Category: Spring 2006 Newswire
Baldacci’s Assistant Testifies Before Committee
WASHINGTON, March 2 – Gov. John Baldacci’s representative pleaded Maine’s pecuniary plight caused by the new Medicare prescription drug benefit program before the Health Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee Wednesday.
Jude Walsh, the governor’s special assistant in his Office of Health Policy and Finance, told the subcommittee that Maine has had to pay some $6 million to cover the drug costs of those Mainers who did not receive the coverage that they should have under Medicare Part D. That’s the new prescription benefit that went into effect Jan. 1 and has been plagued by what Republican members of the subcommittee called “glitches.”
“The federal drug benefit was not ready Jan. 1 and is still not ready for everyone today,” Walsh testified before the subcommittee, of which Rep. Thomas Allen (D-1 st District) is a member. Walsh said the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services “never would have allowed a state Medicaid program to implement a benefit as flawed as this one remains.”
While the new benefit is intended to give many seniors and poor people access to medications that they did not have last year, much of the problem in the program’s first weeks had to do with the plight of former Medicaid recipients who were automatically assigned to the new Medicare program and found themselves at least temporarily deprived of government drug benefits.
Critics see the new program as corporate welfare for the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.
“Speaking for my constituents in Maine, I have to say the process has been chaotic,” Allen said. “The Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 gave the pharmaceutical and insurance industry most of what they wanted. But it denied senior citizens and people with disabilities the simple option of adding a Medicare-administered drug plan to their existing benefits.”
Dr. Mark McClellan, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, agreed that Medicare Part D gives less coverage than some employer plans, but he said that seniors now had a wide range of choices, up to 50 depending on the area, and that help is available in choosing the plan that best fits their needs.
One of the biggest criticisms Democrats at the hearing had was that the original legislation was drafted by industry lobbyists and congressional Republicans.
“It was conceived in sin, born in the darkness of night with no participation by Democratic members at all and was attended only by a fair gaggle of lobbyists of the health care industry, the insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry,” Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said.
Republicans countered by saying the market is working to provide seniors with choice and the lowest prices, and called the Democrats’ plan for government price negotiations with the industry a relic of the “command economy.”
“The horse that’s actually being ridden on the other side is a unicorn,” Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.) said. “Because it’s pure fantasy to believe that if you’re going to have price control in America that we’re going to be the land that creates these blockbuster drugs that will provide quality of life to people not only here but throughout the world.”
Walsh said there also were problems in the implementation of the new program. Many pharmacists around the state reported that as many as 50 percent of their customers who had sought the benefit could not be confirmed as participating.
The state set up a hotline to air these grievances, and at the turn of the year as many as 15,000 people called every day, Walsh said. Many of the callers said they were having to pay $250 deductibles and $100 co-pays after they were moved automatically into the new program.
Baldacci responded by reauthorizing the state’s pharmacy benefit, which so far has spent $6 million on 115,000 prescriptions for more than 50,000 Mainers. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has promised to pay this back, but that has not happened yet, Walsh said.
###
Shays, Farrell Duke It Out With Their Pocketbooks
By Adam Kredo
WASHINGTON, March 2 - As he gears up for what many expect to be one of the nation's most competitive congressional races, Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4, has raised more than twice as much money as Democratic challenger Diane Farrell has raised.
As of Dec. 31, 2005, Shays, who was first elected to the House in a special election in 1987, had contributions of more than $1.3 million, according to financial disclosure reports filed by the candidate with the Federal Election Commission. Farrell raised $585,482 through the same date.
Despite the cash advantage, Shays is " one of the top ten most vulnerable Republican incumbents in the country," according to Stuart Rothenberg, author of The Rothenberg Political Report, a nonpartisan analysis of American politics and elections.
Shays, who in 2004 won the race against Farrell by a margin of 14,160 votes, reported a year-end total of $892,552 cash on hand, while Farrell reported having $452,208. Cash on hand is the total available for expenditure by a candidate.
Fundraising has yet to pick up at this point, with the Connecticut primary not until Aug. 8, but Shays lags far behind some colleagues who reported raising more than $1 million in campaign funds last year.
