Hi Tommy,

     I just got home from a Doo **** Dance, at the Elk's Lodge, or I would have posted sooner, and yes it was fun!!! 

     NO, it was not the Washington Post which you copied from, instead it was "World Net Daily" which is known for their Conservatism,and dramatic Articles which have distorted the truth for their own agenda.   In this case it was mainly the slant on the article implying that AARP has done wrong!   

      Now I'm not against AARP for making money in their endorsements of Health, Life and Auto Insurance Policies, because they are very good Policies and in most case their members get better rates and/or benefits for being AARP Members.   

      AARP is not representing your viewpoints, but to me they are, and there is no way to please everyone!   I happen to trust AARP, even if this is isn't the case with you!   AARP explained why they are endorsing this Health Care Reform Bill, and I don't feel there is need for them to explain anything more!

      So as I mentioned, let's agree to disagree.  Tommy, we are discussing this issure to death, and there is no way that there will be a meeting of the minds between us.  So let's change the subject, as both of our opinions are out there for all to see!!   Shelby

I don't think it is bad to look at both sides.  For example, I often watch MSNBC and FOX,. I research the gov sites, both republican and democratic, the White House and others that do slant left or right.   The caveat is you have to know what you are looking at.

Please notice my last topic post on the AARP getting royalities from insurance sales, I believe the source was the Washington Post which is known to have a slant to the left....Do a little research and you will see.

Also, if there are any misstatements either made by me or by the sources I use, please point them out......

Good posting with you,

TommyBoy

Hi Tommy,

   <Our readers should do further research to determine which point of view is correct and it is incumbent upon them to do so.>

    Your statement above is very true.  However when they do so, they should not research websites or publications which have agendas, because there are too many which contain misstatements, and are worded in such a way to manipulate the mind!  

  I have to get ready to go out now, I'm going to be late.  I'll talk to you later this evening!   Shelby

Fine, that is what makes America great, Littlemite, we can agree to disagree.  I am a paid member of the AARP and truly believe they are not putting their members first by giving us all the facts on health care reform. 

Also,I do not consider this as taking advantage of AARPs hospitality.  You should be aware though that there is no requirement for membership, no requirement for one identity, and no age requirement necessary to be a part of this community?  I have been told through posts that there are paid posters for healthcare reform, SEIU, AARP employees, lobbyists, and others who constantly post in this community.  This is not a question of hospitality to them it is a question of partiality and paid bias.

I am not a paid posters, I am not a member of any union, I am not a lobbyist, and I have absolutely nothing to gain from posting on this site.  I am an AARP member and a retiree only.

Now, back to the AARP.  The AARP did not fully disclose how they will profit from the additional royalties from United Healthcare if Medicare Advantage is done away with or hurt by cuts in Medicare under the Pelosi Bill....

AARP shared with us only the good things about ObamaCare but ignored the bad and the really ugly......I have shared many post on the bad and the ugly.....

I have seen bias from the far left and the far right in this community and this also is what makes debate and posts worthwhile. I have no problem with that.

Our readers should do further research to determine which point of view is correct and it is incumbent upon them to do so.

Hello Tommy,

      I feel these vicious attacks on AARP, because you don't agree with their stand, is inappropriate to the purpose of our Group!  

     You are also taking advantage of AARP's hospitality which gives you the opportunity to post here and then attacking them on their very website! 

     Then as to the validity, you copied this article from "World Net Daily" which has it's own Conservative agenda.  

    I feel this publication mixes some truth, with untruths and inuendos, and this makes your post uncredible!   

  Let me suggest we just agree to disagree, for I don't care for such an attack on an organization that so many of us respect!   Shelby

TommyBoy2010: No bleeding heart stories please.....Emotion should play no part in health care reform....Your previous example and unproven figures can be used by those against the present bills also.

TommyBoy aka BenFact the factsman......So I look forward to a professional post in which you prove my facts false as presented. 

TommyBoy2010: No bleeding heart stories please.....Emotion should play no part in health care reform....Your previous example and unproven figures can be used by those against the present bills also. 

There must be some common ground To have a rational discussion. I find we have none. The health care reform is about justice and care for our fellow human beings. I believe human life and the prevention of human suffering is more important than money. I find we have no common ground for a discussion as it appears that money is more important to you than compassion and justice. Would you stand by and watch your neighbor starve?

You disregard research that has been reverified by almost 100 new studies since 2002.
http://www7.nationalacademies.org/ocga/testimony/Americas_Uninsured_Crisis.asp
Jack C. Ebeler, Institute of Medicine, The National Academies
Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of Representatives, Date: 03/10/2009
Important new research has emerged since 2002 when the IOM last studied the health consequences of being uninsured for children and adults, including nearly 100 new studies that our Committee reviewed. These new studies have confirmed and extended the evidence regarding the harms of being uninsured that were featured in earlier IOM reports. Furthermore, rigorous new research in the past six years has demonstrated the benefits of gaining health insurance for both children and adults.

