NCPSSM Letter to Senate Opposing S. Con. Res. 41

United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator:

On behalf of the millions of members and supporters of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, I am writing to urge you to vote against S. Con. Res. 41, Senator Rand Paul's so-called "Six Penny Plan" budget resolution. Members of the National Committee come from all walks of life and every political persuasion. What unites them is their passion for protecting and strengthening Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the other programs that are so vitally important to older Americans.

Although the title of the "Six Penny Plan" gives the impression that the cuts anticipated by S. Con. Res. 41 are minimal, in fact, the resolution would impose a 6 percent reduction each and every year in all on-budget outlays for the next decade, cutting the nominal-dollar value of federal spending, even as inflation and population rise. In dollar amounts, the resolution calls for nearly $20 trillion in cuts to federal spending over the next decade.

Although the allocation of cuts is not specified, enactment of this resolution would force an across-the-board cut to all on-budget federal spending in 2034 of 35 percent below the Congressional Budget Office's baseline projection. That is a cut of over $1 for every $3 spent by the federal government on programs and services that promote the safety and well-being of seniors like Medicare, Meals-on-Wheels, congregate meals and low-income energy subsidies, just to name a few. If defense and veterans were to be held harmless as is typically the case, the cut to all other programs as a result of Senator Paul's budget resolution would be 45 percent in 2034.

If the nearly $20 trillion in 10-year spending cuts were to be assessed across the board, Medicare would be cut by $3.7 trillion and Medicaid would be cut by $2.1 trillion, as just two examples. These draconian cuts to programs important to seniors are unconscionable at a time when over 10,000 Americans each day reach age 65, increasing demand for services. The proposed Medicare cuts threaten payments to hospitals, physicians, skilled nursing facilities, and other health care service providers who serve the more than 60 million people over age 65 or who have disabilities on Medicare, imperiling providers' ability to adequately provide care. The Medicaid cuts align with former President Trump's Project 2025 plans to slash federal funding for Medicaid by converting it to block grants or per capita caps, threatening coverage and care for more than 80 million Medicaid beneficiaries.

At the same time, S. Con. Res. 41 includes a permanent extension of former President Trump's tax cuts [also known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA)], which would cost $4.6 trillion over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and which overwhelmingly benefit the ultra-wealthy and large corporations. In fact, according the Tax Policy Center, nearly one-half of the benefits of the TCJA tax cuts would benefit the top 5 percent of taxpayers, and almost one-quarter of the benefits would go to the top 1 percent.

Finally, Senator Paul's resolution includes numerous changes to established Congressional voting procedures that increase the likelihood that the fiscal policies adopted in coming decades will favor the well-off at the expense of middle- and low-income Americans. Thresholds for multiple budget points of order are raised from the current super-majority threshold of 60 votes requirement to approve budget waivers to two-thirds, or 67 votes. These provisions represent the ultimate disenfranchisement of the majority of Americans, allowing a mere 34 Senators to force their budget priorities against the will of the remainder of the Senate.

The National Committee supports responsible government budgeting. However, we oppose S. Con. Res. 41 because it would significantly harm the economy and force severe cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal programs vital to America's seniors. We urge all members of Congress to vote no on this dangerous way to address the federal government's long-term fiscal challenges.

Sincerely,

Max Richtman
President and CEO