Congress to Balance Budget on the Backs of the Poor

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi’s new plan proposes to balance the budget in ten years through massive cuts in domestic programs, with no revenue contribution over that time. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the Senate Budget plan and the House Budget Committee plan will get 69 percent of their cuts from programs that benefit low and moderate income people.

The Stated Clerk of the General Assembly, when discussing priorities in the federal budget, wrote “we know that we are responsible to each other and, as the Gospel of Luke teaches us, ‘from everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required.’  We, therefore, urge a solution to the…. federal deficit that ensures long-term fiscal stability; deficit reduction; just, new revenue; long-term integrity for entitlement programs; and a priority on the most vulnerable in society[1].”

The published budgets would slash essential funding and weaken the federal safety net at a time when many families have yet to fully recover from The Great Recession. Here is a closer look at what gets cut and what programs are safe:

•      Health care for low- and moderate-income people. Each plan would repeal health reform, including its subsidies to make coverage affordable for people with low or moderate incomes and its Medicaid expansion, and block-grant much of Medicaid, while also making deep cuts to the program.  At least 14 million people would lose their Medicaid coverage or no longer gain coverage in the future[2].
•      SNAP (formerly food stamps). The House plan block-grants SNAP starting in 2021 and cuts SNAP funds by $125 billion, or more than a third, over 2021 to 2025.  Cuts of this magnitude would end food assistance for millions of low-income families, cut benefits for millions of such households, or do some combination of the two.
•      Tax credits for low- and modest-income working families. Each plan would let critical provisions of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC) expire at the end of 2017, which would push more than 16 million people, including almost 8 million children, into or deeper into poverty.
•      Other mandatory (i.e. entitlement) programs serving low-income people. The House and Senate plans would each cut hundreds of billions of dollars from mandatory programs in the education and income security categories of the budget.  Although each plan lacks specifics, severe cuts of up to 90 billion dollars would occur to Pell Grants, which help students from families with modest incomes afford college.
•      Low-income non-defense discretionary programs. The House and Senate plans each would make additional cuts on top of the significant reductions required by the Budget Control Act’s discretionary caps and sequestration.  These cuts would shrink the funds available for investments in education, research, and transportation, as well as for low-income programs such as housing assistance, Head Start, and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program[3].
•              Military Spending is Safe. The House and Senate would both stay within the budget caps for the Pentagon’s base budget ($523 billion) in 2016 but the House would significantly increase the war funding account to $90 billion, and would add $397 billion to the Pentagon accounts over the next 10 years[4].
  
  

  
  

---

[1] Gradye Parsons,  “Addressing the Moral Concern of Deficits through Principles, not Politics” http://www.pcusa.org/news/2012/12/11/addressing-moral-concern-deficits-through-principl/

[2] http://www.offthechartsblog.org/proposed-medicaid-block-grant-would-add-millions-to-uninsured-and-underinsured/

[3] http://www.offthechartsblog.org/house-senate-budget-plans-each-get-69-percent-of-cuts-from-low-income-programs/
[4] http://fcnl.org/blog/2c/battling_budgets/

Giving Health Reform a Chance to Work: An Unbound Publication

Giving Health Reform a Chance to Work: 

Increasing Access to Health and Wellness

By Leslie Woods

This article was published by Justice Unbound as part of a three week-long series on health care.  See this week's articles here.

While most of the recent coverage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), more commonly referred to as “Obamacare,” has been negative, these news stories fail to tell a complete story. There is no doubt the Obama Administration has made some serious errors in the rollout and initial implementation of Obamacare. Nevertheless, the ACA has already made a huge difference in the lives of people who now have access to health coverage due to important changes in the health care law. And now, in the final months of the first open enrollment session of the new exchanges, even more people will see better – and hopefully less expensive – access to coverage.

Why does the Church care about Obamacare?

