The Senate leadership will illustrate those differences by making the Transportation-Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill (S. 1243) the first it takes to the floor.  Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) filed a motion to cut off debate on July 18; that cloture vote will take place on Tuesday, July 23.  The leadership expects to be able to get 60 votes so that the bill can be considered.   Six Republicans voted for the Transportation-HUD bill in committee; if they join with all the Democrats and Independents to cut off debate, there will be enough votes.

The Senate Transportation-HUD bill is $10 billion or 20 percent larger than the House version.  With both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees having acted on this bill, the differences to specific programs are clear.  For example, the Community Development Fund is funded at $3.295 billion in the Senate bill, but at only $1.697 billion in the House.  The Senate bill has nearly $1 billion more than the House for the rental voucher program.  While even the House bill has more funding than this year’s $17.9 billion (including sequester cuts), its funding level is not adequate to reverse more than about one-quarter of this year’s lost vouchers, and so would continue the elimination of 100,000 rental vouchers, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.  The Senate bill provides enough funds to undo most of the up to 140,000 vouchers lost this year.

The House cuts funding for public housing by 16 percent below this year’s spending (including sequestration cuts).  Coming on top of several rounds of cuts affecting public housing programs over the past few years, maintenance and repairs will fall farther behind, with more units lost due to disrepair and families forced to live in substandard conditions.  The Senate provides $838 million more for public housing capital and operations than the House.  While the Senate’s funding does not undo all the losses of the past, it comes closer to meeting current needs.

Almost every program receives less in funding in the House bill than the Senate’s, unsurprisingly, including Homeless Assistance Grants (the House is 7.6 percent lower than the Senate)and lead hazard abatement (the House is 58 percent lower than the Senate and 56 percent lower than current year spending).  (For more comparisons of House and Senate Appropriations Committee funding levels for housing programs, see the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the National Low Income Housing Coalition.)

In the transportation side of the bill, the Senate increases TIGER infrastructure grants to localities by $50 million (for a total of $550 million).  The House zeroes out this popular program, and rescinds $237 million previously appropriated but as yet unspent.

The Senate leadership wants to take up the Transportation-HUD bill in order to show the harmfulness of continuing the sequestration cuts, to try to build support for a negotiation with the House to replace the new round of cuts in FY 2014 with new revenues and other savings, mostly but not exclusively in Medicare.

The Senate leaders may also wish to bring the Labor-HHS-Education bill to the floor.  There the differences between House and Senate funding are particularly gaping.  The Senate bill is funded at $164.3 billion, about $43 billion more than the House (or 35 percent above House spending).  While neither the House Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee nor the full Committee has taken up the bill so far, the full Senate Appropriations Committee has completed work on appropriations for these departments.  The House agreed-upon spending total for Labor-HHS-Education is 18.6 percent lower than this year’s levels, counting the sequester cuts.  The Senate bill is higher than this year’s spending, allowing for some of this year’s cuts to be reversed.

While a handful of appropriations bills may make it to the Senate or House floor, the prospects for the House and Senate resolving their differences and sending separate funding bills to the President for signing are dim.  Instead, Congress is likely to roll up most if not all of the appropriations bills into one stopgap spending measure (called a Continuing Resolution, or CR).  Agreeing even on such a temporary spending bill will be difficult.  The existing deficit reduction legislation, the Budget Control Act, requires that Department of Defense spending be reduced by $20 billion below current levels, so a temporary spending measure that simply continues this year’s funding will not be possible without changing the law.  (Domestic appropriations bills do not have to be immediately reduced; most of the required domestic reductions can be achieved by automatic cuts in Medicare and other mandatory programs.)

Reluctance to cut Pentagon programs, if nothing else, may force negotiators to the bargaining table to stop the sequestration cuts.  The President has threatened to veto legislation that continues sequestration.  Both he and the Senate leadership are calling for increased revenues to be part of a replacement package.  How close Congress will come to allowing a government shutdown when the fiscal year ends on September 30 is not knowable at this point; all that is sure now is that bridging the gaps between House and Senate will not be easy.   (See House  and Senate funding totals for each appropriations bill.)

The post CHN: Senate to Show the Cost of Continuing Sequester Cuts: Will Bring Transportation-Housing Appropriations to the Floor appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

With this extension (PL 112-24) expiring on September 30, Congress is deeply enmeshed in work on the new farm bill. Both the Senate and House Agriculture Committees have approved legislation, and now the Senate bill (S. 954) has been taken up on the Senate floor. Most disturbing to nutrition advocates is the fact that both bills cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) substantially, meaning added hardship for low-income people, including families, the elderly, and people with disabilities, who rely on nutrition assistance to get by.

The Farm Bill in the Senate

The full Senate took up the farm bill in the week before the Memorial Day recess, and voted on many of the nearly 200 amendments filed.  They were unable to complete their work but hope to wrap up consideration of the bill in the week after they return, starting June 3.

The Senate Agriculture Committee’s bill, the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2013 (S. 954), includes a $4.1 billion cut to SNAP over ten years. While a smaller cut than the one proposed in the House plan, the cut would restrict the coordination of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) with SNAP.   Fifteen states and the District of Columbia have opted to provide SNAP households with a nominal LIHEAP payment, so that instead of having to provide burdensome monthly documentation of their shelter and heating/utility bills, they can deduct a standard allowance from their income, thereby increasing the amount of SNAP benefits they qualify for.  This “Heat and Eat” approach disproportionately helps seniors and those with disabilities, who pay a high proportion of their income on shelter costs. Without this coordinated approach, such households may lose $50 – $75 a month in SNAP benefits. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D –NY) spearheaded a failed effort to eliminate the cuts (see below).

SNAP-related Amendments to the Senate Farm Bill

The Senate rejected a number of amendments before the Memorial Day recess that attempted to make SNAP cuts as bad or worse as those in the House Agriculture Committee’s bill (see House bill description below).

Roberts Amendment (#948):  This would have increased the cut to SNAP from $4.1 billion to more than $30 billion. It was defeated by a vote of 40 to 58.

Inhofe Amendment (#960): This amendment would have converted SNAP into a block grant, similar to the extreme proposal in the House-passed Budget Resolution. The amendment was defeated 36 to 60.

Vitter Amendment (#1056): The Vitter Amendment bans for life convicted pedophiles, sex offenders and murderers from receiving SNAP benefits. It also requires SNAP applicants to submit a written statement of whether any member of the household has been convicted of any of these crimes.  If a household member has been convicted of any of these offenses, even decades before, his or her income counts in determining the family’s eligibility for SNAP, but the family’s total benefit will be reduced.  The amendment passed by unanimous consent.  Although constructed to exclude the most unpopular individuals, the amendment’s likely victims include children and other family members, as the household’s total food budget is reduced.  Asking applicants for a written statement about each household member could also have a chilling effect, deterring some families from completing an application despite need.

Franken/Blunt Amendment (#992): This amendment improves the bill by allowing homebound seniors and individuals with disabilities to use their SNAP benefits for home-delivery services, as long as the home-delivery service includes no additional costs over in-store service. This language is also included in the House farm bill and therefore should make it into the final bill. The amendment was approved by unanimous consent.

Gillibrand Amendment (#931): The Gillibrand Amendment would have dropped the $4.1 billion SNAP cut in the bill, replacing the lost savings by making cuts to crop insurance. The amendment was defeated, 26 to 70.

Many amendments to cut SNAP remain to be considered.  Among them are a Johanns Amendment (#1070), which limits categorical eligibility (“Cat-El”), in which families receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) become eligible for SNAP as well; a Roberts Amendment (#949) that restricts the coordination of SNAP and LIHEAP well beyond the approach now in the Senate bill, and a Thune Amendment (#991) which cuts funds for SNAP nutrition education and obesity prevention.

The Farm Bill in the House

The House Agriculture Committee backed a five-year farm bill (H.R. 1947) that slashes $20.5 billion from SNAP over ten years. This cut is even deeper than last year’s House version, which cut $16.5 billion from SNAP. The total savings from the proposed House farm bill equals $39.7 billion, with over half coming from SNAP.

The bill passed out of Committee on a 30-10 vote, with 13 Democrats and all Republicans in favor.  An amendment by Representative Jim McGovern (D-MA) to eliminate the $20.5 billion SNAP cut in the bill failed by a vote of 17-27. All committee Republicans voted against it, as well as three Democrats: Ranking Member Collin Peterson (MN), Representative Sean Patrick Maloney (NY) and Representative Mike McIntyre (NC).

