By Keith Shikowitz
Pearl River, NY – A protest outside Congressman Mike Lawler’s office in Pearl River on Monday brought together about 50 demonstrators, predominantly senior citizens and healthcare advocates, who expressed concern over what they view as impending cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
The protesters alleged that the recent federal budget resolution in Congress would result in drastic reductions to these vital programs.
However, in a separate interview with Rockland News one week prior to the protests, Congressman Mike Lawler firmly denied that such cuts were on the table, asserting that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid would be protected.
The stark contrast between these positions has fueled a heated local debate over the true impact of congressional budget decisions. A vote in the House is pending, possibly within a matter of days, or hours.
Listen Now: Interview with Congressman Mike Lawler
Protesters Warn of Cuts to Healthcare and Senior Benefits
At Monday’s rally, speakers passionately voiced fears that reductions in federal spending would lead to losses in healthcare coverage for vulnerable populations. Reverend Wes McNeil, Director of the New York State Labor-Religion Coalition, stated, “Over 70% of people in nursing homes in New York rely on Medicaid. These are our family members, our neighbors, and we will not stand by while their healthcare is cut.”
Protesters cited the $880 billion in spending cuts embedded in the recent budget resolution, arguing that such reductions could only come from core entitlement programs. Dylan Wheeler of Empire State Voices accused Lawler and House Republicans of advancing a budget that prioritizes tax breaks for the wealthy at the expense of essential social services.
“The Republican budget resolution specifically calls on the Energy and Commerce Committee, the committee in charge of Medicare and Medicaid, to find $880 billion in cuts,” Wheeler claimed. “In New York 17 alone, nearly 190,000 people rely on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. These programs aren’t waste, fraud, or abuse – they save lives.”
Joe Mayhew of the Communications Workers of America outlined potential repercussions for hospitals, stating, “If Medicaid cuts go through, hospitals will lay off staff, insurance costs will rise, and rural hospitals will shut down. This affects all of us.”
Lawler Emphatically States: ‘Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid Will Be Protected’
In the interview with Rockland News, Congressman Lawler on February 22, 2025 countered these claims, stating unequivocally that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid would not be cut.
“We will protect Social Security. We will protect Medicare. We will protect Medicaid recipients,” Lawler said, emphasizing his stance that the budget aims to reduce government inefficiencies rather than eliminate core benefits.
Lawler argued that his focus remains on reducing overall government spending and eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse, rather than taking funds away from seniors or low-income individuals. He pointed to ongoing efforts in Congress to rein in excessive expenditures, particularly through the Department of Government Efficiency, which he stated has uncovered significant misuse of taxpayer funds.
Lawler also dismissed accusations that he was favoring billionaires at the expense of working-class Americans. He defended the renewal of the 2017 Trump tax cuts, arguing that allowing them to expire would result in “the largest tax increase in American history.”
On Medicaid, he did not directly address how the proposed budget cuts would impact the program, but reiterated that essential services would be preserved. “The objective is to make sure that we right-size government,” Lawler said, “while still protecting those who depend on these programs.”
A Battle Over Budget Realities
The contrast between what Lawler claims and what protesters fear highlights the complexity of federal budget debates. While Lawler maintains that his votes do not endanger Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid, protest leaders argued on Monday that the numbers in the budget proposal simply don’t add up without significant cuts to these programs.
One of the primary sticking points is whether spending reductions in government agencies could fully account for the $880 billion in cuts, or whether some of that burden would inevitably fall on entitlement programs. Protesters insist that Medicaid, in particular, will take a hit, pointing to language in the budget resolution directing congressional committees to find savings.
Meanwhile, Lawler has positioned himself as a defender of taxpayers, saying that his policies will “support middle-class and working-class families” by eliminating inefficiencies rather than slashing critical benefits.
What Comes Next?
Protest leaders vowed to continue their fight, urging constituents to call Lawler’s office daily and attend a town hall in Peekskill on March 22 to push for transparency on the budget’s impact.
Lawler, on the other hand, indicated that he would continue working on budget negotiations and defended his stance that the federal government must reduce overall spending without harming necessary social programs. He has scheduled several Town Hall meetings in the coming weeks to talk further with his constituents and detractors.