I'm not a big of any attempts to deny people access to its government. The following article illustrates how costly in financial terms shutting down the government can be. Of course the human costs will be even greater.
The cost of keeping the government’s lights off
Carrie Dann writes:As the standoff in Congress continues over where and what to cut from federal spending for the rest of this fiscal year, the prospects for a government shutdown loom larger.
But the haggling over the budget could have a very expensive consequence: A shutdown costs the government money.
A lot of it.
The Office of Management and Budget estimated early in 1996 that the first of two government shutdowns – for six days in November 1995 – cost taxpayers an estimated $100 million per day. The final price tag for that closing and the record three-week shutdown later that year - including back pay to workers who did not go to work over that time: Over $1.25 billion.
Other shutdowns have been costly too. According to the Government Accountability Office, a funding gap of just three days in 1991 rang up a $607 million bill, including $363 million in lost revenue and fees.
If Congress fails to reach an agreement on a stopgap spending measure before the current funding law expires on March 4, the federal government could be headed for the 16th closure since Jimmy Carter’s presidency.
The costs of shutdown
The executive branch of the federal government currently employs just over two million civilians – about the same number as it did in the mid-1990s – and requires hundreds of millions of dollars per day to function.
But why does it cost so much to keep the lights off?
First of all, pay.
The Office of Management and Budget requires federal agencies to maintain a contingency plan in case of a “funding hiatus” – including information about how many employee are essential for “military, law enforcement, or direct provision of health care activities” or otherwise “to protect life and property.” That would include air traffic controllers, national security professionals, key medical workers, and law enforcers, among others. But, in the event of a shutdown, “non-essential” employees would be forced to stay home until the impasse gets resolved.
In the 1990s, the 800,000 employees who were furloughed in November and the 260,000 who sat idle in December received a total of about $1 billion in back pay even though they could not report to work, according to a report by the Office of Management and Budget.
(That was a relief to many employees, who were uncertain for weeks about whether or not they would ultimately be paid. Robert Tobias, who served as the president of the National Treasury Employees Union during the shutdown and now teaches at American University, said that his organization and other federal employee groups dispersed tens of thousands of dollars in loans to workers who were unable to pay their bills without receiving their paychecks on time.)
There’s also the issue of uncollected fines, fees, and other revenues.
The Environmental Protection Agency, for example, failed to collect $63 million in fines because of cancelled facility inspections during the November shutdown in 1995. Uncollected airline taxes and fees by users of government facilities like national parks also added up.
There are also major potential trickle-down effects for the nation’s economy.
Shortly after the three-week shutdown in 1995, the Interior Department concluded that the shuttering of national parks had cost related businesses and nearby local governments almost $300 million. A study conducted by the by National Parks and Conservation Association found that – even a year after the budget standoff – small businesses were still suffering from a lingering decline in tourism, especially by foreign visitors.
Contractors also suffered during the mid-1990s shutdowns. According to a survey conducted at the time by Signet Banking Corp., a third of federal contractors furloughed some of their own employees in January 1996. Many of those workers never received checks from their private-sector employers to make up for time lost.
Looming threat
It remains unclear whether or not a shutdown will occur, and the Obama administration has been mostly muted in its warnings about the economic effects of a potential budget stalemate after March 4.
"We don't want to do things that would jeopardize confidence in the (economic) recovery,” said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner at a breakfast sponsored by Bloomberg News on Wednesday. But he declined to comment further on the possible impact of a shutdown, saying of the congressional negotiators working on a stopgap bill, “I don’t want to complicate their challenge.”
Still, the potential political and commercial costs of the 1995-96 standoff are on the minds of the shutdown’s veterans and its students.
“What Republicans discovered was that, while people don’t pay much attention to the federal government, they notice a great deal when the services they need are not available,” said Tobias. “That’s why there was a huge backlash.”
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Saturday, February 19, 2011
The Worst News So Far
As expected, the House voted to cut billions of dollars from the federal budget. Programs that serve seniors, low income children and families,
veterans will all be impacted by these cuts. Agencies like CAPSTJOE will have to do all that we can to serve those in need. We remain hopeful that some of the cuts will be restored when the Senate meets to consider the spending package.
House Votes to Cut $60 Billion, Setting Up Budget Clash
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: February 19, 2011
WASHINGTON — The House early Saturday approved a huge package of spending cuts, slashing more than $60 billion from domestic programs, foreign aid, and even some military projects, as the new Republican majority made good on its pledge to turn the grassroots fervor of the November elections into legislative action to shrink the size and scope of government.
The vote, of 235 to 189, was a victory for the large, boisterous class of fiscally conservative Republican freshmen that is fiercely determined to change the ways of Washington and that forced party leaders to pursue far bigger cuts than originally planned. It set the stage for a standoff with Senate Democrats and the White House that each side has warned could lead to a shutdown of the federal government early next month.
The House Democratic leader, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, late Friday night put forward a temporary extension of the stopgap measure that would maintain expenditures as they are now, generally at 2010 levels, and avert a shutdown through March 31. But Republicans quickly dismissed it.
Democrats, for weeks, have warned that Republicans were risking a shutdown by showing no flexibility in the spending debate.
“The last thing the American people need is for Congressional Republicans or Democrats to draw a line in the sand that hinders keeping the government open,” Ms. Pelosi said at a news conference earlier on Friday. “Closing our government would mean our men and women in uniform wouldn’t receive their paychecks and veterans would lose critical benefits. Seniors wouldn’t receive their Social Security checks and essential functions fromfood safety inspection to airport security could come to a halt.”
Just as the Senate ultimately controlled the health care debate, so too will it control crucial negotiations in the current spending fight. Senate Republicans have said they support the overall goals of their House counterparts but have not committed to making identical cuts, and Democrats have a majority in the chamber.
veterans will all be impacted by these cuts. Agencies like CAPSTJOE will have to do all that we can to serve those in need. We remain hopeful that some of the cuts will be restored when the Senate meets to consider the spending package.
House Votes to Cut $60 Billion, Setting Up Budget Clash
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: February 19, 2011
WASHINGTON — The House early Saturday approved a huge package of spending cuts, slashing more than $60 billion from domestic programs, foreign aid, and even some military projects, as the new Republican majority made good on its pledge to turn the grassroots fervor of the November elections into legislative action to shrink the size and scope of government.
The vote, of 235 to 189, was a victory for the large, boisterous class of fiscally conservative Republican freshmen that is fiercely determined to change the ways of Washington and that forced party leaders to pursue far bigger cuts than originally planned. It set the stage for a standoff with Senate Democrats and the White House that each side has warned could lead to a shutdown of the federal government early next month.
The House Democratic leader, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, late Friday night put forward a temporary extension of the stopgap measure that would maintain expenditures as they are now, generally at 2010 levels, and avert a shutdown through March 31. But Republicans quickly dismissed it.
Democrats, for weeks, have warned that Republicans were risking a shutdown by showing no flexibility in the spending debate.
“The last thing the American people need is for Congressional Republicans or Democrats to draw a line in the sand that hinders keeping the government open,” Ms. Pelosi said at a news conference earlier on Friday. “Closing our government would mean our men and women in uniform wouldn’t receive their paychecks and veterans would lose critical benefits. Seniors wouldn’t receive their Social Security checks and essential functions fromfood safety inspection to airport security could come to a halt.”
Just as the Senate ultimately controlled the health care debate, so too will it control crucial negotiations in the current spending fight. Senate Republicans have said they support the overall goals of their House counterparts but have not committed to making identical cuts, and Democrats have a majority in the chamber.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Budget Battle Will Go Late Into The Night
It looks like the House of Representatives will be working late into the night to decide on their version of spending cuts.
I plan to make a pot of coffee stay up late and watch the action on capitol hill tonight. I expect that this will be one of the lowest points for those of us who are concerned about thousands of people needing help having nowhere to turn. I'm amazed with the rhetoric about how we have to reign in government spending by cutting programs that help people. As usual, the first place congress looks are programs that help the most vulnerable among us. It's easy to do when the people you hurt the most don't have a place at the table. The last time we had a government shutdown was 1995. At that time there was a tremendous outcry from the American people that congress, and the president had to reach a deal to get vital services to the people back on line. Finally, after fierce backlash towards congress, a deal was reached and the government shutdown ended.
Here is the latest on the Budget Battle in Washington
Congress veers toward spending showdown
As Republicans push cuts, threat of government shutdown grows
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The Republican leader of the U.S. House said Thursday he won’t support federal spending at current levels, raising the odds of a major confrontation with President Obama.
John Boehner, speaker of the House, said Republicans plan to keep their word to cut spending, starting with the final seven months of current fiscal year that ends on Sept. 30. The government is on track to report a record-high deficit of $1.65 trillion in fiscal 2011.
“We’re going to do everything that we can to cut spending,” Boehner said.
The White House has already threatened a veto if Republicans make cuts the administration deems excessive. Even before a bill gets to the president, however, the House would have to strike a deal with the Democratic-controlled Senate, where resistance to its proposals is high.
In the ongoing discussion about the economy, the Fiscal Commission's recommendations are being largely ignored. WSJ's David Wessel says the chairmen, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, need a publicity tour to hammer home their recommendations.
Barring a compromise, money to operate most departments of the federal government could run out next month. The government has been funded since last October through a temporary agreement that expires March 4.
Already, both sides are trying to blame the other if an interruption in government services occurs. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate’s top Democrat, accused Boehner of threatening to shut down the government without any negotiations.
“We will not stand for that. He’s wrong.” Reid said.
Boehner, on the other hand, said Democrats would bear blame because they are unwilling to bring the budget under control. Deficits would remain at high levels under the White House’s latest long-term budget outline.
“We have some Democrats here on Capitol Hill threatening to shut down the government rather than to cut spending and to follow the will of the American people,” Boehner said.
The last time a shutdown occurred was in 1995, when the public sided with President Clinton in his fight against congressional Republicans. The lesson from that political defeat still lingers with veteran Republicans such as Boehner, who’s seeking to position his party better if another stalemate ensues.
Before any showdown takes place, the House has to finish its budget proposal. Lawmakers have worked through hundreds of amendments over the past two days, with a final vote potentially on Thursday night.
Republicans have pledged to cut spending $100 billion from President Obama request of $3.8 trillion in the current fiscal year.
In the Senate, meanwhile, a handful of Democrats and Republicans are working on a deal to put the nation’s finances in order over the long haul. Yet their proposal might not be ready for several months, if at all.
The senators are using as a jumping-off point for negotiations the recommendations of a bipartisan deficit-reducing commission, which includes a mix of spending cuts and tax increases.
The panel, created by President Obama, released its report late last year. Yet most politicians were hesitant to embrace its conclusions because it urged major reforms in such politically sensitive programs as Medicare and Social Security. Both parties worry the other side will attack them ahead of the 2012 election if they follow the panel’s recommendations.
Boehner, for his part, said he’s willing to negotiate with the president if he wants to pursue a major overhaul of how the government taxes and spends.
“I’ve said it right to his face because I’m ready to sit down with the president. I’m ready to start the conversation,” the speaker said Thursday.
Jeffry Bartash is a reporter for MarketWatch in Washington.
I plan to make a pot of coffee stay up late and watch the action on capitol hill tonight. I expect that this will be one of the lowest points for those of us who are concerned about thousands of people needing help having nowhere to turn. I'm amazed with the rhetoric about how we have to reign in government spending by cutting programs that help people. As usual, the first place congress looks are programs that help the most vulnerable among us. It's easy to do when the people you hurt the most don't have a place at the table. The last time we had a government shutdown was 1995. At that time there was a tremendous outcry from the American people that congress, and the president had to reach a deal to get vital services to the people back on line. Finally, after fierce backlash towards congress, a deal was reached and the government shutdown ended.
Here is the latest on the Budget Battle in Washington
Congress veers toward spending showdown
As Republicans push cuts, threat of government shutdown grows
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The Republican leader of the U.S. House said Thursday he won’t support federal spending at current levels, raising the odds of a major confrontation with President Obama.
John Boehner, speaker of the House, said Republicans plan to keep their word to cut spending, starting with the final seven months of current fiscal year that ends on Sept. 30. The government is on track to report a record-high deficit of $1.65 trillion in fiscal 2011.
“We’re going to do everything that we can to cut spending,” Boehner said.
The White House has already threatened a veto if Republicans make cuts the administration deems excessive. Even before a bill gets to the president, however, the House would have to strike a deal with the Democratic-controlled Senate, where resistance to its proposals is high.
In the ongoing discussion about the economy, the Fiscal Commission's recommendations are being largely ignored. WSJ's David Wessel says the chairmen, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, need a publicity tour to hammer home their recommendations.
Barring a compromise, money to operate most departments of the federal government could run out next month. The government has been funded since last October through a temporary agreement that expires March 4.
Already, both sides are trying to blame the other if an interruption in government services occurs. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate’s top Democrat, accused Boehner of threatening to shut down the government without any negotiations.
“We will not stand for that. He’s wrong.” Reid said.
Boehner, on the other hand, said Democrats would bear blame because they are unwilling to bring the budget under control. Deficits would remain at high levels under the White House’s latest long-term budget outline.
“We have some Democrats here on Capitol Hill threatening to shut down the government rather than to cut spending and to follow the will of the American people,” Boehner said.
The last time a shutdown occurred was in 1995, when the public sided with President Clinton in his fight against congressional Republicans. The lesson from that political defeat still lingers with veteran Republicans such as Boehner, who’s seeking to position his party better if another stalemate ensues.
Before any showdown takes place, the House has to finish its budget proposal. Lawmakers have worked through hundreds of amendments over the past two days, with a final vote potentially on Thursday night.
Republicans have pledged to cut spending $100 billion from President Obama request of $3.8 trillion in the current fiscal year.
In the Senate, meanwhile, a handful of Democrats and Republicans are working on a deal to put the nation’s finances in order over the long haul. Yet their proposal might not be ready for several months, if at all.
The senators are using as a jumping-off point for negotiations the recommendations of a bipartisan deficit-reducing commission, which includes a mix of spending cuts and tax increases.
The panel, created by President Obama, released its report late last year. Yet most politicians were hesitant to embrace its conclusions because it urged major reforms in such politically sensitive programs as Medicare and Social Security. Both parties worry the other side will attack them ahead of the 2012 election if they follow the panel’s recommendations.
Boehner, for his part, said he’s willing to negotiate with the president if he wants to pursue a major overhaul of how the government taxes and spends.
“I’ve said it right to his face because I’m ready to sit down with the president. I’m ready to start the conversation,” the speaker said Thursday.
Jeffry Bartash is a reporter for MarketWatch in Washington.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
More Information About the Impending Cuts to Services for People in Need
The following was extracted from an article from the web site Roll Call(www.rollcall.com). It illustrates the ever changing environment in Washington. Programs that help people in need are threatened with deep cuts that will mean people who are fighting to stay out of poverty will lose even more opportunities for economic security.
House Republican leaders may have to make an unexpected course correction on the continuing resolution to head off defections from unhappy moderates.
The discontent surfaced Tuesday as the House began debate on the stopgap spending measure, which is being considered under an open process that could result in hundreds of amendments. Moderates have stopped short of threatening to vote no on final passage but are complaining that leaders have been too arbitrary about the spending cuts contained in the CR.
Rep. Steven LaTourette is leading the charge of some members of the moderate Tuesday Group who want to make sure the CR does not pick “winners and losers.”
Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, co-chairwoman of the Tuesday Group, would not commit to supporting LaTourette’s amendment, but the Missouri Republican said she expects it would get a lot of support. Emerson said she is in a tough spot because she also serves on the Appropriations Committee, which crafted the original CR language.
“I’m not, not supportive of it, but as I said, I’m in an awkward position right now,” she said. “I mean, hopefully, I think it would get a fair amount of support.”
Even Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton said he would back LaTourette’s amendment to avoid deeper cuts to programs such as low-income heating assistance.
More to come...
House Republican leaders may have to make an unexpected course correction on the continuing resolution to head off defections from unhappy moderates.
The discontent surfaced Tuesday as the House began debate on the stopgap spending measure, which is being considered under an open process that could result in hundreds of amendments. Moderates have stopped short of threatening to vote no on final passage but are complaining that leaders have been too arbitrary about the spending cuts contained in the CR.
Rep. Steven LaTourette is leading the charge of some members of the moderate Tuesday Group who want to make sure the CR does not pick “winners and losers.”
Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, co-chairwoman of the Tuesday Group, would not commit to supporting LaTourette’s amendment, but the Missouri Republican said she expects it would get a lot of support. Emerson said she is in a tough spot because she also serves on the Appropriations Committee, which crafted the original CR language.
“I’m not, not supportive of it, but as I said, I’m in an awkward position right now,” she said. “I mean, hopefully, I think it would get a fair amount of support.”
Even Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton said he would back LaTourette’s amendment to avoid deeper cuts to programs such as low-income heating assistance.
More to come...
Monday, February 14, 2011
Sharing News from the Coalition on Human Needs
House Appropriators Would Slash More than $65 billion in the Next Seven Months;
Vulnerable People Hit Hard
The House Appropriations Committee has released the cuts it will make to finish out the remaining 7 months of this fiscal year. It proposes to cut $100 billion below the President's FY 2011 budget proposal, of which $81 billion is cut from domestic and international programs, and $19 billion comes from military, homeland security, and veterans' programs. The President's proposals were higher than the level of spending that has been adopted so far in temporary spending measures. This proposal cuts about $60 billion as compared to FY 2010. Because there are increases in military, veterans' and homeland security spending, the cut to domestic and international programs is higher than the $60 billion in net reductions. There are $65.5 billion in cuts to domestic and international spending and a net $3.4 billion in cuts to military construction, homeland security, and veterans affairs. There are increases for veterans health care ($3.687 billion), homeland security ($1.2 billion) and defense spending (approximately $9 billion?).
Even though we are already five months into the fiscal year, some programs lose ALL of their regular FY 2011 appropriations (some may have remaining economic recovery or other funding). Some terminated programs:
Reintegration of Ex-Offenders
YouthBuild
Green Jobs Innovation Fund
Career Pathways Innovation Fund
National Health Service Corps
Family Planning (Title X)
Teen Pregnancy Prevention Discretionary Grants
Mentoring Children of Prisoners
Even Start
Striving Readers
High School Graduation Initiative
Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (higher ed financial assistance)
LEAP program (for low-income college students)
There are other very draconian cuts. Here are some comparisons to FY 2010 levels. PLEASE SHARE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CORRECTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT THESE OR OTHER CUTS:
$1 billion from Head Start (15 percent);
$1.4 billion from various job training programs (we're not sure exactly what is cut, but for purposes of comparison, two major job training programs, adult and youth training, were funded at $1.78 billion in FY 2010. (That does not include nearly $1.7 billion in economic recovery act funding that was available in FYs 2009 and 2010 - that is gone too.)
Community Health Centers (46 percent of regular appropriation);
Substance abuse treatment (more than $200 million cut);
Community Services Block Grant (44 percent cut);
Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP) contingency fund (66 percent cut);
FEMA Emergency Food and Shelter Program (50 percent cut);
Title I (K-12 education for low-income students) ($693.5 million),
IDEA (special education) grants to states: (nearly $560 million);
Commodity Supplemental Food Program (11.4 percent cut);
Community Development Fund ($2.95 billion, or 66.3 percent cut);
Project-based rental assistance ($715.5 million, or 8.4 percent cut);
Public Housing Capital Fund ($1.07 billion, or 42 percent cut);
Housing for the Elderly ($551 million, or 67 percent cut);
Housing for Persons with Disabilities ($210 million, or 70 percent cut).
OUR ABILITY TO FIGHT THESE CUTS DEPENDS ON GETTING INFORMATION ABOUT HOW MANY ARE CURRENTLY SERVED, HOW THEY ARE HELPED, AND SOME ESTIMATES OF HOW MANY WILL LOSE HELP BECAUSE OF THESE RECKLESS PROPOSALS. PLEASE HELP!
This continuing resolution (CR) will be on the House floor next week (likely starting on Wednesday). Debate may proceed for several days; amendments will be permitted. However, amendments to increase funding for any program can only be allowed if they include cuts in other programs within the same subcommittee jurisdiction. Amendments to cut more deeply will be allowed; funds saved through such cuts are reserved in a "lockbox" to reduce the deficit; the money saved cannot then be used to restore funds to another program. After the bill is passed in the House, the Senate must act on it, and a final CR enacted before the March 4 deadline, when the current temporary spending measure expires. SAVE for All: Strengthening America's Values and Economy for All
If you were wondering whether you should be part of the SAVE for All campaign, the House spending proposal is a good reason to join. Please read and sign the Statement of Principles, and join with hundreds of organizations to fight harshly short-sighted cuts - and to SAVE vulnerable people from losing services and opportunities to escape poverty.
The House Appropriations Committee has released the cuts it will make to finish out the remaining 7 months of this fiscal year. It proposes to cut $100 billion below the President's FY 2011 budget proposal, of which $81 billion is cut from domestic and international programs, and $19 billion comes from military, homeland security, and veterans' programs. The President's proposals were higher than the level of spending that has been adopted so far in temporary spending measures. This proposal cuts about $60 billion as compared to FY 2010. Because there are increases in military, veterans' and homeland security spending, the cut to domestic and international programs is higher than the $60 billion in net reductions. There are $65.5 billion in cuts to domestic and international spending and a net $3.4 billion in cuts to military construction, homeland security, and veterans affairs. There are increases for veterans health care ($3.687 billion), homeland security ($1.2 billion) and defense spending (approximately $9 billion?).
Even though we are already five months into the fiscal year, some programs lose ALL of their regular FY 2011 appropriations (some may have remaining economic recovery or other funding). Some terminated programs:
Reintegration of Ex-Offenders
YouthBuild
Green Jobs Innovation Fund
Career Pathways Innovation Fund
National Health Service Corps
Family Planning (Title X)
Teen Pregnancy Prevention Discretionary Grants
Mentoring Children of Prisoners
Even Start
Striving Readers
High School Graduation Initiative
Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (higher ed financial assistance)
LEAP program (for low-income college students)
There are other very draconian cuts. Here are some comparisons to FY 2010 levels. PLEASE SHARE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CORRECTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT THESE OR OTHER CUTS:
$1 billion from Head Start (15 percent);
$1.4 billion from various job training programs (we're not sure exactly what is cut, but for purposes of comparison, two major job training programs, adult and youth training, were funded at $1.78 billion in FY 2010. (That does not include nearly $1.7 billion in economic recovery act funding that was available in FYs 2009 and 2010 - that is gone too.)
Community Health Centers (46 percent of regular appropriation);
Substance abuse treatment (more than $200 million cut);
Community Services Block Grant (44 percent cut);
Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP) contingency fund (66 percent cut);
FEMA Emergency Food and Shelter Program (50 percent cut);
Title I (K-12 education for low-income students) ($693.5 million),
IDEA (special education) grants to states: (nearly $560 million);
Commodity Supplemental Food Program (11.4 percent cut);
Community Development Fund ($2.95 billion, or 66.3 percent cut);
Project-based rental assistance ($715.5 million, or 8.4 percent cut);
Public Housing Capital Fund ($1.07 billion, or 42 percent cut);
Housing for the Elderly ($551 million, or 67 percent cut);
Housing for Persons with Disabilities ($210 million, or 70 percent cut).
OUR ABILITY TO FIGHT THESE CUTS DEPENDS ON GETTING INFORMATION ABOUT HOW MANY ARE CURRENTLY SERVED, HOW THEY ARE HELPED, AND SOME ESTIMATES OF HOW MANY WILL LOSE HELP BECAUSE OF THESE RECKLESS PROPOSALS. PLEASE HELP!
This continuing resolution (CR) will be on the House floor next week (likely starting on Wednesday). Debate may proceed for several days; amendments will be permitted. However, amendments to increase funding for any program can only be allowed if they include cuts in other programs within the same subcommittee jurisdiction. Amendments to cut more deeply will be allowed; funds saved through such cuts are reserved in a "lockbox" to reduce the deficit; the money saved cannot then be used to restore funds to another program. After the bill is passed in the House, the Senate must act on it, and a final CR enacted before the March 4 deadline, when the current temporary spending measure expires. SAVE for All: Strengthening America's Values and Economy for All
If you were wondering whether you should be part of the SAVE for All campaign, the House spending proposal is a good reason to join. Please read and sign the Statement of Principles, and join with hundreds of organizations to fight harshly short-sighted cuts - and to SAVE vulnerable people from losing services and opportunities to escape poverty.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Is it Really a Good Time to Cut Programs That Help The Poor?
Like many of you I was pretty surprised to hear President Obama announce his intention to cut the Community Services Block Grant by 50 percent. This has been on my mind a lot for the past few days and this morning when I arrived at the office I was reminded one more time why now is not the time to cut aid to the poor. We have already seen our funding for LIHEAP cut considerably this past year we have had to reduce the number of staff who can help people sign up for heating assistance. We have reduced the number of days we can take applications to just a couple per week. The assistance that we can provide is just a drop in the bucket when you consider how many people will face disconnections when the weather warms ever so slightly.
It's sometimes hard to look into the faces of people who have been humbled by asking for help. It's not the same picture that some people want you to believe. "Why don't they just get a job" - I hear that a lot. Well, the fact is that many of them do have a job. I remember, not so long ago when working full time meant that you could have at least enough to pay for your basic needs. That's no longer the case. Especially when the job pays barely above minium wage and provides no benefits, like healthcare. Add to that the cost of renting a 2 bedroom apartment for over $600 a month, utility bills that exceed $300, the rising cost of gasoline and the list goes on. After it's all said and done that paycheck is already spent and a crisis like car repair, a trip to the doctor, or a broken appliance means you will more than likely either do without, or ask for help.
It's not a good time to cut spending for people who need help now. The economy is showing faint signs of recovery, but a lot of the people we help are at the very far end of recovery. Recovery for them would mean having a job that pays wages that they can afford live on, being able to live in a house that's clean, safe and energy efficient. Recovery means that hope is restored and the fear of not having enough to keep the lights on is gone.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Telling our Story for our Kids
During my trip to Washington DC, David Bradley and others emphasized just how important it is to have numerous stories about how our programs positively impact our families and the community. With all the programs we administer we could create an entire book about how we've changed the lives of thousands of people. We must continue to raise awareness of Community Action in the communities we serve. Only through public support can CAPSTJOE continue to be a leader in advocacy and service delivery. Please take time to regularly think about what activity, or event would make a good story to use for CAPSTJOE. Just yesterday Traci Bowman shared a success story given to her by Carmen Lankford about a Kindergarten teacher that praised the school readiness of two children who had attended South 9th Head Start. What a great story. Telling stories like these are rewarding for the people we serve as well as the staff who are working hard everyday to make a difference in the lives of people they serve.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)