Posts Tagged ‘Capitol Hill’

AmeriCorps Funding Is on the Congressional Chopping Block

Monday, April 11th, 2011

Budget cutters on Capitol Hill are aiming their scissors at AmeriCorps, which was created in 1993 when President Bill Clinton signed into law the National Community Service Trust Act. With the stroke of a pen, Clinton created the Corporation for National and Community Service and brought domestic community service programs under a single umbrella organization.  This legislation built on the first National Service Act signed by President H.W. Bush in 1990 as part of his “Points of Light” campaign.  AmeriCorps is a network of national service programs that engage Americans in a year of public service to meet the nation’s needs in education, public safety, health, and the environment.

Writing in The New Republic, former AmeriCorps member Tiffany Stanley says “Now, 17 years after its creation, AmeriCorps is on the chopping block.  The most recent continuing resolution passed by the House would cut all federal funding for the agency that oversees the program, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), effectively wiping out AmeriCorps.  Ending the program would not only eliminate jobs for the 85,000 individuals who serve each year through AmeriCorps, it would also significantly burden organizations like Habitat for Humanity, Teach for America (TFA) and City Year that depend on AmeriCorps participants for their cost-effective labor.”

“This is potentially a devastating disaster, a civic tsunami,” said Karen Baker, California state Cabinet secretary for service and volunteering.  AmeriCorps is one of many programs targeted for cuts by the House of Representatives’ new Republican majority, which campaigned on a promise to slash spending in Washington.  The House’s conservative caucus, the Republican Study Committee, disagrees with the living stipends and education awards offered to AmeriCorps members.  “With the federal budget going $4.3 trillion — plus interest -=-into the red in just the last three years, paying people to ‘volunteer’ is not an appropriate use of taxpayer money,” caucus spokesman Brian Straessle wrote.  A House of Representatives spending bill approved in February cuts $1.15 billion for the Corporation for National and Community Service, effectively shutting down the federal agency that operates AmeriCorps.

According to Stanley, AmeriCorps had much bipartisan support throughout its history.  “Perhaps the most objectionable element of the proposal is that many of the programs that AmeriCorps funds are exactly the kind that so-called compassionate conservatives are supposed to support,” she writes.  “Rather than offering a government hand-out, AmeriCorps-backed programs like Habitat for Humanity which require low-income recipients to work alongside volunteers.  (As Newt Gingrich once wrote:  ‘I am proud to work with Habitat for Humanity, which helps poor people build their own homes.’)  And, over the years, AmeriCorps’ efficacy has won over a host of conservatives, including John McCain and Colin Powell.”

Exactly what do AmeriCorps members do?  Stanley notes that “Corps members spend a year or two in the most blighted neighborhoods in America, serving in non-profits, social service agencies and community- and faith-based organizations.  They teach in schools, clean up parks, create affordable housing, and respond to natural disasters.  Last year, for example, 650 AmeriCorps members serving with Habitat for Humanity helped manage 200,000 volunteers, completing 3,500 houses.”

Representative Hal Rogers (R-KY), the House Appropriations Chair, claims the cuts are necessary and will “weed out excessive, unnecessary and wasteful spending, making tough choices to prioritize programs based on their effectiveness.”  Considering that AmeriCorps attracts more than $800 million annually from private and non-federal resources, Stanley says that its proven results and sound funding hardly makes it “excessive” or “wasteful.”

A Boston Globe editorial also questions cutting the AmeriCorps program.  “Beyond that, the national service program has become an incubator for initiatives — in areas ranging from housing to urban education –promising a more entrepreneurial, participatory approach to addressing public needs.  This kind of innovation should appeal to budget-conscious lawmakers, even if it involves some up-front expense.  The national service agency mobilizes more than five million Americans — mostly unpaid volunteers — who fan out into schools, food banks, senior developments, homeless shelters, and other areas in need of experienced hands.  Some Republicans look askance at the modest stipends offered by some of the service programs.  AmeriCorps members, for example, scrape by on about $12,000 in living expenses during their year of service.  What Republicans ignore is that each AmeriCorps member is expected to recruit 30 or more unpaid volunteers.  And that the commitment to public service lasts long after the stipend disappears.  Thankfully, many senior Republicans, including former President George W. Bush, have stepped forward to defend it as a means of leveraging Americans’ community spirit.  Even in a time of deficits, when all acknowledge that some worthy programs will have to be cut, the agency looks completely out of place on the chopping block.”

Democrats, Republicans Butt Heads on Fed’s Quantitative Easing 2

Monday, February 21st, 2011

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is knocking heads with Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI), the new chairman of the House Budget Committee, about how to best control inflation while buying billions of dollars worth of Treasury bonds to build up the economy in a process called quantitative easing 2 (QE2). As the nation’s debt climbs to an unprecedented high level, President Obama is in the difficult position of having to forge an agreement with Congress on how high the legal cap on how much money the government can borrow will be.  The Republicans who now control Congress say they will consent to an increase in the cap only if President Obama agrees to make significant budget cuts. Ryan has been an outspoken opponent of the Fed’s stimulus policy, which is pumping $600 billion into the economy through purchases of long-term Treasuries.  He is concerned that the policy will accelerate inflation, create asset bubbles and reduce the dollar’s value.  “My concern is that the cost of the Fed’s current monetary policy…will come to outweigh the perceived benefits,” Ryan said. “We are already witnessing a sharp rise in a variety of key global commodities and basic material prices.”

Bernanke disagreed, saying “The inflation is taking place in emerging markets because that’s where the growth is.”  In the United States, he said, “overall inflation is still quite low and longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.”  Bernanke pointed to growth in economies like China, India and Brazil as the real cause of rising prices.