Nutrition advocates and most House Democrats are firmly set against H.R. 1947, however, motivated by the belief that nutrition benefits should be upheld for America’s low-income people.

Sixty percent of the $20.5 billion cut to SNAP would come from ending categorical eligibility as an option for states.; If the House bill were to become law, 2 million people would lose SNAP benefits and 280,000 children would lose access to free school meals because states would be unable to align their TANF and SNAP eligibility requirements. Low-income working families would be especially hard-hit by this cut.  Additionally, these reductions come on top of the across-the-board reduction that every SNAP recipient will have to endure starting in November 2013, when the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s short-term SNAP boost expires. For a family of three, this loss will likely mean $20-$25 less a month for a family of three, making the average benefit only $1.40 per person per meal. See more here from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

As in the Senate, the Heat and Eat cut included in the House bill is very troubling for nutrition advocates. The House bill is harsher, creating a steeper requirement for maintaining Heat and Eat eligibility, mandating that households must receive at least $20 in LIHEAP funding in order to qualify for the standard deduction for shelter/utilities. About 850,000 low-income households, a total of about 1.7 million individuals, would lose an average of $90 a month in SNAP benefits as a result of this House Agriculture Committee provision.

The House bill does include some reinvestments, including:

• $217 million to TEFAP (emergency food) (in comparison to $250 last year)
• Community Food Projects are level-funded at $100 million
• $50 million is afforded for SNAP retailer trafficking prevention

The House will likely bring its bill to the floor in June – thus allowing the House and Senate to start conferencing the bill over the Independence Day recess.  However, the House bill is opposed by some on the right and the left; it is not clear yet whether there are enough votes to enact it.  For nutrition advocates, failure to pass a bill with such extreme SNAP cuts would be good news.

The post CHN: House and Senate Agriculture Committees Back Farm Bills with Significant Cuts to SNAP appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

The furloughs of air traffic controllers were the result of sequestration, the across-the-board automatic cuts triggered when Congress was unable to agree on a more sensible plan for deficit reduction.  The sequester was meant to be a thoroughly unappealing means of cutting about $1.2 trillion through FY 2021, with cuts equally assigned to the Pentagon and to domestic programs.  Initially set to kick in on January 1, 2013, Congress replaced the first two months of these cuts in hopes of a last ditch effort to come up with an alternative.  Enough Republicans decided they could tolerate the military cuts, so no deal, and sequestration took effect at the beginning of March.  (For background on sequestration, see Senseless Cuts Begin in the March 4, 2013 Human Needs Report.)

The President and Congressional Democrats continued to call for a comprehensive replacement of the sequestration cuts. Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) offered legislation in the week before recess to stop the FY 2013 cuts, paying for them with savings from ending the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  But a bipartisan group of Senators abandoned the call for a comprehensive solution to carve out the airport fix.  The bill passed in the Senate was sponsored by Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), with 15 co-sponsors including six Democrats (Begich-AK, McCaskill-MO, Nelson-FL, Rockefeller-WV, Udall-CO, and Warner-VA).  Similar legislation had been previously co-sponsored Senators Klobuchar (D-MN) and Hoeven (R-ND).  The Administration caved too:  spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that the President would “be open to looking at” separate legislation to allow the FAA to move money around to end the furloughs.

In passing legislation that let the FAA spend less on infrastructure improvements and shift those funds to pay the air traffic controllers, Congress was coming closer to the approach of a number of Republican-sponsored bills.  S. 799, co-sponsored by Senators Inhofe (R-OK) and Toomey (R-PA) would give the Obama Administration until May 15 to come up with alternative cuts for all of sequestration, but would not reduce the total amount to be cut.  The White House and Senate Democrats have strongly opposed this approach, saying that it is impossible to cut $85 billion in this fiscal year without doing harm, and sparing some programs will only result in even more unacceptably deep cuts in others.  The FAA could choose to put off building projects, even though that hurts jobs now and will constrain economic growth in the future.  Most other programs do not have funds to invest in infrastructure, so this choice is not even an option.

In a minor footnote to Congress’ haste to adopt this legislation, a typo made it necessary for the bill to be taken up one more time for form’s sake in the Senate.  This occurred on April 30, and the bill is now on its way to the President’s desk.