For more than 60 years, Presbyterian General Assemblies have been calling for reform of the U.S. health system, urging the establishment of a national medical plan that will ensure universal health coverage for all persons residing in the United States. In 1988, the Assembly wrote, “Jesus’ command to love our neighbor requires persons with plentiful health resources both to comprehend the condition of those persons without basic health care and to share the means to health.” In other words, it is our collective responsibility as a community, and as a nation, to make sure that all people have access to the means to good health – that is, access to quality, affordable, comprehensive health coverage. 

As yesterday’s article pointed out, the PC(USA) has supported the implementation of a national medical plan, or a single-payer system (i.e. Medicare for all) for many years, and the ACA still falls short of this ideal. However, as the Office of Public Witness engaged in the health care reform debate in 2009-10, we saw some significant opportunities. To be sure, we encountered some disappointments and missed opportunities, but we also witnessed some important steps toward increasing access to health coverage, especially for low-income families and adults without children. We saw sensible, preventative services and wellness care become available for millions of people who previously could only access health services through the Emergency Room.

We also saw many more opportunities to make reforms that move us in the right direction. Certainly, the PC(USA)’s long-standing commitment to health, wellness, and universality of coverage would have moved us away from the intervention of private, for-profit insurance companies, had that been a political possibility. However, decades of Presbyterian witness lead us to believe that the ACA is making improvements. Furthermore, we urge its critics give it a chance to work.

So, what does the ACA do?

Well, right now, and most in the public eye, the new “exchanges” have gone live, and Americans are purchasing health insurance, many with the aid of need-based subsidies from the federal government. Despite a botched initial rollout, many anecdotes suggest that people are now having positive experiences using healthcare.gov or their own states’ systems. So far, 3.3 million people have used the exchange to obtain coverage, and the enrollment period has not yet ended. Enroll America has some great resources, as well as a subsidy calculator, and of course, healthcare.gov is the place to go to enroll.

But insurance has never really been the faith community’s concern. As the PC(USA) and its partners have engaged the health care debate, our primary and immediate concern has always been people – their health, their care, and the shalom that God intends for all of us. Access to health insurance is a means to an end, and that “end” is making sure that more people can live healthy, whole, safe lives, free from the fear that the next illness will mean not only personal tragedy but also bankruptcy.

Ultimately, our concern has been people’s access to care. And despite its shortcomings, the ACA’s reforms are making health care more accessible for more people.

Certain reforms went into effect even before the new exchange launch that has been making headlines. In many ways, what seem like the small changes have been some of the greatest accomplishments of this law. For example:

• Young adults may now stay on their parents’ health plan up to the age of 26, regardless of being a student, residence, or martial status.
• Insurers may no longer discriminate against children with pre-existing conditions, and starting in 2014, adults have the same protections.
•  Women can no longer be charged higher coverage rates due to their gender or health status.
•  Insurance companies can no longer cancel coverage when someone becomes sick or because of an unintentional mistake, nor can insurers limit the amount of care for essential health benefits in a lifetime.

Some of the more substantial changes have also turned out to be huge victories:

• States have the option to expand Medicaid benefits to individuals and families who have incomes less than 133% of the federal poverty level.

o   This is crucial, as many low-income people, especially those without children, have no access to health coverage at all. 

o   To date, six million people have gained access to health coverage through Medicaid expansion.

o   Twenty-three states have elected to expand Medicaid coverage (with four additional states implementing alternative expansions).

o   Campaigns are ongoing in many of the remaining states to urge state legislatures to take action.

• Older adults receive a 52% discount on covered medications while in the Medicare Part D prescription coverage “donut hole,” and the donut hole will close in 2020.
• All standard insurance plans will now cover preventative health services like check-ups, vaccinations, and cancer screenings without a copay or deductible.
• Private insurance plans are now required to cover essential services like maternity and newborn care, pediatric services including dental and vision, mental health and substance abuse treatment, prescription drugs, lab work, rehabilitative and habilitative services, emergency care, and hospitalization.

This may be a long list of wonky policy changes, but they all boil down to one thing – access to more care for more people.