"I think Chris Shays doesn't like some of the things about being a politician," Rothenberg said in a telephone interview. "He doesn't like to attack; I suspect he doesn't like the griminess of politics, but he's doing what he has to do."
Unlike many long-term incumbents, Shays received the majority of his money - $771,824 - from within the state, collecting less than 3 percent of his campaign money from New York and less than 1 percent from Washington, D.C., according to a Feb. 13report compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan, non-profit research group that tracks money in politics.
Both candidates raised the majority of their campaign money from individual donors, not political action committees. According to Rothenberg, Shays received considerably less PAC money than his fellow colleagues in the Connecticut delegation.
"His number is way down, and he must not like to do PAC fundraising or must not do most of it. He's really into looking like a reformer and squeaky clean, and he may have put limits on his PAC fundraising," Rothenberg said.
Shays was one of the principal sponsors of the 2002 law that overhauled campaign finance rules.
Michael Sohn, Shays' campaign manager, said fundraising efforts this cycle have consistently outpaced previous campaigns.
"He will continue to raise what he needs to in order to get his message out and correct misinformation about his record," Sohn said.
Shays raised more than $916,000,or 69 percent of his total, from individual donors, while Farrell raised $498,168, or 85 percent of his total, according to filings with the election commission.
Among the individual donors who contributed to Shays' campaign were several of Connecticut's state representatives. Rep. Lile Gibbons, for example, contributed $3,200, Rep. John Hetherington gave $700 and Rep. David Hopper contributed $250.
Individual donors are allowed to contribute up to $2,100 for a primary race and the same maximum for the general election.
Although Shays doesn't rely on PAC money to the extent many of his colleagues do, corporate PACs donated $400,564 to Shays as of Dec. 31. Finance and insurance interests topped the list, contributing more than $76,000 to his campaign through their PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Shays is a member of the Financial Services Committee and its Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee.
Purdue Pharma, a pharmaceutical company based in Stamford, is the top PAC contributor to Shays thus far, offering up more than $23,000 to the campaign, according to the center. It also contributed $5,200 to Farrell's campaign.
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., contributed $10,000 to Shays' campaign through his Leadership PAC, Keep Our Majority.
Shays' campaign also received funds from PACs associated with tobacco companies such as Altria Group, the parent of Philip Morris, and U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co.
Sohn said it makes sense that a significant portion of Shays' funds come from the financial and real estate industries. About one-third of the jobs in the district are in these industry. "Bottom Line, that's where people in the fourth district work," Sohn said.
In 2002, when Shays' beat Farrell with 52 percent of the vote, his campaign spent $2,255,210 to Farrell's $1,542,410, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In that year, Farrell received the majority of her funds from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and EMILY's List, a national political action committee whose main goal is to elect pro-abortion rights female Democrats.
How Much Have the Candidates Raised? [Cape Cod Times Version]
WASHINGTON, March 1- Nine of the ten U.S. Representatives from Massachusetts received/most of their campaign contributions from within the state in 2005, while Democratic Sens. John F. Kerry and Edward M. Kennedy received most of their contributions from out of state.
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Newton, collected only 33.6 percent of his funds last year from Massachusetts contributors, according to the PoliticalMoneyLine.com, a nonprofit organization that analyzes campaign finance data compiled by the Federal Election Commission.
The FEC, an independent regulatory agency, discloses campaign finance information and enforces provisions of the law, including limits and prohibitions on contributions. Members of Congress are required to file their data quarterly.
PoliticalMoneyLine.com reported that 91 percent of Kerry's itemized contributions--donations of $200 or more--was from states other than Massachusetts, with California and New York topping the list. Kennedy collected 76 percent from out-of -state donors, but with Massachusetts residents contributing more than those in any other state. Overall, Kerry, whose term doesn't end until 2008, raised $5,507,537 and Kennedy, who is up for reelection in November, raised $6,657,973.
Kerry, unlike most members of the Massachusetts delegation, did not accept money from political action committees. Of Kennedy's total campaign receipts, 80 percent were from individuals, and 20 percent from PACs, with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association tied for the largest contribution, with $10,000.
