Agencies worried about proposed budget

 12 comment(s)  
 E-mail Story
 Print Story
  Share

 digg it!
 Facebook
 del.icio.us
Seed Newsvine
Fark It
Reddit

Text Size: 

Tools Sponsor

By JoANNE YOUNG / Lincoln Journal Star

How do you fund a war, a more secure nation and a constituency clamoring for tax relief? If you’re President George W. Bush crafting the 2007 budget, you look for programs to cut spending. And one of the places you pick is domestic spending.

And that has local and state human service agencies and education providers for disadvantaged students worried.

Really worried.

[+]Enlarge

Chuy Papalatzi (left), 4, is afraid his Lego tower will fall as Jesus Guzman, 4, shakes the table during Head Start class at McPhee Elementary on Wednesday. Head Start is among the agencies that would feel a budget pinch. (William Lauer)

Chuy Papalatzi (left), 4, is afraid his Lego tower will fall as Jesus Guzman, 4, shakes the table during Head Start class at McPhee Elementary on Wednesday. Head Start is among the agencies that would feel a budget pinch. (William Lauer)

The Bush proposal cuts billions from such programs as special education, Head Start, child care, supplemental food programs, food stamps, children’s health insurance and home energy assistance programs.

If passed, the budget proposal  would also take the heart out of community action programs such as Lincoln Action Program, which seeks to help low-income families in Lancaster and Saunders counties become independent.

The proposal would cut deep and wide.

“It’s not good,” said LAP executive director Sue Hinrichs. “It’s not in the best interest of low-income and working families.”

Three-fourths of families LAP works with are employed, Hinrichs said. “But they are still struggling daily with paying for child care, health care, gas and utilities.” 

The core funding for community action agencies — about 1,000 across the country and nine in Nebraska — is Community Services Block Grants, said Kathy Stokes, LAP grants and communication manager.

Block grants pay for the administration of the agency so its leaders can find grants and donations to pay for programs and services, and make sure those programs are carried out effectively and efficiently.

Bush’s proposal would take away those grants.

The Bush budget would focus on the country’s priorities and hold or reduce discretionary spending. It would eliminate or reduce 141 programs not getting results or fulfilling essential priorities.

Claude Allen, domestic policy adviser to Bush, said in a February press briefing: “… when we look at core safety net programs that impact low-income individuals, the state of the union is not only strong, but in this area the programs are effective and are working.”

The Senate passed its version of the budget earlier, restoring some of the money taken from human services and education. But people who are closely watching the debate say the House seems willing to go along with many of Bush’s proposed reductions.

That would freeze domestic spending, increase defense spending by 7 percent — outside of spending on the war in Iraq — and raise homeland security spending by nearly 4 percent.

The reality is, said Becky Gould, attorney with the Nebraska Appleseed Center, the proposal would cut funding while reducing revenue with tax cuts.

“Is that the best choice we should be making right now for Nebraska and the rest of the country? What we would be asking for is a balanced approach.”

If money for human services and education is cut, funding for many programs would be shifted to individuals or the state, she said.

When you take away child care benefits, she said, that could force a parent out of the workforce. When you take away food stamps or supplemental food boxes, you force individuals, churches, local government and agencies to pick up the responsibility.

“Food needs do not go away,” Gould said. “And food pantries are already overburdened.”

Programs for low-income people are easy targets, she said, because there aren’t a lot of voices out there taking up their cause, she said.

“We would feel more comfortable if everyone was sharing the burden and if the overall goal was to reduce the deficit,” she said.

In the end, she said, the deficit is growing. But Bush has proposed a reduction in the deficit by 2009.

Jim Towey, director of the White House’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, said in the February briefing the White House understands advocacy groups’ concerns about funding, but Bush must look at the whole pie and keep the economy running.

“The reality is the president has to play the hand he’s dealt,” Towey said. “And when you have a war on terror and you have the requirements of the homeland security and you have Katrina relief that’s $88 billion that came out of nowhere … there’s $100 billion that wasn’t anticipated that’s gone — $88 billion now, and there’s another $18 billion placeholder in the budget.

“It puts a lot of pressure.”

Reach JoAnne Young at 473-7228 or jyoung@journalstar.com.