Speaking in a different venue, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner expressed confidence that Congress ultimately will raise the debt limit.  “I can say this with complete confidence – that the U.S. will meet its obligations, that Congress will act as it always has to make sure we meet those obligations,” Geithner said.  “There’s always a little political theater around this.”

Democrats and Republicans remain sharply divided on the issue.  “It would be reckless from an economic and financial perspective…to essentially default on our debts and question the creditworthiness and full faith and credit of the United States, correct?” asked Representative Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) “Wouldn’t significant reductions or addressing the short-term spending aspect be good for the market and economy?” asked Representative Scott Garrett (R-NJ).

Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) and a Libertarian characterized Bernanke’s testimony as “cocky”. Paul, a 2008 presidential candidate who is a long-term critic of the Federal Reserve, now has a platform to air his views, thanks to the Republicans winning control of the House. As chairman of the House Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Subcommittee, Paul called the hearing to examine the impact of the Fed’s policies on job creation and the unemployment rate.  Paul has advocated for measures that would review the Federal Reserve or even eliminate it.  Additionally, Paul slammed the Fed’s latest $600 billion bond-buying program, saying it and near-zero interest rates haven’t led to job creation in the United States.

Support the National Alzheimer’s Project Act in Congress

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010

Legislation to create the National Alzheimer’s Project Act is quietly working its way through Congress.  By 2050 – just 40 years from now — nearly 16 million Americans will be afflicted with Alzheimer’s Disease.  Surprisingly, there is not yet a national plan to deal with this looming crisis, although one has been proposed on Capitol Hill.  The National Alzheimer’s Project Act (NAPA) would establish an inter-agency advisory council to address the government’s efforts on Alzheimer’s research, care, institutional services, and home- and community-based programs.  S.B. 3036 and H.R. 4689 would create a government agency to exclusively deal with Alzheimer’s issues.

Co-sponsored by Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Birch Bayh (D-IN), Susan Collins (R-ME), Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Jon Tester (D-MT), the proposal would create a special office within the White House to coordinate research, clinical care and services with the goal of preventing, caring for and curing Alzheimer’s Disease.

“Alzheimer’s takes a tremendous emotional and financial toll on over 75,000 Coloradans and their families,” according to Bennet.  “Yet our nation’s healthcare system is not set up to appropriately coordinate and share the research we’re doing to prevent, cure and care for our patients.  This bill will streamline the country’s research efforts so that we can better find ways to combat this disease while also making much better use of our taxpayer dollars.”

Approximately half of Americans who live to 85 will suffer from Alzheimer’s.  Once the legislation is passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate, the Office of the National Alzheimer’s director would be named to the Domestic Policy Council and the Office of Science and Technology.  This director would have input into all policy aspects of the disease, as well as focus on high-risk groups and those underserved by existing Alzheimer’s programs.

Kenneth Feinberg Widens Review of Rescued Bank Compensation

Thursday, April 1st, 2010

The nation’s pay czar is widening his review of how much money hundreds of banks paid their top executives during Pay czar is asking for details on compensation at U.S. banks that took TARP money.  the 2008 financial crisis. Kenneth R. Feinberg, officially the Special Master for Executive Compensation, is asking for details on compensation at 419 banks that were bailed out by the Treasury Department’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).  Because Feinberg’s authority over compensation only started on February 17, 2009 – when President Barack Obama signed the $787 billion stimulus bill into law and gave Treasury the ability to shape compensation at bailed-out companies – he can do nothing about bonuses paid at the end of 2008.

The standards for deciding that compensation is excessive must be “contrary to the public interest.”  Feinberg’s “look back letter” gives the firms 30 days to provide the information requested.  The compensation review applies only to managers who earned upwards of $500,000 during the four-month period that is under assessment.  Scott Talbott, senior vice president of the Financial Services Roundtable, said the big banks “will work with Mr. Feinberg to demonstrate that the industry has eliminated pay practices that encouraged excessive risk-taking.”

Last fall, Feinberg cut executive paychecks by approximately 50 percent for the seven biggest bailout recipients.  Of those, Citigroup and Bank of America have since repaid the government.  Feinberg was able to pressure AIG employees to return a percentage of their compensation.  James Angel, a finance professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business, said, “On one hand, some of these banks were effectively forced to take TARP money.  But you could also argue that the executives of surviving banks should not be compensated highly because it wasn’t really their particular skill, it was their luck that they were in an institution that survived when the government bailed out the financial system.”

TARP Savings Could Finance Jobs Program

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

Returned TARP funds could finance jobs creation program.  The $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) cost $200 billion less than originally anticipated,  according to a new Treasury Department report.  That reflects faster repayments by big banks, as well as less spending on rescue programs as the financial sector recovers more quickly than expected.

And it’s good news for President Obama’s new job creation stimulus.  In a speech delivered at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution,  President Obama outlined a wide-ranging plan to create jobs that could be partially financed by the $200 billion in TARP funds that the government now expects to get back.

Among the job creation proposals detailed by President Obama are:

  • A tax cut for small business to encourage hiring.
  • Eliminate capitals gains on these businesses for one year.
  • Redirect leftover TARP money to support small business growth.
  • Invest new money in rebuilding roads, bridges and other infrastructure improvements.
  • Start a “Cash for Caulkers” plan that would give rebates to people who make their homes more energy efficient.

“Small businesses, infrastructure, clean energy:  these are areas in which we can put Americans to work while putting our nation on a sturdier economic footing,” according to President Obama.  “That foundation for sustained economic growth must be our continuing focus and our ultimate goal.”

The President’s proposals require Congressional approval.