You respond with anectdotal stories about Canada and ignore the real statistics. The US has the highest lost years of life of any developed country, including Canada. Canada actually measures waiting times (as do most other developed countries except the US) and no one in Canada has to wait for critical care. Their wait times for elective surgery (e.g., hip replacement) are longer than in the US, but tests and treatment for cancer are as good as or better than in the US. Besides, many of the horror stories about Canadian health care are just that - stories.

Republicans owned the congress for eight years under a president that claimed to be a "compassionate conservative" but did not attempt to do anything to prevent the over 100 unnecessary deaths that occur every day. At least the Democrats are trying to fix the problem.

As for the deficit, libertarian ideas got us into the mess we find ourselves (even Greenspan admitted he was wrong). Greenspan also worries about the grossy unequal distribution of wealth and income in this country (for 30 years wealth has been shifted to the richest 5% of the population from the remaining 95% - the US ranks first in the developed world with regards to income and wealth inequality). I believe that the President is more capable of managing our problems than anyone else.

We have no common ground when you dismiss validated research (facts you do not like) and rely on anectdotal stories that are often fabricated (like the Canadian woman that testified before congress claiming she had a life threatening brain tumor). So, I will let you have the last word because I find no benefit in trying to discuss anything with you.

Bye, bye.

Littlemite,

I just ask you to keep an open mind and read the following along with researching AARP's financial statements. 

http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/TopicAreas/annual_reports/assets/AARPConsolidatedFinancialStatements.pdf

AGE OF DECEPTION
Dark secrets of AARP finally exposed to light
Posted: November 10, 2009
8:25 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
WorldNetDaily

When the AARP, formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons – one of the wealthiest advocacy groups in the U.S. – began backing the $1.2 trillion House health bill despite concerns about Medicare cuts, death panels and assisted suicide, many members shredded their membership cards, saying the organization no longer represents their interests – but AARP's history of left-leaning activism on a host of issues may surprise its constituents.

AARP's Nov. 5 health bill endorsement left many seniors wondering why the powerful group that claims to represent their interests would call for an estimated $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, a system many seniors have indicated that they would like to preserve.

"After carefully monitoring developments in Washington and studying the various legislative proposals, AARP's all-volunteer Board of Directors – made up of working and retired doctors, nurses, business people, and teachers – has decided to endorse the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962/H.R. 3961) because it delivers on key priorities we've been fighting for," an AARP announcement stated.

But while many seniors believe AARP offers worthwhile discounts on health and car insurance, vacations and advice on financial planning, the group has a history of left-leaning political stances and activism.

Why the AARP health 'reform' endorsement?

AARP collects royalties on "Medigap insurance," a privately purchased insurance coverage that helps pay some of the health-care costs that Medicare doesn't cover.

However, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Medicare website, seniors have the option of joining Medicare Advantage plans, allowing them to use Medicare funds to purchase private insurance plans that offer extra benefits and lower copayments than the Original Medicare Plan. An estimated 10.2 million seniors have enrolled in Medicare Advantage.

When seniors enroll in Medicare Advantage plans, they often drop Medigap policies. Therefore, the switch may slash Medigap revenues – and simultaneously impact AARP royalties from Medigap insurance.

However, Sec. 1161 of the House bill would slash payments to Medicare Advantage health plans used by 20 percent of seniors and cause them to lose some benefits, including vision and dental coverage.

Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, one of the leading health-care policy organizations in the country, told WND's Radio America AARP saw that it would lose revenue if it didn't stop the Medicare Advantage programs.

Send Congress a message – no government health care, or you're outta there – through WND's exclusive "Send Congress a Pink Slip" campaign!

"The House bill would dramatically cut money out of Medicare Advantage programs, forcing people to need the Medigap policies that are such a big cash cow for the AARP," she said.

"Seniors are going to have higher costs in Medicare. Because of the cuts in Medicare, they are going to have ever more need for these Medigap policies. So the AARP, therefore, will be able to make even more money off of us," Turner explained. "The legislation both kills competition that the AARP has with these Medicare Advantage programs, and it boosts the number of people who need the Medigap insurance because Medicare is going to become an even more deficient program than it is now if you take half a trillion dollars out of it."

Following the money trail

According to the AARP website, the group promises seniors it will be a "voice in Washington and in your state, representing you on issues like Medicare, Social Security and consumer safety."