Where do we go from here?

There is no question – this is not the final chapter in health care reform. Many new reforms and policy changes are still required to improve access and quality, to reduce costs, and most importantly, to make sure that all people living in this nation have access to the care they need to live healthy, whole lives. For those who were disappointed that the ACA was not a single-payer system, or even that it did not include a public option, take heart. We know from experience that the implementation of major new government programs will inevitably lead to more discussion, tweaks, improvements, and ongoing policy debates. The conversation will continue. After we’ve lived into the new current system, we’ll have to figure out how to improve it… again.

Sabrina Slater, Intern for Public Witness, contributed to this article.

Click here for the rest of this week's Unbound articles on Health Care.

Author Bios:

Leslie Woods has served as Representative for Domestic Poverty and Environmental Issues for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Office of Public Witness (OPW) since January 2007.  In this capacity, she advocates on behalf of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) on matters related to economic inequality, poverty, hunger, health, human needs, federal budget, climate change, energy and other environmental issues. She also coordinates the Internship and Fellowship programs for Public Witness Programs, the OPW’s service learning opportunities for young adults. Leslie holds a Master of Arts in Religion with a concentration in Hebrew Bible, magna cum laude, from Yale Divinity School and a Bachelor of Arts in Religious Studies and French, magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, from Randolph-Macon College. Leslie is the proud mother of two little boys – Daniel and Joshua.


Sabrina Slater currently serves as an intern for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Office of Public Witness.  Currently pursuing a Master of Divinity degree from Princeton Theological Seminary, Sabrina is interning while spending a semester in DC with the National Capital Semester for Seminarians program hosted at Wesley Theological Seminary.  Her advocacy focus includes domestic poverty, the relationship between poverty and violence, human trafficking, women and relationship violence.  Having enjoyed a career in higher education prior to beginning the ordination process  Sabrina is committed to honest dialogue and hearing peoples' voices and stories.  Sabrina holds a Master's in Education with focus on general and special education from Wagner College and a Bachelor of Arts in Cognitive Science and Health & Human Development from Lehigh University. 

Oppose House Reconciliation Bill

From a blog post by Bread for the World:

Tell Your Representative to Vote NO on the House Reconciliation Bill



Marie Crise is able to use her SNAP benefits to purchase fresh,
healthy fruits and vegetables at the Abingdon Farmers Market in
Abingdon, VA. Photo by Laura Elizabeth Pohl. From Bread blog.


We need your voice today! Congress has been proposing more cuts to programs vital to hungry and poor people. The latest is a vote that the House of Representatives will take soon on additional cuts to SNAP and Child Tax Credits. 


Call your member of the U.S. House of Representatives today using 1-800-326-4941 and tell them to VOTE NO on the reconciliation bill. Or Send an Email.  Call NOW!  The House may vote as soon as Thursday, May 10.


The House of Representatives is using a legislative process known as reconciliation for the FY 2013 budget. (Reconciliation reduces the federal deficit by changing mandatory programs such as SNAP. It instructs authorizing committees in Congress to change eligibility requirements or benefit levels to save money.)

This reconciliation bill, which the House of Representatives is about to vote on, will have a devastating impacts on hungry and poor people. Please call your representative now at 1-800-326-4941 and tell them to VOTE NO on the reconciliation bill.  Or Send an Email.

Here are the basic talking points:

• We support a Faithful Federal Budget that “act[s] with mercy and justice by serving the common good, robustly funding support for poor and vulnerable people, both at home and abroad, and exercising proper care and keeping of the earth.
• Don’t balance the budget by cutting programs for hungry and poor people.
• SNAP is a lifeline for 46 million vulnerable Americans struggling to put food on the table. Eighty-five percent of SNAP benefits go to families with children, elderly or disabled people.
• The Child Tax Credit effectively lifts millions of children and families out of poverty every year. In 2010, the Child Tax Credit lifted 1.3 million children out of poverty.

