Showing posts with label Budget Cuts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Budget Cuts. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Conyers Opposes Republican Plan to Protect Millionaires and Cut Social Security Benefits




(WASHINGTON) – Today, Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) issued the following statement criticizing Speaker Boehner’s refusal to accept a balanced approach to avert the end-of-year automatic spending cuts and tax increases, as well as the Speaker’s decision to include Social Security benefit cuts in these discussions:

“Despite clear evidence that the American people support balancing the deficit by requiring the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes, Speaker Boehner announced a plan today that would allow millionaires to keep their tax cuts,” said Conyers.

“This so-called ‘Plan B’ is not a balanced approach to deficit reduction and it should be rejected.   

“I resent that Speaker Boehner has chosen to put cuts to Social Security benefits for current and future retirees on the table as a way to resolve the budget crisis.

“The change in the way Social Security calculates yearly cost-of-living-adjustments, called ‘Chained CPI,’ would place an increased  burden on elderly Americans - nearly 70 percent of whom rely on Social Security for more than half of their income and whose benefits average less than $15,000 per year.  Under this proposed policy, benefits would be cut by 0.3 percent annually and would increase over time.  As a result, the older and poorer a beneficiary becomes, the larger the benefit cut.

“The fact that Republicans would seriously consider cutting the current and future Social Security benefits of all Americans to benefit the wealthy few is unconscionable and unacceptable.  We cannot ask our seniors and the most vulnerable to bear the burden of deficit reduction.

“If Congress were to pursue this unwise course of action, we would not only be embracing a deeply unpopular policy, but also ignoring the will of the American people. A recent poll by Hart Associates in the days before the November election found that an overwhelming 84 percent of Americans said they did not want their Social Security benefits cut. 104 House Democrats have also already stated their opposition to including Social Security in any deficit reduction package. 

“Any debt deal that cuts Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid benefits is unacceptable.”


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Michigan Is Broke

According to the majority, Michigan is broke and must make major budget cuts, but here we have $215.9 million in new debt to upgrade state buildings and prisons.

Welcome to Michigan.

House Concurrent Resolution 13: Approve debt for Kirtland Community College well water system
Introduced by Rep. Bruce Rendon (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $502,500 in new state debt for a Kirtland Community College well water system upgrade.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574103
House Concurrent Resolution 14: Approve debt for Oakland University Human Health Building
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $40 million in new state debt for a Oakland University Human Health Building, the total cost of which is projected to be $64.5 million.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574104
House Concurrent Resolution 15: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $26.4 million in new debt for state building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574105
House Concurrent Resolution 16: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $12.8 million in new debt repairs and upgrades to a state building.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574106
House Concurrent Resolution 17: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $9.4 million in new debt for state building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574107
House Concurrent Resolution 18: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $25.5 million in new debt for state building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574108
House Concurrent Resolution 19: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $14.4 million in new debt for state building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574109
House Concurrent Resolution 20: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $6.0 million in new debt for state building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574110
House Concurrent Resolution 21: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $5.7 million in new debt for state prison repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574111
House Concurrent Resolution 22: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $13.2 million in new debt for state prison building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574112
House Concurrent Resolution 23: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $7.5 million in new debt for a new fire alarm and sprinkler system at a state prison.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574113
House Concurrent Resolution 24: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $3.1 million in new debt for state prison facility upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574114
House Concurrent Resolution 25: Approve debt for state building repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Eileen Kowall (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 106 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $14.4 million in new debt for state prison building repairs and upgrades.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574115
House Concurrent Resolution 26: Approve debt for state university repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Matt Huuki (R) on May 4, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $18.7 million in new debt for a $25.3 million research building at Michigan Technological University.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574116
House Concurrent Resolution 27: Approve debt for state university repairs and upgrades
Introduced by Rep. Mark Ouimet (R) on May 5, 2011.
Passed 107 to 0 in the House on June 14, 2011, to approve $31.5 million in new debt for a $42.0 million upgrade project for a building at Eastern Michigan University.
See [Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No"] at http://www.michiganvotes.org/RollCall.aspx?ID=574117

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

The Republican Budget War on Children

The Republican Budget War on Children

Congress's drive to address the U.S. debt is making budget cuts fall heaviest on children, which could hobble their long-term financial well-being—not to mention our own, says Chris Farrell



Politicians who seek steep government spending cuts while opposing a higher U.S. debt ceiling sound a common theme. Slash spending for the sake of the next generation, they say, because the nation's debt is crippling our children's aspirations. "The question comes down to this: What will you say to that next generation about what you did to make sure that wouldn't be their fate?" said Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) at a Republican rally in New Hampshire on Apr. 30.
The problem is that the proposed spending cuts would disproportionately affect the current generation of children. It's emblematic of skewed priorities that the same Congress that on Apr. 15 approved Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-Wisc.) budget proposal to exempt anyone 55 and older from changes in Medicare had less than two months earlier supported cuts of at least $7 billion in discretionary spending for children's education. Slashed were such programs as the Even Start Financial Literacy Program, the High School Graduation Initiative, and Head Start. (The eventual compromise budget reached late on Apr. 8 focused cuts in other areas, such as high-speed rail.)
Pressure on education is even more draconian at the state level. The District of Columbia and 34 states have reduced expenditures on K-12 education and 43 states have cut into higher education, according to the Center on Budget & Policy Priorities. Human capital is the key to creating wealth in a modern economy. "I don't think most people are thinking about the long-term time bomb we're creating," says Robert Pianta, dean of the Curry School of Education at the University of Virginia. "There's no question you'll save some money upfront, but the long-term cost is enormous."

