CCC's Policy Alert (Pt. 1)

[hn0186 at handsnet.org]

Date: June 12, 1995 1:03 pm PDT Item: R009Sym

From: HN1415 Center for Community Change

To: $HCDLEGWKLY Hsng Legislative Weekly Update

Subj: Policy Alert 21 (Part 2)

Policy Alert #21 (Part 2) Center for Community Change
June 12, 1995

WELFARE UPDATE

Background: On May 26, the Senate Finance Committee passed by a vote of
12-8 Chairman Bob Packwood's (R-OR) welfare reform bill. Senator Max
Baucus (D-MT) joined the Republican majority in support of Packwood's bill.
Like the Personal Responsibility Act (PRA) passed in March by the House of
Representatives, the Senate Finance bill embraces the idea that states
should receive broad authority over the main federal cash assistance
programs. Both proposals slash funding for key safety net programs and
abandon the federal government's promise to provide at least minimal
assistance to those in need.

Like the PRA, Packwood's plan eliminates Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC), the federal guarantee of cash assistance to all eligible
poor families with children, and replaces it with a block grant.
Packwood's plan ends the traditional federal-state partnership by releasing
states from their current obligations to match federal assistance funds.
Like the PRA, Packwood freezes the federal share of program costs at the
1994 spending level through Fiscal Year 2001. This has the effect of
basing future distribution of funds on 1994 federal spending, rather than
the current need (such as the number of children in poverty in any state in
a given year.)

Prospects for Floor Action: Although the Packwood Bill received the
support of all Republican members of the Finance Committee, it has provoked
criticism from other members of the Republican party, as well as from
Democrats. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX), Phil Gramm (R-TX) and
twenty-eight other sunbelt senators from both parties sent a letter to
Senator Packwood on May 23 expressing their concern that his block grant
funding formula ignored the needs of states with growing populations. In
addition, four Republican Senators -- Lauch Faircloth (NC), Phil Gramm
(TX), Trent Lott (MS) and Richard Santorum (PA) -- wrote a letter
threatening to withhold their support from the Packwood Bill because it
does not include provisions to deny benefits to unwed teen mothers, impose
a family cap, establish illegitimacy ratios or include the work
requirements from the PRA.

Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) will probably offer an amendment to adjust the
state allocation formula to reflect the number of children in poverty in
each state. This could foreshadow a major showdown between Senators whose
states do relatively well under the Packwood proposal and those that do
not. For example, according to Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) estimates, federal allocation of cash assistance in Massachusetts
under the Packwood proposal would average $2177 per poor child (the fifth
highest in the nation), compared to only $408 per poor child in Alabama
(the fifth lowest.) While the national average per poor child allocation
is $1168, twenty-eight states fall below the average mark and could
potentially suffer from the block grant formula.

Other issues likely to be debated on the floor include conservative child
exclusion provisions and a state maintenance of effort requirement.
Senator John Breaux (D-LA) will likely offer a maintenance of effort
amendment similar to the provision he raised during the Finance Committee
markup. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) will probably offer an amendment to
provide an exemption from the time limit in the bill for states
experiencing high unemployment.

Finally, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) is working with
colleagues on a Democrative alternative bill; a draft summary indicates
that the Daschle bill will remain a cash assistance entitlement. Other
Democratic substitutes are also possible.

In addition to amendments to the Finance Committee provisions, other key
safety net programs may be folded into consideration of this bill on the
floor. Changes to the food stamps and other federal nutrition programs
could be added to the welfare bill, as well as the Child Care Development
Block Grant legislation recently approved by the Senate Labor and Human
Resources Committee. The Senate agricultural Committee will vote on
Chairman Richard Lugar's proposal on Wednesday (June 14, 1995) which would
preserve the entitlement status of the federal nutrition programs. The
bill would however cut 16.5 Billion from the food stamp program and 2
Billion from child nutrition programs.

While a definite date for floor consideration has not been given, a number
of sources indicate that the Packwood bill could reach the Senate floor
this week. It is expected to be considered on its own as a free standing
bill unless it gets bogged down in protracted debate. At which point
Senate leaders always have the option of folding welfare reform into
reconciliation legislation.

