Two noteworthy comments from Senator's recent 'Community Conversation'

Dealing with proposed cuts in federal funding, the reality of smaller government & the many issues facing us

At a recent ‘Community Conversation’, hosted by state Senator Sam Singh at the Williamston Public Library, the Democratic lawmaker from East Lansing made a couple of comments I found noteworthy.

One, which was an eye opener for me, was his statement that 41 percent of the revenues in the current Michigan budget come from the federal government. The Senator, in citing this figure, said the percentage is ‘in line’ with what other states receive, adding that a few of them get as much as half of their money from Washington, D.C.

He put forth this information as a way of telling those present that there is only so much the state could do to offset the large cut in funding to the Medicaid program being discussed, a reduction that, if enacted, would adversely impact thousands of state residents, but also hospitals and health-care clinics. While Medicaid is aimed at lower-income individuals and households, with many of the recipients being families with young children and the elderly living in nursing homes, the money from this program has created a rising tide beneficial to the larger population.

Singh pointed out that Medicaid Expansion, enacted in 2014-15, has allowed states to add their dollars to pull in extra federal funding and that this has resulted in an increase in coverage through the Affordable Care Act,

“We’ve gone from between 200,000-to-300,00 Michiganders being covered to over 600,000,” he said. “This is affordable, quality insurance they have access to through the current program.”

I doubt that many, if any, of the 30 or so attendees at the meeting are direct beneficiaries of Medicaid, although they might have a family member who is. Still, it was not lost on them that cuts in funding, both for individual coverage and reimbursing providers, could likely mean fewer doctors, nurses, and support staff and an overall lessening of quality care. The ebbing to the tide would mean higher medical care costs, hikes in insurance premiums and co-pays, and a shrinkage of care options.

While there is the moral aspect of having all those people either losing coverage or seeing a larger chunk of their limited income spent on premiums and co-pay, the pragmatic fact is that these cuts would have a ripple effect.

But getting back to that ‘eye opener’—while I knew federal funds went to the state for a myriad of programs, including health care, education, agriculture, economic development, and infrastructure improvements—I had no idea of this high amount.

For Michigan, this means not only would the state government be unable to make up any substantial loss of federal funding for the various programs which it’s involved in, but it would be unable to supplement any reductions in federal money to schools, colleges, or non-profit organizations.

The other noteworthy comment by the Senator was that, while he’s a Democrat, he understands the conservatives now oversee the executive branch and hold the majority in Congress, having won the election, and that they want smaller government.

“That’s fine,” he added, “cutting waste is fine, but look at the programs, see what they do, and make specific cuts and reductions rather than what’s happening now. Millions of dollars are either not being allocated or eliminated and the impact could be dire.”

Singh pointed out that Congress hasn’t passed its budget which, depending on what’s decided, could include large cuts and the elimination of certain programs and services. With this in mind, he suggested those in attendance contact their Congressional representatives to ask their questions and to express their concerns about eliminating programs or with the level of cuts being proposed.

Of course, this proposed reduction to the size and scope of federal government is being done in the context of the immigration crackdown, with people being imprisoned or deported without due process, the arrests of a Wisconsin judge and the Newark mayor, threats to Democrat members of Congress as well as journalists and others, and most recently news of the possible suspension of habeas corpus.

There’s also the tariffs and their effect on the economy, with higher commodity prices and inflation being a concern, and the whole realm of foreign affairs—from war to trade to a new world order—that competes for attention, deserves consideration, and in some instances is reason for alarm.

President Trump and his administration have, as they say, “flooded the zone” and, in doing so—both by intent but also happenstance—caused confusion and more than a little mayhem.

Understandably, citizens alarmed that the nation is turning into an autocracy complete with the loss of Constitutional rights and individual liberties, are more focused with this scenario than debating over the size and scope of federal programs as if it was ‘business as usual.’

What Senator Singh alluded to (although I don’t wish to put words in his mouth) is that—like it or not—a much smaller federal government and a frayed social safety net are the reality heading into the immediate future. This, in turn, means a smaller state government and also fewer financial resources available for local governments which receive a substantial portion of their money from the state. A smaller pie, no matter how you slice it, means smaller pieces.

Senator Singh recommended that those opposed at what’s being bandied about contact members of Congress and urge them to alleviate some of the pain and suffering with a less draconian budget. They might also attempt to persuade friends and neighbors to do likewise, adding to the pressure. In response to those who are supportive of the Administration’s cost cutting, they can point out that the ripple effect could be dire for them as well.

This might seem a tame course of action given all the other things that are happening, but—to borrow a line from U.S. Senator Elisa Slotkin—“we should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.” In other words, we can wage a multi-front effort that includes both persuasion and, where needed, opposition.

For the moment at least we can support our democracy and Constitutional rights by continuing to be engaged in civil discourse, to stay informed, and to work towards policy compromises rather than taking an all-or-nothing approach. At the same time, we stand on behalf of the less fortunate and those threatened, insist on due process, and the right of free expression.

In my own case, I try not to demonize those who have a differing view, but with the caveat that there are those whose utterances and actions are beyond the pale of my moral principles. I do so with the expectation and hope that others will do likewise.

I still feel, to borrow a sentiment from the art historian Kenneth Clark, that “human sympathy is more valuable than ideology” and of the importance of courtesy in our social interactions.

The open hand of friendship or the clenched fist. Our choice.

Steve Horton is a mid-Michigan journalist.