Wilkeson sends pleas to D.C. as rural bridge closure cuts off tourism lifelineNew Foto - Wilkeson sends pleas to D.C. as rural bridge closure cuts off tourism lifeline

(The Center Square) - After hand-delivering over 100 letters to Washington, D.C., Pierce County Councilmember Dave Morell says emergency grants could save a historic mining town that the state left out to dry. Washington State Route 165 leads hundreds of thousands of tourists to Mount Rainier National Park every year. The highway stretches through Wilkeson to one of the few entrances, but not before crossing a 103-year-old bridge the stateclosedlast month, cutting off access to the park. The Fairfax Bridge israpidlydeteriorating after the Legislature put off years of maintenance. Morell said a few coats of paint every three decades could have avoided this, but the state is out of options. Years could pass before it can afford to rebuild, upending Wilkeson's economy. "Whenever we do in-district meetings at the county, whether it be in District 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7, I remind them," Morell told The Center Square, "that it was the towns of Wilkeson and Carbonado that built Tacoma, and without them, Tacoma would not be where it is today." Morell met with the state's congressional delegation in Washington, D.C., last week and returned home on Friday. While he planned the trip before the state closed the bridge, it allowed him to lobby for federal support. A solution may still be years away, but he said Wilkeson could survive. Businesses, residents and even outdoor enthusiasts from Tacoma and Auburn sent more than 100 letters with Morell. Someone wrote one on the back of a napkin. Morell said U.S. Rep. Kim Schier, D-Wash., smiled as she opened it, reflecting on the rural community amid the chaos of Congress. A group of roughly 30 people who live on the other side of the bridge collected the letters before Morell left. The Friends of the Carbon Canyon help maintain the area and told The Center Square that the local access route they now have to take adds almost an hour to their trip into town. "It's over an hour if we call 911," Jill Cartwright said, "Carbonado and Wilkeson are volunteer fire departments, and they're going to be the first ones that would be coming through, but we wouldn't expect any help for over an hour — if that." Bridge maintenance typically falls on the state, but Morell said Wilkeson could declare an emergency to open the door to U.S. Department of Commerce grants. The funding wouldn't rebuild the bridge but could save the city and local economy until the state has enough money. Morell said the county talked to Wilkeson Mayor Jeff Sellers about a declaration and plans to explore all possible avenues. The Washington State Department of Transportation willhosta meeting after Memorial Day so residents can weigh in on potentially rerouting the bridge later. In the meantime, Morell said the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service and the state have an opportunity to repair campsites, trails and other infrastructure on the other side of the bridge. "Things are happening behind the scenes. We're not sitting around, saying, 'Woe is me,'" he told The Center Square. Wilkeson is the first stop for gas on the way down from the park, but it takes another 20 minutes to get to grocery stores in Bonney Lake. Some residents who live across the bridge are disabled and feel trapped on the other side without a quick way to town. Cartwright wants to prevent Wilkeson from becoming a ghost town like the other mining communities that once thrived there. One lies beneath the Fairfax Bridge, serving as a reminder of what the loss of tourism could mean for Wilkeson, much like the decline of the coal industry in the area. "They do depend on the tourist traffic," Cartwright said. "People come from all over the world in those three months."

Wilkeson sends pleas to D.C. as rural bridge closure cuts off tourism lifeline

Wilkeson sends pleas to D.C. as rural bridge closure cuts off tourism lifeline (The Center Square) - After hand-delivering over 100 letters ...
Four takeaways from House hearings on Republican Medicaid, tax proposalsNew Foto - Four takeaways from House hearings on Republican Medicaid, tax proposals

