Grandma, Grandpa Spared From Bulk of Automatic Supercommittee Cuts
EmailWith less than three days before their midnight deadline, the 12-member Congressional supercommittee is expected to announce today that they did not reach a deal to cut $1.2 trillion from the federal budget over the next ten years.
While Congressional aides stress a last-minute Hail Mary pass is still possible, deep divides over taxes are still shaking the foundations of any prospective, and as of now unlikely, deal.
This race-the-clock game has already played out twice this year, but this time there is no looming government shutdown or imminent debt default. Instead, there are $1.2 trillion in automatic, across-the-board budget cuts split evenly between defense and domestic spending that will take effect in 2013 in the absence of a deal.
Unlike the last two doomsday-like failure scenarios, the automatic cuts may not be so devastating on the non-defense spending side of the equation. Both Medicaid and Social Security are spared from the funding reductions and Medicare cuts are limited to 2 percent of the entitlement program’s budget.
Budget hawks looking for significant spending reductions herald the automatic cuts as real deficit-reduction. And entitlement program defenders claim the limited cuts — which include exceptions for the poor and disabled — are less damaging than any that are likely to come out of a supercommittee deal.
“I think failure is a success,” said Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the conservative CATO Institute. “I think that a supercommittee that does not come to an agreement is more likely to achieve real cuts than one that does.”
Under the automatic cuts, or sequestration, Medicare will lose about $123 billion between 2013 and 2021. But that entire amount will come out of the pockets of doctors and hospitals, not grandma and grandpa.
“If there’s a deal, it could be much worse,” said Eric Kingson, the co-director of Social Security Works. “I’m not going to suggest that a 2 percentage point cut focused on providers may not result in tighter payments for certain kinds of procedures, but it is far less onerous than further raising deductibles on people.”
That doesn’t mean the many-billion-dollar cuts will be painless.
Tanner said that slashing the amount the federal government reimburses health care providers who care for Medicare enrollees could make it more difficult for senior citizens to find doctors that will care for them.
“About 12 percent of physicians already will not accept Medicare patients and a larger number are not accepting new patients,” Tanner said. “If you further reduce reimbursements, you’re liable to find additional physicians saying it’s just not worth it.”
Leemore Dafny, an associate professor of management and strategy at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, said the provider-side cuts could force already cash-strapped rural and inner-city hospitals to search for alternate forms of revenue.
“Hospital margins are extremely low,” Dafny said. “Most are under 5 percent and Medicare counts for well over a third of hospital admissions. One possibility is that hospitals will pressure private insurers to pay higher prices because they have nowhere else to turn.”
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
We’re doomed
Posted by: craig | November 21, 2011, 8:49 am 8:49 am
The only way we begin to recover is to make huge cuts to entitlement spending.
Posted by: sick of waste | November 21, 2011, 9:03 am 9:03 am
You write this as though you believe that the “automatic” cuts will actually be made. Good luck with that.
Posted by: ray | November 21, 2011, 9:21 am 9:21 am
Surely, people can’t believe that in an election year when politicians are pandering to the masses for votes that they are going to cut programs that millions of people are just now receiving the benefits of. Haha. Dream on.
Posted by: howdymo1 | November 21, 2011, 9:35 am 9:35 am
These automatic cuts will hit the poor hard. But that was the conservatives aim all along, never raise taxes on the wealthy and cut aid to the poor. Conservatives only care about babies in the womb, once they are out, they are on their own! Actually, they don’t really care about babies in the womb or they would fully fund food stamps and medical care for the poor who are pregnant, as pre-natal nutrition and seeing a doctor regularly while expecting is vitally important for the health of the baby.
Posted by: Lydia | November 21, 2011, 9:35 am 9:35 am
lydia…you’re a dyed-in-the-wool liberal! If you really believe that more tax revenue would be used by this government to reduce our debt, you’re a loon. The government will spend every penny (actually, Obama’s spending about $1.4 TRILLION more than we have EVERY YEAR) it takes in. The supercommmittee was set up to fail. 6 who want to raise taxes even more against 6 who want Americans to keep as much of their paychecks as possible. How do YOU think that vote was going to turn out? The president himself admitted that the drivers of our debt are the entitlement programs. So why aren’t his yes-men (Harry Reid + ALL of the Democrat party) leading the charge on real reforms to the entitlement programs? Yeah, right. Like that will EVER happen in our lifetimes. We know that we simply cannot tax people at the levels that would be necessary to balance the budget and begin to pay down our $15 TRILLION of debt. That is a known mathematically inescapable fact. Yet, the Democrat party insists on tax increases. A country of some 307 million people can’t find 535 sensible, country-loving folks to elect to Congress who understand what’s at stake. Unbelievable.
