The Politics.  The President’s budget includes $166 billion in job creation initiatives, investing in infrastructure improvements, clean energy, and a comprehensive re-building approach in 20 poor communities.  It commits modest funding towards all levels of education in addition to the early childhood initiative.  But by using the budget as a platform to put forward a deficit reduction offer already made to Speaker Boehner (R-OH) and rejected by him, it makes cuts in Social Security strongly opposed by most Democrats and raises less revenue than the Senate budget plan.  As a gambit to demonstrate his willingness to compromise and to smoke out Republican unwillingness, the budget seems to have worked.  Pundits praised the elements of compromise and Republicans scrambled away from previous support for the Social Security change in order to stay firmly opposed to the President.  (Last December, Bloomberg News reported that Speaker Boehner was “pressing harder for the CPI revision than for other entitlement changes…”  Senate Minority Leader McConnell (R-KY) was looking for higher Medicare premiums for upper-income retirees, raising the age to become eligible for Medicare, and reducing Social Security benefits by shrinking the adjustment for inflation (the “chained CPI”) in order to consider new revenue last winter.)  But although the President included the reduced inflation adjustment and higher Medicare payments for upper-income retirees, his budget was rejected out of hand by the Republican leaders.

The President has said that he will only agree to cut Social Security as part of an overall deal that increases revenues and includes some economic investments.  But many strong advocates for Social Security and other vital safety net programs strongly oppose the Social Security cut under any circumstances.  Even those who could imagine it as part of a plan with healthy doses of revenue and job creation are worried now that the Social Security cut will find its way into a far less helpful budget plan.

The Math.  The President proposes $3.78 trillion in spending and $3.03 trillion in receipts for FY 2014, leaving a deficit of $744 billion, down from a deficit of $973 billion this year.  The deficit will decline from 6 percent of GDP now, to 4 percent in FY 2014, and down to 1.7 percent of GDP in 2023.

Revenues.  The budget includes $583 billion in revenue increases over 10 years from limiting high-income deductions to 28 percent and from increasing taxes on millionaires.  It adds another $100 billion in revenues from the chained CPI proposal’s effects on tax payments, and adds $78 billion in tobacco taxes to pay for the early childhood initiative.  In a move disappointing to many human needs advocates, the President’s budget lists a large number of corporate tax loophole-closings, but holds them in reserve to pay for an unspecified reduction in corporate tax rates.  Advocates are seeking a net increase in revenues from any corporate tax reform agreement, but the President would make reform revenue-neutral.

Spending Overview:  The President’s budget would replace the multi-year cuts that started this year with sequestration with the new revenue, plus about $400 billion in health care savings (largely Medicare), $130 billion from spending cuts due to the chained CPI reduced inflation adjustment, another $200 billion in savings in other mandatory programs (such as farm subsidies), and $200 billion in appropriations cuts, split evenly between the Pentagon and other programs.  By reducing the deficit, interest payments will decline by $210 billion over the same 10-year period.  Together, the revenues and spending cuts will reduce the deficit by $1.8 trillion.  The Administration estimates prior deficit reduction at $2.5 trillion; adding in his new budget proposal, deficit reduction would total $4.3 trillion over 10 years.

Budget Comparisons:  The President’s budget raises less revenue than the Senate’s $975 billion from progressive sources over 10 years.  The President’s plan cuts mandatory spending more ($600 billion in health care and other savings); the Senate’s mandatory savings total $350 billion.  The President cuts discretionary spending (appropriations) less than the Senate.  The Senate cuts $240 billion from the Pentagon, compared with $100 billion in the President’s budget.  The Senate cuts domestic and international appropriations by $142 billion, compared with the President’s $100 billion.

The Administration’s and Senate’s plans both differ starkly from the House budget, which includes no net revenue increases, and cuts spending by about $5 trillion, plus another $700 billion in interest savings.  The Pentagon is not cut.  About two-thirds of the cuts affect low-income programs, including deep cuts in Medicaid and SNAP/food stamps.  (For more details about the House and Senate budgets see the March 18 Human Needs Report.)

