Lieberman Blasts Bush Budget for Shortchanging American People

Lieberman Blasts Bush Budget for Shortchanging American People
Calls for additional funding in response to paltry Administration proposal

Senator Joe Lieberman today blasted the Bush Administration's budget proposal for shortchanging critical programs that provide aid and support to millions of Americans, and he called for significant funding increases for these initiatives.

Among the programs either under-funded or completely cut by the Bush Administration were Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Hope VI Program, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Program, and the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG).

"Across the board, the President's budget has cut funding or under-funded critical federal programs to help hard working Americans and our nation's neediest citizens," said Lieberman. "These are the wrong priorities. Shortchanging vital investments in energy assistance, crime prevention and community development means that families in Connecticut will have to scrape by to own homes and pay their energy bills and fear for their safety in their own neighborhoods."

In a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Kent Conrad (D-ND), Lieberman expressed concern over the Bush Administration's budget cuts in several important areas, including:

LIHEAP: The importance and effectiveness of LIHEAP is incontrovertible. LIHEAP assists low-income, vulnerable households with children and disabled and elderly individuals who are at risk for health problems due to insufficient home heating or cooling. The home energy burden for low income households is over four times that of non-low income households. LIHEAP serves the same low-income population that also relies on assistance with heating costs through the Weatherization Assistance Program, for which a 32% cut is proposed. Ongoing debates over LIHEAP funding highlight the unmet winter heating needs of the most impoverished. A survey of LIHEAP recipients found that 44% had been forced to skip energy payments, or pay less than the entire home energy bill over the last year; 30% reported that they had received notice or threat to disconnect their electricity or home heating fuel, and 8% reported that their electricity or home heating had actually been disconnected. The Administration should be calling for LIHEAP to be funded at $5.1 billion, the full amount authorized by the Energy Policy Act.

Hope VI Program: The HUD HOPE VI program is once again proposed for elimination in the federal budget and OMB rated the program as "Ineffective." The Administration has been successful in cutting the funding level for the program from $149 million in FY2004 to only $99 million in FY2006, so the program is effectively decimated already; this year, the Administration proposes the coup de grace. It not only proposes no new funding for FY2007, but would rescind the funding for FY2006! Part of the reason, the Administration claims, for eliminating the program is that it has accomplished its mission of "demolishing 100,000 units of public housing." On the contrary, the need to address public housing improvement in Connecticut and around the nation continues apace. Recent estimates are that there is a backlog of about $20 billion in public housing improvement needs around the country. Not only is this program effective, it is badly needed and should be continued.

CDBG Program: The Administration has this year continued its effort to reconfigure the CDBG program. Last year, the Administration proposed to remove the program from HUD, shift it to the Department of Commerce, merge it into a block grant with several other programs, and substantially cut the funding for all of them. Fortunately, Congress did not adopt the proposal. Unfortunately, the Administration was successful in attaining a substantial cut in the program of almost $500 million, to $4.1 billion. This year, the Administration has given up on its idea to transfer the program to Commerce, but it again seeks a substantial budget cut of more than 25%; it asked for a funding level of only $3.0 billion for CDBG. CDBG has been one of the most successful and flexible programs of assistance to local governments the federal government has ever produced. It is continually cited by mayors and local officials in Connecticut and across the country as the model for how a federal program should work: it provides them resources with which they can make local decisions about how to improve communities. That was the original purpose of the program and should not be abandoned in favor of excessive federal oversight and control.

COPS Program: The COPS program is a very effective program administered by the Department of Justice that provides grants to local law enforcement agencies to promote community policing and acquire technologies that help local law enforcement agencies become more efficient. One of the great advantages of the COPS program is that it gives local first responders flexibility to use the money to meet their specific needs. OMB concluded that the COPS program is not performing. I disagree with OMB's assessment. GAO issued a report in June 2005 showing evidence that the level of COPS program funding is correlated with reduced crime rates. Moreover, I have seen the benefits of the COPS program throughout Connecticut. I propose restoring the cuts to COPS program in order to bring it back to its FY2006 funding level of $478 million.

Census Bureau's Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP): The Budget request calls for the elimination of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), an important source of Census Bureau data about poverty, income, and program participation. The Census Bureau has indicated that it wants to improve the survey that is used to collect data in these vital areas, and the Budget for FY2007 provides funds for the development of the new survey, but does not provide funds for conducting the SIPP itself. The SIPP provides information about low-income families across the nation. The SIPP provides essential information on the effectiveness of programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid, Social Security, and unemployment insurance. Many experts have long believed that the SIPP is the nation's best source of data about poverty and income. For example, the National Academy of Sciences stated in 1995, "SIPP should become the nation's primary source of income statistics … [Other national surveys] can never be designed to provide the same extent of detail or achieve the same quality of reporting as in SIPP." The Panel on Poverty and Family Assistance of the National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, "Measuring Poverty: A New Approach," page 11 (1995). The SIPP also tracks health insurance coverage, and provides more in-depth information than any other government survey on work-family issues, such as maternity leave. It is essential that SIPP be funded at its FY2006 appropriated level of $33.9 million.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) - State and Local Preparedness Grants: The CDC state and local preparedness grants are authorized to provide funds to states to support preparedness planning, including deployment of the Strategic National Stockpile, surveillance and epidemiology of diseases, laboratory capacity for biological and chemical agents, establishing information technology capacities, communicating health threats with the public and others, and education and workforce training. Across all 50 states, funding has decreased from $919 million in 2005 to $824 million in 2006. This year, the Administration is proposing a slight cut again to $822 million. CDC state and local preparedness grants are one of the few mechanisms available to states to plan for any hazard - whether it be a biological or chemical terrorist attack, hurricane, or pandemic flu. The Trust for America's Health (TFAH) released an issue report on public health preparedness across the nation. Their panel of experts recommended that the CDC grants program be funded at a minimum level of $950 million for public health and bioterrorism preparedness to states. Funding should not be cut for the CDC state and local preparedness grant program

CSBG: The CSBG is a federal block grant that delivers and coordinates programs and services to low-income Americans aimed at fighting poverty. It funds more than 1,100 agencies that are currently operating in 96% of counties in the country. In 2005, $637 million was provided to the CSBG and $630 million in 2005. However, for fiscal year 2007, no funds have been requested for the program. The Department of Health and Human Services has reported that CSBG funds have resulted in over 2 million service opportunities, including the provision of public and private transportation, access to medical care and child care, establishment of community centers, funding of youth development programs, increased business opportunities for low-income Americans, and access to quality food shopping in low-income neighborhoods with limited access to quality foods. More than 100,000 low-income families have received improved housing based on CBSG funds and more than 50,000 Americans have had higher income earnings as a result of the grants. CSBG has also resulted in more than 100,000 Americans completing high school, higher education, or job retraining. Lastly, CSBG has resulted in greater private and public investments in fighting poverty, with estimates indicating that $1,486 was leveraged for every $1 in CSBG funds. That amounts to a $9.6 billion investment in American communities. Congress should maintain funding for the CSBG grants and not terminate a program and destroy an infrastructure that has benefited millions of low-income Americans, who are already disproportionately negatively affected by the Administration's budget proposal.

Enhancing Education Through Technology (EETT): The President's FY2007 Budget proposes eliminating funding for the EETT program, which seeks to ensure that by the time students complete eighth grade, they are technologically literate. The program also awards grants to states and local school districts for teacher training and curriculum development, as well as other related activities. Grants are provided to state educational agencies on the basis of their proportional share of funding under Part A of Title I. states may retain up to 5 percent of their allocations for state-level activities, and must distribute one-half of the remainder by formula to eligible local educational agencies and the other half competitively to eligible local entities.

http://lieberman.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=252216