WASHINGTON – House Republicans defended a bill that would enact sweeping tax cuts, raise the debt ceiling, and add restrictions to benefit programs during a heated marathon day of committee hearings on Capitol Hill. Three separate panels reviewed the legislation that would become part of a massive package to implementPresident Donald Trump's agenda on May 13, including the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee; the committee with oversight of Medicaid, the Energy and Commerce Committee; and the committee that manages food assistance programs, the House Agriculture Committee. Democrats repeatedly slammed the package as a giveaway to the wealthy at the expense of benefit programs like Medicaid and food stamps. The hearings are expected to go well into the night. The Medicaid hearing is expected to break records, going past the 27 consecutive hours lawmakers debated a repeal of theAffordable Care Actin 2017. The proposals that lawmakers considered will become the biggest portions of the most important piece of legislation passed during Trump's second term. As the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Medicaid kicked off, protesters began chanting: "No cuts to Medicaid!" They were escorted out of the hearing room and 26 people were arrested for "crowding, obstructing, and incommoding," according to U.S. Capitol Police. Araucous crowd of protestersalso chanted and shouted outside the hearing room. "People feel very strongly because they know they're losing their healthcare," said Rep. Frank Pallone, D-New Jersey, the top Democrat on the committee. While Republicans did not pursuethe drastic cuts they had considered before releasing the legislation, an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the Medicaid changes would result in7.6 million fewer peoplewith health insurance over the next 10 years. That would save around $625 billion in federal spending, which Republican lawmakers are hoping will balance out lost revenue from tax cuts. Tensions ran high at the Energy and Commerce hearing over the proposed Medicaid changes. Republican members argued that they are trying to eliminate waste and fraud from the system in order to protect it for those who really need it. Among the changes would be work requirements for adults enrolled under the 2010 Medicaid expansion and more frequent eligibility checks. "Medicaid was created to provide health care for Americans who otherwise could not support themselves, but Democrats expanded the program far beyond this core mission," said Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky, the committee chairman. Democrats highlighted the stories of people on Medicaid who could lose coverage under the proposal. They argued that Republicans had produced a bill that would cut coverage, even though they have in the past claimed such cuts would not happen. "For months, Republicans told the American people that their budget would not cut Medicaid," said Rep. Nanette Barragán, D-California. "That is not true. And today they continue to say it. Don't believe it." Republicans said Democrats were the ones lying during the hearing by highlighting the stories of children and people with disabilities, which Republicans argued would not be impacted by the proposed changes. "I have a young daughter and if she was on Medicaid and we were at risk of taking that away from her, I would share that fear," said Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas. "The problem with this narrative is that there's no reason to have that fear . . . I am sorry that so many people on the left and in the media have lied to you about what's in this bill." The House Ways and Means Committee debated House Republicans'broad tax plan. The proposal would make the2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Actpermanent, increase the standard deduction, increase the child tax credit, temporarily create a tax deduction for tips and overtime through 2028, and implement an additional $4,000 tax deduction for seniors,among other proposals. Democrats lampooned the proposal as a giveaway to the wealthiest Americans, repeatedly invoking the name of Trump ally Elon Musk, the world's richest man. "So here we are, one big beautiful tax cut for billionaires. The Republican pathology with tax cuts for wealthy people continues," said Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the committee. Democrats are referencing the 2017 tax cuts, which would be extended under the plan and whichdisproportionately benefittedwealthy Americans while cutting taxes for all income brackets. Republicans highlighted the provisions in the bill that would help working class Americans. Rep. Kevin Hern, R-Oklahoma, highlighted that likelihood that billionaires would not significantly benefit from the tax breaks on tipped income, overtime and the child tax credit. "While we're talking specifically here about the tax rate staying permanent, all these other provisions that we put in there that President Trump has talked about taking that they're wanting to demagogue – these other ones do (direct) hundreds of billions of dollars to the lower end of the income scale that they don't want to allude to," he said. The House Agriculture Committee is meeting at 7:30 p.m. on May 13 to debateproposed changesto the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP or food stamps, which provides food assistance to around 42 million Americans. The Republican plan would implement new work requirements for people ages 55 to 64, require states to provide more funding for the program for the first time, cap reimbursement to states for administrative costs, limit SNAP eligibility to citizens and lawful permanent residents, and prevent future presidential administrations from increasing benefits without Congressional approval. The proposals could force people off of the program asstates may restricttheir programs without the continued federal funding.GOP leaders arguethat the changes would make sure the program works the way it was intended to by "reinforcing work, rooting out waste, and instituting long-overdue accountability incentives." The nonpartisanCongressional Budget Officeestimated the committee's plan would cut $300 billion over the next decade – exceeding the $230 billion they were instructed to eliminate. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Four takeaways from marathon hearings on GOP Medicaid, tax proposals

Four takeaways from House hearings on Republican Medicaid, tax proposals

Four takeaways from House hearings on Republican Medicaid, tax proposals WASHINGTON – House Republicans defended a bill that would enact swe...
California approves State Farm's request for 17% premium increase for homeownersNew Foto - California approves State Farm's request for 17% premium increase for homeowners

