We are fast approaching a critical time in the history of
this country. There are an ever
increasing number of persons with disabilities severe enough that they are
unable to care for themselves or support themselves due to their inability to
hold a job. The majority of these people
require large amounts of medication, daily assistance with personal hygiene,
meals, transportation, lodging, general shopping and so much more. The list includes those with physical,
emotional and developmental disabilities.
We can add to this population another quickly increasing
group: Senior Citizens. People are living longer due to advances in
health and medicine. That's good
news. Yet once again we are challenged
with finding the means to care for these people. Nursing homes and personal care homes are
grossly expensive. According to
HealthGuide.org the average annual cost of a nursing home in the United States
is around $70,000. Medicare will only
pay for 100 days of skilled nursing care or rehabilitation. If one's income is limited Medicaid may cover
most of the cost for long term care.
Many facilities, however, require applicants to be able to pay their own
way for a period of time, typically 3 years.
Together these two populations, the disabled and the seniors
who are, essentially, also disabled in that they require support and care in
order to live, constitute a significant sub-culture. The numbers are staggering.
·
51.2 million people, or 18% of the American
population, have some form of disability.
·
32.5 million Americans, or 12 %, have a severe
disability.
·
72% of those 80 years of age and older are
disabled. This is the highest percentage
of any age group.
These numbers are increasing constantly. None of these persons want to be in the
situation they find themselves in.
Almost none have any hope of getting better. These people depend on Medicaid and other
government programs, including waivers and various funding streams, to
survive.
Survive! We are not
talking about luxury lifestyles. Nor are
we referring to unnecessary expenditures.
Rather, I am talking about the most basic human needs - food, clothing,
hygiene, a place to live, and medical care.
Anyone who has a loved one in this situation understands. It can be depressing and frustrating, made
even more so by the reality of budget cuts in the Federal and State levels.
This brings me to the newly proposed budget by Paul Ryan (R
- WI), Chair of the House Budget Committee.
You may remember the infamous Ryan Plan of 2011 which was mercifully
defeated before it could ravage the poor and disenfranchised. Ryan's 2012 version - call it the Ryan Plan,
Part II - is even more insulting the Part I, if that is possible.
I love the opinion of this plan as voiced by Bib Greenstein,
President of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. He calls the Ryan budget "Robin Hood in reverse - on steroids. It would likely produce the largest
redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U. S. history and
likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent
times (and possibly in the nation's history.)"
Here are just a few of the lowlights.
Ø
Further tax cuts to the wealthy
Ø
Increased taxes for the low and moderate income
people
Ø
Significant increases to the core military
budget
Ø
Cutting $5.3 trillion dollars over the next ten
years, with most of these cuts coming from health programs
Ø
Turning responsibility for major programs for
the poor, such as Medicaid and Food Stamps, over to the States, including a
required deadline for recipients to find work and get off the government
support programs.
These are but a few of the problems inherent in the Ryan
proposal. They alone are enough to cause
serious concern for any one, especially for any follower of Jesus. The New Testament clearly calls the Christian
to be generous and supportive of those less fortunate. Jesus modeled this lifestyle for us and we
who claim to follow him would do well to take another look at our leader before
we attempt to protect our privileged lifestyles.
But what I really want to know is this: What ever happened to the so-called budget
compromise that was worked out in Congress last year? Remember the deal that was cut at the
midnight hour? A bi-partisan "Super
Committee" consisting of 6 Republicans and 6 Democrats were commissioned
to develop a proposed budget plan with a defined deadline. If they failed to do so certain conditions
would automatically go into effect.
These conditions included:
ü
Half of all spending cuts would come from
defense
ü
The remaining half would come from domestic
programs, except as follows:
ü
Programs for the poor, including Medicaid and
Social Security, would be shielded from the automatic spending cuts
ü
No entitlement reform
ü
Debt-limit increases would be matched dollar-for-dollar
with Budget decreases
I recall thinking at the time this was passed that Congress
will find a way to wiggle out of any and all binding clauses contained
within. However, I did not truly believe
they would have to, because I honestly thought the "Super Committee"
would find a last-second compromise to meet their obligation before the
deadline and thus avoid the agreed-upon fail safe measures. I was wrong about that one. But it looks like I was right about the first
point. Congress conveniently seems to
have forgotten its own pledge. Why does
that not surprise me? The pledge was
made by men and women who got elected by promising all kinds of commitments
they have little or no intention of keeping.
In effect, they are only showing their true colors once again.
This is another classic example of a Congressional Claptrap
(see definition at the beginning of this article). Non-binding deals and meaningless mandates
that have more escape routes than Hogan's Heroes. Isn't it about time we, the citizens of this
great country, demand more from our elected officials than all this smoke-and-mirrors
dribble? It's getting old, and so am I.
gdgehr
March 24, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment