| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Medicaid and the 2006
Budget
By Carolynn Race
During the month of March, Members of Congress, particularly Members of the
House and Senate Budget Committees, spent a great deal of time working on budget
resolutions for fiscal year 2006. The budget resolutions are intended to
guide appropriators' spending for the upcoming fiscal year.
On March 17, 2005, the House and Senate passed their respective chambers'
budget resolutions for fiscal year 2006. The Senate budget resolution,
S. Con. Res. 18, passed by a vote of 51-48, with all Democrats, Republican Senators
Snowe (R-ME), DeWine (R-OH), Voinovich (R-OH), and Chafee (R-RI), and Independent
Senator Jeffords (I-VT) voting against the resolution and the remainder of Republicans
voting for the resolution. The House resolution, H. Con. Res. 95, passed
by a vote of 218-214. Both resolutions will make steep cuts to programs
that impact vulnerable populations. The House version calls for $68.8
billion in cuts to mandatory spending programs over five years, while the Senate
version was amended to strike $15 billion of the $32 billion in mandatory spending
cuts over five years and to expand its tax cut proposal. (Footnote: April
4, 2005)
Following their Easter recess, the House and Senate are expected to appoint
conferees to iron out differences between the House and Senate resolutions and
develop a bicameral conference report. Both chambers of Congress must then
vote on the conference report. It does not need to be signed by the President.
One major point of contention between the two budget resolutions is how to
fund Medicaid, the nation's major public health program for low-income Americans. Medicaid,
which finances health and long-term care services for more than 50 million people,
is a source of health insurance for 38 million low-income children and parents
and a critical source of acute and long-term coverage for 12 million elderly
and disabled individuals, including more than 6 million low-income Medicare beneficiaries.
The House budget resolution includes a $20 billion cut that would apply largely
to Medicaid, while the Senate version includes no Medicaid reductions. During
the Senate floor debate on the budget resolution, Senators voted, 52-48, for
an amendment to strip from the Senate budget resolution instructions to the Finance
Committee to cut $15 billion from programs under its jurisdiction. It was
assumed that about $14 billion of those cuts would have come from Medicaid. The
amendment, offered by Senators Smith (R-OR) and Bingaman (D-NM), was supported
by the sponsors and all Democrats, Senator Jeffords (I-VT), Senator Snowe (R-ME),
Collins (R-ME), Chafee (R-RI), Specter (R-PA), Coleman (R-MN), and DeWine (R-OH). To
see how your Senator voted, see the roll call vote below.
Viewing the Federal Budget through a Moral Lens
Why are many Members of Congress so focused on cutting Medicaid and other
entitlement programs? The language heard around Capitol Hill revolves around
the "fiscal deficit," which is currently $412 billion. As was
mentioned in the Health Care Outlook for 2005, politicians have promised to reduce
the deficit. During last November 's election, President Bush promised
to cut the deficit in half over five years, while Senator Kerry (D-MA) said he
would reduce the deficit — and would roll back tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans
to fund expansions in federal programs, notably health care.
But in claiming to reduce the deficit, both the House and Senate budget resolutions
are putting an unfair burden on the least of these among us. Additional
tax cuts remain in both House and Senate budget resolutions, while programs that
benefit people in and near poverty are being reduced.
What happens when we view the federal budget through a moral lens? As
Jesus noted in the Gospel of Matthew, "Where our treasure is, there your
heart will be also." (Matthew 6:21). How does the budget respond
to the significant human needs deficits we have as a nation — and as a global
community? How is this year's budget resolution responding to the
health care deficit — and the fact that over 45 million Americans are uninsured
— and millions more are underinsured? How is the budget resolution
responding to the human needs' deficit — and the fact that over 36 million Americans
live in poverty?
Regarding health care, it is clear that the health care deficit would increase
if cuts to Medicaid are included in this budget conference report. Contact
your Members of Congress and urge them not to include cuts to Medicaid and other
vital human needs programs in the budget conference report. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| |
ACTION
First, thank Senators who voted for the Smith-Bingaman amendment to strip
the Medicaid cuts from the Senate Budget Resolution. A list of how your
Senators voted is below.
Second, urge all your Members of Congress to insist on a budget conference
report without cuts to Medicaid and other vital human needs programs. Tell
them that you are a Presbyterian who is concerned about the impacts that cutbacks
to Medicaid could have on the millions who rely on Medicaid for health care. Call
the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121, and ask to be connected to your Senators
or Representative.
Conferees
The Senate budget conferees are:
Gregg (R-NH), Domenici (R-NM), Grassley (R-IA), Allard (R-CO), Conrad (D-ND),
Sarbanes (D-MD), and Murray (D-WA).
How Did Your Senators Vote?