While the President will sign this legislation, he has continued to point out the harm of allowing cuts to proceed for vulnerable children seeking Head Start and other programs that affect the health and life chances of hundreds of thousands of people.  But every time a powerful interest is able to carve out its own fix, the chance of getting agreement on ending sequestration is diminished.

The post CHN: Fear of Flying; Congress Fixes Waits in Airports but Lets the Poor Wait One More Year for Housing Vouchers appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

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.

Final agreement between the House and Senate on most of the bills became more difficult when the House decided on a lower overall appropriations cap than the $1.047 trillion established for FY 2013 in the bipartisan deficit reduction legislation, the Budget Control Act (PL 112-25), enacted last August.  The Senate is adhering to the Budget Control Act cap.  The House set an overall level of $1.028 trillion, the number in its Budget Resolution.  The House allocates $8.1 billion more for Defense than the Senate and $28 billion less in the rest of the bills. The biggest difference in House bills compared with those in the Senate are $7.7 billion, or 5 percent, less in the (L-HHS) bill, and $1.4 billion, or 7 percent, less for Agriculture programs.

The President views the House’s total spending level for fiscal year 2013 as breaking the August agreement.  On April 18 the Administration sent a letter to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) saying that the President would not sign into law any appropriations bills unless the House agrees to the $1.047 trillion level in the Budget Control Act.  The letter states, “Unfortunately, the House Budget Resolution for FY 2013 breaks our bipartisan agreement and proposes $28 billion in new cuts in annual non-defense spending – exactly the area where we have already cut the most.”  See the letter from the Administration here.

It’s important to note that because the human needs programs talked about below are annually appropriated programs (funded at the discretion of Congress every year) for many of the programs only a limited number of families or individuals who meet the eligibility requirements actually receive assistance.  Less than one-third of families eligible for HUD rental assistance receive it; nearly 20 percent of those eligible for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) receive aid; the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) serves approximately 60 percent of those eligible to receive it; and only one in six families eligible for federal child care assistance receive the help. See in CHN’s April report, Self-Inflicted Wounds: Protecting Families and Our Economy from Bad Budget Choices (beginning on p. 25ff) with data showing deep cuts that have already occurred in many human needs programs since 2010 and the impact of further devastating cuts if the impending sequestration next January goes forward.  (For more information about sequestration, see the May 31 Human Needs Report.)

Funding for human needs in L-HHS-ED, HUD, and Agriculture Committees thus far:

Labor, Health and Human Services, Education Programs  After 7 bills passed the Senate Appropriations Committee with bi-partisan support, the L-HHS-ED bill advanced along party lines and will likely be one of the most controversial to negotiate with the House who has not yet acted on its bill.  With the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act pending, Republicans objected to including $4 billion for its implementation.  The $158.8 billion bill, the largest of the discretionary bills after defense, is $2 billion more than in FY 2012 and is consistent with the Administration’s request, but nearly $9 billion more than the House allocation.  The House is expected to introduce its bill soon.  Last year the House Subcommittee Chairman Dennis Rehberg (R-MT) crafted his own version of the bill, one that was so draconian that it was never brought to the floor of the House, ensuring that the L-HHS-ED bill would became part of the omnibus appropriations bill.

The Senate bill includes $2.438 billion for the Child Care and Development Block Grant, an increase of $160 million over FY 2012 funding. Head Start also saw an increase, receiving $8.039 billion, or $70 million more than its current level.  Based on the failure of some grantees to meet new performance standards enacted last year, $1.2 billion in Head Start grants will need to be re-competed.  Funding for the education of students with disabilities between the ages of 3 and 21 receives a $100 million increase, to $11.678 billion.  Under the bill the maximum Pell Grant award would increase by $85 to $5,635 for the 2013-2014 school year.  Funding for community health centers is increased by $300 million over FY 2012 to $3.067 billion.  Title I education for disadvantaged students is funded at $14.616 billion, an increase of $100 million over its current level.  The committee rejected the Administration’s proposal to decrease funding for home energy assistance (LIHEAP) by $452 million, instead level-funding it at $3.472 billion.  The Administration again this year proposed to cut in half the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) but the committee instead level-funds the program at $677 million.  See a more detailed summary of the committee’s bill here. For the full text of the bill, click here.