Details on Low-Income Programs in the President’s Budget:

Early Childhood:   The $75 billion 10-year Preschool for All proposal to ensure that every low- and moderate-income four year old gets pre-kindergarten education is joined by $1.4 billion next year for Early Head Start and child care partnerships to increase high quality early learning programs for infants and toddlers through age three.  Further supporting young families, the budget would expand voluntary home visiting services for families with newborns, with $15 billion over ten years, starting in FY 2015.

Aid to Poor Communities:  The President’s budget attempts a comprehensive approach, putting together resources from multiple government agencies to attack both the causes and toxic by-products of poverty.  It would create 20 Promise Zones, coordinating housing, education, anti-violence, and other economic development initiatives.  The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative would provide $400 million to improve distressed HUD-assisted housing in very poor communities (up from $120 million this year).  Homelessness Assistance Grants are increased by about $350 million, not counting the extra across-the-board cuts now being made.  Apart from the early childhood education expansions, there are initiatives to improve high schools and to invest in community colleges, both targeted to low-income community needs.  Related to the Administration’s push to reduce gun violence, the budget includes $160 million in new funds for Project AWARE, providing for more trained mental health providers able to work with children and youth in school, as well as more public safety support in poor communities.

The budget repeats the President’s $12.5 billion Pathways Back to Work proposal, which would fund summer and year-round jobs and training for low-income youth and provide subsidized jobs and training for the long-term unemployed.  This initiative was part of the President’s unsuccessful American Jobs Act proposal last year.  In part, it builds on the success of subsidized jobs funded through a now-expired Temporary Assistance for Needy Families emergency fund, in which hundreds of thousands of temporary jobs were created.

There are broader job creation initiatives, with funding to rebuild infrastructure, invest in clean energy, and create manufacturing hubs.  These are not specially targeted to help the poor, but overall efforts to create jobs will be a help, especially if the Administration connects job training for low-income workers to these new plans.

Reverses SNAP Cuts:  Millions of poor people are now facing a reduction in SNAP/food stamp benefits scheduled to start in November.  The President’s budget would cancel that loss in food assistance, estimated to cost a family of three $20-$25 a month.  In another critical area where the budget at least partially reverses cuts to low-income programs, rental housing vouchers for low-income families are increased by more than $1 billion.  The automatic cuts now in effect could reduce the number of vouchers going to low-income families by 140,000, out of 2.2 million households now benefiting from this form of housing assistance.  The President’s budget would end these cuts.

Makes Low-Income Tax Credits Permanent:  While the last deficit reduction deal made the Bush tax cuts permanent for all but the richest 1 percent, the low-income tax credits were only extended for five years.  The Obama budget makes the current levels permanent for the Child Tax Credit, Earned Income Tax Credit, and the American Opportunity Tax Credit (the latter for college students).  The Child Tax Credit and EITC lifted more than 9 million people out of poverty in 2011.  However, the chained CPI proposal will reduce the value of the Earned Income Tax Credit over time.

Protects Health Coverage:   The budget protects Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.  It continues implementation of the Affordable Care Act, showing states that they can count on the promised federal support for expanding their Medicaid programs.

Cuts to Low-Income Programs:  Unaccountably, despite the Administration’s emphasis on interconnected programs to maximize effectiveness, the budget repeats its proposal to slash the Community Services Block Grant to $350 million (down from $682 million this year, not counting the across-the-board cuts).  These funds support community action agencies nationwide, which administer Head Start, home energy assistance, emergency food, and local economic development and other anti-poverty initiatives.  These agencies leverage private dollars and do the kind of coordination of services the Administration is counting on.  The budget also cuts the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) by more than $500 million, counting this year’s across-the-board cuts.

Scope:  By choosing to stick to the deficit reduction offer made and rejected last year, the budget cannot support enough job creation and economic development to meet the needs of the current weak economy.  There is no doubt that there is strong opposition to making the needed investments.  But just as President Obama’s leadership has maximized public support for gun legislation and helped to shape public support for immigration reform, his leadership in pressing for jobs and shared prosperity will matter.