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's top insurance regulator said Tuesday that State Farm can soon startraising premiums by 17%for all of its home insurance customers in the state to help the insurer rebuild its capital following the Los Angeles wildfires. State Farm has argued the emergency rate hikes are necessary to help the company avoid a "dire" financial crisis that could force them to drop more California policies. The state's largest home insurer said it was already struggling financially before this year but the LA fires, which destroyed more than 16,000 buildings in January, have made things worse. The increase will apply to all of the roughly 1 million homeowners State Farm insures in the state. The decision comes as California is undergoing a yearslong effort to entice insurers to continue doing business in the state as wildfires increasingly destroy entire neighborhoods. In 2023, several major companies, includingState Farm,stopped issuing residential policiesbecause of high fire risk. Last year, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara unveiled a slate of regulations aimed at giving insurers more latitude to raise premiumsin exchange for more policiesin high-risk areas. Those rules kick in this year. State Farm initially asked for a 22% rate increase for homeowners but revised it to 17% during a recent hearing before an administrative judge. The request also includes a 38% hike for rental owners and 15% for tenants. The new rates will take effect in June. In exchange, State Farm will get a $400 million cash infusion from its parent company and agree to halt some nonrenewals through the end of this year. On Tuesday, administrative Judge Karl Frederic Seligman ordered a ruling supporting State Farm's request, calling it "a rescue mission to stabilize State Farm's financial condition while safeguarding policyholders." Lara adopted the recommendation the same day. The new rates are temporary until the state has a chance to consider State Farm's request from last year for a 30% rate increase for homeowners. The hearings for that request are set for October. "I expect State Farm provide the highest level of service to its California customers and to fulfill its promises. State Farm must now justify its financial condition and detail its recovery plan in a full rate hearing before a neutral judge and my Department's experts," Lara said in a statement. State Farm said in a statement that the approval "is a critical first step for State Farm General's (SFG) ability to continue serving our California customers." The company received a financial rating downgrade last year and has seen a decline of $5 billion in its surplus account over the last decade. The company said it has paid more than $3.51 billion and is handling more than 12,600 claims as of this week. "Today's decision that would make consumers pay now but allow State Farm to wait months before having to show its math is a great disappointment for consumers," Carmen Balber, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, said of the ruling. The group opposes State Farm's request for higher premiums. State Farm said it plans to refund the emergency rates if California later approves lower rates. The insurer last received state approval for a 20% rate increase in December 2023.

California approves State Farm's request for 17% premium increase for homeowners

California approves State Farm's request for 17% premium increase for homeowners SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's top insuranc...
Here's what's in the House GOP's sweeping tax and spending cuts packageNew Foto - Here's what's in the House GOP's sweeping tax and spending cuts package