Housing Programs  The Senate Appropriations Committee completed its Transportation-HUD bill in April.  On June 7 the House Appropriations Subcommittee passed its bill which the full Committee may consider the week of June 18.   Under the House bill HUD receives $33.6 billion for FY 2013, about $1.4 billion less than the Senate Committee bill. Like the Senate, the House rejects HUD’s proposal to mandate minimum rents of $75 per month in Tenant Based Rental Assistance, Project-Based Rental Assistance, Public Housing, Section 202 Elderly Housing, and Section 811 Housing for Persons with Disabilities. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, adoption of the minimum rent could cause serious hardship for up to 500,000 of the most extremely poor tenants served by HUD’s programs.
The House either meets HUD’s request or provides less funding than the Administration for key rental and homeless programs.  The House bill provides $19.1 billion for housing vouchers including $17.24 billion for renewal of voucher contracts, equaling HUD’s request, but $262 million less than the Senate Committee provides.  HUD requested a lower level than needed, assuming policy changes such as the mandatory minimum rent which the House does not include.  According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, up to 55,000 vouchers could be lost if Congress adopts the Administration and House’s funding level.  The House Subcommittee provides $8.7 billion in funding for Project-Based Rental Assistance, the same as HUD requested but nearly $1.2 billion less than the Senate bill provides.  The lower number in the Administration’s bill reflects its proposal to short-fund the program with less than a full year of funding along with a promise to fund the remainder with money not used in prior year accounts.  The House bill, like the Administration, provides $4.524 billion for the Public Housing Operating Fund, $67 million less than the Senate.  The Public Housing Capital Fund would receive $1.985 billion in the House and Senate bills, $85 million less than HUD requested.

Homeless Assistance Grants would be receive $2 billion in FY 2013, an increase of $99 million over FY 2012, but less than HUD’s request for a $330 million increase and $146 million less than in the Senate bill.  The Senate requests level-funding of $375 million for the Section 202 elderly housing program.  HUD is seeking a $100 increase and the House a $50 million increase in the program.  Both the Administration and the Senate fund Section 811 housing for persons with disabilities at $150 million, a $15 million cut over FY 2012, while the House provides level funding.  The Senate funds Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) at $3.1 billion, $152 million less than the FY 2012 level and the Administration’s request.  The House provides $3.344 or $396 million more than the FY 2012 for CDBG formula grants.  Click Here to see the National Low Income Housing Coalition budget chart for HUD programs.

Nutrition Programs  The Senate Agriculture Appropriations Committee bill that passed in April funds the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) at $7.041 billion, the level requested by the Administration and enough to cover the current and projected caseload.  Included in that amount are $60 million for breastfeeding peer counselors, $14 million for infrastructure, $30 million for management information systems and $16.5 million for WIC farmers’ markets. The House Appropriations Subcommittee bill adopted on June 6 provides $6.9 billion for WIC which is believed to be sufficient to meet caseload, but does not include funding for breastfeeding per counselors or infrastructure.  The Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), which serves 599,000 mainly low-income seniors, is funded at $187 million in the Senate and Administration bills; $9.2 million more than in FY 2012.  The House funds CSFP at $173.25 million, a level that would result in approximately 43,000 fewer low-income participants receiving a food package.  None of the bills provides the $5 million needed to expand service to six new USDA-approved states.  The Emergency Assistance Food Program (TEFAP) received $269.5 million in mandatory funding for food commodities in the House and Senate bills, reflecting the level established by the 2008 Farm Bill plus an adjustment for food price inflation. TEFAP commodities were funded at $260 million in FY12.  TEFAP administrative grants, which help charitable food providers store, transport and distribute TEFAP commodities, are funded in the Senate bill at the Administration’s request of $49.4 million, a $1.4 million increase over FY 2012, but receive only $47.04 in the House bill. The Emerson/Leland Hunger Fellowship Program is level-funded at $2 million in the Senate and House versions of the bill.

The post CHN: Appropriations Bills Funding Human Needs Move in House and Senate: Differences Won’t Be Resolved Until After Election appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

Most of the bill’s details were agreed to five days ago but Democrats delayed signing off on the bill’s conference report with concerns over several ‘riders’ (policy issues not related to funding) and to give more time for negotiations to work out a deal extending the payroll tax and unemployment insurance and addressing the reimbursement rate for Medicare doctors.  (See related article in this Human Needs Report.)

