I believe they are important priorities. But as a result of that decision, and because this bill contains no revenue offsets, I believe that there is a substantial certainty that the tax reductions contained in the energy bill will be funded, at least in part, by raiding the Medicare and possibly the Social Security Trust Funds. Therefore, I cannot support this bill, and I would oppose it. Mr. Chairman, we are not the only ones saying this. Even a recent Republican memo on the surplus states that we are possibly already into the Medicare Trust Fund, and we are very close to touching the Social Security surplus in fiscal year 2003.
Karen Thurman: “I believe they are important priorities. But as a result of that decision, and because this bill contains no revenue…”
Editor's note · Context
Opposing the energy bill due to concerns about funding and its impact on Medicare and Social Security.
Share
More from Karen Thurman
We keep hearing this 30 percent. Actually, there has been a letter dated by the CBO on July 26 that says that they are confused, that there has been some confusion about the meaning of the 30 percent cost management factor that CBO applied…
The only thing I would say then is maybe us being here tonight and talking about this issue, maybe it will give some pause; and maybe we will have the opportunity to have that debate.
It was to also recognize that Social Security was never supposed to be what people would have to live off of. So if we could find these U.S.A. accounts or whatever magic name we wanted to call them, the fact of the matter was that they…
I have enjoyed this. I hope some people have been listening. We certainly would love to hear their comments or their stories or issues that make a difference in people's lives, because I think it is important that we hear from the real…