The details of House Republicans' plans for their sweeping tax and spending cuts package – otherwise known asPresident Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" – are coming into view now that lawmakers have revealed many of the consequential and controversial proposals. The House Ways and Means Committee on Monday released their long-awaited plan to extend trillions of dollars in tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of this year, as well as add thetax cutsthat Trump promised during his 2024 campaign, including exempting tips from taxation. It would beef up some tax breaks – including the popular child tax credit – as well as add at least one relatively new idea, a "MAGA" savings account for kids. Overall, the proposal would cost a little more than $3.8 trillion over 10 years, according to a revised Joint Committee on Taxation score – below the Ways and Means Committee's target of at least $4 trillion. The House Energy and Commerce Committeeon Sunday unveiled the initial textof its contentious proposal to slash spending on Medicaid, though the measures did not slice as deeply into program as some conservative members would like. The plan would hit the committee's target of reducing the deficit by at least $880 million over a decade, according to an initial Congressional Budget Office analysis. The two committees' proposals aren't finalized yet and could still change before they are voted on by the panels, which is expected to take place in the coming days. The overall package aims to extend the GOP's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, as well as to fulfill several of Trump's campaign promises. To help offset these tax reductions, the House is also looking for at least $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. Republicans are also signaling they will make good on other Trump campaign promises, such as significant investments in staffing at the US southern border, new systems to discourage immigration into the US and a gigantic new missile defense shield. Then there are other longtime GOP policy goals, such as an overhaul of the nation's outdated air traffic system, new fees targeting electric cars and a pivot away from federal student loans. Eleven House committees are working on pieces of the larger bill, which will then be assembled into the package. Speaker Mike Johnson hopes to vote on the legislation before Memorial Day — an ambitious deadline. The Senate, however, has different ideas of what should be in the package. The chamber also has stricter rules of what can be included since congressional Republicans are pushing the legislation through using the budget reconciliation process so they don't need Democratic support in the Senate. Here's what we know about the initial plans that some House committees have proposed for the legislative package: For the first time in Medicaid's 60-year history, certain recipients ages 19 to 64 would be required to work at least 80 hours a month to retain their benefits, according to an initial version of the Energy and Commerce Committee's plan. They could also meet the controversial mandate by engaging in community service, attending school or participating in a work program. The requirement, which would take effect in 2029, would not apply to parents, pregnant women, medically frail individuals and those with substance-abuse disorders, among others. Republicans have long sought to add work requirements to Medicaid, which provides health insurance to more than 71 million low-income Americans. The first Trump administrationgranted waiversto several states to implement such a mandate, but the efforts were halted byfederal courts. The mandate may result in millions of people losing their coverage, multiple analyses have shown. While many adults on Medicaid have jobs, they may have trouble meeting the reporting requirements, obtaining exemptions or landing enough hours each month to maintain their eligibility. The plan also mandates states to check Medicaid expansion recipients' eligibility every six months, instead of annually, and to require that certain low-income adults covered under Medicaid expansion pay for a portion of their care. Recipients would also have to prove they have US citizenship or legal immigration status. In addition, the plan would penalize states that have expanded Medicaid and that provide Medicaid coverage to undocumented immigrants using state funds. These states would see a 10% reduction in their federal matching funds for the expansion population. Several states, including California, New York, Utah and Illinois, cover undocumented children, adults or both in state health plans. And it would limit states' ability to levy taxes on health care providers, the revenue which states use to boost provider rates and fund health-related initiatives, among other uses. All but one state levy at least one type of provider tax, which some Republicans claim is a scheme by states to get more federal matching funds. However, the committee did not include several other controversial proposals that would have reduced the share of federal funds that states receive. The child tax credit would rise to $2,500, up from $2,000, per child from 2025 through 2028, under the Ways and Means Committee plan. Also, the measure would require that parents, in addition to the child, have Social Security numbers. Currently, parents can claim the credit if they have individual taxpayer identification numbers, which some noncitizens who are not eligible for Social Security numbers use to file federal taxes. The change would mean 2 million fewer children would be eligible next year, according to the JCT. The Ways and Means Committee plan would create