[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 177 (Friday, November 18, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2107]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                THE NEED TO PROTECT PROGRAMS FOR SENIORS

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. MIKE ROSS

                              of arkansas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, November 18, 2011

  Mr. ROSS of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, earlier this summer, Congress 
passed a bipartisan, compromise agreement--known as the Budget Control 
Act of 2011--to raise the debt ceiling in two stages by 2013. The new 
law cuts spending by more than it increases the debt limit and it does 
not raise any taxes.
  Specifically, the Budget Control Act will reduce the deficit by more 
than $2 trillion over the next 10 years. To do so, it directly 
specifies $917 billion in deficit cuts now and requires at least an 
additional $1.2 trillion in savings by December 23, 2011. Tasked with 
finding these deficit cuts is the 12-member, bipartisan and bicameral 
Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction, also known as the ``Super 
Committee.''
  According to the new law, the Super Committee must recommend a plan 
to Congress by November 23, 2011, that cuts the deficit by at least 
$1.2 trillion in ten years. Then, Congress has until December 23, 2011, 
to pass the plan on a straight up-or-down vote, meaning no amendments 
and no filibusters allowed. If Congress fails to pass the plan or comes 
up short, then across-the-board spending cuts would automatically take 
effect, split evenly among defense and non-defense spending.
  As we are approaching the November 23 deadline, I continue to believe 
that we need to make serious changes to our budget that will provide 
necessary savings to help stabilize our long-term financial security. 
However, any changes that take place over the long run must not be at 
the expense of our seniors. We absolutely cannot reduce the deficit by 
cutting seniors' benefits or jeopardizing the stability of programs 
that they rely on. This is not what I want and this is not what the 
American people want.
  Over 20 million Americans aged 60 and older are economically 
insecure--living at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level 
(FPL). The FPL does not account for the rising cost of living seniors 
experience as they age, which can include illness, loss of a spouse, or 
care for a disabled spouse, adult dependent child, or grandchildren.
  Many seniors rely on fixed incomes, receiving on average $1,081 in 
Social Security benefits, $401.70 in Supplemental Security Income, and/
or $297 in public assistance each month. Women fare worse than men, 
with 56% economically disadvantaged compared to 30% of men. Weekly 
earnings vary by age and gender. Men aged 55 and older have the highest 
average weekly earnings at $965, while women earn $744.
  In August 2011, 1.7 million Americans aged 55 and older were actively 
seeking work. The unemployment rate for mature workers in this age 
group is 6.6 percent. The average duration of looking for employment is 
44.6 weeks.
  These are only a few statistics highlighting the economic 
difficulties many of our nation's elders face.
  I believe that reducing the federal budget deficit is important to 
our nation's economic future and will require difficult choices and 
shared sacrifice. However, spending cuts cannot be made at the expense 
of economically disadvantaged seniors. Due to the recent economic 
downturn, more seniors than ever need assistance and support to make 
ends meet.
  The Super Committee and Congress must be mindful of this as any 
possible changes are made to senior related programs and benefits.

                          ____________________