Newt Gingrich “clarified” his support for privatizing Medicare on a call with conservative bloggers and journalists this afternoon, as he continues to back away from his claim that Paul Ryan’s plan presented a “radical” change to the program. Gingrich admitted that he’s unsure if allowing seniors to purchase Medicare benefits from private insurers would work, but proposed moving bravely ahead by offering supplemental vouchers to today’s senior citizens:

While he continued to warn against imposing “radical change,” Gingrich called for an arguably bolder move on Medicare. “I would offer on a voluntary basis, a supplement plan, a voucher—I wouldn’t call it a voucher—but some kind of support plan this year,” Gingrich said. Paul Ryan’s plan wouldn’t begin to take effect for 10 years. [...]

“Part of what I’m worried about is going through a radical change that has not yet been tested,” Gingrich said. “But you could really start this year. And you could start to reduce some of the pressure on Medicare and on the budget this year. And you then put Obama in the position of saying, ‘No, I’m not going to let any senior citizen choose.’”

“There’s actually an advantage to starting with a voluntary plan,” he continued, “so you get practical operational experience with the first couple hundred thousand people, the first couple million people. And then you look comparatively.”

Someone should tell Gingrich that there is already such a voluntary plan and it’s called Medicare Advantage. And for all the raving you hear about private insurers lowering costs and providing better coverage for less, the data from that “experiment” doesn’t back it up. While some plans are certainly better than others, on the whole private insurers — which don’t have the bargaining power of Medicare — are receiving an average of 9 percent (about $8.9 billion) more than traditional Medicare and don’t seem to be saving the program any money (an estimated 13 percent of the payment going towards profits and administrative costs).

The Washington Examiner’s Phil Klein offers additional details from the call:

Gingrich explained that his differences with the Ryan approach is that he thinks instead of transitioning Medicare entirely into a system in which retirees are given money toward the purchase of private policies, seniors should be given the choice between the current system and a new system. He said he would support offering them that choice immediately, so that the government could study the results of the so-called “premium-support” model with the hundreds of thousands of people rather than implementing it system-wide for all Americans currently 54 and younger.

This is all very similar to what Sens. John Breaux (D-LA) and Bill Frist (R-TN) offered in 1999 and 2001 — which Gingrich seemed to support. Unlike Ryan, Breaux and Frist replaced the current Medicare program with competing health plans, while maintaining the CMS-sponsored Medicare fee-for-service coverage as an option. They also offered seniors a premium support that did a better job of keeping up with health care costs by establishing a contribution that was set as a percentage of actual plan bids for a comprehensive set of benefits. The beneficiary paid the difference between the plan bid and the government’s contribution (which is indexed to average costs).

Analysts at the time argued that the proposal would lead to severe adverse selection for seniors who remain in traditional Medicare and now concede that the cost savings from this kind of approach were likely overstated. Henry Aaron — who developed the premium support concept with Robert Reischauer in 1995 — has since walked away from the proposal, arguing that the Affordable Care Act may push Medicare to use its leverage to create much more substantial savings.

That graphic to the right is part of Rick Santorum’s latest fund-raising email and marks the second time in less than a week that the former senator from Pennsylvania has directly attacked Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care law. Santorum was the first presidential contender to condemn Romney’s attempt to whitewash his ongoing support for the individual mandate last Thursday and this latest statement doesn’t pull any punches. Santorum quotes the Wall Street Journal’s strong condemnation of Romney’s refusal to back away from his signature accomplishment and adds:

Mitt Romney has been spending the last week defending his failed “experiment” in government-run health care — and based on news reports it hasn’t been working. The same way that President Obama has been defending ObamaCare since its passage through Congress.

Thursday’s Wall Street Journal discusses how RomneyCare was the first in the nation to introduce “individual mandates” (i.e. the government forcing you to buy insurance) and how health care in Massachusetts has gotten more expensive — even more than the national average.

President Obama & former Governor Mitt Romney’s policies both put government squarely at the center of your health decisions. But I believe more government is not the answer. And I’d be willing to bet you agree.

Look:

I’ve noted the similarities between the two plans before (check out this table here), but it’s also worth pointing out that the differences between the two plans are also not insubstantial. Unlike Massachusetts’ reform, the federal law reduces health care spending by establishing a payment control commission, levying an excise tax on very generous health care plans and financing demonstration projects that, if successful, could transform the way health care is financed in the United States.

