Tag Archives for BBA

House Fails to Pass GOP’s Balanced Budget Amendment

Published in Woonsocket Call on April 15, 2018

Following the recent passage of the $ 1.3 trillion omnibus government spending bill and the massive GOP tax cut bill that added more than a $1 trillion to the nation’s despite economic growth, and with midterm elections looming, the House GOP leadership quickly acted to tackle the spiraling nation’s deficit by bringing H.J. Res. 2, a balanced budget amendment (BBA), to the floor for a vote. Simply put, the amendment requires that total annual outlays not exceed total annual receipts. It also requires a true majority of each chamber to pass tax increases and a three-fifths majority to raise the debt limit.

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), introduced H.J. Res. 2, which he notes is nearly identical to text in legislation that passed the House in 1995, but failed in the Senate by one vote. This would be the Virginia Congressman’s last chance to push for passage of a BBA because he is not seeking re-election at the end of this term.

Last October. House Speake Paul Ryan (R-WI) agreed to vote on Goodlatte’s BBA, in exchange for conservative votes from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Mark Walker (R-NC), on a procedural budget measure needed for Republicans to move forward on tax reform.

BBA Gets Thumbs Down by House Lawmakers

As expect, the House GOP’s BBA was defeated by a vote of 233 to 184, falling far short (by 57 lawmakers) of the two-thirds vote required for passage of an amendment under the Constitution. Six Republicans voted against it while only seven Democrats voted for it. But, the GOP’s BBA had little chance of becoming law because the required support of two-thirds in the Senate and Democratic Senators unified in their opposition, and finally the requirement that 38 states ratify the constitutional amendment.

“Our extraordinary fiscal crisis demands an extraordinary solution. We must rise above partisanship and join together to send a balanced budget amendment to the states for ratification.

I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment and in freeing our children and grandchildren from the burden of a crippling debt they had no hand in creating, so they can be free to chart their own futures for themselves and for their own posterity,” Goodlatte said during the House floor on Thursday evening.

During the four-hour debate, House Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), asked Congress to balance its budget like typical families do. She said,“Families across the country sit down at their kitchen tables every month and make tough decisions to balance their budget so that they can make ends meet. Just like American families, the federal government should spend within its means. A Balanced Budget Amendment, which requires a two-third majority in both chambers of Congress to pass, is a needed and important mechanism to restore fiscal discipline. “

On the House Floor, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi called the BBA “a brazen assault on seniors, children and working families – the American people we were elected to protect.”

“Make no mistake, this GOP con job has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. It is not balanced in terms of money because of their GOP Tax Scam that’s placed us in a bad spot fiscally and it’s not balanced in terms of values,” says Pelosi, noting that GOP fiscal responsibility comes down to “ransacking Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and breaking our nation’s sacred promise of dignity and security for seniors and families.”

Before the House vote on the BBA, Darrell M. West, vice president and director of Governance Studies at the Washington, D.C.-based the Brookings Institution, stated “I would be surprised if the bill made it through Congress.” He added, “It’s hypocritical for Republicans to support a balanced budget amendment after they cut taxes by $1.5 trillion and added significantly to the federal deficit. Voters will see through that and understand the vote is about scoring political points and not making good public policy.”

House Lawmakers Bombarded with Opposition Letters

Days before the House vote the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), AARP expressed opposition to the passage of the BBA by sending a letter to the Hill, urging House lawmakers to reject the GOP’s constitutional amendment. Hundreds of aging, health care, educational, unions, and business groups were cited in the April 12, 2018 issue of the The Congressional Record as opposing the amendment.

Max Richtman, NCPSSM’s President and CEO, wrote House lawmakers warning that a BBA would unravel the nation’s social safety net by making gigantic entitlement cuts by blocking benefit payments from the Social Security and Medicare Part A trust funds because “all federal expenditures, including these earned benefits, would have to be covered by revenue collected in the same year. “

A BBA would also force Congress to make huge spending cuts to Medicare Parts B, C and D, Medicaid, and many other social safety net programs for seniors, to rein in the nation’s deficit and pushing lawmakers to make “massive new tax cuts.,” says Richtman.

“While the balanced budget amendment did not dictate any particular approach to deficit reduction, by altering established Congressional voting procedures it would have increased the likelihood that the fiscal policies adopted in coming decades would favor the well-off at the expense of middle- and low-income Americans. The amendment would have required a two-thirds vote of the full membership of the House and Senate to raise taxes. Spending cuts, by contrast, would continue to require only a majority of those present and voting and could be passed on a voice vote,” observed Richtman.

Finally, Richtman noted that the risk of a federal government default would increase because a BBA requires a three-fifths vote of both the House and the Senate to raise the national debt limit, rather than the current simple majority.

AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond also expressed opposition to the BBA in a letter to House lawmakers charging that the amendment would impact the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, “subjecting both programs to potentially deep cuts without regard to the impact on the health and financial security of individuals.” Programs that provide meals or heating assistance to low income seniors would also see available resources diminish, she predicted, she said.

