[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 16 (Tuesday, February 15, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H606-H607]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PRESIDENT'S BUDGET
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, last week, President Bush delivered
to Congress his proposed Federal budget. In the coming months,
Democrats and Republicans in Congress will debate budget proposals
largely based on divergent cardinal moral values. We will debate budget
cuts that represent more than just program scale-backs. The President's
proposed cuts to vital government programs are reflective of
differences in core philosophies on the role of our government in
serving our people.
Budgets are moral documents that reveal the fundamental priorities of
a person, of a household, of a government. The President's ``every man
for himself'' budget disregards millions of Americans and undercuts our
Nation's values. There is no better example of where Democratic and
Republican values diverge than Medicaid. The President claims he only
wants to cut programs that are not getting results or that duplicate
current efforts or that do not fulfill essential priorities.
So which of these is Medicaid? There is no question it is getting
results. It operates at a lower cost than private health insurance, in
spite of what my friends on the other side of the aisle like to say
about Medicaid. In fact, private health insurance has grown
historically at 12.6 percent a year; Medicare costs have grown at 7.1
percent a year; and Medicaid has grown at 4.5 percent a year. So
government-delivered health care through Medicare and through Medicaid
has been significantly more efficient than wasteful, profitable private
insurance.
There is no duplication here, because Medicaid is the only program of
its kind. It fulfills an essential priority. It is the sole source of
nursing home care for five million seniors living in poverty.
The President knows that Medicaid is already running on fumes, but he
made a choice. He chose more tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of
Americans instead of providing for subsistence care for America's
seniors. He chose tax cuts for the most privileged Americans instead of
subsistence care for America's seniors through Medicaid. Different
priorities reflecting a different set of moral values.
[[Page H607]]
Medicaid provides health coverage to 52 million Americans, including
roughly 1.7 million in the home State of myself and the gentlewoman
from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur). It is the only source of coverage for one in
four of Ohio's children. It provides 70 percent of the nursing home
funding in Ohio, as it does in most States.
The Bush plan cuts $60 billion out of Medicaid over the next 10
years. Different priorities reflecting a different set of moral values.
These cuts mean kicking seniors out of nursing homes. And the
President's plan, in addition to doing that, shifts tens of billions of
dollars in costs to States like Ohio. He gives a tax break to the
wealthiest people in the country, then he shifts costs by cutting
spending in Ohio and the other 49 States, all of which have to make up
for that to take care of Medicaid.
The President cannot eliminate basic needs by ignoring them. He
cannot eliminate the need for nursing home care by ignoring it or by
shifting responsibility to the States. In the short run, his budget
cuts will create victims; in the long run, they will force the States
to spend more.
And who will have to cover these costs? Students will pay as a result
of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and Medicaid cuts. Students in my
State, and every State, will pay through higher tuition; homeowners
will pay through higher property taxes; consumers will pay through
higher sales taxes; workers will pay through higher income taxes, all
to make up for the President's tax cuts for the wealthy in Washington
and cuts in Medicaid to the States.
Medicaid has always been a partnership between Federal and State
governments. Cutting the Federal share hurts our families and our
communities and our States and our country. We can give up many things,
Mr. Speaker, in the name of shared sacrifice, but common sense should
not be one of them. The President's ``every man for himself'' budget
neglects our communities and betrays our values as a Nation.
____________________