a new "money account for growth and advancement," or MAGA account. The federal government would provide a one-time $1,000 credit to the accounts of children born from 2025 through 2028 who are US citizens at birth. The annual contribution limit to the tax-preferred accounts would be $5,000, and money could not be withdrawn before the beneficiary turns 18. After that, the funds could be used for higher education or a first-time home purchase, among other purposes, and taxed at capital gains rates. After a beneficiary turns 31, the account would cease to be a MAGA account. Certain taxpayers would be able to deduct the income they receive from tips on their tax returns, fulfilling a key Trump campaign promise, under the Ways and Means Committee plan. But it would only apply to occupations that traditionally receive tips, in an effort to prevent employers and workers from recharacterizing their income as tips to escape taxes. The Treasury secretary would be tasked with publishing a list of such jobs. Highly compensated individuals, who make more than $160,000 in 2025, would not qualify. The deduction would apply to 4 million tipped workers, according to a fact sheet from Rep. Jason Smith, the committee's chair. Likewise, many workers who receive overtime would not have to pay taxes on that extra compensation. It would apply to 80 million hourly workers, according to Smith. Both breaks would be available to taxpayers who do not itemize their deductions, who are the majority of Americans. However, the measures would only be in effect from 2025 through 2028. Senior citizens would receive a $4,000 increase to their standard deduction from 2025 through 2028, according to the Ways and Means Committee plan. But the benefit would start to phase out for individuals with incomes of more than $75,000 and couples with incomes double that amount. This measure is aimed at fulfilling Trump's promise to end taxes on Social Security benefits since lawmakers cannot include such a measure under the rules of budget reconciliation, which Republicans are using to advance the package without Democratic support in the Senate. The Ways and Means Committee is proposing a new temporary deduction for the interest on car loans, in keeping with Trump's campaign promise. Eligible taxpayers could deduct up to $10,000 in interest annually from 2025 through 2028. But the tax break would start to phase out for single filers earning more than $100,000 and married couples earning $200,000. It applies to taxpayers who get car loans starting in 2025 and who buy passenger vehicles that had their final assembly in the US. The Ways and Means Committee plan would temporarily boost the standard deduction by $1,000 for single filers and $2,000 for married couples. And it includes some measures that would benefit wealthy Americans. It would make permanent the larger estate tax exemption, which would be set at $15 million per person for 2026 and would be indexed to inflation thereafter. Plus, it would make permanent a special deduction for the owners of certain pass-through entities who pay their business taxes on their individual tax returns. It would beef up that deduction to 23%, up from 20%. These so-called pass-through businesses include partnerships, such as those formed by lawyers, doctors or investors. The Ways and Means Committee plan would also hike the current limit on state and local tax deductions to $30,000 annually for married couples, up from $10,000. But the full amount would be limited to those making $400,000 or less, before it starts to phase out. For single filers, the cap would be raised to $15,000 for those earning $200,000 or less, before phasing out. The change would take effect starting in 2026. Republican lawmakers from high-tax states, including California and New York, have been demanding an increase to the so-called SALT cap for years since it disproportionately hits their constituents. The limit mainly affects higher-income residents in those states. Four New York representatives said last week that raising the cap to only $30,000 was "insulting." Republicans introduced the cap as part of their 2017 tax cuts package as a way to help pay for the sweeping legislation. Trump had promised to eliminate the cap on the campaign trail last year, but doing so would be very costly. The Ways and Means Committee would restore a tax break from the 2017 tax package that allowed businesses to fully write off the cost of equipment in the first year it was purchased. The incentive has been phasing out since 2023. Also, the plan would once again allow businesses to write off the cost of research and development in the year it was incurred. The TCJA required that companies deduct those expenses over five years, starting in 2022. The two provisions would expire after 2029. However, the plan would limit writing off the purchases of professional sports teams. Some universities currently pay a 1.4% tax on the net investment income from their endowments. The Ways and Means Committee plan calls for raising that rate to as high as 21%, depending on the endowment's size. Similarly, private foundations would see their tax rate jump to as much as 10%, up from roughly 1.4%. The Ways and Means Committee's plan would also raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion. Congress needs to raise the debt limitbefore its August recessto prevent the nation from defaulting on its obligations, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wrote to lawmakers last week. Under a plan released by the House Agriculture Committee on Monday, more food stamp recipients would have to work to qualify for benefits. Currently, adults ages 18 to 54 without dependent children can only