The post CHN: The President’s FY 2014 Budget: Important Initiatives Face Uphill Battle appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

The House subcommittee bill, which passed mostly along party lines, is not at this point expected to be taken up by the full Appropriations Committee or by the full House as a separate bill. Most analysts believe that Congress will not get final agreement on spending bills before funding runs out on September 30, and will instead pass a combined stopgap measure to extend funding to some point past the election.

The subcommittee provides $150 billion in funding for FY 2013, $6.8 billion below the enacted level for FY 2012 and $8.8 billion less than the Senate’s Labor-HHS-Ed bill (S. 3295) and the President’s proposal.  Both the Senate and the President provide funds at the level enacted last August in deficit reduction legislation (the Budget Control Act; seeHuman Needs Report, August 9, 2011 for a description of that law).  The House decided to go lower.  However, there have been a number of reports that House members will ultimately agree to the higher Senate totals for appropriations at least on a temporary basis to postpone final decisions till the next Congress.

The bill makes much of its savings by eliminating funds for the Affordable Care Act (the health insurance reform recently upheld by the Supreme Court), said by Committee Chair Hal Rogers (R-KY) to cut $8.6 billion in FY 2013 and $123 billion over 10 years.  The health care law is not the only source for cuts, however.  The Department of Labor would receive $497 million less than this year’s funding; Health and Human Services is funded at $1.3 billion less than the current year; the Department of Education would receive $1.1 billion less.

According to an analysis by the House committee’s Democratic minority, the bill would cut substance abuse and mental health programs $324 million below FY 2012 funding.  It would cut teen pregnancy prevention programs by $93 million, and transfer $20 million of the remaining $40 million to abstinence education, which research has shown to be ineffective at pregnancy prevention.  The bill eliminates the Obama Administration’s education reform initiative Race to the Top, which provided $549 million in grants to school systems this year.  Family planning funding under Title X is eliminated.  Title X provides health care services including cancer screenings and contraceptives for low-income women.

Among other cuts, the bill would reduce Job Corps funding from $1.7 billion in FY 2012 to $1.57 billion in FY 2013.  It cuts the Ryan White AIDS funding by $47.6 million (down from $2.39 billion this year).  The President’s budget proposed to increase Ryan White funds to $2.47 billion.  Refugee and Entrant Assistance is reduced from $768.3 million to $658.2 million (the President proposed increasing this funding to $805 million).  The Social Services Block Grant is reduced from $1.785 billion to $1.7 billion. The bill also eliminates Americorps, Vista, and most other programs under the Corporation for National and Community Service, leaving funds only for the National Senior Volunteer Program.

The House subcommittee bill does maintain or increase funding in key areas.  It increases Head Start funding by $45 million (up from $7.968 billion in FY 2012); child care appropriations rise by nearly $25 million (from $2.278b in FY 2012).  In both these early childhood programs, the President’s proposal provided somewhat higher increases.  It maintains home heating and cooling assistance for low-income households at $3.47 billion (the President had proposed cutting LIHEAP down to $2.82 billion).  The subcommittee budget also keeps the same funding for the Community Services Block Grant ($677.4 million), which the President’s FY 2013 proposal would have cut to $350 million.  Education for children with disabilities (IDEA) funding rises to $13.1 billion, from nearly $12.4 billion in FY 2012.

The policy prohibitions in the draft bill provide ideological and partisan red meat to some of the House’s most right wing members.  There are several anti-labor provisions.  One would prohibit the Department of Labor from finalizingregulations covering home care workers working for home care agencies with minimum wage and overtime protections from which they are currently excluded.  Over 19,000 comments in favor of extending these protections were received by DOL when it published draft regulations.  The bill would prevent the Administration from doing further work on rules to improve the prevention of Black Lung disease among coal miners, who are experiencing a resurgence of the disease.  The bill would ban new agriculture child labor protections.

The bill seeks to end the Administration’s efforts to require post-secondary programs to disclose their students’ graduation and job placement rates and to withhold federal student loan participation in institutions that load up students with unsustainable debt with large risk that they will not have earnings adequate to repay their loans.

The Senate Labor-HHS-Ed bill does provide funding for the new health care law, and does not contain the policy riders described above.  It funds home energy assistance and the Community Services Block Grant at current levels, also rejecting the reductions proposed by the President, and similarly increases child care and Head Start.