But the majority of the money AARP collects doesn't come from its annual $16 membership dues.

http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/TopicAreas/annual_reports/assets/AARPConsolidatedFinancialStatements.pdf

AARP's 2008 consolidated financial statements reveal the organization earns far more income from selling supplementary insurance to members than it takes in from yearly member fees.

The group received nearly $653 million in royalties from private insurance companies that sold products referred by AARP in 2008. It also received an additional $120 million for the ads placed in its publications.

By contrast, AARP collected $249 million in membership dues last year.

While the organization claims to represent almost 40 million Americans over age 50 – nearly as many members as the U.S. Roman Catholic Church – the group has been accused of inflating that number by automatically giving spouses and "domestic partners" free memberships. In reality, $249 million in annual dues would indicate members who actually sought and paid for memberships in 2008 may have numbered closer to 15.6 million.

AARP's federal funding

AARP is a private, nonprofit group, but the AARP 2008 annual report shows that of the $1.1 billion in revenue AARP received last year $90 million came from a variety of grants, including a substantial amount of federal aid. Its two largest grant programs offer tax counseling for the elderly and job training for low-income seniors.

According to a National Legal and Policy Center report titled, "How the Federal Government Subsidizes AARP," written by NLPC Director of Policy John Carlisle, AARP administers the federal funds through its the AARP Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charity, because AARP is designated as a 501(c)(4) that's ineligible for federal funds.

"The AARP Foundation is a legally distinct organization that theoretically operates independently of AARP," Carlisle explained. "It has its own board of directors and staff and can engage in fundraising activities to advance its particular public policy agenda. However, the foundation works so closely with AARP that the two entities are barely indistinguishable."

According to the report, the AARP Foundation is located in the same building as AARP, where employees work "practically side-by-side with lobbying staff" – and the AARP Foundation's second largest source of income is AARP.

In a March 2001 letter to the Department of Health and Human Services on federal aid, the AARP Foundation reported receiving money from the Department of Labor, the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice, according to NLPC.

A 2008 donor list includes mention of "institutional support" from the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Labor.

"[I]t's outrageous that taxpayers are being used to advance [AARP's] liberal agenda to expand government and thwart Social Security reform," Carlisle contends. "Ending federal subsidies to AARP would put an end to the unjust practice of publicly funding a highly partisan and controversial interest group."

Left-leaning activism and campaign contributions

Former President George W. Bush attempted to reform Social Security through the use of private retirement accounts in 2005. His plan sought to permit workers to redirect 4 percent of their Social Security payroll taxes into private accounts that would invest in mutual funds and other securities.

But AARP reacted to Bush's proposal by slamming its members with mass mailings and spending $5 million on full-page advertisements in 50 newspapers and an additional $5 million on print ads opposing Bush's plan.

With its nearly 3,000 chapters, AARP attended congressional town-hall meetings to counter Bush's proposal. The group also targeted seniors in its magazine and official bulletin, delivering it to 22 million U.S. households.

Only three months after beginning the lobbying campaign, AARP reported that 535 members of Congress were blasted with at least 460,000 calls in opposition to Bush's plan.

"AARP won the battle," Carlisle wrote. "Due largely to its multi-million-dollar effort as well as considerable legislative lobbying, AARP succeeded in undermining support for private accounts in just a few months."

But AARP's left-leaning activism didn't end there.

According to NLPC, AARP combated tax cuts during the Reagan and Bush administrations. It also fought the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991 and helped the Clinton administration defeat a balanced budget amendment in 1995.


A 2006 AARP Impact Award goes to Harry Belafonte

In 2006, AARP honored singer and activist Harry Belafonte with its Impact Award for doing "something extraordinary to make the world a better place." Shortly afterward, Belafonte, a Hugo Chavez supporter, called President George W. Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world."

While AARP bills itself as a nonpartisan group that does not support, oppose or contribute to any candidates or political parties, AARP's executives and employees overwhelmingly support Democrats.


President Obama with AARP CEO A. Barry Rand (left) and AARP President Jennie Chin Hansen (left) during AARP's July 28 tele-town-hall on health care (White House photo by Pete Souza)

AARP CEO Barry Rand is a strong supporter of President Obama, and federal records show he contributed $8,900 to Obama's campaign committees in 2008. According to Federal Election Commission databases, Rand has given $15,900 to Democratic campaign committees since 1995.

Likewise, AARP executive John Killpack gave $1,000 to the Democratic National Committee and $4,350 to Obama's campaign. AARP strategy consultant Joseph Liu gave $2,300 to Obama's campaign and an additional $2,300 to Obama's victory fund.

