Font Size

Posts Tagged 'budget'

We are pleased to present below all posts tagged with 'budget'. If you still can't find what you are looking for, try using the search box.

Bipartisan Budget Bill a Pretty Good Deal for Seniors

The bipartisan budget bill passed by Congress early this morning is, on balance, good news for seniors and the federal programs that provide them with financial and health security. 

“Seniors will feel these changes in their pocketbooks and even in the way they feel physically. We have been fighting for these measures for quite some time and are happy to see Congress take action on a bipartisan basis.” - Max Richtman, National Committee president 

On the positive side, the budget bill:

*Closes Medicare Part D “donut hole” in 2019.  The prescription drug coverage gap embedded in the original law, which the Affordable Care Act has been gradually closing, will be altogether eliminated one year early. This will save seniors thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket prescription drug costs.

*Repeals Medicare therapy caps.  The bill scraps arbitrary caps on physical, speech, language and occupational therapies that have cost seniors money – or delayed care at crucial times.  Beneficiaries will now find it easier – and more affordable – to get the therapies they need without undue interruption. 

*Lifts non-defense domestic spending caps, allowing Congress to appropriate more adequate funding for the Social Security Administration’s operating budget. The SSA has suffered from draconian budget cuts since 2011 which have impinged on customer service, even as 10,000 Baby Boomers retire every day.  This badly-needed (but yet unspecified) higher level of funding should allow SSA to improve customer service for the program’s 67 million beneficiaries.

On the negative side, the bill increases Medicare premiums for some individuals by further expanding Medicare means-testing. 

“Congress continues to expand Medicare means-testing, and they will not stop until middle-class seniors are burdened with higher Medicare premiums.” - Max Richtman.

Here is a more detailed summary of the budget bill’s implications for seniors. 

For more on this story, view our Behind the Headlines broadcast live from Capitol Hill here


Popular tags: , , , , ,

National Committee President Warns Senators About GOP Tax & Budget Scheme

Seniors and other vulnerable Americans will be hurt if the just-released GOP tax scheme is enacted.  National Committee president Max Richtman told a hearing room full of Senators - including Sen. Ron Wyden (D-WA), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) - that the Republicans' budget and tax legislation must be defeated.

“The Republican budget and tax plans allow [Congress] to slash programs critical to older Americans and people with disabilities – all to pay for massive tax cuts for the very wealthy and profitable corporations.” – Max Richtman, 11/1/17

We analyzed the harm that the GOP proposals would wreak on older Americans in a post last week, entitled GOP Budget Resolution a "Lump of Coal" for Seniors, Middle Class.  Among the more heinous measures, Republicans seek to cut nearly $500 billion from Medicare, $1.3 trillion from Medicaid, more than $600 billion from Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), and will likely slash billions from other programs that seniors rely on for financial and health security.  

Richtman told the Senators that Medicare beneficiaries “cannot afford to pay more for less coverage” – particularly when half of them have incomes of less than $26,200 a year and spend 25 percent of their Social Security check to pay for Medicare premiums and cost-sharing. “And they cannot afford cuts to Medicare such as those assumed in the House budget – turning Medicare into a voucher program and raising the eligibility age from 65 to 67,” he explained.

What’s more, the tax plan will increase the national debt and compel Republicans to cut seniors’ earned benefits more aggressively in the future – even though Social Security and Medicare Part A are self-financed and do not contribute to federal budget deficits.

 “By increasing the federal budget deficit by at least $1.5 trillion, this measure would leave Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid vulnerable to benefit cuts to make up the difference.” – Max Richtman, 11/1/17

Under the tax bill supported by President Trump and congressional Republicans, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates the top one percent of Americans would receive 80 percent of the tax cuts. For the top one percent, the average annual tax cut would be over $200,000 by 2027. 

The bottom 80 percent of Americans would receive 13 percent of the tax cuts. In fact, 115 million households earning less than $75,000 a year would receive a tax cut of just $190 on average. But ultimately, most Americans would lose much more in program cuts than they would gain from tax cuts. 

Richtman implored Congress to resist this reckless legislation:

“The National Committee urges all Senators and Representatives to oppose legislation to enact these ‘Robin Hood-in-Reverse’ budget and tax proposals and instead work together to protect the retirement and health security commitments made to generations of Americans." - Max Richtman, 11/1/17


Popular tags: , , , , ,

House GOP Recklessly Pursues Privatization of Medicare in Budget Process

Congress is targeting the health and financial well-being of America’s seniors by making yet another attempt to privatize Medicare.   Yesterday the House Budget Committee passed the GOP’s FY 2018 budget resolution, which includes Speaker Paul Ryan’s “Medicare premium support” scheme – an innocuous name for turning time-tested senior health care coverage into “Coupon-Care.”  

The House budget blueprint slashes nearly $500 billion from Medicare over ten years and raises the eligibility age from 65 to 67 – along with gutting Medicaid and other social safety net programs for needy seniors.  