Hollywood, no stranger to congressional campaigns, also gave money to the two senators. Actress Maura Tierney of NBC's E.R. donated $2,500 to Friends of John Kerry, and actress Susan Sarandon gave $500 to Kennedy for his 2006 race, according to FEC reports. Individuals are allowed to give candidates a maximum of $2,100 and PACS are permitted a maximum of $5,000 per general election and per primary.
Raising a lot of money is one way to scare off potential challengers, said Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research organization that tracks money's effect on elections.
"If you have a large war chest, you are more likely to end up by yourself on the ballot come November because everyone else thinks they can't possibly raise as much money as you have," Ritsch said.
He added that in Massachusetts, where incumbents often do not face significant opposition, fundraising is still necessary if only to prepare for future elections.
"Members of Congress feel like their jobs are always in jeopardy," Ritsch said. "They think that they need to prepare for this ominous challenger looming in their minds."
Rep. William Delahunt, D-Hyannis, who raised $499,845 in 2005, gave more than $127,000 to other Democratic campaigns, including $125,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and $1,000 to U.S. House candidate Jim Marshall in Georgia, according to FEC disclosure reports.
Delahunt also received $4,000 from Glenn Marshall of the Wampanoag Tribal Council, a tribe that has been seeking formal federal recognition.
Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report, an independent newsletter that analyzes races for the U.S. House and Senate, said donating to other campaigns is "a strategic decision."
"If and when the Democrats take control of the House, they will have chips now with these people and colleagues that might vote for them for the leadership," Rothenberg said.
According to Rothenberg, some members of the Massachusetts delegation may be saving money to make a run at a Senate seat, or if their districts change because of redistricting.
"It's a worthwhile investment for them," Rothenberg said.
###
How Much Have the Candidates Raised?
Cape Cod Times version of this story
WASHINGTON, March 1- Nine of the ten U.S. Representatives from Massachusetts received most of their campaign contributions from within the state in 2005, while Democratic Sens. John F. Kerry and Edward M. Kennedy received most of their contributions from out of state.
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Newton, collected only 33.6 percent of his funds last year from Massachusetts contributors, according to the PoliticalMoneyLine.com, a nonprofit organization that analyzes campaign finance data compiled by the Federal Election Commission.
The FEC, an independent regulatory agency, discloses campaign finance information and enforces provisions of the law, including limits and prohibitions on contributions. Members of Congress are required to file their data quarterly.
PoliticalMoneyLine.com reported that 91 percent of Mr. Kerry's itemized contributions--donations of $200 or more--was from states other than Massachusetts, with California and New York topping the list. Mr. Kennedy collected 76 percent from out-of -state donors, but with Massachusetts residents contributing more than those in any other state. Overall, Mr. Kerry, whose term doesn't end until 2008, raised $5,507,537 and Mr. Kennedy, who is up for reelection in November, raised $6,657,973.
Mr. Kerry, unlike most members of the Massachusetts delegation, did not accept money from political action committees. Of Mr. Kennedy's total campaign receipts, 80 percent were from individuals, and 20 percent from PACs, with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association tied for the largest contribution, with $10,000.
Hollywood, no stranger to congressional campaigns, also gave money to the two senators. Actress Maura Tierney of NBC's E.R. donated $2,500 to Friends of John Kerry, and actress Susan Sarandon gave $500 to Kennedy for his 2006 race, according to FEC reports. Individuals are allowed to give candidates a maximum of $2,100 and PACS are permitted a maximum of $5,000 per general election and per primary.
Raising a lot of money is one way to scare off potential challengers, said Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research organization that tracks money's effect on elections.
"If you have a large war chest, you are more likely to end up by yourself on the ballot come November because everyone else thinks they can't possibly raise as much money as you have," Mr. Ritsch said.
He added that in Massachusetts, where incumbents often do not face significant opposition, fundraising is still necessary if only to prepare for future elections.
"Members of Congress feel like their jobs are always in jeopardy," Mr. Ritsch said. "They think that they need to prepare for this ominous challenger looming in their minds."
Labor unions were the largest contributors last year to Reps. John W. Olver, D-Amherst, and James P. McGovern, D-Worcester, accounting for 25 percent of Mr. Olver's $383,767 in total receipts and 13 percent of Mr. McGovern's total of $412,311, according to PoliticalMoneyLine.com. Mr. Olver, the senior Democrat on the transportation subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, received $32,500 from transportation union PACs.
