The low-income have been hit particularly hard in the recession and by the tax deal. Now low-income seniors could share a disproportionate amount of the sacrifice everybody but the really rich are being asked to make, if the Obama administration's budget proposals for 2012 are adopted.
The National Council on Again completed an analysis, reported by The Washington Independent, which "highlights what will hit low-income older Americans the hardest, emphasizing the 45 percent cut to the Senior Community Service Employment Program, a 45-year old program funded by the U.S. Department of Labor to help unemployed people over the age of 55 find part-time jobs for community service organizations. Eligibility is limited to 125 percent of the poverty line...."
The National Council on Aging predicts the cut would translate to 55,000 lost part-time jobs.
A recent report from the policy research group the Urban Institute (PDF) shows that 8.9 percent of Americans over 65 live in poverty — $10,289 for a single individual living alone at or over the age of 65, and $12,968 for a couple with at least one spouse at or over 65. The official federal poverty measure considers only pre-tax cash income, not out-of-pocket medical expenses that many older adults pay. The report found that 13 million out of 38 million Americans over 65 live in families earning less than twice the federal poverty rate....
The AARP, the loudest defender of senior rights, has been speaking out about the impact of some of the president’s budget proposals.
“AARP is deeply troubled … by the disproportionately large cuts in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), which would mean that millions of Americans, particularly older Americans, would have a hard time paying their heating and cooling bills next year,” said AARP Executive Vice President Nancy A. LeaMond in a statement. “With heating costs rising for many this past winter, cutting $2.5 billion from this program is unfair and potentially dangerous, and would mean that millions of households wouldn’t get the help they need to keep their homes warm in the winter months.”
David Dayen argues that, among these proposed cuts, the energy assistance program is a bit of a red herring, since its budget is unpredictable and it always receives emergency supplemental funding as necessary. It makes it a mess of a program, with great uncertainty, but the money will probably be there eventually. But so many of these cuts, like to the employment program, to nutritional assistance, to public transportation, will hit the working poor and particularly low-income seniors disproportionately hard.