Times Union - Budget Should Make Statement

Op-Ed

By Paul Tonko

The news coming out of Albany last week centered on passage of New York's budget. But another budget battle was under way in Washington; a proposed budget that would shake the foundations of America's principles and priorities -- the Ryan budget.

The House Republicans have voted for a budget, offered by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, that would end Medicare as we know it and balance the debt on the backs of the middle and working class.

But don't take my word for it. AARP said "the proposal lacks balance and jeopardizes the health and economic security of older Americans."

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said it's possible that seniors would face higher costs and "reduced access to health care and diminished quality of care."
It only makes sense that this would be the case. The Ryan budget would end the Medicare guarantee on which seniors depend and replaces it with a voucher to purchase individual private health insurance.

This voucher fails to keep pace with health care costs over time. It does decrease federal spending -- by shifting the burden onto the backs of seniors and the disabled. Beneficiaries will either be forced to pay thousands more from their own pockets on premiums for a plan that provides their current Medicare benefit package, or else buy plans that may leave them significantly underinsured.

Prior to the creation of Medicare, nearly half of all American senior citizens had no health insurance. Imagine if one in every two seniors you knew was uninsured today. That is certainly not the principle of the American dream in which I believe.
The plan also gives massive tax breaks to the very wealthy, ensuring the very rich get richer, and the rest of us are left to pick up the tab.

That's because the Ryan budget, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, would provide those earning more than $1 million per year an average tax cut of $394,000. That means House Republicans would rather give away $394,000 to one person who doesn't need it, including Big Oil companies, than provide 394 college students with Pell grants of $1,000.

Why would they do this?

The assumption is that only the richest among us can create jobs. But the overwhelming source of job creation is not the rich -- it is the middle class and small businesses. An empowered middle class with a larger checkbook is a far better job creator than a handful of the wealthy elite. A few dozen very wealthy shoppers will never be able to buy as many new clothes, dine out or purchase new cars collectively as tens of millions of middle and working class families.

The Ryan budget cuts taxes for the top-tier earners but finances that tax cut by placing an additional burden on the middle class. The budget cuts the top marginal tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent in a "deficit-neutral" way. Based on estimates provided by the Tax Policy Center, this proposal will reduce revenues by nearly $5 trillion over 10 years. But they don't show how they would finance that tax cut without increasing the tax burden on the middle class. Indeed, when recently given an opportunity to prohibit tax increases on individuals with income less than $200,000, all of the Republicans on the Budget Committee voted "No."

Our budget should prioritize seniors and the working class, rather than require them to be the payment for tax cuts for the very wealthy.

We must do better. Our nation's budget must be a statement of our values.

Congress should work together to enact a budget that grows our economy, supports small businesses and creates jobs -- because doing so is the best way to strengthen our middle class, protect our seniors and reduce the deficit.

Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Budget-should-make-statement-3453887.php#ixzz2QrMOjB2h

Source