While the likeliest outcome in the near term will be temporary funding at the Senate level, it is not clear whether House members will fight hard to include at least some of the policy riders in the appropriations agreement.

The post CHN: Ideological Buttons Pushed in House Subcommittee’s Labor-HHS-Education Funding Bill appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

The difficulty of getting to agreement on appropriations through the end of the year was illustrated on March 9 in the Senate, when votes were held on the House-passed plan (H.R. 1) and on an alternative developed by Chairman Inouye (D-HI) of the Senate Appropriations Committee.  The House FY11 plan failed by a vote of 44-56, with no Democrats voting for it and 3 Republicans voting against it (DeMint (SC), Lee (UT), and Paul (KY), because in their view it did not cut enough).  A majority in the Senate viewed the cuts passed by the House as too extreme, because of its harsh reductions in education, health care, housing, nutrition, employment services, and many other programs.  The Inouye plan was also rejected, 42-58, with no Republican support and 11 Democrats and Independents voting against (Bennet (CO), Hagan (NC), Kohl (WI), Levin (MI), Manchin (WV), McCaskill (MO), Nelson (FL), Nelson (NE), Sanders (I-VT), Udall (CO), and Webb (VA)).  Reasons for opposition were mixed – most wanted more cuts; others, fewer.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that H.R. 1 would cut annual appropriations $92 billion below FY 2010 levels, adjusted for inflation.  The Senate Appropriations Committee alternative would cut $40 billion below the inflation-adjusted FY 2010 funding levels.  While the Senate alternative in most instances avoids cuts to low-income programs, H.R. 1 slashes services.  Among its victims:  218,000 fewer children in Head Start (funding cut nearly $1.1 billion below FY 2010, or 15 percent); 11 million patients losing health care at Community Health Centers ($1 billion cut, or nearly half); 20 million people who use services provided by community action agencies to meet home energy assistance, job training, emergency food, Head Start, and other  needs would see those services disrupted if not lost (Community Services Block Grant cut $305 million, almost in half); more than 8 million adults and youth would lose job training/placement help, essentially shutting down Workforce Investment Act programs until July 2012 (a cut of nearly $3 billion); 10,000 people with disabilities whose housing vouchers now allow them to live in accessible housing would be terminated; and 1.2 million poor households in public housing, whose units will deteriorate due to cuts in the Public Housing Capital Fund (cut by more than $1 billion).  (For more information about the cuts, see CHN’s A Better Budget for All:  Saving Our Economy and Helping Those in Need.)

The Inouye plan also makes substantial cuts below last year’s spending, but makes different choices.  It reduces domestic and international accounts $31 billion below FY 10 (as adjusted for inflation), while H.R. 1 cuts these areas by $85 billion.  The Senate plan cut military/homeland security/veterans services by $9 billion, $2 billion more than the House. (For more details, see Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, In Battle Over 2011 Appropriations, Both Sides Calling for Substantial Cuts.)

Other sources of contentiousness that will complicate final agreement are the presence of many policy riders in the House bill.  These provisions would stop important operations of government by prohibiting expenditures for regulatory functions under current law, including those related to climate change, clean water, financial industry consumer protection, and health care reform.  Riders also would stop federal funds from being made available to Planned Parenthood clinics and would prohibit regulations requiring licensed gun dealers to report multiple sales of assault weapons to the same person.  The Senate bill has no policy riders in its bill.

Domestic appropriations are only about 15 percent of the budget; cuts in them can reduce services for millions of people but cannot make a major dent in the budget deficit.  These cuts can also place further strains on our fragile economic recovery.  H.R. 1 would result in a loss of 700,000 jobs, according to Moody’s Analytics economist Mark Zandi; Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke estimated 200,000 jobs lost.  As concerns grow about our economy’s ability to withstand surging oil prices, Congress will have to decide how much it wants to risk in trying to finish its work on a fiscal year nearly half over.