receive food stamps for three months over a 36-month period unless they work 20 hours a week or are eligible for an exemption. The committee's plan would extend the work requirement to those ages 55 to 64, as well as to parents of children between the ages of 7 and 18. Plus it would curtail states' ability to receive work requirement waivers in difficult economic times, limiting them only to counties with unemployment rates above 10%. The measure would also require states to pay for a portion of the benefit costs – at least 5% – for the first time, starting in fiscal year 2028. States with higher payment error rates would have to shoulder more of the burden – as much as 25% of the costs for those with error rates of at least 10%. Plus, states would have to pick up 75% of the administrative costs, rather than 50%. Advocates quickly criticized the proposals, saying recipients could lose crucial food assistance and states would be on the hook for millions of dollars, which could lead them to cut benefits and eligibility. Some 42 million Americans are enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the formal name for food stamps. The proposals from House Republicans would effectively deal a blow to the Inflation Reduction Act, former President Joe Biden's major clean energy law passed in 2022. The proposals would end consumer tax credits helping lower the cost of electric vehicles and buying energy efficient appliance, rooftop solar and insulation. It would also phase out tax credits that businesses could use to build new electricity generation like wind and solar, as well as clean energy sources that the Trump administration has voiced support for, including nuclear and geothermal energy. Tax credits that remain largely intact include one that would allow the oil and gas industry to capture and sequester the planet-warming pollution it emits. Elsewhere, the House Energy and Commerce committee proposed clawing back unspent IRA funds, targeting a $27 billion grant program at the Environmental Protection Agency and other EPA and Energy Department programs. Over 20 House Republicans have called for the preservation of several tax credits that would be killed by the proposed bill, with some saying it's a red line given how much money and jobs have come to their districts following the Inflation Reduction Act. Here's what we know about what other House committees have already voted to approve: The Education and Workforce Committee's plan would dramatically restructure the way students can borrow from the federal government for college, as well as make big changes to the popular Pell grant program. It is seeking to find about $330 billion worth of savings by limiting the federal role in the student borrowing process. The measure would cap the total amount of federal aid a student can receive annually at the "median cost of college" and end economic hardship and unemployment deferments. Plus, it would bar loan servicers from temporarily suspending student loan payments for more than nine months over a two-year period. The changes also include terminating the subsidized loan program for undergraduate students and the Graduate PLUS loan program for new borrowers, with a three-year exception for students with such loans. The plan would amend the maximum annual and aggregate loan limits for unsubsidized loans, as well as require undergraduate students to exhaust their unsubsidized loan options before their parents can take out Parent PLUS loans. In addition, the measure would terminate all income-contingent repayment plans — including Biden's SAVE plan, which has been blocked in federal court. Instead, borrowers would have a choice of a standard repayment plan or a repayment assistance plan based on borrowers' income. The committee is proposing alterations to the Pell grant program, including requiring students attend school at least half time and increasing the number of credit hours needed for full-time enrollment. But it would expand eligibility for such grants for students enrolled in short-term workforce programs. And the measure would create "skin-in-the-game accountability" for colleges participating in the Direct Loan program by requiring them to reimburse the Department of Education for a portion of loans that aren't fully repaid. It would also establish a "Promise" program to provide colleges with performance-based grants of up to $5,000 per federal student aid recipient. The colleges must provide students with a guaranteed maximum total price for their program of study based on income and financial needs categories. The formula would reward institutions for strong earnings outcomes, low tuition, and enrollment and graduation of low-income students. Immigrants applying for asylum and work authorization, as well as those applying for humanitarian parole and temporary protected status, would have to pay new or higher fees, under the House Judiciary Committee's plan. Asylum seekers and parolees would have to pay $1,000 to apply and $550 for an initial work permit, for instance. Plus, sponsors of unaccompanied children would have to pay up to $3,500. The measure also provides $45 billion to build new immigration detention facilities, including family detention centers, to allow the detention of at least 100,000 people a day, on average. It supports hiring 10,000 more Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, including money for retention and signing bonuses for the agents, and provides funding for 1 million annual deportations through ground and air transportation. And it provides $1.3 billion to hire immigration judges and support staff, as well as to expand courtroom capacity. The House Homeland Security Committee is proposing