Schakowsky Statement on GOP Budget Reconciliation Bill
WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 10, 2012) -- Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) issued the following statement in response to passage of the Republican budget reconciliation bill, HR 5652 – Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of 2012:
“Democrats and Republicans agree on the need to address our deficit - but we could not be further apart on how to do it. Today, Republicans in the House passed a bill that asks nothing from the wealthiest Americans while literally taking away food and health care from children and senior citizens. Their bill would cut $33 billion in food stamps and take away school lunches from 300,000 kids. Under their cuts to Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance program, 300,000 are at risk of losing their health coverage. They would eliminate the Social Services Block Grant program, which provides “Meals on Wheels” for almost 1.7 million older Americans and child protective services for 1.8 million at-risk children.
House Republicans would eliminate a key public health fund that targets funds to women’s health, including screenings for breast and cervical cancer, and to childhood immunizations Once again, they ask federal employees –middle-class workers who have already seen their wages and benefits cut by over $75 billion – to contribute even more.
Not a single Democrat voted for this immoral bill which demands that those who have been sacrificing for years bear even more of the burden of the failed Bush policies that caused our deficits. Instead, we offered an alternative that would achieve the same level of savings by eliminating tax breaks for Big Oil, ending agriculture subsidies that go to wealthy farmers, and instituting the Buffett Rule - which simply asks people who make a million dollars a year to pay the same tax rate as middle-class families.
The differences are clear. Republicans want to protect only the 1 percent, putting the entire burden of deficit reduction on children, seniors, women, and the middle-class. Democrats want a balanced approach that asks those who can afford it to pay their fair share and that doesn’t sacrifice the interests and the futures of the 99 percent.”