The post CHN: Congress Likely to Approve Another Three Weeks of Federal Spending; House Approves Another $6 Billion in Cuts Below FY 2010 Levels; Senate Expected to Follow Suit appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

There was an outside chance that Congress would be able to agree on a full-year appropriations bill during the waning days of its session.  For parents needing help with child care or placing their children in Head Start, the outcome was very important.  These programs are facing a significant loss of funding as the temporary increase provided by economic recovery legislation expires.  An omnibus spending bill proposed by the Senate Appropriations Committee would have mitigated the loss of the temporary funding by increasing child care base dollars by $681 million and Head Start by $840 million over their FY 2010 levels.

But hopes for that were dashed when Senate Republicans who had participated in negotiations for the omnibus spending bill backed away from their initial support.  The omnibus, with individual line items for all annual appropriations, was shelved.  Republicans, who will control the House of Representatives and be more influential in the Senate starting in January, decided to unite around delaying full-year decisions until after the new Congress is seated.

Without the necessary 60 votes to pass the omnibus bill, Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Daniel Inouye (D-HI) introduced a short-term continuing resolution (CR) instead, which would fund federal programs through March 4.  The Senate took up this bill on December 21, the day that the previous stop-gap spending bill was to expire.  The Senate voted for the temporary spending measure (a Senate amendment to H.R. 3082) by a convincing vote of 79-16, and sent it to the House for final enactment.  In the evening, the House obliged, with a vote of 193-165, sending it to the President for his signature and preventing a government shutdown.   House Members used this final debate as an opportunity to celebrate the historic career of David Obey (D-WI), the retiring Chair of the House Appropriations Committee.  Chairman Obey has served in the House since 1969, and is the third longest-serving Member in the House.

The expected House leadership once the new Congress is seated has proposed funding levels substantially below current spending for domestic programs including housing, education/training, children’s services, public health, home energy assistance, and much more.  They will get the chance to propose spending cuts when Congress has to extend funding before the March 4 deadline.

In this year of logjam, Congress had not enacted any of the dozen separate appropriations bills in time for the beginning of the fiscal year on October 1.  Instead, they passed temporary continuing resolutions.  That left three options for closing out the year:  (1) passing an omnibus bill, with complete funding decisions for each program; (2) passing another continuing resolution through the end of the fiscal year, with programs flat-funded except for a small number of programs where flat-funding would have bad consequences unacceptable to Congress; and (3) passing a short-term continuing resolution.  By taking the third option, Congress has greatly increased the likelihood of significant cuts in human needs programs.

All of the spending proposals being floated in Congress are lower than President Obama’s FY 2011 budget plan.  Here is a rough summary of appropriations totals (both domestic and military/international) in the proposals Congress has considered or will in the near future:

                        President’s FY 2011 budget: $1.137T
Senate omnibus bill:                $1.108T
House full-year CR:                 $1.089T
Senate CR till March 4
(at full-year rate):                    $1.091T
Boehner proposal (expected
new House Speaker):            $1.029T

The Boehner proposal is $62 billion less than the annualized rate of spending in the short-term continuing resolution, and about $108 billion less than the President’s earlier proposal.  Even worse, the Boehner plan accepts the President’s funding for military, homeland security, and veterans’ programs, inflicting all the cuts in domestic spending.  An analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the Boehner plan will require an immediate 21 percent across-the-board cut in domestic programs, “the deepest cut for these programs from one year to the next in recent U.S. history.”

The short-term continuing resolution just enacted includes a few increases beyond level-funding.  For example, the bill makes up a $5.7 billion shortfall in funding for Pell grants, to ensure that the maximum annual grant per student is not reduced from its current $5,550 amount.  An increase of $460 million was provided for the Veterans Benefits Administration, to keep up with the large number of war-related disability claims.  There are also some proposed increases in military spending.  But the increases in child care and Head Start have been wiped out.  Similarly, the omnibus had funding for 10,000 rental vouchers and other assistance for homeless families and individuals, whose numbers have grown since the housing bust and the recession.  The omnibus provided $830 million in new funds to process disability and retirement claims through the Social Security Administration to prevent long waits due to the rising number of claims.  These modest increases do not appear to be included in the March 4 CR.  Neither is about $1 billion in additional funding for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), much of which would have been used towards implementing the new health care law.  While omitting this funding does not really prohibit the Administration from moving ahead with implementing the law (most of the health care law’s funding is mandatory and not subject to Congressional appropriation), it may slow the process down somewhat.