Posted by: s | November 21, 2011, 9:54 am 9:54 am
Oh Lydia, knock off with the liberal talking points already. I consider myself to be a conservative and believe that personal responsibility is what is deeply needed in this country. People shouldn’t need government assistance to get food for being pregnant. They should be responsible enough to not get pregnant if they can’t afford it.
Posted by: dx | November 21, 2011, 9:56 am 9:56 am
s | November 21, 2011, 9:54 am post ————– Your ridiculous little rant leaves out one very important thing. Democrats understand that raising revenue IN ADDITION to spending cuts is the way to go. Republicans think that spending cuts ALONE will save us. Republicans ARE fighting tooth and nail for their true bosses – the wealthy, and Big Business. Democrats are fighting for the rest of us……………
Posted by: Searambler | November 21, 2011, 10:03 am 10:03 am
How do they figure it won’t hurt seniors? By cutting doctors and hospitals, the seniors DO get screwed…thanks conservatives. Sorry not everyone’s grandparents were savvy investors during their lifetimes and have piles of money to pay their medical bills. And as far as Medicare being an “entitlement”, how about we just make seniors BEG for their Medicare and SS every month…they deserve it!!! Republicans make me sick!
Posted by: america2929 | November 21, 2011, 10:05 am 10:05 am
I consider myself to be a conservative and believe that personal responsibility is what is deeply needed in this country. Posted by: dx | November 21, 2011, 9:56 am.
So then you support the Individual Mandate, right? Which requires people to be responsible by having health insurance. Or is your “personal responsibility” line just lip service?
You also said, “People shouldn’t need government assistance to get food for being pregnant. They should be responsible enough to not get pregnant if they can’t afford it”. I see this frequently from the Right – what people should or should not do. There are lots of things people maybe should and shouldn’t do. But the REALITY is that people DO things. This is a free country for EVERYONE, not just the people YOU agree with. Why is it Republicans always tell us they want less government intrusion in our lives while simultaneously telling us what people should and shouldn’t do? Why do they fight to defund Planned Parenthood, then complain when poor people, who were getting their contraception there, become pregnant? Republican positions on things like this are so incredibly hypocritical…………
Posted by: Searambler | November 21, 2011, 10:10 am 10:10 am
The American people need to wake up, our government has been infiltrated with lobbyists and insiders stuffing their pockets with US taxpayer money and Wall Street money. There’s nothing but corruption in Washington DC that’s why they cannot get anything done but argue each other.
Can it be true? That members of Congress are exempt from insider trading laws? We invade other countries for the corruption of their leaders and how they take full advantage of people by plundering the treasuries, yet we here in US promote and elect the most corrupt to the highest offices and positions. And, they voted themselves an exception to Obama-care. They will keep their current health care plan, fully funded by the taxpayer, instead of falling under the Obama-care legislation.
The late Justice Louis Brandeis warned the nation that ” We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”
Our greed will be our demise.
Posted by: blind spot | November 21, 2011, 10:13 am 10:13 am
Cuts are cuts, take’em where you can get’em
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 10:14 am 10:14 am
Posted by: Searambler—-People Complain, all of them, especially when they feel they are being wronged. The government has stuck its nose into everyone’s business where everything the government does give somebody a complaint to be redressed.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 10:22 am 10:22 am
They should have started with the 1% themselves. Their wages, pensions and
health benefits should be cut. We all know the make money off of insider trading.
yes it would be a drop in the bucket, but who better to start with.
Posted by: deadwrestler | November 21, 2011, 10:32 am 10:32 am
I think it is time for us to demand those on government welfare to do something to earn their pay. And there is plenty they could be doing. Clean government housing, the maintenance on government housing, cleaning public property, maintaining public property, shoveling sidewalks, etc, etc, etc.
Not only would it reward them for work, it would save the taxpayer a bundle of having to pay someone else to do these things.
Posted by: trish | November 21, 2011, 10:33 am 10:33 am
Hey Trish – News Flash. We don’t have enough jobs woman. Then there’s the problem of affording day care when they work them. When the men walk off and don’t help. The wealthy rip you off far more Trish.
