Articles

Bush's 2008 Budget Proposal to Slash 70 Billion from Medicare

 Email

Share

Comments (3)

As a rule of thumb, I don’t discuss religion and politics unless I’m in the company of close friends or family—it’s just too easy to cross the line from thought-provoking to offensive, especially for someone who’s as outspoken and opinionated as I am. After reading a recent article on President Bush’s 2.9 trillion spending plan for 2008, however, I feel I have no choice but to break my rule. President Bush recently went before Congress, controlled by the Democratic Party for the first time in his presidency, and proposed a 2.9 trillion budget that would cut approximately 70 billion in funding from Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years—while increasing military spending and without affecting first-term tax cuts. While the proposed time frame is in line with Democratic goals, there seems to be some dissonance in terms of federal priorities.

If you are a higher-income beneficiary, you could expect to pay much higher premiums and more for drug coverage. Another component of the plan, according to the New York Times: “freezing Medicare payments to home health agencies and reducing inflation allowance paid to hospitals, nursing homes and other providers.” Considering Congress’ negative response to the president’s proposal from last year, which suggested smaller Medicare reductions, it’s unlikely this plan will be accepted as is. Whether you bat for the left or the right, though, there’s no denying that the rapid increase in the retirement-age population puts a lot of pressure on the federal budget. Entitlements for older Americans come from income taxes on people of working age. It takes five working Americans to support one senior citizen’s entitlements. How would—or should—the government respond if Social Security trustees have projected accurately, and by 2030 there are only three workers for every adult older than 65? It is entirely possible for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to consume federal spending. Are there options that don’t involve spending cuts or tax increases? How and where should we conserve to avoid a fiscal crisis without stripping Americans of the care to which they’re entitled?

Calling all opinionated people—

Lori Deschene

Posted in: Editorials

 Email

Share

Comments (3)