In Fitchburg alone, Mr. Olver has earmarked nearly $14 million for several transportation projects, including the construction of the Intermodal Transportation Center's 400-car parking garage and the purchase of new passenger buses and vans by the Montachusett Regional Transit Authority.
Mr. McGovern gave more than $20,000 to other Democratic campaigns across the country, including $10,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and $1,000 to Chris John for Senate from Louisiana.
Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report, an independent newsletter that analyzes races for the U.S. House and Senate, said donating to other campaigns is "a strategic decision."
"If and when the Democrats take control of the House, they will have chips now with these people and colleagues that might vote for them for the leadership," Mr. Rothenberg said.
According to Mr. Rothenberg, some members of the Massachusetts delegation may be saving money to make a run at a Senate seat, or if their districts change because of redistricting.
"It's a worthwhile investment for them," Mr. Rothenberg said.
###
Senators, Witnesses Agree that America Is Not Competitive
By Sara Hatch
WASHINGTON, March 1-Hartford's University High School of Science and Engineering is part of a growing trend toward preparing students for the technology-dominated world they will confront in a few years, particularly in engineering, math and the sciences.
But it's only "a start, not a final destination," Joshua R. Tagore, a sophomore at the high school, told a Senate hearing here Wednesday on the proposed PACE-Protecting America's Competitive Edge-Act.
The measure, of which Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut is a co-sponsor, would, among other things, provide grants to create math and science high schools like the one in Hartford throughout the country, establish college scholarships for students who agree to become public school science and math teachers and offer money to train 10,000 new teachers.
In his testimony, Tagore said: "I believe that if more high school students are exposed to this kind of unique learning experience as a routine part of their high school careers - as I was in my freshman year - we could help to shape a nation of young adults who will gain an interest in careers involving math and science. In this new millennium, the future of our country depends on it."
Dodd, the senior Democrat on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood Development, said in an interview after the hearing: "Too often we're losing too many qualified, highly gifted people who blossom later in life; who don't show their talent in the first, second, third, fourth, fifth or sixth grade or even later, so we need to do a better job of tracking people, investing in people earlier on so we don't just write people off."
PACE is needed, he said, because it is "so critically important in the 21st century; that nations which have a workforce that is knowledgeable and gifted in the math, science and engineering fields are going to play a critical role in determining the economic success of the nations in which they live and so this is essential."
"And so if we don't do it soon . the abruptness of the change is startling," Dodd said. "You won't have the time to build back up because people are going to move on and therefore you may never recover from it."
The Hartford high school is one of about 70 in 25 states, with almost 12,000 students, that is part of the early college high school movement, and advocates expect those numbers to rise to 166 schools and more than 60,000 students six years from now.
The schools partner with a college to provide what the Hartford high school describes as "a bridge to a college education," with students attending classes at an affiliated college and submitting those classes for credit to the colleges they eventually attend.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said students like Tagore are the future.
"He does things with technology that we never dreamed about," Burr said. "Not providing them the opportunity is the only mistake we can make."
Assistant Secretary of Education Henry Johnson said that there has been progress in grades K thorough 8 but that "too many students hit the wall when they get to high school."
Former North Carolina Gov. James Hunt also testified that America has fallen behind the world in competitiveness in math and science and that more must be done to change science and math education in the United States.
"We have so far to go, and the competition is about to clean our clock," Hunt said. "We are not competitive today."
Hunt added that though education has "historically" been a local issue, it needed to become a "national issue." He also urged greater financial support, floating the idea of phasing in the money now going to Iraq to help pay for these programs.
Dodd and other senators agreed that this cannot be done without more money being put into the program.
"We heard from Gov. Hunt--this can't be done on the cheap," Dodd said.
###
Gregg Criticizes Bush Administration on National Security
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 - Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., criticized the Bush administration Tuesday for not budgeting more money for homeland security.
The view of domestic security "where security is a stepchild of national defense is clearly the attitude of this administration, and it's the wrong attitude," Gregg said in an interview after a subcommittee he chairs heard from Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.