Posted by: lexingtonlady | November 21, 2011, 10:40 am 10:40 am
Posted by: lexingtonlady—-Decisions made in the heat of the moment have unintended consequences, and in the case of having kids, it is a 20 year commitment, and a several hundred thousand dollar investment, maybe more women and men should think about that before they do the deed, and if they don’t, they get to pay the consequences, namely a life of poverty, and the loss of opportunity to give you offspring a competitive advantage that will make them successful.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 10:41 am 10:41 am
Posted by: trish—It competes with Union Labor, they won’t let it happen, and don’t let it happen. The Unions hate when someone does a Union Job for less that Union Wages. Having people who collect Wellfare do the work, would drive down the Union Wages, and take jobs Union Members could be doing. Union representatives, represent their Union, not the employers, not the non union employees, and not the country.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 10:45 am 10:45 am
Ralph wrote, “…my money confiscated to pay for women who spread their legs to get welfare money”.
Yeah, Ralph, THAT is the Republican mind-set today, that poor pregnant women are the cause of all that’s wrong in the world. What a pathetic and sexist statement. Because it takes two to tango. The fractions of pennies they need to survive pales in comparison to the trillions in corporate welfare the Republicans have engineered and continue to fight for in this nation for the rich, the really rich, and the super rich………
Posted by: Searambler | November 21, 2011, 10:46 am 10:46 am
snewsom union jobs are a whopping 10% of jobs in this country. Find something else to blame.
Posted by: lexingtonlady | November 21, 2011, 10:46 am 10:46 am
Posted by: trish—It competes with Union Labor, they won’t let it happen, and don’t let it happen. Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 10:45 am.
LOL! Union membership in this nation in 2010 was approximately 12% of the work force, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Demonize them and tell lies all you want, but you are wrong…………..
Posted by: Searambler | November 21, 2011, 10:50 am 10:50 am
Posted by: lexingtonlady–If you cannot afford to have them, don’t. If you have them anyway, you are greatly reducing the opportunities open to you and you kids sometimes to 0. Your right we don’t have enough jobs, and we won’t have enough jobs as long as Americans are uncompetitive, and we will never have enough jobs as long as the Chinese and Indians do the same work for less. As a result we have a surplus population, more people than the economy needs, even if we trained everyone to do a highly trained STEM Field, there isn’t a place for everyone and there never has been. Life is a Giant Game of Musical Chairs, except the stakes are more dire than hurt feelings.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 10:55 am 10:55 am
Lexingtonlady says we don’t have enough jobs. Really? Have you seen government housing and how disgusting and run down it is? Have you seen the graffiti on public property? There is plenty to do.
I think you are confused though. I’m not talking about them having a job doing these things for additional pay. They are already being paid with our tax dollars, why not have them work for their pay? The things I listed need to be done. If you are on welfare or unemployment, you work for it doing things that benefit the general public and society.
Versus what they are currently doing, nothing.
PS – This posting too quickly thing is getting annoying.
Posted by: trish | November 21, 2011, 10:57 am 10:57 am
snewsome – Go lecture the dead beat FATHERS that are running up your entitlement bill as you guys promote heaping this all on the mothers raising the children. When I read women join in it angers me even more. These are sad times if we must demonize the poor mothers that are trying and speak of them like they are just pure trash not worthy of any consideration or dignity. And caring about children? What a joke. They talk about that in the Bible.
Posted by: lexingtonlady | November 21, 2011, 10:57 am 10:57 am
While they are 10-12% of the Private sector workforce, they are 40+% of the public sector workforce. The public sector workforce is what does the cleanup and maintenance jobs. It would be the public sector Unions that they would be competing against, say we have Wellfare people clean up the streets, cleaning up the streets is a Union Member Public Sector Job, preforming maintenance of public property, is a Union Job. The Jobs that Trish Mentioned are all Union Jobs.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:00 am 11:00 am
Did you see Grover Norquist on 60 Minutes. If a Republican congressman does not take/keep the Pledge, they are toast at the next election. They say they do not raise taxes. They have certainly been behind a number of expenses they put on the “credit card”. Such as: Bush’s tax cuts, the prescription coverage for seniors, and TWO wars. All without voting to “raise taxes”. The country’s debt comes about when spending is more than the taxes that come in. The PEOPLE should decide what they want to pay for. Paid-for congressmen certainly cannot/will not vote the will of the PEOPLE. Disgusting!