Because the CR avoids most item-by-item appropriating, it also fails to achieve $10.2 billion in savings from military programs that the omnibus would have cut.  These savings are not therefore available to be invested in other services.

If the new Congress replaces the short-term measure with something like the Boehner plan, it will have to cut domestic spending by more than $100 billion, (the 21 percent mentioned above).  The cuts would apply to programs that have been operating since October 1, and so would be far worse because they could not be spread over a full 12 months.  Cuts of this magnitude will hurt the fragile economic recovery, and will invite strong opposition.  As President Obama charts his course in working with a more hostile Congress, advocates will be looking for his use of every Presidential tool to fight off severe cuts, up to and including veto threats.

The post CHN: Senate Attempt at Full-Year Appropriations Collapses appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

Head Start

On December 12, President Bush signed the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act, H.R. 1429, after it passed both the House and Senate with overwhelming bi-partisan support.  Earlier the President proposed to dismantle the program by instituting state-controlled block grants.  Advocates applaud the improvements in the bill.

The Head Start program was first authorized in 1965 to serve economically disadvantaged pre-school-aged children. Currently over 900,000 children are enrolled in Head Start programs around the country.  The bill sets a goal that all Head Start teachers will have at least an associate’s degree and half will have a bachelor’s degree by 2013.  It expands eligibility from 100 percent of poverty to families at 130 percent of the poverty level.  It eliminates a controversial National Reporting System for testing 4-year-olds supported by the Bush administration, and it disallows hiring of Head Start staff based on an individual’s religion.

The bill authorizes funding for Head Start of $7.35 billion in FY ’08, up from $6.9 billion in FY ’07, but still insufficient to restore cuts made since 2002. While advocates applaud the improvements in the bill, they know that funding levels will be critical to strengthening the program.  The FY ’08 omnibus that passed Congress this week again provides only $6.9 billion for the Head Start program, which means it will not even keep up with inflation in FY ’08.

Child Support Enforcement

In 2006, more than 17 million children and their families received $24 billion in child support through the help of the Child Support Enforcement Program.  This effective federal program collects over four dollars in child support for every dollar it spends.  However, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2006 cut the program by $6.7 billion over 10 years.  States will begin to feel the affects of the cut beginning in January.  Some counties report that they will have to lay off up to one-third of their staff leaving uncollected billions of dollars in child support.

Despite strong bi-partisan support, Congress failed this year to pass stand-alone legislation that has been introduced in the House and Senate or to attach language to other bills that would reverse the cuts made in 2006.  Advocates will be working in 2008 to restore the funds lost in the program.  Their efforts will be bolstered by a strong letter of support for the program from The National Governor’s Association.

Unemployment Insurance

Earlier this year the House and Senate introduced The Unemployment Insurance Modernization Act, H.R. 2233/S. 1871.  The Unemployment Insurance (UI) Program provides vital temporary income support when workers are laid off or must leave their jobs through no fault of their own.  The bills would reform eligibility criteria and the benefit structure providing financial incentives to states to update their programs.

In most states only full-time workers are eligible for UI.  The bills include incentives for states to extend UI to part-time workers.  States would also be encouraged to offer benefits to workers who leave their job for family reasons, such as fleeing domestic violence, needing to care for a sick or disabled relative, or moving with a spouse who relocates to take a new job.  Currently to be eligible to receive UI benefits, a claimant must have a specified amount of earnings during a specific set of months prior to their job being terminated.  Depending on the state, between three to six months of the most recent earnings may be disregarded when determining eligibility and benefit level.  The bills would encourage states to use more recent earnings to determine eligibility and benefits.

Advocates will continue to press for passage of this legislation when Congress convenes in January.

The post CHN: Congress Finishes Head Start and Leaves Some Unfinished Business appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

Like the House, the Senate bill rejects the President’s proposal to dismantle the program through state-controlled block grants. It disallows hiring of Head Start staff based on an individual’s religion, terminates the controversial National Reporting System testing for toddlers, and increases set-asides for Early Head Start and Migrant and Indian Head Start programs. Both bills authorize funding for Head Start of $7.35 billion in FY 2008, up from $6.9 billion in FY 2007, but still insufficient to restore cuts made since 2002.