"They've made a very robust commitment to our national defense, from the standpoint of military, but they've not made an equal commitment to securing the borders or upgrading the Department of Homeland Security as a force for interior defense," the senator said.
Throughout the hearing by the homeland security subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, Gregg stressed that the security of the borders was an important concern, even for a state like New Hampshire, which shares a small international border.
"Everybody in New Hampshire is part of the country," Gregg said after the hearing. "Everybody travels by airline, everybody wants to be sure that the people coming to this country are coming here to be participants in a positive way in our society and not harm us."
During the hearing Gregg called President Bush's proposed budget for fiscal 2007 a "hollow budget, and I can't understand it, because I've watched the press conferences where the administration has said it's committed to border security and domestic defense, and yet this budget didn't really get there."
Gregg, along with most members of the subcommittee, stressed that the control of American ports was a major concern. "I think there's a genuine concern, and it's legitimate, turning these ports over to Arab operations," Gregg said. The issue deserves significant review, he said, stressing that although Dubai has been friendly and supportive, it also had individuals that were involved in the September 11 attacks.
"I can't think of anything more significant than national defense, than protecting our borders and making sure that our homeland is secure," Gregg said. "Yet time and time again, we see budgets being sent up here which dramatically increase the core operations of the Defense Department. and yet the Department of Homeland Security is being starved for funds in crucial areas."
Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., the senior Democratic member of the subcommittee, said that of the $860 million that Congress has appropriated.for port security, only $46 million was requested by the president. There's nothing robust about that; if that's robust then I'm an 810-pound giant, take me on!"
Byrd echoed many of the criticisms that Gregg had for the administration.
Gregg said that he aggressively asked the administration to add $1.2 billion in a supplemental budget for Coast Guard planes, border patrol cars and training facilities, but that the money was not provided.
"That seemed like a fundamental element of national defense to me, and yet the administration has stonewalled us on that," Gregg said. The supplemental budget included money for Katrina relief and the war in Iraq, but includes no money for border protection. Gregg said that he was sure both were necessary, "but in the pecking order of national defense, protecting our borders is right up there with both those exercises."
Gregg also cited computer technology capabilities across the department and the inability to communicate with other agencies as another major flaw of Homeland Security. However, despite the criticisms, Gregg praised both the leadership of Chertoff and the 180,000 workers within the department.
"I respect Secretary Chertoff. I think he's trying very hard, but the hand he's dealt is not the hand he wanted, I don't think," he said after the hearing.
###
National Congress of American Indians Holds Winter Meeting
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 - Chief James Sappier of Maine Penobscot Tribe ate buffalo meat on toothpicks and gourmet nachos at a "gala reception" the National Congress of American Indians hosted at the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian on Monday.
Hundreds of Native Americans from all over Indian Country milled around under the colossal dome that the museum's galleries wrap around, socializing with themselves and with congressional staffs and members of Congress from Capitol Hill, only a few blocks away.
Sappier said he came down to Washington to make sure that the interests of the Penobscot people and Indians in the Northeast in general were as well represented at the congress's winter executive session as those of the tribes in such western states as Oklahoma and Arizona.
Representatives of the Micmacs also were here, but they said they were not authorized to talk to the news media. No Passamaquoddy or Maliseet representatives came down to Washington. All four of the Wabanaki Tribes that are still live cultures in Maine--the Maliseet, Micmacs, Passamaquoddy and Penobscot--were here for a meeting of the United South and Eastern Tribes at the beginning of February. The tribes at that convention all met with the Maine congressional delegation to discuss Indian affairs.
The Washington-based National Congress of American Indians, started in 1944, is one of the oldest Indian advocacy groups in the country. Sappier said that when the Penobscots were looking for formal federal recognition, the congress passed resolutions and wrote letters in support of the tribe. The chief said the congress was the only organization where all the tribes come together; he called it an effective way of projecting a unified Indian voice to the federal government.
Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and John McCain (R-Ariz. addressed the congress, along with several Cabinet secretaries, including Mike Johanns of Agriculture and R. James Nicholson of Veterans Affairs. Many House members also made appearances, including Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.), who represents the most Indians of anyone in the House, and Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a member of the Chickasaw Tribe and the only tribal member among the 533 current members of Congress.