The Associated Press had a pithy summary of the painful cuts that the GOP proposes in its new budget:

“The plan, in theory at least, promises to balance the budget through unprecedented and unworkable cuts across the budget. It calls for turning this year's projected $700 billion or so deficit into a tiny $9 billion surplus by 2027. It would do so by slashing $5.4 trillion over the coming decade, including almost $500 billion from Medicare, $1.5 trillion from Medicaid and the Obama health law, along with enormous cuts to benefits such as federal employee pensions, food stamps, and tax credits for the working poor.” – Associated Press, 7/18/17

 National Committee President Max Richtman says that converting Medicare into a voucher program is an existential threat to the program itself. 

 “Over time, giving seniors vouchers to purchase health insurance would dramatically increase their out of pocket costs since the fixed amount of the voucher is unlikely to keep up with the rising costs of health care. And, as healthier seniors choose less costly private plans, the sicker and poorer seniors would remain in traditional Medicare, leading to untenable costs, diminished coverage, and an eventual demise of traditional Medicare, plain and simple.” – Max Richtman, NCPSSM President

Of course, raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 as the House spending plan also proposes, is in itself a drastic benefit cut.

Undermining Medicare has been a long-held dream of fiscal conservatives. Their “premium support” proposal is a thinly veiled scheme to allow traditional Medicare to “wither on the vine,” as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich once put it.

Privatization is being sold as “improving customer choice,” but based on the way current Medicare Advantage plans work, private insurance will continue to offer fewer choices of doctors than traditional Medicare does.  If traditional Medicare is allowed to shrink and collapse, choice will disappear, too.

“Weakening Medicare is a politically perilous path for Republicans.  Recent polling indicates that large majorities of Americans across party lines prefer that Medicare be kept the way it is, not to mention that President Trump repeatedly promised to protect the program during the 2016 campaign.” – Max Richtman, NCPSSM President

Meanwhile, the National Committee strongly condemns other priorities of the House Republican budget resolution, as well.  The GOP budget resolution will mean: 

*Hundreds of billions in painful cuts to Medicaid, which seniors depend on for long-term care services and supports.

*Reaffirmation of a House rule that puts 11 million Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries at risk of a 7% benefit cut in 2028.

*Reductions to SSI (Supplemental Security Insurance), which provides cash assistance to low-income seniors and people with disabilities.

 *Caps on non-defense spending that will likely lead to devastating cuts to Older Americans Act programs and the Social Security Administration (SSA) operating budget.

 *Slashing of programs that benefit our nation’s veterans and deep cuts to spending on medical research (including cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and other conditions afflicting the elderly).

The savings from these devastating cuts will likely go to tax breaks for the wealthy.  Last year’s House Republican tax plan gave 99.6% of its benefits to the top one-percent of earners, with virtually nothing for middle and low income Americans.

 

 

Popular tags: , , ,

Tom Price's "Alternate Reality"

In the Orwellian world that Trump’s Washington has become, we are used to hearing language abused and misused to forward a right-wing agenda.  This week was no different.  As Kaiser Health News reported, HHS Secretary Tom Price was on Capitol Hill Thursday reciting a blatantly false Tea Party mantra:  government programs for our society’s most vulnerable members deserve to be cut because they “don’t work.”  This falsehood flies in the face of evidence - of history, really.  But in an attempt to dismantle the New Deal and Great Society programs that boost up the neediest – which includes millions of older Americans – the administration will literally say anything even if the opposite is true.

Price appeared before two congressional committees yesterday to defend President Trump’s 2018 budget, which calls for drastic cuts to programs benefitting seniors - including Medicaid, Meals on Wheels, and medical research by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).  His testimony included the following whopper:

“The problem with many of our federal programs is not that they are too expensive or too underfunded. The real problem is that they do not work—they fail the very people they are meant to help.”  HHS Secretary Tom Price before the Senate Finance Committee, 6/8/17

In spreading these myths, Price is singing from the same hymnal as other administration officials, most notably Budget Director Mick Mulvaney who defended funding cuts for Meals on Wheels thusly:

“Meals on Wheels sounds great… [but] we're not going to spend [money] on programs that cannot show that they actually deliver the promises that we’ve made to people.” – OMB Director Mick Mulvaney, 3/15/17

With an extra-Orwellian touch, Mulvaney added that draconian cuts in safety net programs are “one of the most compassionate things we can do.”

All of this begs the question:  by what imaginary standard do these programs “not work” or “fail the people they are meant to help?”   How does Medicaid – which allows millions of needy seniors to afford long-term care at home or in skilled nursing care facilities – not work?  Or Meals on Wheels, which provides hot, nutritious meals for 2 million hungry and isolated seniors – not work?  These are programs that undeniably do work.

