It is necessary to share portions of a press release about a pending vote on the budget that makes deeper cuts in human services to the tune of $10 billion short of what’s needed.
Members are being asked to vote on a non-binding resolution stating that appropriations for Labor-Health and Human Services-Education programs be $7.2 billion higher than the President’s proposal – provided they pay for the increase with cuts in other programs. Some reports suggest that these cuts could come from entitlement programs (such as Medicaid, Medicare, Food Stamps, student loans, etc.). There is no assurance that the extra funds would not come from cuts in other domestic services, either those that need annual funding (housing, veterans, nutrition, environment, etc.) or ongoing programs like Medicaid.
Further, the non-binding vote seems not to promise that the House Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill will contain the full extra $7.2 billion beyond the President’s proposal. The House appropriations bill will add about $4.1 billion, as had already been promised. The other $3.1 billion could be part of the conference deal with the Senate, if such a deal is ever worked out. Even if it is added, the total is still about $3 billion less than the cost of providing current services.
REASONS FOR A NO VOTE:
$4 billion of the budget cuts could effect the following programs: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, child care, child welfare services, child support enforcement, unemployment insurance, cash aid for poor seniors and people with disabilities, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Specifics:
a non-binding vote calling for the extra funds moderates have sought for health, education and other services – but ONLY if the extra money is paid for by cuts in other services. The offsetting cuts may come from entitlement programs like Medicaid, Food Stamps, or income assistance for the poor, or from other services that need annually approved funding.
The toll free number to contact your representatives is 800-459-1887. The following is a message is suggested:
“Please vote NO on the budget deal before you. It still requires cuts in human needs programs – once again robbing Peter to pay Paul. It still cuts needed services to pay for tax giveaways to millionaires.”
