Any reduction in the sequester should at minimum fully replace these temporary savings with more targeted and permanent deficit reduction. And even that impact assumes that lawmakers will continue funding discretionary programs after based on the low sequester levels. Without that assumption, the sequester would have zero further impact on our long-term debt beyond a small impact on interest costs, evaporating just at the time when our debt problems become more severe.
For these reasons, replacing even part of the sequester with permanent savings could have substantial beneficial effects on our long-term debt. FY Budget. Wailes, M. Aetna recently announced it would begin to transition to an all-electronic payment and remittance process in Septembe CMA recently joined AMA and 28 other medical and specialty societies to express strong concerns over unfair business pr There continues to be a big push away from paying physicians under traditional fee-for-service models and toward paymen The legislative bill signings concluded last week with all seven California Medical Association CMA -sponsored bi The cha A bipartisan group of members of Congress recently submitted a joint letter to the U.
Department of Education, urging All physicians may now apply for this Phase 4 funding. Applications must be received by October 26, at As we enter our second year since the onset of the COVID pandemic, we still hold many questions about the nature of View Newsroom News View.
April 20, Was this article helpful? Stay Informed Opt in to receive updates on the latest health care news, legislation, and more. Latest News. Read More. January 13, Sequestration Update Report: August August 13, August 15, The required spending cuts in the BCA were intended to come half from defense programs and half from non-defense programs. The defense category is the federal budget's national defense function, which includes the Department of Defense, nuclear-weapons related activities at the Department of Energy, and the national security activities of several other agencies such as the Coast Guard and Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Non-defense is everything else. The defense category has few mandatory programs, so nearly all the defense reduction was applied to discretionary programs. On the non-defense side, roughly one-third of the non-defense savings originally came from mandatory spending and the rest from a reduction in discretionary spending. Within each category, the BCA allocated the savings proportionally across discretionary and non-exempt mandatory programs.
On the mandatory side, each year the Office of Management and Budget OMB calculates the percentage and dollar amount to be taken from affected programs to achieve the total mandatory cut required by the BCA. When Congress raised the discretionary caps, it directed that the mandatory sequester calculations be made as if the caps had not been raised. Unlike discretionary spending caps, which expire after , sequestration of mandatory spending has been extended on several occasions.
The BBA of extended the mandatory sequester through , and then a law modifying military retiree benefits extended the sequester through These extensions did not specify the amount of savings that the sequester would need to achieve in fiscal years after FY , but instead directed OMB to apply the percentage reductions calculated for FY to subsequent fiscal years.
0コメント