National Committee President Max Richtman takes Secretary Price to task for telling untruths about these vital federal programs:  

“As a former member of Congress and a physician, Secretary Price should know better.  By maligning programs that have been a lifeline for millions of Americans for decades, Secretary Price is denying history and facts.  He is attempting to create an alternative reality that is patently false and misleading.”  - Max Richtman, NCPSSM President & CEO

Price also resorted to the spurious claim that rising costs in programs like Medicaid demand cuts.  He insisted that cutting $610 billion from Medicaid would lead to “innovations and efficiencies.”  No, cutting billions from Medicaid will result in a shortfall for states facing rising costs, forcing them to cut benefits or kick people off the rolls altogether. 

The truth is that these federal safety net programs are incredibly efficient already. Medicaid’s per capita costs are significantly lower than private insurers’.  Meals on Wheels can feed a senior for an entire year at the same cost as a single day in the hospital.  And those are only two of the safety net programs which fall under the Trump budget axe.

Democrats on the Hill pushed back against Price’s pronouncements and Trump’s budget cuts, too:

It’s mean-spirited. It’s not good for America. We can do much better." - Rep. John Lewis (D-GA)

If Republican budget hawks like Price truly cared about seniors, children, the disabled, and other vulnerable segments of society, they would not be slashing safety net programs.  But they cannot pay for trillions in tax cuts for the wealthy and big corporations without cutting domestic spending, so programs that benefit our neediest citizens go on the chopping block.  The rationale that the Trump budget cutters are simply seeking “efficiencies” is a thin veil for denying needy seniors long term care or hot meals. 

President Franklin D. Roosevelt, father of the New Deal and grandfather of the Great Society (which today’s GOP is fighting to undo) put it best when he said:

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have little."  - President Franklin D. Roosevelt

Unlike Trump’s budget hawks, FDR understood the importance of authentic language that shines a light on fundamental truths.  He would never confuse “compassion” for cruelty, “helping people” for hurting them, or success for failure.  Neither should we.

Popular tags: , , ,

Oh, yes: the Trump Budget Definitely Does Cut Meals on Wheels

 

Would the Trump administration and its acolytes please stop saying that the President's budget does not cut funding for Meals on Wheels?

Just today, Budget Director Mick Mulvaney made that very claim at a House hearing on the new budget: 

"Let's talk about Meals on Wheels, because we don't reduce it.” – Mick Mulvaney, Trump Budget Director, 5/24/17

Meals on Wheels is a program that delivers hot meals to more than 2.4 million needy seniors across the country every year. Volunteers not only deliver sustenance; they check in on isolated seniors and provided a much needed human connection.


Anyone looking at the actual numbers can plainly see that the Trump budget does, in fact, slash funding for Meals on Wheels. In addition to cutting Older Americans Act home-delivered meals by $1.5 million, the President’s budget eliminates the Community Services, Community Development and Social Services Block Grants, upon which some Meals on Wheels programs rely for funding.

Because of previous budget cuts, Older Americans Act nutrition programs are already serving 23 million fewer meals than in 2005.  The loss of Community Services Block Grants ($715 million), Community Development Block Grants ($3 billion) and Social Service Block Grants ($1.7 billion) funding for home delivered meals would increase the number of seniors threatened by hunger.

According to Feeding America, 5.7 million Americans over the age of 60 were food insecure as of 2014. That means 9% of all seniors in the wealthiest nation in the world are at risk of going hungry.  Worse yet, the number of food insecure seniors is projected to increase by 50% when the youngest of the Baby Boom Generation reaches age 60 in 2025. There are waiting lists in every state for seniors who need food assistance. Cutting Meals on Wheels funding at a time of growing need is outrageous and dangerous.

In a letter to the editor of the Washington Post on March 20th, National Committee President Max Richtman recounted his days as staff director for the Senate Select Committee on Aging.  He tells the story of a Republican Senator who changed his mind about the program after riding along with a Meals on Wheels van:

“He (the GOP Senator) was impressed by not only the sustenance of the food, but also the seniors’ human connection to the volunteers, and became an enthusiastic advocate for the program.” – Max Richtman, Letter to the Editor of the Washington Post

At the end of the letter to the editor, Max suggested that a certain occupant of the White House follow the Senator’s lead. 

Perhaps Mr. Trump should ride with a Meals on Wheels van and witness the profound benefits to our nation’s most vulnerable seniors.

That suggestion seems even more appropriate today, given that the President obviously has no problem defunding Meals on Wheels in his new budget.  Perhaps Mick Mulvaney should ride along with him.

Popular tags: , , , ,

Pages: Prev1234NextReturn Top



   

Questions?

Have a Social Security or Medicare question?




 

Archives
Media Contacts

Pamela Causey
Communications Director
causeyp@ncpssm.org
(202) 216-8378
(202) 236-2123 cell

Walter Gottlieb
Assistant Communications Director 
gottliebw@ncpssm.org
(202) 216-8414

Entitled to Know

            

 

Copyright © 2018 by NCPSSM
Login  |