Posted by: Gordon Byrd | November 21, 2011, 11:01 am 11:01 am
Posted by: lexingtonlady—I had one, and you know what it didn’t make much of a difference. Even though he had a job, he never made enough money, to contribute, in the end I was lucky he wasn’t in the picture because more than likely I would have ended up just like him. You are right it takes two to tango, and it is choice on the part of both people, what are you going to do, throw them in prison, turn them into indentured servants. If they had skills it wouldn’t matter they would have some money , but they don’t, and you cannot squeeze blood from a turnip.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:08 am 11:08 am
It is too bad that there is nothing that they could agree with. If they even found 50% of the cuts and revenue enhancements the mandatory cuts could be reduced by dollar for dollar! If they cannot even use this logic there is no solution!
Posted by: Common _ Sense | November 21, 2011, 11:10 am 11:10 am
Snewsom – How much do you suppose it costs taxpayers to have these public union people doing these things?
We are in a time when all of the government spending must be cut and if something can be done to save us money, it must be. Paying someone union wages plus benefits to clean the yard of trash at these government housing projects while the people inside creating the trash are being paid to sit on their behinds and play video games is about as dumb as it gets. It is a circle, people paid to create a mess and people paid extremely well to clean that mess.
My gosh, not only would this save us a bundle, but think of the health benefits these people would get from getting up off the couch and getting outdoors. They would then be putting forth effort to clean their neighborhoods, talking with other “workers” and taking pride in doing something.
Posted by: trish | November 21, 2011, 11:12 am 11:12 am
Posted by: Gordon Byrd—You are right, but how do you change the system, we are still presented with who to vote for, and that is controlled by the bought and paid for politicians. The media will still pick who gets face time, and most Americans are too lazy to go out on their own and learn about the candidates that are running.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:12 am 11:12 am
Posted by: Common _ Sense—What is the compromise between spend more and spend less. These people or at least a majority of them believe their way is right, the rest stick a wet finger in the wind.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:14 am 11:14 am
Yesterday, I listened to Mr. Norquest bragging about holding up any spending and revenue. His smirky smile annoyed me but his remarks made me angry. He is bragging that if anyone who has signed his petition, forgets this and votes for revenue…he will see to it that their political career is over. Is this the America I knew where one lobbyist holds the country’s future in his hand…more power than a president?. This republican party is nuts. He also bragged that if they do what HE SAYS.. he will guide them right into the white house. My God…what were the republicans thinking. They have signed away their freedom to think and vote for whatever they want…this man pulls the strings on the entire republican party. How in hell can this be good for the country. Thank God Pres. Reagan did not think this was a good idea as he raised revenue 18 times because it was necessary to save the country and it worked. Every economist says we cannot save this country with cuts alone….we must have revenue and to think that one person ….a lobbyist…..holds the strings as to whether this country succeeds….what are you all thinking? He has taken away your freedom to think and choose…a freedom our boys have been fighting for in Iraq….and you give it away to some jerk called Norquest. I am appalled and so disappointed in a party to which I belonged to for 24 years.
Posted by: talmag | November 21, 2011, 11:15 am 11:15 am
What fools we mortals be! The Feds own half the natural resources in the nation. Full development of oil resources alone would be enough to take care of Medicare deficits (unless the politicians gave it away to their big supporters). If we can get Obama out of there, most of our problems will disappear. Iowa gave us Obama in 2008 by voting for Huckabee and threatens to give us Obama in 2012 by voting for Gingrich. Iowa needs to be stuck back in the pack or a third party needs to be formed. I would prefer a third party of Republican and Democratic moderates. It would get my first donation to a political party.
Posted by: Wm. Inman | November 21, 2011, 11:20 am 11:20 am
The payroll tax reduction tax reduction was supposed to be only temporary so when it goes away it is not a tax increase anymore than when the “Bush” tax cuts fo away! The insidious part of the payroll tax reduction is that this reduction took place by reducing funding for Social Security and Medicare! This is stealing from Peter to pay Paul!!!!
Posted by: Common _ Sense | November 21, 2011, 11:22 am 11:22 am
Deadbeat dads and welfare recipients, this has been going on my whole life.