The lack of a dependable Social Security and Medicare benefit [if a BBA was passed] would be devastating for millions of Americans. Social Security is currently the principal source of income for half of older American households receiving benefits, and roughly one in five households depend on Social Security benefits for nearly all (90 percent or more) of their income. Over 50 million Americans depend on Medicare, half of whom have incomes of less than $24,150. Even small fluctuations in premiums and cost sharing would have a significant impact on the personal finances of older and disabled Americans,” said LeaMond.

Midterm Elections Just Six Months Away

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted early this week that the annual government’s deficit is projected to be $ 1 trillion next year. And the nation’s $21 trillion debt would skyrocket to 33 trillion by 20028. With the midterm elections just six months away, combined with the CBO’s recently released economic analysis, the Republican party’s image as being the fiscally responsible political party is now shattered.

Even controlling both chambers of Congress and with President Donald Trump in the White House, GOP lawmakers must now look for political issues that may resonate with their constituents. Further attempts to dismantle Socials Security and Medicare may not be the way to go.

Bill Seeks to Soften Impact of Medicare Cuts

Published in Pawtucket Times on September 23, 2002

One week to go before the new federal Medicare cuts go into effect – cuts that will slash $1.7 billion in 2003 funding for the developmentally disabled and frail seniors in nursing facilities.

According to the American Health Care Association (AHCA), over the next two year’s cumulative Medicare cuts, called the “Medicare Cliff,” will total a whopping $5.2 billion.

Meanwhile, AHCA, representing 12,000 nonprofit long-term care providers, has been lobbying Congress for federal relief from the draconian reductions.

A new ad appearing in the Capitol Hill newspaper, Roll Call, reminds lawmakers that the upcoming cuts could lead to reduced nurse staffing and puts residents at risk.

In the upcoming November elections, voters might just get riled up too, over Medicare being cut by 10 percent, says AHCA.

The Roll Call ad notes a recent national survey of 800 persons found that 84.6 percent of the respondents opposed cutting Medicare funding for nursing facility care by 10 percent.

Additionally, 64.1 percent were less likely to vote for a candidate running for Congress if they knew that the candidate “voted to cut Medicare funding for nursing facility for nursing facility care by billions.”

Charles H. Roadman, II, M.D., AHCA’s president and CEO noted that a recent study by the University of North Carolina School of Public Health confirms the devastating impact of the impending Medicare cuts.

The study says that cuts could lead to reduced numbers of staff caring for seniors in nursing facilities, thus jeopardizing quality of care.

“At a time when the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) and nursing care providers are actively pursuing efforts to improve the quality of care in nursing facilities throughout the nation, new federal cuts to Medicare are inconsistent with achieving this important goal,” says Dr. Roadman.

Roberta Hawkins, executive director of the Alliance for Nursing Home Care and state ombudsman agree with Roadman’s assessment.

“Huge Medicare cuts pull the carpet from under the federal quality initiatives that take effect across the country in October,” she tells All About Seniors. “The right hand of the federal government does not seem to know what the left hand is doing.”

According to Hawkins, the staffing shortage in Rhode Island is having a drastic impact on the quality of care delivered to more than 10,000 residentes.

“The upcoming Medicare cuts combined with an outdated Medicaid payment system will only further compromise patient care in the Ocean State,” she says.

U.S. Rep. James Langevin and House colleagues today announced a legislative fix that would delay scheduled cuts for nursing facilities and assisted living facilities in Rhode Island.

Langevin is co-sponsoring the Medicare Skilled Nursing Beneficiary Protection Act, sponsored by Congressman Tom Allen (D-ME), that would extend Medicare reimbursement add-ons for three years, through 2005, to allow the Bush administration more time to implement an adequate reimbursement formula for skill nursing facilities.

Langevin and the other bill sponsors hope this new timetable will obviate the need for further cuts in Medicare reimbursement rates, which would place severe financial burdens on nursing facilities.

Langevin stated that unless Congress acts this year, Medicare funding for skilled nursing care will be cut by 10 percent in 2003 and 19 percent in 2004 – translating to cuts of nearly $ 35 per patient per day in 2003 and $68 in 2004.

The Rhode Island congressman believes that in the Ocean State, the Medicare cuts will be even greater than the national average totaling $ 38.81 in 2003 and $ 76.90 in 2004.

“Difficult decisions were made in 1997 with passage of the Balanced Budget Act, and some of the changes were not implemented as Congress intended,” Langevin said. “The Medicare Skilled Nursing Beneficiary Protection Act will postpone further cuts and ensure that critical funding remains available for thousands of Rhode Islanders who rely on skilled nursing services.”

According to Langevin in mid-1998, the new Medicare prospective payment system (PPS) was implemented for skilled nursing care, as mandated in the 1997 Balanced Budget Act (BBA).

He noted that the new system resulted in cuts far deeper than intended by Congress.

In 1999 and 2000, Congress temporarily restored some of the unintended cuts as part of the Balanced Budget Refinement Act (BBRA) and the Benefits Improvement and Protection Act (BIPA).

These temporary add-ons helped restore beneficiary access to care, but overall Medicare funding levels for skilled nursing facilities continue to be below BBA projections, Langevin said.

“I am wholly committed to making the restorations of 1999 and 2000 permanent,” he said.

“We cannot turn our backs on a generation who built and defended the very foundation of this nation. They answered the call of our nation -now we must answer theirs.”