[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 5]
[House]
[Page 6044]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1030
                      REPUBLICAN 2012 BUDGET PLAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Matsui) for 4 minutes.
  Ms. MATSUI. Madam Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong opposition 
to the Republican budget plan and its effects on America's seniors. I 
believe that we must address our national deficit, but I believe we can 
do it in a responsible manner that does not hinder our fragile economy 
and does not risk important programs.
  I support the Democratic budget proposal, which makes practical cuts 
to reduce our Nation's deficit but without hurting America's seniors 
and sacrificing their health and financial security.
  Madam Speaker, the Republican plan is irresponsible. It would hurt 
America's seniors while giving enormous tax breaks to the top 2 percent 
of the wealthiest Americans. It does nothing to create jobs but gives 
billions in corporate loopholes and subsidies to Big Oil. Most notably, 
the Republican plan would literally end Medicare. And while this may be 
a new plan, these are not new ideas.
  The Republicans' 2012 budget attempts to do to Medicare what 
President Bush wanted to do to Social Security in 2005--privatize it 
and severely cut benefits. Madam Speaker, can you imagine if we had 
privatized Social Security in 2005 the way the Republicans wanted to do 
just before the biggest financial collapse since the Great Depression? 
Is that what we really want to do with Medicare? We cannot afford to 
have Wall Street control the fate of our seniors.
  The Republican plan would convert Medicare into a voucher program 
that forces seniors to buy costly private insurance plans. It asks 
seniors, half of whom have less than $19,000 a year in total income, to 
pay more and get less. If this plan were put in place, the nonpartisan 
Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the average senior would 
end up paying nearly three times more out-of-pocket expenses.
  Meanwhile, the health care law enacted last year is already helping 
to close the gap in prescription drug coverage known as the doughnut 
hole and provides annual exams and preventive services. But a repeal of 
the health care law, as the Republican budget plan calls for, would 
eliminate these benefits. Madam Speaker, these benefits for Medicare 
patients are making a real difference in the lives of my constituents.
  I recently heard from a 71-year-old woman from Sacramento who 
requires several expensive drugs to maintain her health. In October of 
2010, she was worried about her ability to pay for her medication 
because she fell into the coverage gap. But she was relieved to learn 
that she would get $250 in 2010 and that 50 percent of her costs would 
be reimbursed this year and even more would be reimbursed in the 
future. But now Republicans want to pull the rug out from under our 
seniors and their families.
  What is astonishing to me is that in addition to privatization of 
Medicare, the Republican plan also goes after Medicaid. Instead of 
making real reform to the Medicaid program, the Republican budget calls 
for converting Medicaid into a block grant program. That would sharply 
reduce funding for seniors and low-income Americans on Medicaid so that 
it would not keep up with health care costs.
  Medicaid helps keep our seniors in their homes and helps them afford 
nursing homes if they need them, but the Republican plan would leave 
seniors on their own and ignores the promise that our country has made 
from one generation to another.
  Madam Speaker, the Federal budget should reflect our American values 
that have been passed down for generations where seniors earn the 
benefits that they have paid into and have been promised and are able 
to enjoy their retirement after working hard in their careers.
  That is why I will continue to fight to protect the dignity of 
America's seniors and protect them against the devastating effects of 
the Republican budget proposal.

                          ____________________