6 Groups: Medicare Sequestration Shouldn’t Fund Infrastructure Plan
The AHA and other organizations are urging Congress to reconsider its plans to fund Biden’s infrastructure package at the expense of extending Medicare sequestration.
Source: Getty Images
By Jill McKeon
- Funding for the Biden administration’s new infrastructure package should not come with the sacrifice of extending mandatory Medicare sequestration through 2031, the AHA and other major healthcare organizations asserted in a July 15th letter to top lawmakers.
The AHA, American Medical Association, American Health Care Association, National Association for Home Care & Hospice, National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, and the Association for Clinical Oncology voiced this consensus opinion to Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer and Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell. The groups also commented on the measures outlined in the recently released bipartisan infrastructure framework.
Announced in late June, the bipartisan infrastructure framework intends to combat climate change, invest in clean water, universal broadband, and transportation infrastructure. The framework will require $1.2 trillion in funds to come to fruition, and two-thirds of the resources proposed in Biden’s American Jobs Plan will be allocated to the framework, according to a statement from the White House.
Proposed funding sources for the investment include reducing the IRS tax gap, repurposing unused COVID-19 relief funds, state and local investments in broadband, and extending the mandatory Medicare sequester for the next decade.
On July 14th, Biden said he will also push a $3.5 trillion budget blueprint that would support the expansion of Medicare along with social and environmental efforts. If passed, the budget blueprint would work in tandem with the infrastructure framework to funnel funds into a variety of climate and social initiatives.
Medicare will pay the price under the bipartisan infrastructure framework, despite the infrastructure bill being unrelated to healthcare. As a result, the group of healthcare organizations expressed their disapproval for Medicare cuts and urged the administration to reconsider.
“We understand that addressing core infrastructure needs can allow us to continue to serve our communities and our patients,” the letter explained.
“However, we are opposed to the use of an extension of mandatory Medicare sequestration as a pay-for in any infrastructure package. Additionally, we do not believe that Medicare funds should be used to pay for non-health care programs.”
The letter asserted that extending Medicare sequestration further will destabilize healthcare access through cost increases that are not sufficiently accounted for in Medicare payments.
“The inclusion of the continuation of the mandatory Medicare sequestration in the bipartisan infrastructure framework as an offset for the agreement is not something we can support, and we ask you to remove it from the list of possible pay-fors,” the letter continued.
“Health care providers cannot sustain additional cuts to the Medicare program.”
This request by a group of healthcare organizations spearheaded by the AHA similarly urges lawmakers to reconsider using Medicare and unspent provider relief funds to offset infrastructure spending.
On June 29th, the first letter was sent to Senators Schumer and McConnell initially asking them to reconsider where to look for infrastructure funding.
“Medicare funds should not be used to pay for roads and bridges,” the letter emphasized. They also cited the struggles that healthcare providers continue to face as a result of the pandemic and stressed that every penny of the Provider Relief Funds should remain in the hands of healthcare organizations that need it most.
“We would ask that none of these COVID-19 health care relief funds be used for the purpose of funding an infrastructure package, given the ongoing need for health care providers to offer assistance to their patients and communities.”