A search of campaign contributions by AARP executives and employees reveals they overwhelmingly gave to Obama's campaign and Democrats during the 2008 election cycle – by a ratio of 14 workers to one.

According to those records, the following are recipients of reported contributions exceeding $200 from 75 AARP executives and employees during the 2008 election cycle:

Democratic Party and/or Democrats for Congress: $15,600

John Edwards: $250

Hillary Clinton: $7,350

Barack Obama: $36,556

Fred Thompson: $1,000

Republican Party: $871

Rudy Giuliani: $1,150

John McCain: $1,550

In its March/April 2003 magazine, AARP honored billionaire George Soros as one of its 50 "top innovators" in a "Fearless 50" article. Robert Knight of Concerned Women for America reported that while the list featured a few conservatives, it was "top heavy with liberal luminaries."

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, blasted AARP in an interview with the Hill just days ago.

"AARP is one of the most liberal organizations in Washington, D.C.," Boehner said. "Obviously, most seniors aren't aware of that."

Gun-control advocacy

Some opponents claim AARP supports gun control. AARP declared in its 2007 policy book, "Congress should eliminate gaps in and strengthen enforcement of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and other federal gun laws."

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act required federal background checks on purchasers of handguns.


AARP 2007 policy book promotes strengthened enforcement of federal gun laws

In a 2001 letter to a constituent from AARP legislation and public policy Director John Rother, AARP outlined its pro-gun-control position (Page 1, Page 2, Page 3).

Also, in a Dec. 10, 2004, press release, AARP stated:

"AARP believes in the Constitutional right to bear arms. But to make the nation safer, we must do what we can to keep guns out of hands of children and criminals. AARP supported the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which went into law in 1994 with bi-partisan support, but was allowed to expire this year."

Immigration and migrant workers

AARP also supports entitlements for "migrant workers." In the same Dec. 10, 2004, press release, AARP stated:

"Migrant workers are among the most poorly paid and ill-housed workers in the nation. They often do not qualify for Social Security or income assistance programs. AARP supports efforts to meet the needs, particularly of older and disabled workers, including making them aware of low income assistance programs for which they may be eligible."

In 2004, the Arizona arm of the influential seniors group announced its opposition to Proposition 200, a measure to deny state welfare benefits to illegal aliens. The measure also required state agencies to report illegals to the federal government and voters to show U.S. identification.

In 2008, AARP International hosted a series in which three "experts" in the fields of immigration and aging addressed the topic "Immigration: Challenges, Trends and the Impact on the U.S. Labor Force."

The first speaker, Robert Suro of the School of Journalism at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication, was introduced as an expert in the field of immigration. He discussed U.S. demographic trends.

"Immigration is increasingly becoming a function of who we import to fill holes in our labor market," he explained.

The next speaker, Alejandro Garcia, regional representative of the AARP National Policy Council, said an estimated one in six illegal immigrants are employed in long-term care settings.

"Garcia expressed concern about the treatment and welfare of undocumented workers, which are often invisible and unacknowledged," the AARP International executive summary stated. "In his view, we must challenge the notion that they are parasites living off of the wealth of America without contributing; these individuals provide the cheap labor and products that American society demands, including much-needed relief to the shortage of long-term care workers. Many of them pay taxes for services they are not eligible to receive. In spite of their contributions, we have been reluctant to integrate them into society. According to Garcia, this fact has been reflected in the rise in ethnicity-motivated violence against Hispanics and the proliferation of nativist-extremist groups in recent years."

Finally, the last speaker, John Rother, AARP group executive officer of policy and strategy, advocated providing education and "taking advantage of the younger, immigrant workforce."

The AARP International executive summary stated, "AARP has for the most part been a proponent of a universal approach to social issues and public policy, which holds that everybody, regardless of origin, should have the same access to education, opportunities, and laws protecting them from discrimination."

In 2004, AARP partnered with the National Council of La Raza – a group that has promoted driver's licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs and no immigration law enforcement by state and local police – to "educate elderly Hispanics and their families" on the Medicare prescription drug program.

As WND reported, the American Family Association, or AFA, warned in August that AARP launched a "huge and costly" television ad campaign in support of the health-care plan proposed by President Obama.

A video of part of the AARP effort, which the AFA described as "scare tactics," is here:

The group also produces shows on Retirement Living TV, a cable network that is beamed into retirement communities across the country as an entertainment channel geared toward seniors.

Now AFA has renewed its call for AARP constituents to cancel their memberships due to the group's endorsement of the Democrats' health "reform," claiming the organization no longer represents the best interests of the elderly.

"AARP claims to be all about representing the interests of seniors," AFA said in a statement, "but when it comes to health care reform, they are selling seniors down the river to line their own pockets."