Romneycare did not try to tackle health care costs — even though Democrats are now working on an effort to reform the way the state pays for health care services — but is in some ways even more progressive than the federal law. For instance, uninsured residents below 300% of the federal poverty level can participate in the state-subsidized Commonwealth Care program where members get health services by enrolling in health plans which cover a comprehensive package of benefits like “doctor’s visits, surgery, radiology and lab” and abortion services — a procedure Romney says he now opposes. Romney’s law also includes a requirement that employers provide health care coverage, while the national law only requires employers to provide insurance or pay a fee if an employee is receiving government subsidies. Romney did veto the employer mandate and was overridden by the state legislature. He later minimized the significance of the provision in national interviews.

During a speech at the Economic Club of Chicago yesterday, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) defended his proposal to privatize Medicare for future retirees, arguing that the plan would empower seniors to “deny business to inefficient providers” while President Obama’s proposals to reduce the growth of the program would “give government the power to deny care to seniors.”

As TPMDC’s Brian Beutler notes, Ryan went even further. He likened Medicare to welfare, as if to imply that the program was some sort of government hand out to seniors:

RYAN: As we strengthen welfare for those who need it, we propose to end it for those who don’t. We end wasteful corporate welfare for those such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, big agribusinesses, and others that have gotten a free ride from the taxpayer for too long.

Ironically, Ryan rejected this very same premise during a town hall in Waterford, Wisconsin on April 28th. Pressed by a constituent about why he was referring to Medicare in a derogatory manner — by calling the program an “entitlement” — Ryan assured the man that he

Q: I don’t necessarily like these programs being called entitlement programs. As far as I’m concerned, I paid in for 50 years….more or less a retirement program that I thought I was putting in with the government.

RYAN: I get this fairly often about why we call this an entitlement program. It almost seems to some people like a demeaning thing. It’s the law — it’s the term of art that’s used in law. It’s not meant to be demeaning. If you pay into the program, you’re entitled to the benefit…so don’t think of it as a slight.

Watch it:

Since Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) announced that he would be resigning from the Senate after his term ends in 2013, a slew of potential candidates, from Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) to former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), have expressed interest in the seat. This morning, Politico reports that Tommy Thompson, the former two-term Republican Wisconsin Governor and Health and Human Services Secretary under President George W. Bush, is jumping into the race, telling friends and colleagues that he plans to pursue the position.

And while politicos predict that Thompson will enter the race as a front-runner, his moderate positions may give pause to conservative activists in the state:

– SUPPORTED THE INDIVIDUAL HEALTH MANDATE: During a symposium in Orlando in September 2008, Thompson said, “Just like people are required to have car insurance, they could be required to have health insurance.” In 2009, he walked back his support saying, “I’m not opposed to it, I just don’t think it’s the most practical way.” [Miami Herald, 3/23/2010; YouTube, 2/03/2009]

– SAID GOP SHOULDN’T REPEAL HEALTH LAW: “When it’s all said and done, you’re not going to be able to repeal health care because President Obama is not going to sign it,” Thompson said during an appearance on CNBC in 2010. “And they don’t have enough votes to override a veto, so why push a cart uphill when you know it’s not going to be able to get to the top?” [CNBC, 11/02/2010]

– PROMOTES SECTIONS OF HEALTH LAW: “The Affordable Care Act gives great discretion to the CMS Administrator to experiment with alternative payment systems. CMS has created an “innovation center” and is looking for ideas,” Thompson wrote just last month. [Huffington Post, 4/20/2011]

– OPPOSES RYAN’S MEDICARE PLAN: “Simply cutting Medicare isn’t the answer by any means. Instead, let’s focus on the most effective fiscal path forward with the least amount of impact on millions of seniors, their families and our broader economy. In other words, reform Medicare, don’t cut it,” Thompson wrote in April. [Huffington Post, 4/20/2011]

– DEVELOPED STATE’S MEDICAID PROGRAM: As governor in the 1990s, Thompson helped develop BadgerCare into one of the country’s most innovative and generous Medicaid program. [NPR, 2/23/2011]

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has dubbed Thompson “the smartest guy on health care,” but despite his moderate streak, he has done little to expand access to health care. During his four year tenure as President Bush’s point man at the HHS, the number of uninsured increased from 41.2 million to 46.6 million, Thompson pushed through a lobbyist-written prescription drug bill, helped misrepresent the legislation’s true cost, proposed a radical restructuring of the Medicaid program, and “improperly altered a report documenting large racial and ethnic disparities in health care.”