 |
|
|
 |
  |
|
 |
|
Letter to Sen. Gregg: "We ask the Senator to take a stand as a powerful friend of children" Children's Alliance urges NH Sen. Judd Gregg to oppose Medicaid cuts and domestic discretionary spending caps February 23, 2005 Our primary focus in on the President’s budget – and how it affects the children and families of New Hampshire. We hope the Senator will stand with us on two key issues First, we hope the Senator will oppose any cuts to the Medicaid health care entitlement. While we understand the desire to rein in government health care spending on both the federal and state levels, we view cuts to Medicaid health care entitlements as a response to a symptom that ignores the underlying disease. The impact of the prescription benefit contained in the Medicare Modernization Act aside, per-person Medicaid spending has grown at a much-slower rate than have private health care premium costs. We suggest that it is the overall cost of providing care that has pulled federal and state Medicaid costs upward, and not inefficiencies in the Medicaid program. A report from the Center on Budget Priorities released this week indicates that President Bush's proposed budget would cut $165.4 million from what New Hampshire would otherwise expect to receive from the Medicaid program over the next 10 years. That translates into a loss of 14,000 coverage years for children by 2010. We urge Sen. Gregg to oppose any attempt to impose arbitrary limits on Medicaid spending, either by use of budget reconciliation or any other form of cap. Any such limit will not address the real drivers of health care costs. Moreover, cuts in federal support will shift the cost of caring for poor children down to the states – at a time when the state legislature is, as you know, struggling with the impact of a $100-million reduction in federal Medicaid dollars. Second, we ask the Senator to oppose any rule changes that would create caps on discretionary spending. The President’s budget calls for cuts of $214 billion in discretionary funding by 2010 – this means average cuts of 16% on domestic discretionary programs like education, housing assistance and child care. In New Hampshire, such cuts would have direct and harmful effects. In education, New Hampshire stands to lose $51.9 million dollars between 2006 and 2010, including cuts to funding for special education and school improvement. Given our current crisis in education funding in New Hampshire, it is hard to see where such a loss of federal revenue could be absorbed. By the state? By local school districts? In human services, the President’s budget would result in cuts to WIC funding, foster care services, and child care funding, including a projected loss of rental vouchers for 1,600 families in 2010 and child care assistance to 1,000 children in 2009. Education and human service costs did not cause the current deficit and should not be targeted for budget cuts. The deficit was caused by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. The deficit will be exacerbated if those tax cuts are extended and made permanent. We ask the Senator to stand up for children and families by seeking revenue-side solutions to the budget deficit. New Hampshire favors a government that is lean, but not mean. We ask for the Senator’s support of key domestic programs. Apart from these budget issues, we also seek the Senator’s support for emerging bipartisan efforts to move forward on the TANF reauthorization bill – separate from any budget reconciliation. We have been told that Senators Grassley and Baucus are working in a bipartisan coalition to bring forward a bill based on Senator Grassley's PRIDE bill last year. Recent information indicates that negotiations are moving forward – with significant progress on the question of increased child care funding. We believe a bi-partisan stand alone TANF bill is preferable to addressing TANF in the reconciliation process – as it is more likely to recognize that increased work provisions must be accompanied by an increase in child care spending. Even now, the number of child care slots for low-income children in our state are dwindling – due in large part to the lack of any rate increase in five years. We believe child care funding, together with other initiatives to support family self-reliance, are at risk if TANF reauthorization is undertaken through the budget reconciliation process. Please know that the Children’s Alliance stands ready to support the Senator in creating a federal budget that is friendly to children and families. Investments in children’s health, in quality child care, in workforce housing are sound public investments – investments that not only meet individual needs today, but also build human capital for the future. We ask the Senator to take a stand as a powerful friend of children – by opposing harmful budget proposals. With thanks for your time and your commitment, I remain, Very truly yours,
|
Voices for America's Children federal budget page Coalition on Human Needs federal budget page Connect For Kids budget analysis Child Welfare League budget analysis
|
 |
|
|
© Children's Alliance of New Hampshire 2000-2005 |
