SOCIAL ISSUES
is one of several DAF working groups. More about them
here.
If interested in joining this group, please contact
Linda Quinet.
BUDGETARY PROCESS March
20 2005
An earlier meeting focussed on the Patriot
Act
Initial description of the budgetary process
led to concerns about accountability, transparence and the
way policy is being affected by the budgetary process.
If the group were to make recommendations to the Democratic
party platform, it was agreed that it would be better not to
go into specific programs, but point out that Bush is influencing
policy by using the budget. Giving limited detail and "report
language" often conceals real intent. When budget steps are
more stated and open, people at least have a chance to contest
provisions. Currently, constituencies affected don't mobilize
because they don't even know what's happening.
Bush's approach is to indicate spending for certain areas,
but leave a lot open, so not much can be traced. Bush proposes
bringing down spending caps and making them become law...then
figure out what to do. Social programs will be starved by spending
caps.
Report language provides opportunity to include a lot of riders
(report language is not considered law, but the intent of the
law). A Congress person who votes yay or nay on the budget is
voting on the whole thing, and details can be used against the
person in future campaigns.
Another way to make huge cuts is to state reduction over time.
Initital amounts don't seem alarming; however, when ramped up
over years are significant.
Another approach is to turn responsibility over to states,
leaving the federal goverment "blameless" when services are
curtailed. Federal money pays for state administration of budget
allottments. States are tempted to take block grants because
of freedom to use as desired, whereas federal funds entail a
lot of regulation and strings attached. As the trend toward
state control continues, the scenario is in place for disaster
when neither states nor federal provide adequate services. It
was pointed out that the Democrat party should start thinking
about what this is going to do state by state, since overall
funding to states is getting cut $70 billion over four years.
Reinstate "Pay-as-you-go" rules. These rules would require
any new tax cuts or spending to be fully offset and paid for.
In a time of rising deficits, pay-as-you- go-rules would affect
proposed tax cuts that run up deficits [RC 53, S. Amdt. 186
to S. Con. Res. 18, 3/16/05]
Comments:
- "We need to show how the country overall needs strengthening.
This is what happens when children are well fed....you save
money in the long run on not having to provide special services."
- "How can welfare programs be strengthened without a direct
association with increased taxes? This knee-jerk link often
precludes constructive thinking/action."
- "America's arrogance keeps it from looking into these issues...It's
been #1 for so long, that few think about caring for the disenfranchised....it
may take a cataclysmic event to shock people into caring about
this."
- "The Neocons are hiding behind Republican party....reducing
every program except defense...trying to bankrupt the US government."
- "Whatever happened to 'compassionate conservatism'?"
To do:
- Given that the poor and disenfranchised don't have lobbyists,
identify, support and use organizations such as the Center
for Budget and Policy Priorities, which analyzes the impact
of government policy. Also pay attention to groups such as
the National Governors' Assn. and the National Assn. of State
and Local Governments which can shed light on the closer-to-home
reality of policy decisions. These can be expected to be more
effective, since the further away from federal level, the
less party conflict. Some of these work on the grass roots
level (such as http://www.kwru.org, the Kensington Welfare
Rights Union), others in think tanks.
- Work toward strengthening society and making input in decision
making better, i.e., make the case for long-term savings for
preventive programs that save medical/special services expenses
later.
- Pick out statistically comparative issues and show how badly
the US is doing (such as infant mortality rates and/or comparative
standing in student performance in math, science and geography).
- Consider budget implications state by state in view of expected
cuts.
- Do an article for the DA newsletter about why we need to
pay attention to the budget's impact.
Preliminary description of the budgetary process: The President's
budget comes out in February, the Senate's by the end of spring,
and the House's soon after and by the end of summer, versions
need to be reconciled. The President's budget incorporates requests
from departments and indicates his stands on issues and priorities
for the next five years. It is comprised of three parts: Entitlements,
non-Defense discretionary and Defense discretionary.
The next meeting will continue to focus on the budget. In the
meanwhile, we will email each other pertinent topics/sources.
Attending the March 20 meeting were Barney Kirchhoff, Edwin
Lau, Lynn Lindstrom, Sophie Marzin, Zach Miller, Linda Quinet,
Peter Villani and Edwin Lau. Edwin, who worked five years in
the Office of Management & Budget, led discussion, having previously
distributed these sources:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/
- Office of Management & Budget
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8764-2005Mar4.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20348-2005Mar9.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62802-2005Mar1.html