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PAYS OFF

In recent years, scientific and economic research has coalesced around the insight that the biggest bang for the public buck comes from investing in early childhood development programs, especially for young kids growing up in poverty. Investment in early childhood education not only improves academic and social skills; it reduces future crime and teenage pregnancy rates for disadvantaged children.
Still, early childhood education has taken a hit on the state level. According to the National Institute for Early Education Research, "state cuts to preschool funding transformed the recession into a depression for many young children." On Apr. 26 the group released its "State of Preschool 2010" report, which found that while enrollment increased slightly, total state funding for pre-K fell by nearly $30 million. It would have dropped by a further $49.3 million if not for funding from the 2009 federal stimulus bill. That financial support is ending.
The education pipeline is worsening, too. The U.S. was once the world's leader in mass education, with succeeding generations of children better educated then their parents. The trend toward ever-greater educational achievement has slowed since the 1970s, according to Harvard University economists Claudia Goldin and Lawrence Katz. They note that the U.S. has slipped from the top of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's ranking for high school graduates to near the bottom. The U.S. college graduation rate has remained steady over the last decade, but the country has the highest college dropout rate among OECD nations.

HELP WANTED: WELL-EDUCATED WORKERS

Yet demand for well-educated workers is rising. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, about half of the 30 fastest-growing occupations in the U.S.—jobs such as biomedical engineers and financial examiners—require at least a bachelor's degree. Entry into an additional seven growth occupations, including dental hygienists and occupational therapy assistants, requires either an associate's degree or a postsecondary vocational certificate.
Here's the thing: The quality of retirement for the Baby Boom generation—from Social Security to private pensions—will depend on cash flow created by the current generation of young people. From the Morrill Land Grant College Act of 1862 to the G.I. Bill of 1948 and on to the National Defense Education Act of 1958, the lesson of history is clear: Education pays.
For example, the NDEA funded the education of a generation of young people that became the driving force behind the infotech and biotech revolutions. For the nation's financial planning, it's not a question of "can we afford it?" Of course we can. Maybe those in the 50-to-70 age range will have to relinquish something now so that economic growth will support them in old age. In a world of trade-offs, the U.S. needs to invest more, not less, in children.

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Ending Fraud Is Job Killing

Oh dear, it looks as if the child abuse propaganda machine has to kick it up a notch because emotional tear-jerking will no longer be acceptable as program performance.  These child welfare programs are must finally be ... oh my, dare I say that term of taboo...

MANDATORY COMPLIANCY


Get ready, the war to keep the fraud funding stream flowing to create jobs is on and Child Abuse Propaganda Month is around the corner.