There are some differences in the two bills. Both increase income eligibility from 100 to 130 percent of the federal poverty level, but the House bill limits to 20 percent the children in any one program above 100 percent of poverty while the Senate bill calls for prioritizing slots for children at or below 100 percent of poverty. The House bill requires that by 2013, 50 percent of Head Start teachers nationwide have a baccalaureate degree, without sanctioning programs that have difficulty meeting the benchmark. The Senate bill requires that each state achieve the 50 percent threshold.

One key difference in the bills relates to the role of the Policy Councils. Comprised of at least 51 percent Head Start parents, under current law Policy Councils share decision-making, except for the hiring and firing of the program director, with the governing body that has legal and fiscal responsibility for running the programs. The House bill maintains the current structure. The Senate bill includes provisions that would diminish the role of the Policy Council from decision-maker to that of advisor. On June 19, the National Head Start Association, which represents 2,700 Head Start programs, wrote to committee Chairman Kennedy (D-MA) and Ranking Member Enzi (R-WY) saying NHSA could not support the Senate bill because of the diminished role of parents who play a critical and central role in the success of Head Start programs.

The Head Start program was last reauthorized in 1998 and has been slated for reauthorization since 2003. The main stumbling block has been disagreement over whether Head Start staff could be hired based on religion. With the House and Senate bills in agreement now on this point, most working on the legislation believe that remaining differences can be ironed out and a bill passed this fall.

The post CHN: Senate Passes Head Start Reauthorization appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

H.R.1429 rejects the President’s earlier proposal to dismantle the program through state-controlled block grants.  The bill maintains the current shared governance structure between the board of directors and Head Start parents on policy councils, except for the hiring and firing of the Head Start director.  It increases income eligibility from 100 to 130 percent of poverty level for up to 20 percent of the children in any one program.  H.R. 1429 terminates the controversial National Reporting System testing for toddlers. The bill also requires that by 2013, 50 percent of Head Start teachers nationwide have a baccalaureate degree, without sanctioning programs that have difficulty meeting the benchmark. Set-asides for Early Head Start and Migrant and Indian Head Start program funding are increased in the bill.

Several amendments approved during floor debate will help increase the number of teachers with baccalaureate degrees by creating partnerships between Head Start and universities, and providing incentives for their participation through loan forgiveness for those who commit to teach in the program for at least three years.  Other amendments that passed will require Head Start grantees to perform background checks before hiring employees, and will make funds available to improve the quality of ‘inclusive classrooms’, those for children both with and without disabilities.  The House rejected an attempt to allow faith-based groups to consider religion in hiring for Head Start programs.

The National Head Start Association, which represents 2,700 Head Start programs, estimates that Head Start would need to increase by $750 million in FY 2008 just to restore cuts made since 2002.  H.R. 1429 authorizes funding of only $7.35 billion in FY 2008, up from $6.9 billion in FY 2007.

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions unanimously passed its version of reauthorization, the Head Start for School Readiness Act, S. 556, in February.  Full Senate consideration of the bill has not yet been scheduled.

The post CHN: Head Start Reauthorization One Step Closer to Passage appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

S. 556 rejects the notion of dismantling the program through state-controlled block grants. According to the National Head Start Association (NHSA), which represents 2,700 Head Start programs, S. 556 also makes some key positive changes to the program.  It provides a stronger definition of what constitutes poorly performing programs and provides them with an opportunity to correct deficiencies.  Only those programs that fail to correct deficiencies will be required to re-compete for their grants.  The bill increases program eligibility from 100 percent to 130 percent of poverty.  In recognition of the difficulty of cash-strapped programs to attract degreed teachers, new teacher credentials are made a goal rather than a hard requirement.  S. 556 allows programs flexibility to serve additional pregnant women and younger children, and it terminates the National Reporting System test given to Head Start children.

NHSA has also raised concerns about the bill.  S. 556 weakens the role of the parent policy council in the current system of shared decision-making between the governing body of Head Start and parents.  It prohibits all Head Start programs from registering parents to vote and even from giving them a voter registration card.  It prohibits use of funds by programs for legal assistance when appealing arbitrary or unreasonable decisions by HHS.  The bill restricts the use of training dollars to attend national conferences.