While Sappier lingered in the Museum's gift store and debated over what gift to buy his staff for a future raffle, he described what he hoped to accomplish in Washington: "To influence the decisions of Indian tribes and look out for the Northeast tribes' welfare in federal legislation, in policy making, in regulatory decisions with regards to health services for the tribes and their relationship with the U.S. government."
In the working meetings of the Indian congress, Sappier said he and his colleagues from around the country discussed every major issue Indians face today, including tribal court systems, law enforcement, energy, natural resources and health care.
As a group of traditional performers sang to the party below, Sappier said the Penobscots needed more economic development and an improved infrastructure to succeed. Another theme many who attended the conference voiced was the need for more education to break the cycle of poverty that is plaguing the vast majority of Indian Country, and a need for more health care spending.
"The issue is the level of health care in Indian Country; on a per capita basis, federal prisoners receive twice the health care the Indians receive," Sappier said. "Tribes receive $1,900 per capita, federal prisoners receive $3,800 per capita, and the average nationwide is $5,600 per capita."
"Every year we come to these same meetings and ask for the same crumbs," said Jefferson Keel, the congress's first vice president. "We don't even get a slice, we get crumbs, and that is insulting."
Some Indian supporters expressed concern that the current Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal, which in part involves his representation of Indian tribes, might lead some to think that Indian tribes spent enormous amounts of money in Washington and received enormous dividends in return. But Rep. Cole told the convention that all 500 tribes across the nation contributed some 0.3 percent of all the money spent in the 2004 elections. Sen. Kerry, for his part, said the tribes were innocent in the scandal; he put the blame on corrupt Republicans.
###
Bush’s 2007 Budget Could Force Connecticut to Cut Programs
By Adam Kredo
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 - In the next five years, Connecticut could lose more than $401 million in federal aid if Congress fully adopts President Bush's fiscal year 2007 budget proposal, according to a report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The report, which examines proposed cuts to 16 federal aid programs over the next five years, found that nearly half of the overall reductions in domestic discretionary funding proposed by the President for 2007 would come from such programs, including Community Development Block Grants public school aid.
The bulk of the cuts will occur after 2007 and grow deeper each year, reducing Connecticut's supply of federal money, according to the report, which was published last week. This would place the burden of the cost for such programs onto the state. If Connecticut decides against a tax hike, the report estimates, many aid programs could be significantly reduced.
For the last 25 years, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which calls itself nonpartisan, has done research on how national and state fiscal policies affect low-income people.
The center's report estimates that over the next five years, more than $151 million could be cut from educational grants to Connecticut for programs such as education for the disadvantaged, special education and school improvement programs.
Cuts to education would hurt not only Connecticut's children, but also the economic future of the state, said Ellen Scalettar, senior policy fellow for Connecticut Voices for Children, a children's advocacy group.
"The cuts are continuing to grow while our population is continuing to grow, so we're moving in the wrong direction" Scalettar said in a telephone interview Tuesday.
Commenting in a press release when the proposed budget was made public in early February, Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said, "When President Bush gave me guidance on what the 2007 budget should look like, he directed me to focus on national priorities and tighten our belt elsewhere."
As the Bush Administration adheres to this plan, the center estimates that Connecticut could lose $9.3 million in Community Development Block Grants in 2007. By 2011 the program could lose $61 million.
Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4, disagrees with cuts in the program, saying in a statement he would prefer to see the grants augmented.
"While we need to rein in our spending, the President's proposed budget puts too much of the burden on our urban areas," Shays said. "As Congress reviews his proposal, I will look for wasteful spending as well as areas that funding should be increased."
Earlier this year, in a letter to Bush, Shays and 28 other members of Congress urged full funding for the community development grant program in the 2007 budget proposal.
A report titled Major Savings and Reforms, published earlier this month by the Office of Management and Budget, said that the administration is reducing funding for the community development programs because of what the report cites as ineffectiveness and "lack of a clear purpose." Moreover, the office concludes, the program fails to "produce transparent information on results."
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn, said in a statement that he does not agree with many of the President's proposed cuts.
"Shortchanging vital investments in housing initiatives, community development, public safety and medical care means that Connecticut families will have to face cutbacks in the availability of decent housing in safe neighborhoods, as well as reductions in quality health care," Lieberman said.