The largest of the non-defense appropriations bill is the one that funds Labor, Health & Human Services (HHS), and Education programs.  It will provide $156.3 billion for FY 2012, $1.1 billion below the FY 2011 level.  Programs critical to low-income families that received additional funding include the Community Services Block Grant, funded at $714 million, an increase of $12 million above last year’s level, Head Start, funded at $8 billion, up $424 million over last year’s level, and the Child Care and Development Block Grant which receives a $60 million increase to $2.3 billion.

Job Training
The final package rejects the deep cuts proposed to job training and education programs in a House draft of the L-HHS-Ed bill released in October that made $2.2 billion in cuts to training, including $1.9 billion to Workforce Investment Act (WIA) formula grant programs.  The final bill includes $150 million in cuts to job training programs in the Department of Labor (DOL), with the bulk coming from reducing funding for the WIA  Dislocated Worker program ($55 million below FY 2011 level) and the Workforce Innovative Fund ($75 million below FY 2011 levels). The bill does not include the proposal in the House draft to eliminate advance appropriations for DOL training programs, which facilitates longer-term planning.

Pell Grants
The news on Pell Grants is not as bad as some had expected.  The maximum Pell Grant award is maintained at $5,550.  The income threshold at which students automatically qualify for the maximum Pell Grant without a more detailed needs analysis (referred to as the “auto-zero”) has been reduced from a $30,000 limit per year to $23,000, which will make it harder for working students to protect income needed for living expenses.  The lifetime eligibility for Pell Grants was reduced from 18 to 12 semesters.

Low-Income Home Energy Assistance LIHEAP
The LIHEAP program received a deep cut in funding, down from $4.7 billion in FY 2011 to $3.48 billion in FY 2012, a 26 percent reduction.  The President’s budget slashed the program even more deeply, requesting only $2.57 billion for the program.  LIHEAP helps low-income families pay their heating and cooling bills.  Currently only a fraction of those eligible for assistance receive it.  Cuts to this program will be devastating for families struggling to balance the need to put food on the table, pay for medicines, and heat their homes.

H.R. 2005 contains an additional 0.189 percent cut to all discretionary accounts.  The House and Senate will also vote on a separate bill, the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2012 (H.R. 3672), which provides $8.6 billion in disaster aid financing.  Republicans want to pay for the aid with another across-the-board cut to most discretionary accounts.  The Senate will likely not adopt the offsetting cut.  By setting up separate votes for the Disaster Relief spending and the offset, the House is allowing the Members to have their chance to show their support for spending cuts to pay for emergency relief, without jeopardizing final enactment of the legislation.

The post CHN: Congress Poised to Pass Omnibus Fiscal Year 2012 Appropriation Bill appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

House and Senate appropriators hope to avoid passing another short-term appropriations bill and instead come to agreement by November 18 on a final omnibus bill for FY 2012 that includes funding for all discretionary programs.  Both House and Senate leaders have agreed to accept the total $1.043 trillion overall cap on funding passed in the Budget Control Act on August 2. This represents a $7 billion (non-inflation adjusted) cut from the FY 2011 total, an inflation-adjusted 1.8 percent cut. While working with the same total spending cap will make an agreement easier, still there are differences in the House and Senate bills that could prove difficult to resolve – starting with whether to include offsets for FEMA funding, something that has never happened because of its emergency nature. In addition to differences in funding levels for certain programs, policy riders also loom large.

Negotiators will use the 12 bills as they have been developed to negotiate the final package.  The Senate has passed 11 of the 12 bills in the Appropriations Committee – the Interior-Environment bill has not been taken up.  Senate leadership hopes to take a number of the bills to the floor before omnibus negotiations, hoping to get more leverage in the process.  The House has passed 9 of the 12 bills within the Appropriations Committee and 6 of those have passed the full House.

Labor-HHS-Education:  One of the bills the House has not considered in either the Appropriations full or subcommittee is Labor-HHS-Education.  However, Subcommittee Chairman Rehberg (R-MT) took the unprecedented step of posting on the Committee’s website a draft bill representing his proposals for FY 2012. He does not plan to convene the subcommittee to consider the bill.  The largest bill next to Defense, the Labor-HHS-Education bill, will be one of the most difficult to resolve. The House draft bill for FY 2012 is funded at $153.4 billion, $4 billion below its FY 2011 level and below the Senate bill.  The House draft makes particularly deep cuts to job training programs, decreasing aggregate funding by $2.4 billion or 75 percent while the Senate maintains current funding for the programs.  The House draft also cuts nearly 30 education grant programs.  As controversial as the cuts are the new policy riders in the House bill: prohibiting the use of funds to implement almost any part of the Affordable Care Act; overturning protections of the National Labor Relations Act for workers in many companies now covered; and blocking Education Department rules designed to protect students and taxpayers from for-profit colleges with the worst default records.