NHSA estimates that Head Start, funded at $6.9 B in FY ‘07, would need to increase by $750 million in FY ’08 just to restore cuts made since 2002.  Advocates are disappointed that S. 556 authorizes funding of only $7.35 B in FY ’08, $7.65 B in FY ’09, and $7.995 B in FY ’10.

The House Committee on Education and Labor is currently working on the House version of the bill.  Full Senate consideration of S. 556 has not yet been scheduled.

(For more analysis on Head Start from the National Head Start Association see: http://www.nhsa.org/)

The post CHN: First Step To Head Start Reauthorization appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

The failure of the final conference agreement was a surprise to House leaders. All Democrats and 22 Republicans rejected the bill. Several Republican lawmakers voted no because their special projects had been eliminated. In addition, Democrats and some Republicans were concerned about cuts to rural health funding and education programs and the lack of increase for home energy assistance in the face of rising energy costs.

The bill includes $142.5 billion in discretionary funding, $329 million less than last year’s level. Several human needs services, such as mental health, child care, Title I education, workforce training and others are funded at levels not adjusted for inflation, or below last year’s level.

But the cuts contained in the legislation are not the end of the story. It is widely expected that Congress will approve an across-the-board cut, which would affect all discretionary programs (those that must be approved each year). The across-the-board cut, which could be in the neighborhood of one or two percent, would be attached to the only other unfinished appropriations bill — the one funding the Department of Defense. For an explanation of how such an across-the-board cut may harm human needs programs, see a recent Center on Budget and Policy Priorities report.

In coming days negotiators will try once again to come up with a final Labor-HHS-Education bill that can be approved on the House floor and Senate floor. But if House leadership is unable to round up the necessary votes, then appropriators will seek to attach the bill to the Department of Defense bill. The two bills joined together would be difficult for lawmakers to vote against.

For More Information

Conference report 109-300
Appropriations Committee Republican staff: Highlights of the bill  ***Page Not Found
Appropriations Committee Democratic staff: Democratic views of the bill  *** Page Not Found

The post CHN: Labor-HHS-Education Bill Must Clear One Last Hurdle appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

Lawmakers have yet to agree on the bill that funds the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (H.R. 3010). Typically the Labor-HHS-Ed bill is the most contentious. Disagreements remain over funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and preparations for avian flu. The House version contains $2.4 billion for LIHEAP; the Senate bill has $2.2 billion. Because of sharply rising energy prices, pressure is growing to increase LIHEAP funds closer to the authorized level of $5.1 billion. The House spending reconciliation bill included a $1 billion increase in LIHEAP funding over the current year (to $3.16 billion).

Labor-HHS-Ed negotiators have agreed to a total discretionary level of $142.5 billion, which is $329 million less than fiscal 2005. Many human needs programs such as child care, Head Start, Title I education for low-income students, workforce training, mental health services and many others are funded through this bill. Many of these programs are funded either at last year’s levels or lower.

Other appropriations bills not yet passed include Defense, Military Construction and Veteran’s Affairs, and the Treasury, Transportation, and Housing bill (H.R. 3058). Several cuts to housing proposed by the President in his budget were rejected by the House and Senate. One victory in particular is the bi-chamber support of the Community Development Block Grant program. The President’s budget eliminated CDBG but the House bill provides $4.2 billion and the Senate provides $4.3 billion. (The fiscal 2005 level was $4.671 billion.)

An across-the-board cut that hits all domestic discretionary programs remains a possibility. Such a cut could be tacked onto any of the remaining appropriations bills and could affect even those appropriations bills already approved by Congress. End of the year across-the-board cuts are becoming standard operating procedure for appropriators. In 2003 the across-the-board cut was 0.65%, in 2004 it was 0.59% and in 2005 it was 0.8%. Across-the-board cuts mean that programs described as “flat-funded” are actually shrinking – even before taking inflation into account.

The post CHN: Appropriations Bills Moving Towards Completion; Across-the-Board Cuts Threatened appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.