Another program that would face major cutbacks is Community Oriented Policing Services - a law enforcement program that, among other things, provides technology grants to state and local law enforcement for equipment to assist with crime fighting. Under the current budget proposal, these technology grants would be completely eliminated.
The Office of Management and Budget report, again citing ineffectiveness as the main reason for elimination, said "the program has not been able to demonstrate its impact on crime."
Norwalk Police Chief Harry Rilling said he is disappointed by the proposed cuts and disagrees with the office's conclusions.
He said in a telephone interview, "You cannot evaluate or estimate the things that you prevented."
Rilling wondered aloud, "What would that increase [in crime] have been if they had not given these grants to police departments?"
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that Connecticut could face a $32.3 million cut over the next five years to the Public Housing Capital Fund, and $40.1 million over five years to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program. Both programs aim to support Connecticut's neediest citizens.
During a press conference to unveil the report, Robert Greenstein, the center's executive director, said that the government has been shifting program costs to the states for the past several years through reductions in grants.
"The federal government doesn't have clean hands here," Greenstein said.
But the Office of Management and Budget disagrees with the center's study.
Scott Milburn, a spokesman for the budget office, said in a statement that the center "is a liberal think tank that opposes every effort to control domestic spending. It has made these same false predictions in the past that it knows have been proven wrong."
Milburn said that two years ago the center predicted the President's budget would require deep reductions in programs for veterans, low-income mothers and children and special education. According to Milburn, the President's subsequent budgets have instead increased spending for all of these programs.
"The country can meet the goal of cutting the deficit in half and still invest in key programs for vulnerable Americans, and our recent budget history supports this," Milburn said in the statement.
Think Tank Examines Budget Proposal’s Impact on Maine
WASHINGTON, Feb. 23 - Maine will have to raise its taxes or accept cuts in social programs if President Bush's budget recommendation for fiscal year 2007 is fully implemented, the independent Center on Budget Policy and Priorities warned Thursday. Bush's proposal would cut $7.5 billion nationwide from state and local grants.
The center released a report on program cuts that outlined what effect the budget would have on various social safety net programs in each of the 50 states.
The $7.5 billion in reduced federal grants to states and localities would represent almost half the total proposed cuts in domestic discretionary spending, the center said.
The report was compiled from materials from the President's Office of Management and Budget (OMB), including computer predictions on the budget's impact over the next five years that was apparently erroneously released. For the last 25 years, the center, which calls itself nonpartisan, has done research on how national and state fiscal policies affect low-income people.
"When President Bush gave me guidance on what the 2007 budget should look like, he directed me to focus on national priorities and tighten our belts elsewhere," OMB Director Joshua B. Bolten said in a statement earlier this month. "Congress substantially delivered on the President's spending restraint goals last year, and after speaking with members at this week's congressional hearings, I'm optimistic we can again provide a significant level of savings for American taxpayers."
OMB also had some things to say about the center, which is not popular in Republican circles.
"This is a liberal think tank that opposes every effort to control domestic spending," OMB spokesman Scott Millburn said in a statement. "It has made these same false predictions in the past that it knows have been proven wrong. For example, two years ago, it stated that the President's budget would require deep reductions in programs for veterans, low-income mothers and children and special education. Instead, the President's subsequent budgets have increased funding for all of these programs."
The President's proposed budget would cut $183 billion in domestic discretionary spending nationwide over the next five years, according to the center. Discretionary spending is for programs that are not mandated by law. These include many social programs like the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, educational subsidies, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program and job training under the Department of Labor.
Under the Bush proposals, the center said, Maine would sustain cuts, for example, of almost $42 million in elementary and secondary school aid and $25 million in heating assistance for low-income families over the five years, among other scaled-back social programs.
"To me this budget is incomprehensible because when I was growing up in the '60s and frankly all through the rest of the 20 th century, I think people in both parties wanted to reduce poverty," Rep. Tom Allen (D-1 st ) said. "This is a budget that will increase poverty, and it will diminish opportunity."
Allen sits on the House Budget Committee. He said the President's cuts in education, jobs, health care and other social programs would hurt the poor and not help reduce the federal deficit.
