Contact: Trudi Renwick, 518-786-3156
HOUSE BUDGET
CALLS FOR LARGE CUTS IN DOMESTIC PROGRAMS AND WOULD WORSEN DEFICIT
Program Cuts Even
Larger Than Those Proposed by President or Senate,
Yet Would Be
Offset by Tax Cuts and Added Defense-Related Spending
The five-year budget plan approved on
Wednesday, March 29, 2006, by the US House of Representatives’ Budget
Committee is badly out of step with both America’s needs and Americans’
concerns for fiscal responsibility and adequate funding of critical
services.
Both houses of
Congress are now in the process of finalizing their budget plans (in the
form of "budget resolutions") for FY 2007 (the federal fiscal year that
begins on October 1, 2006 and ends on September 30, 2007). The Senate
passed its FY 2007 budget resolution on March 16th and the
House of Representatives is scheduled to act this week on the budget
resolution recommended by the House Budget Committee on March 29.
The House budget plan would provide $10.3
billion less in funding for domestic discretionary programs (the part of
the budget that includes education, veterans’ medical care, law
enforcement, transportation, environmental protection, and medical
research) than is needed simply to keep pace with inflation. This
reduction means that either fewer people will be served by these
programs in coming years or that the level or quality of services will
have to be cut back in other ways.
In later years, the House budget would
cut this part of the budget by even larger amounts than President Bush
proposed earlier this year. The House budget, for example, fails to
include funding that was requested by the President (and that was
included in the US Senate’s budget) that is needed to prevent hundreds
of thousands of children and parents in low-income working families from
losing health coverage. This funding would plug a 2007 shortfall in the
State Children’s Health Insurance Program and extend the component of
Medicaid that continues health coverage for up to a year for families
that work their way off welfare.
In addition to these short-term
deficiencies, the House budget plan would cause the federal deficit to
be at least a quarter-trillion dollars higher over the next five
years than if current policies were continued. That is because the
House budget plan contains more than $200 billion in tax cuts — most of
which would go to high-income households.
“Overall, the House budget plan would be
more harmful than either President Bush’s budget or the budget plan
recently approved by the Senate,” said Trudi Renwick, Senior Economist
for the Fiscal Policy Institute. “Over the next five years, the House
budget calls for even larger funding cuts in domestic discretionary
programs than the other two plans. The result is that the cuts in
federally-funded services would be even more severe and widespread if
the House plan were to be adopted.”
The House budget plan would:
·
Reduce funding for
domestic discretionary programs. Funding would be cut by $9 billion
in fiscal year 2007 and $169 billion over five years, compared to the
2006 funding levels adjusted for inflation.
·
Require cuts in
entitlement programs. $7 billion in cuts in entitlement programs
would be required over the next five years. Some $4 billion would have
to come from programs overseen by the Ways and Means Committee including
the Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income workers, the Supplemental
Security Income Program for low-income people who are elderly or have a
disability, child support assistance for low-income parents, and the
Social Services Block Grant, which helps fund a range of services for
low-income, elderly, and disabled individuals.
·
Provide large,
unpaid-for tax cuts, mostly for the wealthy. These tax cuts would
likely cost much more than the House’s estimate of $228 billion over the
next five years, mostly because the House’s estimate does not include
the cost of extending relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)
after 2006. If AMT relief were extended through 2011, as virtually
every lawmaker and analyst expects, the cost of the House tax cuts would
more than double.
·
Increase the federal
deficit by at least $256 billion over the next five years. The
savings from the program reductions in the House budget would be used
not to reduce the deficit, but instead to offset a portion of the
plan’s tax cuts, as well as the increases in defense spending it calls
for. Overall, the House budget plan would increase the deficit over the
next five years by $254 billion compared to what deficits would be if
current policy were left unchanged. But the actual increase in the
deficit under the House plan is likely to be much more than $254
billion, because the House Budget Committee has understated the true
price tag of the tax cuts it is proposing.
“New Yorkers are concerned about
our country’s growing deficits and they don’t want more unaffordable tax
cuts that lead to cuts in critical government services and higher
deficits that weaken our economy,” said Frank Mauro, Executive Director
of the Fiscal Policy Institute. “The House budget plan shows that House
leaders haven’t heard these messages, so it’s important that House
members hear them as they consider this budget and decide to do what is
best for their communities and their constituents."
____________________________________________________________________________
FPI is a nonpartisan research and education organization that focuses
on the broad range of tax, budget, and economic and related public
policy issues that affect the quality of life and the economic well
being of New York State residents. FPI's analyses are intended to
further the development and implementation of public policies that
create a strong, sustainable economy in which prosperity is broadly
shared by all New Yorkers. FPI has offices in Albany and new York City.
The FPI website may be found at:
www.fiscalpolicy.org.