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
And we could say the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley) has given us a wonderful opportunity to understand what happened in Nevada. And it would seem to me that it would be something this Congress ought to be looking at where the…
Mr. Speaker, I want the people of the fifth district's voices to be heard tonight, too. First of all, I want to say that this debate tonight is not about the provider givebacks in this bill. This debate is about the most important issue…
And that is a concern because there needs to be a debate. We need to understand the cost. We need to understand the consequence of whatever we bring to the floor. We need to understand if there is a market product out there for us. I mean…
The gentlewoman brings up an excellent point, and it is a point that needs to be talked about even more. As we just did the tax bill, and we are watching all these dollars kind of go out there right now, which legitimately we all agree…





