|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
Cutting Services for Vulnerable People
The President's budget would cut supports for vulnerable and low-income people, disproportionately women and children, including services for victims of domestic violence; energy, nutrition, and housing assistance; child support enforcement, and other vital social services.
Programs to combat violence against women in the Department of Justice, which provide funding for individual victim service organizations, police, prosecutors and judges, would be cut by over $100 million, a reduction of over 25 percent. Funding for services in the Department of Health and Human Services, including funding for the domestic violence hotline, shelters, and prevention services, would be frozen, meaning a cut in real terms for service providers already struggling to absorb the impact of cuts in last year's budget.
The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program would be cut by 22 percent ($570 million), despite rising energy prices. If implemented through reductions in eligibility, more than one million low-income households-mostly headed by single mothers and elderly women-would lose assistance.
Housing assistance programs especially important for women and their families would be cut.
Housing assistance for the elderly would be cut from an estimated $735 million in 2008 to only $540 million in 2009. Women are 70 percent of the elderly poor. 1
Housing assistance for people with disabilities would be cut from an estimated $237 million in 2008 to only $160 million in 2009. The majority of people with disabilities are women. 2
Funding proposed for the Section 8 housing voucher program is over $1 billion less than the amount needed to renew all current vouchers in 2008, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).3 As a result, CBPP estimates that at least 100,000 fewer households would receive housing vouchers under the President's budget.4 In 2000, 84% of the households receiving Section 8 certificates and vouchers were headed by women and 56% of those households were headed by women with children. 5
Nutrition assistance programs would be underfunded, even as low-income people struggle to cope with rising food costs and increasing economic difficulties.
Food Stamp eligibility would be denied to over 300,000 people in low-income, overwhelmingly female-headed families by eliminating the option for states to provide automatic Food Stamp eligibility for families that are receiving Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families services but not cash assistance. The loss of Food Stamp benefits carries other consequences for the children in these families, who would lose their automatic eligibility for free school breakfast and lunch programs.6
Though the President's budget increases overall funding for Food Stamps, and includes a contingency fund to cover the rising cost of food and program participation, it does not fund key Farm Bill provisions, such as raising the minimum monthly benefits, nor does it take the advice of leading economists and grant a short term increase in Food Stamp benefits to target assistance to low-income people who will spend it quickly and boost local economies.
Funding for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) would increase by just one percent, not enough to keep pace with inflation. This represents a real cut of $113 million and would be insufficient to meet the need created by the economic downturn and rising food prices.7
The Commodity Supplemental Food Program, which provides nutritious food packages to an estimated 473,000 low-income seniors, pregnant and post-partum women, and young children each month, would be eliminated. Though the budget includes a transitional food stamp program to help the elderly losing CSFP, the benefits of this program amount to only $20 per month. For many of those elderly who need both food stamps and CSFP, this will not be enough. 8
Funding cut from child support enforcement as part of the Deficit Reduction Act would not be restored. The cuts, which started to take effect in FY 08, represent a 17 percent reduction in funding9 for a program that served over 17 million children and collected $24 billion in child support from noncustodial parents in 2006. 10 The cuts will cost families about $1 billion per year in uncollected child support ($11 billion over ten years), according to preliminary estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Nine out of ten of the custodial parents seeking government services in collecting child support are mothers. 11 The funding cuts will also affect promising initiatives to provide employment and case management services to low-income noncustodial parents, mostly fathers.
The Social Services Block Grant, which funds a range of services including meals on wheels and other services for the elderly and people with disabilities, child care, and services for abused and neglected children, would be cut by 30 percent ($500 million). Funding for this program has already been frozen for the past six years-a 14 percent cut in real terms-and the Administration seeks to have the program terminated in 2010.
The Community Services Block Grant, which provides a range of health, nutrition, education, and employment services for low-income, elderly, and disabled individuals, is proposed for elimination again this year.
The Administration on Aging, which encompasses a number of programs for older Americans, would receive a 2 percent ($32 million) cut in funding under the Administration's budget. The cut stems from the elimination of preventive health and Alzheimer's demonstration programs.
Footnotes
(1) U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Social and Economic Supplement.2007.
(2) U.S. Census Bureau, Americans with Disabilities: 2002, P70-107 (May 2006).
(3) The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) budget cites $14.319 billion for Section 8 contract renewals in 2009. In calculating this number, HUD includes FY 2009 appropriations and advanced appropriations enacted in FY 2008 for FY2009. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) cites $14.161 billion for Section 8 contract renewals in 2009. In calculating this number, CBPP includes FY 2009 appropriations and advanced appropriations enacted in FY 2009 for FY 2010. CBPP handles advances this way because the housing voucher program operates on a calendar year, not a fiscal year, basis. As a result, the advance of funding for FY 2010 is to be used in the 4th quarter of calendar year 2009. CBPP estimates the cost of renewing all current vouchers at $15.5 billion.
(4) Robert Greenstein, James Horney and Richard Kogan, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The Dubious Priorities of the President's Budget" (February 4, 2008).
(5) Department of Housing and Urban Development, "A Picture of Subsidized Households - 2000." Available at http://www.huduser.org/picture2000/index.html, accessed February 5, 2008.
(6) Food Research and Action Center, "FRAC Statement: Nutrition Program Changes in the President's Budget" (February 4, 2008). Available at http://www.frac.org/news/budget02.04.08.html, accessed February 5, 2008.
(7) Id.
(8) Id.
(9) The Lewin Group and ECONNorthwest, Anticipated Effects of the Deficit Reduction Act Provisions on Child Support Funding and Performance (2007).
(10) Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Child Support Enforcement, FY 2006 Preliminary Report (2007).
(11) U.S. Census Bureau, Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2005 (2007), detailed table 2.
