Our View: Cutting blind benefits saves state money


Higher Education in Missouri is facing a looming $66 million cut in the state budget. The government needs to make difficult decisions at the state and local level to make ends meet. Programs will have to be cut and sacrifices will have to be made.

Therefore, we support Missouri House Budget Committee Chairman Ryan Silvey’s plan to eliminate the Supplemental Aid to the Blind program, which would save $28 million in state funding to reallocate to public colleges and universities (see story here).

At first glance, taking money from the blind seems cruel. However, we must not jump to conclusions before learning the facts. This program funds medical care for approximately 3,000 people who make too much to receive Medicaid health care but already receive state blind pension payments.

Therefore, Silvey’s plan would not be leaving the blind empty handed — they still would be receiving monthly Blind Pension program payments of $707, according to the Missouri Department of Social Services website, and it would only affect those who legally make enough to pay for their health care.

To qualify for Medicaid, annual income cannot exceed 85 percent of the Federal Poverty Level. For a family of four, 85 percent of the FPL is $18,998, according to covermissouri.org. As of 2011, Medicaid covers more than 900,000 Missouri residents, 27 percent of which are aged, blind or disabled, meaning 82 percent of aged, blind or disabled people are able to pay for their health care based on Missouri eligibility rules. Supplying state-funded health care to the blind people in the 82 percent of that demographic who can afford it is a waste of money.

Through both the Blind Pension program and the Supplemental Aid to the Blind program, the blind receive state-funded health care, something deaf and paralyzed people do not qualify for. We think that if deaf and paralyzed people are not eligible, blind people shouldn’t be either.

A mark of a civilized society is to help people with disabilities function as normal as possible. However, we think Silvey’s plan would not be putting the blind at a financial disadvantage because of the existing pension program. Higher Education, though, would be at a disadvantage without such funds.

Filed Under: EditorialOpinions

RSSComments (3)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Gary Wunder says:

    http://trumanindex.com/2012/03/21/our-view-cutting-blind-benefits-saves-state-money/

    The argument this article doesn’t address is that many of the people on this program have opted for it because, at the time they made their healthcare choices, it was the most reasonable and affordable. People who might have qualified for commercial insurance in their younger years now have conditions that will preclude them from getting the care that is provided through Missouri Medical Care. To decide that we want to change the law for new people makes more sense than withdrawing it from those who now count on it. To look at a meaningful means test ought to be on the table, but not by first withdrawing the program and seeing who falls through the cracks. Something as important as life and death deserves more study.

  2. John Dolan says:

    If you’re going to be evil, at least learn to write decently. Please inform your writer that there’s a difference between adverbs and adjectives, so that your last paragraph should read “…to help people with disabilities function as normalLY as possible…” rather than “…as normal as possible.”
    You see, that makes you sound like an illiterate swine, rather than just a swine.

  3. Paula Taylor says:

    First of all, everyone is fighting over just PENNIES! Precisely 3 cent per $100 gathered for the general tax fund. I would bet the cost of this arguement alone cost more than that. Trying to balance a budget on the backs of the poor and disabled is just wrong and those trying to do it should try doing the daily business of trying to live and work blind for just a day and then reconsider this bill. Blindness is considered to be the most dibilitating disability there is. There are extra cost everywhere associated with just trying to do daily everyday task that you sighted take for granted. We are not assigned a chaufer, cook, doctor and maid when we go blind. This pension just helps to cover a SMALL portion of what these extra expenses are. Take my challenge and go “blind” for a day! Hope you don’t trip and fall and break bones as I have. Maybe you’ll just get hit by a car….done that too.

Leave a Reply