Defense:  Funding in the two Defense bills are far apart. The Senate freezes defense spending at its current level of $513 billion and the House increases spending by $17 billion to $530 billion.  Both assume additional spending of $118 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Agriculture/Nutrition:  The Senate would provide $2.699 billion more in Agriculture Appropriations with significantly more for nutrition programs in the bill; $60 million more for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), $10.5 million more for TEFAP administration funding, $38.3 million more for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, and $581 million more for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).  According to appropriators, the $6.582 billion for WIC in the Senate bill would fully fund participation in the program.

Housing:  Advocates are deeply concerned about cuts in several programs that serve extremely low-income households in both the House draft and Senate bills providing funding for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Funding for contract renewals for tenant-based rental assistance in the House bill is $17.04 billion and in the Senate bill is $17.14 billion.  The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that a minimum of $17.37 billion would be needed to prevent households from losing vouchers they are now using to enable them to afford their rent.  Under the House bill an estimated 42,000 vouchers would be lost, with the likely outcome that many would be forced out of their homes. Both bills are well below the President’s request of $2.4 billion for the Public Housing Capital Fund which is barely sufficient to meet accumulating maintenance needs of public housing units. This bill is one reflection of the impact of that cuts to domestic discretionary programs in the name of “deficit reduction” are having.

Another challenge to reaching agreement on final funding for FY 2012 will be pressure from the 53 House Republicans who voted on October 4 against the CR, many of whom are unhappy that the total spending is $24 billion more than adopted in the April House-passed budget resolution.

The post CHN: Congress Passes Short-Term FY2012 Spending Bill appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.

During full Appropriations Committee consideration of the bill an amendment from Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) was approved adding $147 million to the Subcommittee level for the WIC program, bringing its FY 2012 funding level to $6.048 billion.  This is still well below what is needed to serve all who are eligible and significantly less than the $6.7 billion FY 2011 funding level.  Action on the House floor imposed an across-the-board 0.78 percent cut to all areas of the agriculture bill except the one dealing with conservation in order to pay for the $147 million for WIC.

In the final bill, the Commodity Supplemental Food Program is cut by $38 million, down from the FY 2011 funding level of $176.8 million.  Emergency food commodities provided through mandatory funding in TEFAP are capped at $200 million, a $51 million cut below this year’s level.  The bill cuts $2 billion from the SNAP (food stamp) reserve fund that was proposed in the President’s FY 2012 budget, intended to cover unexpectedly high caseload increases.  While previous proposals would have eliminated the Congressional Hunger Center’s Emerson/Leland Fellows program, this bill provides $1.5 million, or half the amount funded in FY 2010.  The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Programs were cut by 10 percent, at $180 million.

The Committee Report accompanying the bill was not subject to the amendment process and includes troublesome language reversing positive changes made in the child nutrition reauthorization bill last year.  The Report directs USDA to scrap its process for new healthy nutrition requirements for the School Lunch and Breakfast Programs.  It also directs USDA to issue a new rule that would not require an increase in the cost of providing school meals.  If schools could not be required to spend more on meals, the proposed nutritional quality improvements would suffer.  This language is not likely to be included in the final bill, and would not be considered binding by the Administration.

Advocates are also deeply concerned about cuts in the bill that would cause tens of thousands of families living in rural areas to lose their rental housing assistance.  The USDA Section 521 Rental Assistance Program is cut from $956 million in FY 2011 to $890 million in FY 2012, affecting 66,000 currently housed tenants.  Ninety-four percent of these households have very low annual incomes, averaging $11,364, and 60 percent are elderly or persons with disabilities.  The bill would also cut funding to repair or renovate USDA-funded developments and funding to develop new rural affordable rental housing and farm labor housing.

The Senate has not begun its process for funding the appropriations bills.  Advocates hope that negotiations with the Senate will lessen the severity of the cuts called for in the House bill.

