Statement of Congressman John D. Dingell, Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
MARKUP TO CONSIDER RECONCILIATION MEASURES

October 25, 2005

Let there be no mistake. Our meetings this week to carry out our Republican colleagues’ budget are not to reduce deficits. To the contrary, reconciliation will increase deficits. Quite simply, the Committee is meeting to try to find ways to pay for Republican tax cuts for the wealthy. Who are the Republicans asking to pay for the lost revenue? Needy Americans and ordinary Americans.

Needy Americans will pay dearly, with the Medicaid safety net being hurt just when it is needed the most. And to help the poor hurt by Hurricane Katrina, other poor people across the country will see additional cuts in programs that help the needy.

Ordinary Americans will also contribute with something that they own – the spectrum – sold and the proceeds going to the most privileged. And they will also have something taken away – over-the-air analog transmission of TV signals – that will force many ordinary Americans to pay extra to get television broadcasts.

My Republican colleagues go after the poor to protect the rich. With the number of uninsured at record levels – six million more Americans are uninsured today than in 2000 – the Republicans have decided to cut about $10 billion out of Medicaid, a program that provides health insurance to more than 50 million vulnerable and needy Americans. For what purpose?

The cuts to Medicaid come only to fund additional tax giveaways – the richest 0.2 percent have already gained on average $103,000 from Republican tax cuts. Now, pregnant women, poor children, individuals with cystic fibrosis, spina bifida, and other chronic illnesses, elderly widows in nursing homes, and others who rely on Medicaid for their care will be told to pay more for their health care and accept reduced insurance benefits or no care so the rich can get richer.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, Congress could find $24 billion in savings simply by not overpaying Medicare HMOs. Yet, these provisions are nowhere to be found in the Republican legislation. The profits of health insurers are protected while the poor and working families fund Republican tax priorities.

• Pharmacists’ Medicaid payments would be cut, impairing access to needed prescription drugs in many communities.
•  Destitute elderly could be denied needed nursing home care, and potentially be forced from their nursing homes. And those who tried to help their family financially with college assistance or assistance with medical bills would also be penalized.
• Families at many income levels would face increased out-of-pocket burdens and reductions in benefits. Most of us in the room are far removed from choosing between paying for health care for a child and paying for food. The poor on Medicaid – and particularly the poor disabled – already pay a greater portion of their income out-of-pocket than privately-insured individuals with higher incomes.
• States get no help with their increased burden of paying for prescription drugs for seniors.

Republicans could have chosen to make program reforms while returning the savings to Medicaid, but then who would have paid for the tax cuts for the wealthy?

My Republican colleagues also plan to fund their tax cuts in part by accelerating the transition from analog to digital television. Auctioning the reclaimed spectrum could generate at least $10 billion in government revenue. This raises two questions. First, will Republicans tax unsuspecting consumers to pay for the transition? Second, how will the government choose to spend the auction revenues?

Nearly 21 million households, many low-income or minority, rely solely on over-the-air analog TV reception. Countless others own at least some TVs that rely on over-the-air transmission. So millions of American families will need a converter box costing $60 or more just to keep watching television once analog signals cease. House Republicans, to protect their tax cuts, would force millions of Americans to reach into their wallets and pay a television tax of $20 to $60 per TV set. Why should ordinary people pay for a government decision that makes their television sets obsolete?

Also, why should proceeds from the sale of a public asset go to the wealthy? The bulk of the spectrum auction proceeds should be devoted to public safety communications that benefit all Americans, not to tax cuts for only the privileged few. Our first responders risk their lives to leave no one behind. We cannot let the Republicans leave first responders behind.

The proposal before the Committee mandates asset sales and spending cuts that hurt ordinary and poor Americans in order to preserve tax cuts for the wealthy. The rich continue to get richer, and everyone else is stuck with the tab. I urge my colleagues to reject these reconciliation measures.

- 30 -

(Contact: Jodi Seth, 202-225-3641)