The Easy Cuts Are Behind Us


IN a little over a week, President Obama will send Congress his budget for the 2012 fiscal year. The budget is not just a collection of numbers, but an expression of our values and aspirations. As the president said in his State of the Union address, now that the country is back from the brink of a potential economic collapse, our goal is to win the future by out-educating, out-building and out-innovating our rivals so that we can return to robust economic and job growth. But to make room for the investments we need to foster growth, we have to cut what we cannot afford. We have to reduce the burden placed on our economy by years of deficits and debt.
When I left the Office of Management and Budget in January 2001, the country had a projected surplus of $5.6 trillion over the next decade. When I returned last November, decisions to make two large tax cuts without offsetting them and to create a Medicare prescription drug benefit without paying for it, combined with the effects of the recession, meant that the nation faced projected deficits of $10.4 trillion over the next decade.
We cannot win the future, expand the economy and spur job creation if we are saddled with increasingly growing deficits. That is why the president’s budget is a comprehensive and responsible plan that will put us on a path toward fiscal sustainability in the next few years — a down payment toward tackling our challenges in the long term.
This starts with doing what families and businesses have been doing during this downturn: tightening our belts. In the budget, the president will call for a five-year freeze on discretionary spending other than for national security. This will reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade and bring this category of spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was president.
Make no mistake: this will not be easy. It will require tough choices since every decision to invest in one program will necessitate a cut somewhere else. In each of the past two years, the administration has put forward about $20 billion in savings from ending some programs and reducing funds for others. This entailed finding programs that were duplicative, outdated and ineffective. But to achieve the deeper cuts needed to support this spending freeze, we have had to look beyond the obvious and cut spending for purposes we support. We had to choose programs that, absent the fiscal situation, we would not cut.
Since they were instituted, community service block grants have helped to support community action organizations in cities and towns across the country. These are grassroots groups working in poor communities, dedicated to empowering those living there and helping them with some of life’s basic necessities. These are the kinds of programs that President Obama worked with when he was a community organizer, so this cut is not easy for him.
Yet for the past 30 years, these grants have been allocated using a formula that does not consider how good a job the recipients are doing. The president is proposing to cut financing for this grant program in half, saving $350 million, and to reform the remaining half into a competitive grant program, so that funds are spent to give communities the most effective help.
Another difficult cut is a reduction of $125 million, or about a quarter of current financing, to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, which supports environmental cleanup and protection. And a third is a reduction in the Community Development Block Grant program. These flexible grants help cities and counties across the nation finance projects in areas like housing, sewers and streets, and economic development in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.
While we know from mayors and county leaders how important these grants are for their communities, and are very aware of the financial difficulties many of them face, the sacrifices needed to begin putting our fiscal house in order must be broadly shared, and we are proposing to cut this program by 7.5 percent, or $300 million.
These three examples alone, of course, represent only a small fraction of the scores of cuts the president had to choose, but they reflect the tough calls he had to make. And as he made them, his administration tried to make sure that there was no undue burden on any one program or area. We also asked agencies outside the freeze to do their part as well. The Department of Defense, for instance, will have its financing plan cut by $78 billion over the next five years, bringing spending down to zero real growth after a decade of healthy increases, and we are eliminating programs like the C-17 transport plane that have broad support but that we do not need and cannot afford.
Discretionary spending not related to security represents just a little more than one-tenth of the entire federal budget, so cutting solely in this area will never be enough to address our long-term fiscal challenges. That is why President Obama made clear in the State of the Union that he wants to work with Congress to reform and simplify our tax code. He also called for serious bipartisan cooperation to strengthen and protect Social Security as we face the retirement of the baby boom generation.
We must take care to avoid indiscriminate cuts in areas critical to long-term growth like education, innovation and infrastructure — cuts that would stifle the economy just as it begins to recover. That, in turn, would deprive us of one of the most powerful drivers of deficit reduction, a growing economy.
Next week, a debate will begin in Washington and throughout our country about the best way forward. The Obama administration will come to these discussions with a responsible, sensible and achievable plan to put the country on a fiscally sustainable path. The plan will incorporate many tough choices and deep cuts — as well as smart investments — to broaden our recovery, spur job creation and prepare the United States to win in the world economy.



Jacob Lew is the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Sunday, September 20, 2009

Ahmed's Administrative Angst



The Michigan Department of Human Services Director, Ismeal Ahmed is out there, using social media, to lobby, oops, I mean rally the child placing agencies, drats, I mean inform the public on the potential impact of the proposed budget cuts to DHS.

In this unrehearsed, cue card reading presentation, Mr. Ahmed starts his spiel on the severe crisis families, dependent upon the state's social support system, will experience. I was somewhat shocked that there were no photos of abused and neglected kids, a long-standing traditional state technique I like to call "throwing-dead-babies." See, whenever DHS is put in the hot seat, being questioned about fulfilling its administrative duties of running an efficient agency, someone always seems to start screaming "more child protection." Here is an example of how it works:

"These cuts are too large, too deep, too damaging, and undermine the safety net needed to protect so many vulnerable children, adults and families," Ahmed said.

He is absolutely correct if the administration of DHS continues along its merry way of turning a blind eye to the pervasive fraud, waste and abuse.

Mr. Ahmed points out that the proposed cuts would also:

* Eliminate the program that helps low-income parents pay for childcare.
* Eliminate the Early Childhood Investment Corp. and its programs that foster school readiness and life success for young children.
* Make a $10 per person, per month cut in the Family Independence Program, which helps families with living expenses such as rent, utilities, clothing and personal care items.
* Reduce the State Disability Assistance program grant which helps people who are disabled and the elderly.

These are pretty compelling points of contention to not cut the the DHS budget, but this is asymmetrical in its presentation of facts.

The truth of the matter is DHS is paranoid of violating the settlement agreement with the Children's Rights class action lawsuit. One of the conditions of the settlement was to hire more CPS workers. If DHS does not hire more workers, then, I am guessing DHS is looking at exemplary damages. The price of the recovery of attorney fees cost Michigan $6.2 million.

Despite the Michigan DHS Audit of 2004 which questions over $600 million in costs and the DHS Audit of 2006 which questions another $600 million in costs nothing really has changed. DHS still refuses to initiate contractual debarment, fines or sanctions of the sub-recipient fraudfeasor. I will save you the angst in not providing a summation of all the DHS single audit program questioned costs.

And just think, the legislature is only proposing a cut of $169 million. Whatever shall Mr. Ahmed do? Reign in on the fraud, waste and abuse in DHS or close his eyes really, really tight and hold up a baby as a shield from public scrutiny. Oh, the administrative angst!

Now, here is another interesting item. Mr. Ahmed claims that the loss of DHS workers would create a barrier for individuals and families to access services. I will close this out by directing you to watch another DHS youtube creation.