Monday, January 02, 2006

"A hit on students, elderly"

"So what did tuition-weary college students and their cash-strapped parents do to become major targets in Congress' last-minute attempt to appear to cut federal spending?
When it came time for Republicans in Washington to show where their hearts are, here's what happened: Vice President Dick Cheney zoomed home from Asia at warp speed aboard Air Force 2 to cast the tie-breaking 51st vote in the Senate for the budget bill, which, in addition to slashing college aid, also makes nasty cuts in spending on medical care for the elderly and the poor and drops new unfunded mandates on the states.

This was legislation conservatives in Congress had demanded so they could assure voters next year that they had done something to curb federal spending. At the same time, lawmakers are hoping the public doesn't realize that this cut is only a faint scratch in a budget larded with tax cuts, war spending, and carefree pork-barrel projects that will balloon - not reduce - the size of the deficit.

As it turned out, a full one-third of the $39.7 billion lopped off the federal budget in the lawmakers' pre-Christmas rush will be realized in reduced college aid and higher interest rates on student loans.

As painful as the cuts in educational assistance may be to middle-class students and parents, two-thirds of the cuts target the least fortunate among us - the elderly and poor who have medical problems.

For example, Medicaid recipients who now pay a $3 co-payment for a range of health-care services will find themselves charged $20 to $100. Medicare recipients - everyone over 65 - will see cuts in home health services, the aid that helps many elderly stay out of nursing homes.

Cash-strapped states like Ohio and Michigan will be required to institute strict new work requirements for welfare recipients, or face the loss of badly needed federal aid.

These are the priorities of Congress' Republican majority. They call it reform. We call it a gratuitous attack on people least likely to be able to protect themselves."-from the editorial today in the Toledo Blade (OH).

How did Dave Reichert vote on this?

No comments: