President’s Budget Will Not Pass, Say Massachusetts Congressmen
STUDY
New Bedford Standard-Times
Valerie Sullivan
Boston University Washington News Service
Feb 22, 2007
WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 —If approved, the Bush administration’s proposed budget would result in cuts in a number of programs across Massachusetts, according to a new study.
The administration’s budget would mean “significant cuts” in domestic social, educational and environmental programs, according to Sharon Parrott, director of welfare reform and income support at the liberal Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
Between 2008 and 2012, according to the center’s study, cuts in Massachusetts would include:
* $146.8 million from federal elementary and secondary education programs;
* $74.8 million from vocational and adult education programs;
* $94.7 million from low-income home energy assistance;
* $103.6 million from state and local law enforcement programs;
* $133.4 million from community development block grants.
“The president basically is opposing cuts in important programs that keep the country going,” said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Newton.
The center estimates are based on the assumption that each state would shoulder percentages of the cuts equal to the percentage of funding that state already receives in each program.
“It’s critical that Massachusetts is given the tools it needs to continue leading the nation in education, health care and the life sciences,” said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.
For Massachusetts, the proposals would mean “important services being withheld, important research not being done… illness not being treated,” Rep. Frank said.
Added Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass: “If President Bush gets his way, families in Southeastern Massachusetts will feel the effects.”
The outcome would be “slashing funding to our schools and local fire and police departments… severely cutting funding for critical anti-terror safety programs… cut budgets for children’s health care and decrease funding for small businesses,” Sen. Kerry said.
Brian Riedl, senior budget analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative public policy think-tank, called the report a “scare-tactic” designed “to frighten members of Congress” from passing any of the president’s proposals.
“The center has produced a sky-is-falling set of projections based on a place holder number that has no legal and statutory impact and whose final legislation will not even be determined by the current Congress,” Mr. Riedl said.
From a policy standpoint, Mr. Riedl said, “the numbers [after 2008] are meaningless,” because programs are budgeted annually. “President Bush and the current Congress have absolutely no control over how much will be budgeted in 2012.”
But 2012 estimates aside, the center’s study said Massachusetts stands to lose millions of dollars of funding in 2008 alone. The study said adult and vocational education would be cut by $13.7 million, Environmental Protection Agency programs by $15 million, low-income energy assistance by $16.3 million, public housing assistance by $12.8 million, state and local law enforcement by $20 million.
The 2008 estimates “are relevant… however, non-security discretionary spending has grown 40 percent under President Bush already,” Riedl said. “Clearly these programs can afford to level off for a year or two.”
In 2008 alone, community service and development block grants still stand to lose a total of $38.4 million in federal funding.
Block grants benefit cities and communities, Rep. Frank said. “Instead, [the president is] asking for money to start a man mission to Mars,” Rep. Frank said. “I am sure we will reject many of the cuts he proposes.”
Head Start, a program that helps economically disadvantaged preschoolers develop early math and reading skills, would be cut by $3.7 million in 2008, with cuts totaling $39.9 million by 2012, according to the center.
“Head Start programs have already coped with funding cuts by spending fewer dollars per child,” Ms. Parrott said. Ultimately, continued cuts would lead to decreased spending on “teacher salaries, classroom materials, and specialized services to children with disabilities,” Ms. Parrott said.
Democratic members of Congress have vowed to ignore Bush’s budget. In the annual budget process, the president submits his proposal to Congress which then develops its own budget.
“I promise to do everything in my power to prevent the President’s reckless recommendations from moving forward,” Sen. Kerry said.
Sen. Kennedy is also determined to halt the proposals. “This budget would continue us down the wrong path, but fortunately the new Congress is determined to change course – and will,” Sen. Kennedy said.
Rep. Frank agreed. If the president’s proposals were to pass, the results “would be devastating… and they’re not going to happen,” Rep. Frank said. “Even if the Republicans were in power, they wouldn’t have accepted some of these terrible cuts in employment and domestic programs.”
###