If you have more time, you can also use the following points to expand your message:

• Cutting programs that serve poor and vulnerable populations is not the way to reduce our deficits. Congress must take a balanced approach that maintains our commitment to serving those in need.

• SNAP efficiently and effectively delivers food assistance to the neediest individuals and families. A recent study confirms that SNAP not only lifts families out of poverty, but also alleviates the depth and severity of poverty.

• The House proposed cuts to SNAP are tantamount to saying that every religious congregation across the United States needs to come up with an estimated extra $50,000 a year for the next 10 years to make up the difference.

• Food banks have seen a nearly 50 percent increase in demand since 2006. Any cuts to nutrition programs will put an even greater strain on charities and churches providing emergency food assistance.

• A parent with two kids working full-time at minimum wage in our country doesn’t earn enough to keep the family above the poverty line. Refundable tax credits, like the Child Tax Credit, boost earnings so working parents don’t have to raise their children in poverty.

• The bill proposes to cut state funding for services that play a critical role in preventing child abuse, increasing the availability of child care, and providing community-based care for elderly and disabled individuals. In 2009, just some of these funds provided adult protective services for well over 500,000 seniors.

Every time Congress proposes these types of harmful cuts to programs for hungry and poor people, we must loudly oppose it. These types of cuts are unacceptable. We need to continue to put the pressure on the House of Representatives.  So please call today.  

Call your representative at 1-800-326-4941 and tell him or her to VOTE NO on the reconciliation bill today! Or Send an Email.

Stated Clerk Gradye Parsons Calls To Protect Vulnerable In Debt Ceiling Talks

Washington, DC, July 27, 2011 -- “Inspired by a common spiritual conviction that God has called on all people to protect the vulnerable and promote the dignity of all individuals living in society,” Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Stated Clerk Gradye Parsons joined other Christian, Jewish, and Muslim leaders on Tuesday to meet with Republican and Democratic Congressional leadership, lifting up those struggling with poverty in the U.S. and abroad.

As elected leaders in Washington, D.C., continue to squabble over a deal to raise the federal debt ceiling, the faith community is urging them to protect the poor and vulnerable from the effects of indiscriminate budget cuts.  In a time of anemic economic recovery, millions of people are relying on Unemployment Insurance, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, SNAP (formerly Food Stamps), and countless other federally funded services that make a difference in the lives of millions of people.  Severe cuts to any of these programs, or even across-the-board budget changes like a global spending cap, debt trigger, or Balanced Budget Amendment, would increase suffering and exact the most sacrifice from those who can least afford it, while exempting from additional responsibility those who can afford to pay more.

In addition to meetings with Congressional leadership and their staff, the religious leaders led a daily prayer vigil on the grounds of the United Methodist building on Capitol Hill, where Reverend Parsons said, “We have come to Washington to meet with Congressional leaders and to join with you in daily prayer for a global economy and a federal budget that breaks the yokes of injustice, poverty, hunger, and unemployment throughout the world.” 

After their meetings with Congressional leadership, religious leaders were struck by the pessimism they encountered when they expressed hope for a productive, balanced approach to the nation’s fiscal woes.  The Reverend J. Herbert Nelson, PC(USA) Director for Public Witness, who attended the meetings with Reverend Parsons said, “There seems to be no movement and no hope among political leaders.  Now is the time for faith leaders and the faith community to take deliberate and forthright action to express disgust at the current situation and to demand a fair solution.  We must be actively involved in this debate, both in Washington, D.C. and across the country.”

As the likelihood of a federal default on the nation’s debt grows and the August 2nd deadline looms, PC(USA) leaders, together with interfaith partners in ministry, are growing increasingly alarmed.  If a deal is reached, they are concerned that a raise to the nation’s debt ceiling will be coupled with callous and draconian cuts to programs that serve the “lease of these.”  Conversely, if the federal government is forced to default on its debt, they fear that the affects of such a failure will be catastrophic for millions of individuals and families both nationally and worldwide.