Unfortunately, I believe that is human nature. Welfare reform was tackled in the 90′s
and actually was working until this depression hit. Obama has expanded coverage
for recipients and change some of the guidelines,but what do you due when your in
a depression. Job creation is the key, but his plan is slanted to unions. The private
sector is what runs the economy, and needs to be addressed. As long as we remain
pitted against each other, we all remain stymied.
Posted by: deadwrestler | November 21, 2011, 11:23 am 11:23 am
Posted by: trish—I agree with you, I think they should do work, I also know the Unions will protest.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:24 am 11:24 am
Posted by: talmag—He is the public face of the no new taxes crowd. Also the left and the right are not trying to save the same country, the left wants to save the entitlement state, the right wants to save the constitution, or at least limit the government. These are not the same (R)’s and (D)’s of 10-20-30 years ago, the world isn’t the same place either, the economy is different, and the players are different.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:27 am 11:27 am
Posted by: Common _ Sense—SSI is robbing Peter to pay Paul, because the first Paul never paid in.
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:28 am 11:28 am
There is NO way Congress will EVER make the necessary cuts to entitlements for the elderly. Considering that they are the one single voting block that actually votes, it would be political suicide to do what is needed on the part of Congress. Face it, America…we CANNOT afford all of these programs that are designed to keep the members of Congress in their positions….to quote Abraham Lincoln, “There are too many pigs for the teats…”
Posted by: angus | November 21, 2011, 11:39 am 11:39 am
Also the left and the right are not trying to save the same country, the left wants to save the entitlement state, the right wants to save the constitution…..
Posted by: snewsom2997 | November 21, 2011, 11:27 am.
Oh BULLSPIT! You freakin’ anarchists are getting tiresome with your ‘The Left hates America the Left hates the Constitution the Left hates everything good about this country’ line of crap. I have been paying into Medicare and Social Security since I was 15 years old. Yes I am ENTITLED to see benefits from these programs. You complain about “entitlements” yet there are just as many Republicans using them as Democrats. And of course no mention from YOU of the Right fighting for the rich and the super rich and saying, ‘screw you poor and middle class, you’re on your own’…………
Posted by: Searambler | November 21, 2011, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
Democrats are proud to have saved grandma and grandpa, but if those cuts are instituted thats exactly what will happen.
Posted by: Lizzie | November 21, 2011, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm
No one will be “spared” when the US credit rating is downgraded leaning to a devalued dollar and increased inflation! If Medicare payments are reduced to the medical community the availability and quality of care of Grandma and Grandpa will suffer!
Posted by: Common _ Sense | November 21, 2011, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
The right wants to save The Constitution Searambler. Those real Americans that love this country more than you or I. Micromanaging my womb after the Supreme Court told them to back off the first time is their first order of business. I’d call that some special constitutional love. Ditching the USPS is also in there.
Posted by: lexingtonlady | November 21, 2011, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm
These cuts do not take place til 2013, and I believe they are based on spending
increases to certain departments. So these departments just will not get additional
funds. If that’s the way i understand it.
Posted by: deadwrestler | November 21, 2011, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm
WE NEED MORE STRONG MEN LIKE REUTHER,MEANY, AND JIMMY HOFFA! HE SHUT DOWN THIS COUNTRY TO GIVE THE WORKING MAN A DECENT WAGE. THEY WOULD NOT STAND BY WHILE EVERY THING AN AMERICAN BOUGHT IN THIS COUNTRY WAS MADE IN CHINA,TAIWAN,KOREA ,ETC. THATS THE REAL PROBLEM,WHICH BEGAN IN THE 60 S. THESE COMPANIES WOULD RATHER PAY 60 CENTS A DAY TO FOREIGN SLAVES WITH THE IMPORT TAX THEN SUPPORT THEIR OWN COUNTRYMEN. WE NEED ISOLATIIONISM NOW!
Posted by: THOMAS NEUENHOFF | November 21, 2011, 3:08 pm 3:08 pm
Left,Right,Whatever. There should be a heart in the middle of all this nonsense!The super-committee did not do their job, do not pay them. Don’t pay the guy that hired them. A corporation goes out of business. A little guy comes along, buys it and is successful. WE are the little guy. Politicians are the CEO’s that bankrupted the company,(The USA). Fire them. Ask the people what should be done rather than forcing any political will on anyone! We the little guys have better sense than all of you corrupt, corporate …….. (And, for Gods sake, quit giving yourselves raises. You do not deserve it!)
Posted by: Sandy | November 22, 2011, 3:08 am 3:08 am