Eachus Largest Deficit Since The Great Depression Under His Watch

Why would Todd Eachus admit to creating the largest deficit since the Great Depression??

Eachus said he’s busy working to try to balance the state budget, which he said is “facing the largest deficit since the Great Depression” – $3.2 billion.

Todd Eachus takes credit for the Democrats reclaiming the House for the first time in twelve years back in 2006.

What is more amazing than all of his rhetoric is this statement found on his website.

Todd hit the ground running, fighting and winning to deliver meaningful legislation efforts that include:

•Guaranteeing affordable medicine to more than 120,000 seniors by expanding Pennsylvania’s prescription drug program.

Todd I challenge you to produce facts from the Department of Aging to verify 120,000 seniors were added to the program since 2006 when there were 317,000 total at the time. Remember, you "guaranteed" 120,000 seniors would be added to the program.

Readers, call the Department of Aging for yourselves to find the answers.

Todd Eachus- You Must Be Stopped With These Outrageous Claims

Todd,

Here goes. Your latest press release on your website states "Eachus plan to expand senior prescription drug coverage introduced in House" .

Quote: "Eachus, who has been a major voice for seniors in the state House for more than 12 years, said his legislation (H.B. 1676) would enhance the quality of life for an additional 30,000 seniors in Pennsylvania who are struggling to make ends meet in today's difficult economy.

Let's review two significant events that I believe totally contradict your assertions.

1) Case in point- let's roll back the tape to your 1998 campaign advertisement-

Voice Over

"One elected official kept his promise- State Todd Eachus"

"He promised to restore PACE benefits to thousands of our senior citizens for lifessaving prescription drugs."

"Todd Eachus delivered. The House overwhelmingly adopted Todd Eachus's amendment to raise PACE income limits for seniors."

Marty Berger: "To get a Bill through the House is a rare accomplishment for a fresheman legislator. We thank Todd Eachus for his hard work."

Todd Eachus: "I fought hard for this legislation. With the huge budget surplus seniors should not lose their PACE benefits."

"Reelect State Representative Todd Eachus leading the fight for senior citizens."

Uhhh.. let's talk about Todd Eachus's work.

Here is a chart depicting the dismall results of Todd Eachus's legislation.


Ohh...but there is more...In 2006 Todd Eachus took ownership for passing legislation that was supposed to add 120,000 seniors to PACE bringing the figure 430,000.

Look at this press release as reported on the PRN Newswire.

"This plan allows Pennsylvanians to get the best features of both PACE/PACENET and Medicare's prescription drug plans," Governor Rendell said. "PACE opened for business on July 1, 1984, and passage of this historic legislation is a very fitting way to celebrate the 22nd anniversary of this life-sustaining program. I thank the Legislature for its support of this program, which is so vital for so many seniors."

PACE Plus Medicare combines the state's popular PACE/PACENET program with the new federal Medicare Part D prescription drug program to ensure that as many as 420,000 Pennsylvania seniors don't pay a dime more for their drugs than PACE/PACENET required them to pay. Under the bill, PACE/PACENET will "wrap around" the federal program and fill gaps in the coverage.

"By having the federal government share in the cost of providing prescription coverage to seniors, we will be able to save significant Lottery funds - nearly $170 million in the new fiscal year alone - to invest in other essential services for older Pennsylvanians," Governor Rendell added. "We expect that the savings will allow an additional 120,000 seniors to enjoy PACE Plus coverage."

In this press release from the governor's office dated February 3, 2006 it states "Expanding prescription drug coverage for Pennsylvania seniors was one of my first priorities when I became Governor, and we did that. Today, more than 303,000 Pennsylvania seniors have coverage for essential medications through PACE, an increase of nearly 50 percent over three short years. While people talked about a national prescription drug program in Washington, we acted in Pennsylvania, creating the largest state prescription drug plan for seniors in the nation.

