"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
WSJ Editorial: Obama Admin Spent $3.5 Mil. In Taxpayer Money On Pro-Obamacare Ads Starring Andy Griffith‏ | Missouri Political News Service

WSJ Editorial: Obama Admin Spent $3.5 Mil. In Taxpayer Money On Pro-Obamacare Ads Starring Andy Griffith‏

March 25th, 2011 by mopns · No Comments

The Wall Street Journal editors write today, “We don’t work for the government, but here’s our ‘save’ suggestion: How about not spending some $3.5 million to deceptively promote ObamaCare? It turns out it cost the Health and Human Services Department $2.78 million to buy airtime for three cable TV ads last year, featuring Andy Griffith praising the new entitlement. The ‘Matlock’ eminence rendered his services pro bono, but Porter Novelli didn’t. The media consulting firm racked up 668 billable hours and earned $404,384.40 producing the spots, according to documents released by the outside GOP advocacy group Crossroads GPS through the Freedom of Information Act.”

In other words, the Obama administration spent $3.5 million of taxpayer money trying to sell Americans on a health care bill they still dislike by a margin of 59% to 37%, according to a CNN poll this week.

Aside from the problem of the expense of these ads, the WSJ editors also note the claims made in them don’t measure up. “At least Porter Novelli didn’t charge taxpayers for fact-checking. Among Mr. Griffith’s many deceptive claims, he tells his fellow seniors that their Medicare benefits won’t change (they will, most immediately in Medicare Advantage) and that ObamaCare strengthens the program’s finances (it doesn’t, according to the chief Medicare actuary). Lovable ol’ Andy of Mayberry then says ‘that new health-care law sure sounds good’ to him, in a transparent bid to win over senior voters in advance of the 2010 election.”

 Recall that contrary to the claims in the taxpayer-funded ads, the Democrats’ health care bill cuts over $500 billion from Medicare to pay for new entitlement programs. The ads claim Medicare benefits won’t change, but the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) wrote last year, “The new provisions will generally reduce [Medicare Advantage] rebates to plans and thereby result in less generous benefit packages.” On top of that, some providers have announced they are going to be dropping Medicare Advantage plans altogether, such as Harvard Pilgrim in Massachusetts.

 The Journal editors conclude with another idea for saving some money: “How about we go one better and save several trillion dollars by repealing a health-care bill that Americans still hate despite Sheriff Andy’s endorsement?”


Rasmussen Reports: Voters Trust Republicans More Than Democrats on Nine out of 10 Important Issues



Tags: Healthcare

0 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Registry Cleaner // Mar 27, 2011 at 11:44 am

    Thank you very much for that marvelous article

Leave a Comment