The post CHN: House Agriculture Appropriations: Some WIC Funding Restored, but Other Cuts to Nutrition and Housing Programs Stay 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.

Both the House and Senate committees would spend less in FY 2011 than this year in appropriations for Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Military Construction-Veterans’ Affairs.  The House also allocated slightly less for Transportation-HUD than this year; the Senate level-funded Transportation-HUD appropriations.

In the House, military, homeland security, and international expenditures would be increased about $22 billion over this year; Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education rise by $12.7 billion (close to 8 percent over FY 2010 levels).  The programs within Commerce-Justice-Science are reduced almost 6 percent in the House and by 6.5 percent in the Senate; most other appropriations bills stay fairly close to FY 2010 levels.

Labor-HHS-ED:  In the House Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee, although the increases were not as high as the President had proposed, there was growth in funding for child care and Head Start.  The Child Care and Development Block Grant would rise from $2.1 billion this year to $2.8 billion.  Head Start would grow by $866 million, to $8.1 billion.  The President proposed another $100 million beyond the House level for child care, and another $124 million more for Head Start.  Still, in a climate of increasing focus on deficit reduction, advocates were gratified to see these significant increases.

The House has not agreed to the President’s proposal to move some of the funding for home energy assistance and for higher education Pell Grants to mandatory funding (not needing annual appropriations).  The Labor-HHS-Ed Subcommittee did, however, approve the full total authorized for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), $5.1 billion (the same as this year).  Pell Grants rise substantially, from $17.5 billion this year to $23.1 billion in FY 2011, a $5.7 billion increase, which was the amount the President had requested.

In other education funding, the House Subcommittee does not provide all of the funding the President sought for his new Race to the Top initiative.  The President recommended $1.35 billion to fund this new program; the Subcommittee included $800 million.  In another new initiative sought by the President, the Investing in Innovation Fund, the Subcommittee approved $400 million, or $100 million less than the President requested.  However, the Subcommittee provided more than the Administration asked for K-12 Education for the Disadvantaged (Title I), Special Education (IDEA), School Improvement Programs, and Impact Aid.  In all, the Subcommittee provides $7.7 billion more for the Department of Education than its FY 2010 levels, but nearly $1.5 billion less than the President recommended.

The Senate Appropriations Committee has not yet taken up funding for Labor-HHS-Education.

Transportation-HUD:  Both the House and Senate have approved Transportation-HUD appropriations in full committee.  The House expects to bring this bill to the floor during the last week in July, just before Congress’ August recess.  The House Committee reduced T-HUD funding by $500 million below FY 2010 levels, and $1.34 billion less than the President requested.  The full Senate Committee level-funded T-HUD at $67.9 billion.  Low-income housing advocates are relieved that Section 8 rental assistance appears to be adequately funded, although slightly below the President’s recommendation.  The Public Housing Capital Fund receives $2.5 billion in both the House and Senate bills – the same amount as in FY 2010, but higher than the $2.04 billion requested by the President.  There is a large backlog of capital projects needing work that cannot be addressed at this level of funding.  Both the House and Senate Committees flat-fund Housing for the Elderly at $825 million, rejecting the President’s proposal to cut it down to $274 million.  The President had also called for decreasing funding for Housing for Persons with Disabilities to $90 million; the House would retain the FY 2010 level of $300 million; the Senate provides $200 million.  (For a table with multi-year comparisons of funding for housing programs by the National Low Income Housing Coalition, click here.)

Appropriations Bills Status:  The House has completed Appropriations subcommittee work on everything but Defense and Financial Services.  So far, the only full Committee votes have been on Military Construction-VA and Transportation-HUD, which are both expected to get floor votes during the week of July 26.  The Senate Appropriations full Committee has approved bills for Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, Energy-Water, Military Construction- VA, Homeland Security, and Transportation-HUD.  The remaining bills have not yet been taken up by the subcommittees.  No floor action is yet scheduled.  It is still expected that stop-gap funding (a “continuing resolution”) will be needed to continue funding for programs after the start of the new fiscal year on October 1.

The post CHN: House and Senate Set FY 2011 Spending Targets Lower Than President’s; Spending Tight, but Some Growth in House Labor-HHS Appropriations appeared first on Coalition on Human Needs.