Kent Conrad: “the Voinovich amendment does nothing to protect Medicare. Just a few short months ago, every member of the Republican…”

“the Voinovich amendment does nothing to protect Medicare. Just a few short months ago, every member of the Republican caucus voted for protection for both Medicare and Social Security. What has occurred that would lead them now to forget Medicare? This is not a wise course. In the name of protecting Social Security, this amendment would cut Medicare. The sequester that is provided for in this amendment says, if we are on the edge of going into Social Security, cut Medicare, cut defense. It is a one-trick pony. It does not matter whether the deficiency was caused by a tax cut, by an economic downturn, or by excessive spending, the answer to each and every one of them is the same: cut spending. It does not matter if the problem was caused by too big a tax cut: cut spending. It does not matter if the problem was caused by an economic downturn, the answer is cut spending. It is not a balanced approach. The assertion that there is no Medicare surplus simply does not fit the facts. This is the report of the Congressional Budget Office. On page 19, under the table 'Trust Fund Surpluses,' it shows Social Security in surplus, it shows Medicare Part A in surplus, it shows Medicare Part B in rough balance. The argument that the Senator from Ohio is making is that because we have chosen, as a Congress, to fund Part B, in part by general fund transfers, that that means Medicare is in deficit. That is not the case.”