O’Connor takes liberties in attack

THE AD: A 30-second television commercial for Democratic congressional candidate Danny O’Connor. WHERE TO SEE IT: YouTube VIDEO: Flattering image of Danny O’Connor, followed by unflattering photos of GOP opponent Rep. Troy Balderson. SCRIPT: Danny O’Connor: “I’m Danny O’Connor, and I approved this message.” Narrator: “On health care, Troy Balderson is dangerous. His big insurance donors want to go back to denying coverage for preexisting conditions. So Troy got on board. They want to jack up your premiums. So Troy supports imposing an age tax on older folks. And they wanted a big tax break even when it means deep cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Troy signed on to that one, too. Troy Balderson. When he does what they say, we pay.” ANALYSIS: The commercial relies on selective use of facts to create a somewhatmisleading impression. Balderson has said he favors scrapping the 2010 health-care law known as Obamacare, in which insurers are forbidden to deny coverage to people based on pre-existing health conditions. Balderson said in an interview with the Dispatch editorial board this year that health-care providers “should not be able to change or deny coverage because of preexisting conditions.” But how to do that outside of an Obamacare framework has not been spelled out by the Zanesville Republican. The “age tax” attack had its origins with AARP, which represents millions of older people. AARP aired a commercial last year claiming that House Republicans’ bill to scrap Obamacare and replace it with a more marketoriented system included an age tax that would overcharge “older Americans for their health insurance.” This charge will take some explaining. Because the overwhelming majority of Americans receive health coverage through their employers, Medicare or Medicaid, part of Obamacare dealt with a smaller slice of people trying to buy individual insurance policies through federally subsidized marketplaces known as exchanges. Under Obamacare, insurers cannot charge older people premiums that are more than three times higher than premiums charged to young people. House Republicans wanted insurers to have the power to charge premiums for people between ages 50 and 64 that were five times higher than those for younger people. That almost certainly would have led to older people in the individual market paying more for their health coverage than under Obamacare, unless the GOP bill led to reduced premiums for everyone. The House bill died last year in the Senate, and Balderson does not appear to have expressed an opinion on raising the limit on premiums for older people. As for the tax cut leading to cuts in Social Security and Medicare, these are standard Democratic talking points. O’Connor opposed the 10-year, $1.5 trillion tax cut signed last year by President Donald Trump, saying it would add to the deficit and favor the wealthy. Democrats assume that by voting for the tax cuts, Republicans automatically favor cutting Social Security and Medicare as the only way to make up for the missing federal revenue. But Republicans could avoid any spending reductions by allowing the federal debt to soar out of control. That might be irresponsible, but it is an option. Balderson has said he opposes any changes in Social Security and Medicare for people who have retired or are close to retirement. But he said he would consider raising the Social Security eligibility age for people who are not near retirement. That is an option favored by scores of budget analysts as a first step in dealing with Social Security’s future financial crunch. Neither political party is being candid with voters on the debt issue. There is no way to balance the federal budget without either raising taxes or restraining the growth of Social Security and Medicare, or a combination of higher taxes and deep spending cuts.