"There is no consistent policy in this budget other than taking money and opportunity away from low and middle-income Americans to protect his tax cuts for the wealthy,"
Allen said. "He's made promises that can't be kept. He can't reduce the deficit without raising taxes. He's nibbling away at these domestic programs. The trouble is they are large enough to do great damage to children and families but too small to help in any material way with the total budget deficit because Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, defense and interest on the national debt are the more important factors in the budget."
According to the report, Maine would lose $41.7 million from 2007 through 2011 for K-12 educational funding, including $25.9 million from special education. The state would lose $6.5 million in grants for vocational and adult education programs next year, and nearly $35 million over the five years. Cuts in education could also keep some 400 to 500 children from participating in Head Start programs in the state in 2011, the report said.
Mainers would lose $5.9 million in grants for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children over the next five years, which could lead to 1,400 people not getting assistance from the program, assuming that the cuts are implemented in part by cutting back on enrollment, according to the center's report.
While the President's budget would increase home energy grants for low-income people, which aids many families in Maine, by $601 million at the national level this year, the center's report says that over the next five years the program's total spending would drop by $1.9 billion, including a cut of $25 million for Maine.
Robert Greenstein, the center's executive director, noted that legislation supported by Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe would move $1 billion of next year's spending for the program to this year. The center supports this move, he said, but added that this would deepen next year's proposed spending reduction.
Rep. Allen said he favors leaving social programs intact and instead ending the recent tax cuts for the wealthy.
"The upper-income tax cuts for people earning over $380,000 a year simply cannot responsibly be continued," he said, "because we have to invest in education, environmental protection and energy conservation if we're going to compete in the global economy and give people a fighting chance to make themselves a better life."
###
Congressional Delegation Oppose Port Deal
WASHINGTON, Feb. 22- Members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation cite security concerns as the reason for opposing a pending sale of a British port operating company to a United Arab Emirates corporation.
The Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Navigation Company, which currently operates ports across the country, including in New York, New Orleans and Baltimore, would be sold to Dubai Ports World, a state-controlled corporation in Dubai, one of the United Arab Emirates.
Democrats and Republicans have raised questions about the sale, but President Bush has defended it and has said he would veto any legislation that blocks the deal.
In a statement on Tuesday, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., said "a veto isn't a solution."
"Four and a half years after 9/11, our ports are still extremely vulnerable," Mr. Kennedy said. "We can't risk contracting out our national security -- we need to get this right."
Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., expressed concern about the sale in a letter sent to Secretary of the Treasury John Snow Wednesday. Snow is chairman of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which approved the sale. The committee, composed of representatives of 12 government agencies and departments, can block a sale for national security reasons.
The port sale is just one of the many poor decisions the Bush administration has made, U.S. Rep. James P. McGovern, D-Worcester, said in a statement.
"Congress must-finally-begin to conduct some serious oversight of the Bush Administration," Mr. McGovern said. "I'm pleased to see that Republican leaders like Speaker [Dennis] Hastert and Majority Leader [Bill] Frist have supported additional congressional review. It's about time."
U.S. Rep. Richard E. Neal, D-Springfield, said in a statement he would support legislation blocking the sale because he is concerned with "outsourcing our homeland security duties to foreign countries."
"This is not a partisan issue. It is a national security issue," Mr. Neal said. "Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress agree that this questionable transaction needs to be examined more thoroughly, and that is why I support congressional hearings to fully investigate this contract."
In a statement released by his office, Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Lawrence, said that two of the terrorists involved in the Sept.11, 2001, attacks were from the United Arab Emirates.
"We need to investigate this fully and make sure that it doesn't undermine our national security," Mr. Meehan said. "It makes no sense to have a foreign country controlling our ports."
Steven Broderick, press secretary to U.S. Rep. William Delahunt, D-Hyannis, said that "no members of Congress have objection to a foreign company operating in the United States."
"Where most members of Congress, including Mr. Delahunt, have some reservations is that this isn't a foreign-owned company," Mr. Broderick said. "This group is an agent of the United Arab Emirates, and that government has been less than helpful in the war on terror."
U.S. Rep. John W. Olver, D-Amherst, could not be reached for comment.
###