“Because Pennsylvania will be sharing the cost of prescription drug coverage under the new federal plan, we will be able to cover an additional 120,000 seniors, bringing total enrollment under PACE Plus Medicare to nearly 430,000 seniors. We think we’ll be able to attract people who meet current income guidelines, but use few prescription drugs and never bothered to enroll. And we will be able to do that at about half the cost of what we had previously been spending, giving us the ability to plow an estimated $180 million in savings back into other services for Pennsylvania’s seniors.”

One press release states they will save $170 million, the other $180 million. By July, 2006 the number of seniors on PACE and PACENET climbed to 317,000 according to a Department of Aging press release but before the legislation was law.

Call the Bureau of Pharmaceutical Assistance at 717-787-7313. The current figure is around 314,000 enrollees. That means there were no net gains for the last two years despite the Commonwealth saving $340-360 million dollars.

You can listen to Todd Eachus talk about the Medicare Plus Pace legislation here from 7/7/2006. Questions remain about the money saved by the legislation and where it was spent.

How Eachus Dropped The Ball On Seniors

In an reader comment that appeared in the Standard Speaker's editorial section Conyngham Mayor Conrad Wittig comes to the defense of Todd Eachus. Eachus really has his writing machine working overtime these days.

What I found particularly interesting was this comment by the illustrious Mayor. Rep. Eachus has fought tirelessly for senior citizens, expanding the state's prescription drug program for seniors not once, but twice. If I was Rush Limbaugh I would be laughing hysterically on that statement.

Let's get to the facts. We will start with this chart from the Department of Aging.



Todd Eachus was elected to the House in 1996 according to his bio. From 1996 to 2002 look how the number of seniors on PACE/PACENET nosedives to 218,922. Robert Casey's terms as Governor and the Democrats witnessed the amount of older Pennsylvanians who received PACE or PACENET take a dramatic decline. It should be noted that there was a dramatic increase in recipients during Dick Thornburgh's tenure as Governor of Pennsylvania from 1984 through 1987. During Tom Ridge's term as governor there wasn't a dramatic loss of seniors on the program. Ridge actually increased the income limits during his term in July, 2001. One must keep in mind that it was a Repubican House that restored those seniors to the program. So much for the Democrats taking the credit for helping seniors in Pennsylvania.

Look at Chart No 2. Rendell did sign legislation to dramatically increase the number of seniors akcnowledging Eachus's role just to be fair. However, if you read the press release you will notice that the co-pay for brand drugs took a 50% jump from $6.00 to $9.00. You know what else took a 50% jump? Eachus's pension.



The increase of the number of seniors on PACE or PACENET increased to 291,241 by 2004 but a far cry from 477,772. Isn't it amazing how they can make you feel good about something that is really bad. Over 186,000 people lost PACE or PACENET through 2002 and they want you to rejoice over the fact that they added 69,679. They called it an expansion. I call it restoring, restoring those who were lost on the Democrat's watch.

Let's look at Chart No. 3.



Notice the income limits on the right hand column. Let's fast forward to 2009 and look at the PACE website. Here are the income limits. Eligibility is also determined by your previous calendar year’s income. For a single person, your total income must be $14,500 or less. For a married couple, your combined total income must be $17,700 or less. As you can see they are the exact same amount as in 2002. There is no Cost Of Living Adjustment(COLA)on income like the legislators have for their salary. That means as Social Security payments increase people automatically lose their benefit and there is nothing they can do about it.

If you look closely at the chart you will notice that income level eligibility only increased by $500.00 or 3.6 percent. The legislative salary in 2002 was 61889.00. Over at PAWatercooler.com there is a great post about the salary grab of 2008. Base salary in 2008 increased on December 1st to $78,315.00. There was a zero increase in eligibility for PACE/PACENET recipients. It boggles the mind how Eachus can claim he is the champion of seniors. Todd, it's called wagging the dog.

Mayor Wittig, or better to the person who authored the letter, show me the "expansion". Today the number of people on PACE/PACENET according to the Department of Aging is 304,725, not 330,000 that the second chart projected would make the program. The program severly retracted and never helped the number of seniors who were helped during Dick Thornburgh's reign as governor.

