Mike Huckabee, who may declare his intention to run for president soon, has some very ill-advised opinions about Medicare and Social Security. In an interview with a small group of reporters, he said the following:
To the logic behind these claims, I say no — but “not just no, it’s you-know-what no.” Several points are in order.
First, Americans now draw substantially more from benefits in Medicare than they ever pay in. In The American Health Economy, Illustrated, Duke University’s Chris Conover estimates that, by 2030, an average two-earner couple — one with low wages and another with high wages — will draw about $400,000 in net lifetime benefits from Medicare. That is, they will take about $400,000 more than they ever put in.
Entitlement reform has nothing to do with refusing people the money they put into the system — because people are getting their full share, and much, much more.
Second, Medicare is only designed in part as a social insurance program. That is Part A, the hospital program. The doctor program — Part B — is funded via premiums, which have been systematically lowered throughout the years. Originally, the cost of premiums was split 50/50 between taxpayer and beneficiary, but they gradually shifted to 75:25, with the extra burden falling on the taxpayers. Reform efforts to shift it back have failed in the face of relentless opposition of senior groups. Again: this is not an issue of people having paid into a program, and merely collecting their fair share. This is wealth redistribution, pure and simple.
Third, it is redistribution to one of the wealthiest age cohorts. As I note in my new book, A Republic No More: Big Government and the Rise of American Political Corruption:
Medicare can thus be counted like a number of programs — from farm subsidies to pork barrel to corporate tax payouts — as a way to subsidize the relatively wealthy at the expense of the relatively poor.
Fourth, the public financing regime of Social Security and Medicare was always suspect from a policy standpoint. It was pure politics. As Franklin Roosevelt himself said of Social Security:
By talking about these programs in terms of “ownership,” Huckabee is simply repeating FDR’s false, wholly politicized premise.
Fifth, something has to be done about this program. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid services projected last year that Medicare would go from consuming about 3.5 percent of gross domestic now to 6 percent in 2050. And they sketch out an “alternative fiscal scenario” whereby it stretches toward 7 percent, with no decline in sight. (See Page 250.) Without reforms, Medicare is going to crowd out the remainder of the federal budget — requiring either massive tax increases or massive cuts in other programs.
Finally, if a Republican wants to champion the working and middle classes, then Medicare reform is actually the best policy. Put aside the politics of it, including Democratic demagoguery. The fact of the matter is that a runaway Medicare program — unconstrained by reforms or means testing — will squeeze the rest of the budget to such an extreme degree that it will require extreme measures. Such measures will inevitably burden the lower half of society — through a reduction in other social welfare programs, higher taxes, or limited economic growth.
I understand why Democrats refuse any and all reforms of Medicare. The party has become the knee-jerk party of government, reflexively refusing any cuts to any program. But what is Mike Huckabee doing here?
I can only think of one thing: he’s carving out a role for himself with the elderly portion of the Republican electorate, which is drawing these benefits. He’s looking to run the old “Mediscare” playbook against his fellow Republicans. Fiscal sensibility be damned. Whether or how that could work is unclear. After all, Democrats have been running Mediscare nonstop since 1996, and the senior cohort has become increasingly Republican. Does Huckabee really think that demagoging Paul Ryan, the 2012 GOP vice presidential nominee, on Medicare is going to work among Republican primary voters?
Jay Cost is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD. His new book, A Republic No More: Big Government and the Rise of American Political Corruption, is now available.