tens of billions of dollars to bolster border security, including $46.5 billion to expand and modernize the border barrier system. Planned investments include the completion of 700 miles of primary wall, the construction of 900 miles of river barriers, and the replacement of 141 miles of vehicle and pedestrian barriers. The measure would also provide $5 billion to acquire, construct or improve Customs and Border Protection facilities. Plus, it would funnel $4.1 billion for the agency to hire and train 3,000 new Border Patrol agents, 5,000 new Office of Field Operations customs officers, 200 new Air and Marine Operations agents, 290 support staff, and eligible retired agents and officers. It would also invest $2 billion in annual retention bonuses and signing incentives. It would provide nearly $1.1 billion to strengthen technology to detect and disrupt the smuggling of illegal drugs and people into the US, and $2.7 billion for border surveillance technology, including tunnel detection capability and unmanned aircraft systems. And the plan includes $1 billion for security and planning for the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles, as well as $625 million for the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which will be hosted by the US, Canada and Mexico. It would also provide $300 million for the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the reimbursement of extra law enforcement costs for protecting presidential residences. The plan approved by Republicans on the House Oversight Committee, which is tasked with cutting at least $50 billion in spending, would require federal employees to contribute more to their pensions and make other changes to their retirement benefits. The most significant measure would be raising the Federal Employees Retirement System contribution rate for many current civilian and postal employees to 4.4% of their salary. Those hired prior to 2014 generally contribute either 0.8% or 3.1%, while more recent hires generally already contribute 4.4%. For new, younger retirees, the plan would also eliminate the additional retirement annuity payment they would receive until they are eligible for Social Security benefits. And it would base retirees' pension payments on their average highest five earning years, instead of highest three years, as well as reduce retirement system contributions for employees who agree to serve "at will," giving them fewer job protections. Plus, the plan would institute a fee for employees' appeals to the Merit Systems Protection Board, which would be refunded to them if they win their appeal. And it would require a comprehensive audit of workers' dependents enrolled in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program, including the verification of marriage and birth certificates. Under the House Transportation Committee's plan, electric vehicles would have to pay an annual registration fee of $250 and hybrid vehicles would be assessed an annual fee of $100. The funds would be deposited into the Highway Trust Fund. But a proposal to levy a $20 annual tax on gas vehicles was dropped, after it faced swift pushback from conservatives. The committee's plan would also eliminate seven green programs authorized by the Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, including the Low-Carbon Transportation Materials Grants Program and the Federal Aviation Administration's Alternative Fuel and Low-Emission Aviation Technology Program. The committee is tasked with providing $10 billion in savings. The House Transportation Committee would appropriate $12.5 billion for the modernization of the nation's air traffic control system. The funds would begin replacing outdated technology and enhance the hiring of air traffic controllers. The plan proposed by the House Financial Services Committee would limit the embattled Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's authority to draw funds from the Federal Reserve. Also, it would essentially eliminate the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which was established by Congress to oversee the audits of public companies, by shifting its responsibilities to the Securities and Exchange Commission and barring it from collecting fees from companies and brokers and dealers. The House Armed Services Committee is proposing to add roughly $150 billion to strengthen the nation's defense programs. The committee's plan includes nearly $25 billion for Trump's "Golden Dome" missile defense initiative, which calls for developing a space-based system and quickly accelerating defense capabilities against hypersonic threats. It would provide nearly $34 billion for ship building and more than $20 billion for munitions, including ramping up the domestic production of rare earth and critical minerals. Also, the measure would funnel more than $8.5 billion to improving service members' quality of life, including renovating military barracks, providing supplemental payments of the Basic Housing Allowance, expanding educational opportunities and child care fee assistance, and broadening professional licensure assistance programs for military spouses. The House Judiciary Committee's plan would defund the enforcement of contempt orders if the judge had previously not ordered the plaintiffs in the case to put up a security bond with a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order granted in their favor. The goal is to stop frivolous lawsuits, according to a committee spokesperson. This story has been updated with additional developments. CNN's Ella Nilsen, Sarah Ferris, Manu Raju, Lauren Fox and Tierney Sneed contributed to this report. For more CNN news and newsletters create an account atCNN.com