FACT, FACT, and FACT not the fiction Todd Eachus wants people to eat at his table of the not so plenty. His spin on events borders on incorrigible.

Finally look at the Governor's Report on State Performance 2007-2008. I point you to page 98. The average price of a PACE prescription went down from $44.42 in 2005-06 to $26.09 in 2007-08. The average price of a PACENET prescription went down from $38.20 in 2005-06 to $27.24 in 2007-08. Folks that is a 29-42% decrease in the cost to the state. What are they doing with the excess money? Raiding the Lottery Fund for the General Fund??? If you go back to Chart No.2 you will see that the amount of seniors on the program from 2004 to 2008 did not change dramatically.

TODD EACHUS's claims are bogus and it is time to call him out on it.

Kanjorski's Lies About Privatization Of Social Security

In this briefing paper from the Economic Policy Institute the author talks about George Bush's proposal to redirect A SMALL PORTION of a worker's payroll tax for Social Security into private accounts. " Under the Bush proposal, workers would be able to divert part of their Social Security payroll tax, reportedly two percentage points, into private accounts." This proposal created a Voluntary Retirement Account. Under this arrangement the worker would have a choice of five diversified, low-cost mutual funds to contribute to.

After retirement, these workers would receive smaller Social Security benefits because it is expected that some of their retirement income would come from these funds. If you want to read a truthful Q & A on the subject click here.

That proposal meant that individual workers would VOLUNTARILY be allowed to divert their payroll taxes to individually owned accounts, similar to their IRAs or 401(k) programs. There would be a "lockbox" that would really work, a Trust Fund that could never be raided.

Paul Kanjorski would have the world believe that George Bush wanted to eliminate the Social Security Administration and privatize its operations. Folks, that isn't stretching the facts, that is lying to the American people. The constituents of Pennsylvania's 11th district deserve better.

What George Bush and Congress did do that Kanjorski won't own up to is force you and me to work extra years to pay for raiding the Social Security Trust Fund to the tune of $4 trillion dollars. That single act reduced the number of retirement years we will collect Social Security and spend in retirement. A higher normal retirement age means that 35-year-old workers in 2002 would have to work an additional six or seven years before they could receive full retirement benefits or retire early with substantially reduced annual benefits. Benefits at age 62 would be paid at 70% of full retirement. As you waited additional months to retire after 62 the benefit would increase based on a sliding scale.

Paul Kanjorski and Congress reduced our retirement benefits! He has the gall to talk about the privatization issue while he is picking our Social Security pockets each and every day. Raising the retirement age was part of the proposal to let people keep a small portion of their Social Security tax payments. Social Security would have been invested in financial assets not government promises to raise future taxes.

Paul Kanjorski is not telling you is the real Social Security story. The tax you and I pay into the Social Security system goes to pay benefits to people on Social Security today. It does not go into an account that pays us when WE retire.

His ad that states privatization would have hurt seniors due to the current market crash is an out and out lie. The proposal to privatize a small portion of the Social Security tax payment would affect young workers, not present retirees. If you were 35 in 2002 you cannot retire and receive a full benefit until you are 67. We would have to know how the market would be in 2034 to predict how it would affect those accounts that would only represent part of your benefit at retirement. Keep in mind that the proposal would not let a person put all of the Social Security tax into a private account.

Present retiree payments are the obligation of the federal government and must be paid even if it means raising taxes. However, this statement from the American Federation of Seniors is a fact. "If we don't redesign the system, Congress will have to cut benefits, raise taxes, or both." To me, that is why Paul Kanjorski must go. He is incapable of thinking; he is incapable of governing; he is incapable of telling the truth.

Paul Kanjorski, STOP SCARING SENIORS. You are psychologically affecting our parents and our grandparents. PRIVATIZATION IS A DEAD PROPOSAL! Let it die in peace.