Smith-Bingaman Amendment to Senate Budget Resolution:
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Nay Stevens (R-AK), Nay
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Nay McCain (R-AZ), Nay
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Nay Salazar (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Yea Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Yea Carper (D-DE), Yea
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Nay Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Nay Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Yea Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Nay Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Obama (D-IL), Yea
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Nay McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Mikulski (D-MD), Yea Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Yea Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Dayton (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Nay Lott (R-MS), Nay
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Nay Talent (R-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Burns (R-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Nay Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Nay Reid (D-NV), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Nay Sununu (R-NH), Nay
New Jersey: Corzine (D-NJ), Yea Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Domenici (R-NM), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Nay Dole (R-NC), Nay
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Yea Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Ohio: DeWine (R-OH), Yea Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Santorum (R-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Chafee (R-RI), Yea Reed (D-RI), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Nay Graham (R-SC), Nay
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Nay Frist (R-TN), Nay
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Nay Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Vermont: Jeffords (I-VT), Yea Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Virginia: Allen (R-VA), Nay Warner (R-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Wyoming: Enzi (R-WY), Nay Thomas (R-WY), Nay
Letter on Medicaid |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| |
Items marked with are
in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. For best results, right-click the link (or click
and hold for Macintosh), select "save target as" and save the document to your
desktop for viewing and printing.

|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| |
General Assembly Policy
Managed Care
[The 211th General Assembly (1999) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.):]
(6) Direct the Stated Clerk to communicate with the federal government
by calling upon the United States Congress to do the following:
(a)Develop a national health plan designed to ensure access to medical care
for all residents in the United States, with particular attention to the elderly,
children, [people with physical, mental, and psychiatric disabilities.
(b) Protect Medicare benefits.
(7) Direct the Stated Clerk to communicate through electronic means
to the elected and appointed officials in the legislative and executive branches
of the federal and state governments calling them to do the following:
(a) Protect uninsured persons, especially those with lower fixed
incomes and those self-employed, from erosion of health-care benefits
(b) Protect Medicaid benefits.
(c) Protect the privacy and confidentiality rights of consumers.
(d) Promote tort reforms to reduce the cost of health-care created by
defensive medicine.
(e) Protect the rights of the individual to choose the health-care providers
of their choice.
(8) Direct the Washington Office to continue their advocacy efforts in support
of the issues addressed in (6) and (7). (1999 Statement - PC(USA) pp. 341-342) |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
 |
| |
Washington Interreligious
Staff Community Health Care Working Group
"Speak out for those who cannot speak, for the rights of all the destitute.
Champion the rights of the poor and needy" (Proverbs 31:8-9).
February 3, 2005
Dear Mr. President and Members of Congress,
As people of diverse faith traditions, we share the core value of championing
the rights of the poor and needy, including the right to health care. All human
beings have the right to safe, affordable and high quality health care,
and Medicaid is an important part of our nation's health care safety net. Therefore,
we oppose Medicaid reform proposals that impose a cap on federal Medicaid spending,
or eliminate the fundamental guarantee to Medicaid coverage for our nation's
most vulnerable citizens, including low-income children and parents, pregnant
women, people with disabilities and senior citizens.
Since 1965, Medicaid has played a crucial role in providing health services
to vulnerable populations; the program currently serves over 50 million people,
about half of whom are children. A cap on federal funding--whether in the form
of an allotment, an allocation or a block grant--would undermine our current
federal commitment to populations whose health care needs would not disappear
after the capped amount was reached.
Arbitrary limits on federal Medicaid spending would fail to adjust automatically
in response to economic recessions, demographic changes, health care inflation
or natural disasters. No formula can account for the multitude of factors that
affect Medicaid costs at different times in different parts of the country. Moreover,
capped federal payments profoundly limit a state's ability to be innovative in
responding to the 45 million people without health insurance in this country.
Cutting Medicaid without real reform of the entire health care system will not
address the health care crisis faced by our nation.
The religious scriptures of our faith traditions speak with dramatic unanimity
on the subject of responsibility to the most vulnerable in society. We believe
that every human being is endowed with worth and dignity and created in the image
of God. Reducing the deficit by cutting health care services for poor children,
elderly sick people and the disabled undermines this dignity and is morally wrong.
To ignore the uninsured in our nation, whose numbers are increasing even without
the proposed caps on Medicaid, is not only negligent of those individuals, but
also a violation of the core values under which our nation was founded.
We in the religious community invite you to join us in advocating for the
common good of our country by supporting policies that improve health coverage
for all and enhance state flexibility without compromising the health and well-being
of our nation's most vulnerable populations.
Respectfully,
American Baptist Churches USA
Anabaptist Center for Healthcare Ethics
The Association of Jewish Family and Children's Agencies
Call to Renewal
Central Conference of American Rabbis
Church of the Brethren Witness/Washington Office
Church Women United
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Fellowship of Reconciliation
Friends Committee on National Legislation
General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church
Jewish Council for Public Affairs
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office
Mennonite Health Services Alliance
National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd
National Council of Churches USA
National Council of Jewish Women
NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Washington Office
The Rabbinical Assembly
Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
Union for Reform Judaism
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries
United Jewish Communities
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
Volunteers of America
Women of Reform Judaism
cc: Mr. Joshua Bolten, Office of Management and Budget |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|