Here’s what’s in the House GOP’s sweeping tax and spending cuts package

Here's what's in the House GOP's sweeping tax and spending cuts package The details of House Republicans' plans for their sw...
'Thicket of red tape' for Medicaid in GOP bill sparks fears of coverage lossesNew Foto - 'Thicket of red tape' for Medicaid in GOP bill sparks fears of coverage losses

Melannie Bachman, 39, of Charleston, South Carolina, is among the patients closely watching the sweeping Republican bill to overhaul Medicaid that's been brought to the House. She was diagnosed withtriple-negative breast cancer— an aggressive and difficult-to-treat form of the disease — in 2021. She said she had to apply for Medicaid multiple times and wasn't approved until four months later, which meant she had to pay for multiple screenings while waiting. Bachman no longer qualifies for Medicaid because she's cancer-free. But she worries that the proposed revisions could make it harder for her or others in similar situations to get covered again, or even cause them to give up on the process altogether. Bachman is still within five years of her diagnosis, and her doctors tell her that it's essential for her to continue being monitored in case the cancer returns. "It's one of the hardest parts of this journey, besides fighting for your life," Bachman said of applying for Medicaid. "The application process, the figuring how and when to find coverage, being someone who had no coverage at all." As House Republicans on Tuesday haggled overparts of a bill that proposes deep cuts and new restrictions on Medicaid, patients and doctors who rely on the program said they're bracing for the worst, including overwhelming red tape and administrative hurdles that could prevent many people from getting the care they need. The legislation, introduced Sunday by the Energy and Commerce Committee, proposes a slew of changes to the health program, such as work requirements, patient co-pays for doctor visits, tougher eligibility checks and citizenship verification. The panel began marking it up Tuesday and hopes to send it to the full House this week, with the goal of passing the entire bill by Memorial Day. The legislation could lead to 8.6 million people losingMedicaid coverage, according to a preliminary estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. More than 70 million people currently get health coverage through the program. The changes would make some people ineligible for coverage due to work requirements. Certain groups, such as the disabled, pregnant women and people who are in prison or rehabilitation centers, would be exempt. Others — particularly those covered under the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion — could be forced to drop out as they face higher fees and additional paperwork to maintain their coverage. Republicans say they're fine with the new rules — including Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who has publicly and repeatedly warned his party not to slashMedicaid benefits. "Based on the work requirement, anti-fraud provisions — there's going to be coverage losses associated with that, which I'm OK with," Hawley told NBC News. Republicans are proposing cutting spending to states that allow immigrants without proof of citizenship to be on Medicaid. "But for people who are otherwise qualified, who are able bodied and are working and need Medicaid because they cannot otherwise afford health insurance, I just am opposed to cutting these people's benefits," he said. Asked if he worries the red tape could end up removing rightful Medicaid recipients from coverage, Hawley downplayed the prospect saying his priority is "just no benefit cuts." The Medicaid provisions are expected to save the government over $715 billion over 10 years, which Republicans intend to use to pay for an extension ofPresident Donald Trump's 2017 tax cutsbefore they expire at the end of this year. Democrats argue the added bureaucracy is a feature — not a bug — of the GOP plan. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the ranking member of the Finance Committee that oversees Medicaid, said Republicans want to throw people off the program by putting recipients through "bureaucratic water torture" that many won't be able to navigate. "This whole thicket of red tape bureaucracy is being deployed in order to keep people who are eligible from getting covered," Wyden said in an interview. "It'd be one thing if they had found a pattern of fraud and abuse, and they were trying to root it out. But what they're doing is they are targeting eligible people who are eligible for Medicaid now." "I think it's really a despicable thing," he said. The bill, as it stood before Tuesday's markup, did leave out some of the more controversial ideas Republican leaders had discussed — including limits on how much Medicaid can spend per person and making states pay more for expanded coverage under the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion, for which the federal government currently pays 90%. Dr. Adam Gaffney, a critical care physician and assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, said the proposed changes to eligibility, even the possibility of additional paperwork, will cause people to fall through the cracks and lose their coverage. "You don't need to be a doctor to realize that this is dangerous," Gaffney said. "If you're facing multiple medical problems, the last thing you need to do is try to get through a lot of red tape and jump through hoops and bureaucracy, and that's exactly what this legislation would do." Peoplewho want to work may not be able tobecause of health issues, lack of childcare or limited transportation options. When people lose coverage, they typically have no other options, Gaffney said. He noted that in the early 2000s, when Tennessee implemented reforms to rein in Medicaid costs, thousands of people lost coverage. "Most people who lost Medicaid went uninsured," he said. "The reality is Medicaid covers some of the lowest-income folks in the nation, and when they lose coverage, they're probably not going to be able to afford it." Likewise, in Georgia, following the implementation of Medicaid work requirements in 2023, fewer people chose to enroll, said Robin Rudowitz, director of the program on Medicaid and the uninsured at KFF, a health policy research group. "Basically reporting and having to document that you're working, or even if you're a group that might be exempt from the requirements, sometimes it's just hard to document that you might be in one of those groups," she said. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said the new rules are part of a "cruel" and "craven" plot. "Any added bureaucracy will take people who are justifiably using these services and make it more difficult for them to get on, which will result in loss of coverage — again, for Americans who have sicknesses and illnesses," Booker said. Rudowitz said the bill proposes a provision that would require patient co-pays for people with incomes up to 130% to 138% of the federal poverty level—around $35,000 a year for a family of three. There's also a provision, she said, that would reduce the amount the federal government gives states if they provide coverage for undocumented immigrants. If the bill clears the House, it goes to the Senate, where some Republicans are eying changes. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who sits on the Finance Committee, said Republicans must take a close look at the new Medicaid rules and coverage impacts. "That's what we're going through now. A lot of that has to do with the semi-annual versus annual affirmation, that sort of stuff. We got a lot of mechanics to work out," said Tillis, who faces re-election next year in a purple state. Tillis also said he wants to review how many North Carolinians are among the 8.6 million projected to lose coverage. "If you look at that distribution across the country, it probably means sizable numbers in North Carolina," he said. "This false narrative that we're going to pick up that bill and pass it as proposed — we got a lot of work to do."

'Thicket of red tape' for Medicaid in GOP bill sparks fears of coverage losses

'Thicket of red tape' for Medicaid in GOP bill sparks fears of coverage losses Melannie Bachman, 39, of Charleston, South Carolina, ...

 

TEC POLITICS © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com