature of medicare at the same