Action Needed: It is critical that advocates contact their Senators and ask
them to oppose the Finance Committee bill. In addition, it is important to
contact the President and ask him to veto legislation that shreds the
safety net for poor families and children. The Capitol Switchboard number
is (202) 224-3121. The White House comment line is (202) 456-1111.

Materials Available: The Coalition on Human Needs' summary of the Senate
bill is available through us by calling Terri Tompkins at (202) 342-0567.

Many thanks to the Coalition on Human Needs for supplying this update!
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deepak Bhargava at (202) 342-0567.

Vote to Revamp the Federal Home Loan Bank System Rescheduled for June 28

The Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Securities and Government-Sponsored
Enterprises of the House Banking Committee has rescheduled to June 28 its
consideration of legislation to revamp the Federal Home Loan Bank System
(H.R. 1478). The markup was originally scheduled for June 7. For
background on the legislation see CCC Policy Alert #20.

Introduced by Rep. Richard Baker (R-LA), who chairs the subcommittee, the
bill would undo many of the reforms that Rep. Gonzalez and other engineered
through Congress in 1989 as part of the S&L cleanup legislation. In
general, these reforms sought to increase the FHLB System's support for
affordable housing and community economic development needs. Among other
things, H.R. 1478:

o removes the minimum annual $100 million funding floor for the Affordable
Housing Program (AHP);

o removes authority from the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB) -- the
public body that supervises the FHLB system -- to provide national
oversight over the administration of AHP and the Community Investment
Program.

o restructures the five member FHFB, reducing the membership to three and
eliminating the slots reserved for HUD and a community representative;

Community groups and others are encouraged to weigh in with the
Subcommittee in opposition to these rollbacks.

Republicans on the Subcommittee: Baker/Chairman, Hayworth, Cremeans, Fox,
Stockman, LoBiondo, Watts, Kelly, Roukema, Lazio, and Bachus.

Democrats: Kanjorski/Ranking, Hinchey, Ackerman, Bentsen, LaFalce, Schumer,
Flake, Waters, and Orton.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Fishbein, at CCC's Neighborhood
Revitalization Project, 202-342-0567.


Sent: June 12, 1995 2:38 pm PDT Item: R009TMZ


This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[hn0186 at handsnet.org]

Date: June 12, 1995 1:03 pm PDT Item: R009Sym

From: HN1415 Center for Community Change

To: $HCDLEGWKLY Hsng Legislative Weekly Update

Subj: Policy Alert 21 (Part 2)

Policy Alert #21 (Part 2) Center for Community Change
June 12, 1995

WELFARE UPDATE

Background: On May 26, the Senate Finance Committee passed by a vote of
12-8 Chairman Bob Packwood's (R-OR) welfare reform bill. Senator Max
Baucus (D-MT) joined the Republican majority in support of Packwood's bill.
Like the Personal Responsibility Act (PRA) passed in March by the House of
Representatives, the Senate Finance bill embraces the idea that states
should receive broad authority over the main federal cash assistance
programs. Both proposals slash funding for key safety net programs and
abandon the federal government's promise to provide at least minimal
assistance to those in need.

Like the PRA, Packwood's plan eliminates Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC), the federal guarantee of cash assistance to all eligible
poor families with children, and replaces it with a block grant.
Packwood's plan ends the traditional federal-state partnership by releasing
states from their current obligations to match federal assistance funds.
Like the PRA, Packwood freezes the federal share of program costs at the
1994 spending level through Fiscal Year 2001. This has the effect of
basing future distribution of funds on 1994 federal spending, rather than
the current need (such as the number of children in poverty in any state in
a given year.)

Prospects for Floor Action: Although the Packwood Bill received the
support of all Republican members of the Finance Committee, it has provoked
criticism from other members of the Republican party, as well as from
Democrats. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX), Phil Gramm (R-TX) and
twenty-eight other sunbelt senators from both parties sent a letter to
Senator Packwood on May 23 expressing their concern that his block grant
funding formula ignored the needs of states with growing populations. In
addition, four Republican Senators -- Lauch Faircloth (NC), Phil Gramm
(TX), Trent Lott (MS) and Richard Santorum (PA) -- wrote a letter
threatening to withhold their support from the Packwood Bill because it
does not include provisions to deny benefits to unwed teen mothers, impose
a family cap, establish illegitimacy ratios or include the work
requirements from the PRA.

Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) will probably offer an amendment to adjust the
state allocation formula to reflect the number of children in poverty in
each state. This could foreshadow a major showdown between Senators whose
states do relatively well under the Packwood proposal and those that do
not. For example, according to Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) estimates, federal allocation of cash assistance in Massachusetts
under the Packwood proposal would average $2177 per poor child (the fifth
highest in the nation), compared to only $408 per poor child in Alabama
(the fifth lowest.) While the national average per poor child allocation
is $1168, twenty-eight states fall below the average mark and could
potentially suffer from the block grant formula.

Other issues likely to be debated on the floor include conservative child
exclusion provisions and a state maintenance of effort requirement.
Senator John Breaux (D-LA) will likely offer a maintenance of effort
amendment similar to the provision he raised during the Finance Committee
markup. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) will probably offer an amendment to
provide an exemption from the time limit in the bill for states
experiencing high unemployment.

Finally, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) is working with
colleagues on a Democrative alternative bill; a draft summary indicates
that the Daschle bill will remain a cash assistance entitlement. Other
Democratic substitutes are also possible.

In addition to amendments to the Finance Committee provisions, other key
safety net programs may be folded into consideration of this bill on the
floor. Changes to the food stamps and other federal nutrition programs
could be added to the welfare bill, as well as the Child Care Development
Block Grant legislation recently approved by the Senate Labor and Human
Resources Committee. The Senate agricultural Committee will vote on
Chairman Richard Lugar's proposal on Wednesday (June 14, 1995) which would
preserve the entitlement status of the federal nutrition programs. The
bill would however cut 16.5 Billion from the food stamp program and 2
Billion from child nutrition programs.

While a definite date for floor consideration has not been given, a number
of sources indicate that the Packwood bill could reach the Senate floor
this week. It is expected to be considered on its own as a free standing
bill unless it gets bogged down in protracted debate. At which point
Senate leaders always have the option of folding welfare reform into
reconciliation legislation.

Action Needed: It is critical that advocates contact their Senators and ask
them to oppose the Finance Committee bill. In addition, it is important to
contact the President and ask him to veto legislation that shreds the
safety net for poor families and children. The Capitol Switchboard number
is (202) 224-3121. The White House comment line is (202) 456-1111.

Materials Available: The Coalition on Human Needs' summary of the Senate
bill is available through us by calling Terri Tompkins at (202) 342-0567.

Many thanks to the Coalition on Human Needs for supplying this update!
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deepak Bhargava at (202) 342-0567.

Vote to Revamp the Federal Home Loan Bank System Rescheduled for June 28

The Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Securities and Government-Sponsored
Enterprises of the House Banking Committee has rescheduled to June 28 its
consideration of legislation to revamp the Federal Home Loan Bank System
(H.R. 1478). The markup was originally scheduled for June 7. For
background on the legislation see CCC Policy Alert #20.

Introduced by Rep. Richard Baker (R-LA), who chairs the subcommittee, the
bill would undo many of the reforms that Rep. Gonzalez and other engineered
through Congress in 1989 as part of the S&L cleanup legislation. In
general, these reforms sought to increase the FHLB System's support for
affordable housing and community economic development needs. Among other
things, H.R. 1478:

o removes the minimum annual $100 million funding floor for the Affordable
Housing Program (AHP);

o removes authority from the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB) -- the
public body that supervises the FHLB system -- to provide national
oversight over the administration of AHP and the Community Investment
Program.

o restructures the five member FHFB, reducing the membership to three and
eliminating the slots reserved for HUD and a community representative;

Community groups and others are encouraged to weigh in with the
Subcommittee in opposition to these rollbacks.

Republicans on the Subcommittee: Baker/Chairman, Hayworth, Cremeans, Fox,
Stockman, LoBiondo, Watts, Kelly, Roukema, Lazio, and Bachus.

Democrats: Kanjorski/Ranking, Hinchey, Ackerman, Bentsen, LaFalce, Schumer,
Flake, Waters, and Orton.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Fishbein, at CCC's Neighborhood
Revitalization Project, 202-342-0567.


Sent: June 12, 1995 2:38 pm PDT Item: R009TMZ


This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list