Budget Reconciliation
BUDGET RECONCILIATION -- (Senate - December 13, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I, too, at the appropriate moment will offer a motion to instruct the conferees. I will offer the motion in conjunction with Senators COLLINS, KENNEDY, SNOWE, LIEBERMAN, LEAHY, BINGAMAN, COLEMAN, SALAZAR, STABENOW, CLINTON, LUGAR, HARKIN, LEVIN, SMITH, and PRYOR.
This motion to instruct conferees is about LIHEAP, the Low Income Heating Assistance Program. Each of us, at this point, is very familiar with the struggle that is taking place today. If you were in New England over the weekend, as I was, or in many other parts of the country, you understand that temperatures have fallen and many families are having to perform a juggling act with their budgets in order to heat their homes.
According to EIA's most recent short-term energy outlook, released last week, energy costs for the average family using heating oil are estimated to hit $1,454 this winter, an increase of $255. That is a 21-percent increase over last year's heating season. Natural gas prices could hit $1,024 for an average family using natural gas. That would be an increase of $282 or a 38-percent increase. For a family using propane, prices are projected to hit $1,269, an increase of $167 from last heating season, and that is a 15-percent increase.
Despite these sharp increases in fuel costs, we sadly continue to fund LIHEAP--the one program that can provide sufficient help to these families--at the same level as last year, which in reality means an actual cut in the level of assistance we can provide low-income consumers this winter's heating season.
The responsible thing for Congress to do is to fully fund LIHEAP at the full $5.1 billion authorized in the Energy Policy Act enacted earlier this year. Indeed, we have tried to do that on numerous occasions. Today marks the fifth time in the last 2 months that Senator Collins and I, along with some 30 other colleagues, have made an attempt to fully fund LIHEAP. We offered amendments to the Defense bill, the Transportation-Treasury-HUD bill, Labor-HHS bill and, most recently, the tax reconciliation bill. On each occasion, we reach across the aisle and across the country to provide more assistance for the LIHEAP program. While we did not reach the 60-vote margin needed to pass these amendments under the budget rules, in each instance, a majority of this body was on record supporting full funding for LIHEAP.
My preference, of course, was to provide funding to fully fund LIHEAP on an emergency basis through an appropriations bill. Those opportunities have passed. Budget reconciliation is the last train that is leaving the station. That is why I come to the floor and will offer, at the appropriate time, a motion to instruct budget conferees to insist on a level of funding for LIHEAP that is sufficient to fully fund the program at its fully authorized level.
The heat-or-eat dilemma is not just rhetoric. The RAND Corporation conducted a study and found that low-income households reduced food expenditures by roughly the same amount as increases in fuel expenditures. In some respects, this is a tidal wave not of rising water, like Katrina, but of rising energy prices.
We have all had the opportunity to visit our constituents and get a firsthand glimpse of the struggle they are faced with. A few weeks ago, I visited with Mr. Aram Ohanian, an 88-year-old veteran of the U.S. Army in World War II, living on a $779-a-month Social Security check. Money is so tight that he sometimes has to eat with his children or go to a local soup kitchen. He also gets assistance from our Rhode Island food bank. These heating price increases to Mr. Ohanian will be very difficult. He received LIHEAP assistance last year, but that assistance will be relatively less this year because of rising prices and greater demand.
Last month, the Social Security Administration announced that cost-of-living adjustments for 2006, on average, are about $65. That $65 increase to Mr. Ohanian is not going to take up the slack in terms of these tremendous increases in fuel prices.
The motion to instruct conferees that we will submit at the appropriate moment calls for LIHEAP to be funded at the fully authorized level. Under the best-case scenario, if we fully fund LIHEAP, there would still be a significant number of Americans who qualify for the program but will not get any help. LIHEAP would still only serve about one-seventh of 35 million households that are poor enough to qualify for assistance. But at least we are taking a step by fully funding this important program.
I urge my colleagues to support this motion when it comes to the floor for a vote.
I yield back the remainder of my time.
http://thomas.loc.gov/