|
Unions want extra billions for social program spending |
|
By Alexander Bolton
|
|
Posted: 04/17/07 08:37 PM [ET] |
A broad coalition of labor groups and liberal organizations are lobbying lawmakers to embrace the House budget blueprint over the Senate measure, hoping to win passage of extra billions of dollars for social programs.
Members of the Emergency Campaign for America’s Priorities (ECAP), which was originally formed to battle Republican tax and spending policies, have now set their sights on congressional Democrats.
While labor and liberal leaders are quick to say the Democratic spending plans are a significant improvement over past Republican budgets, they are not letting their vast lobbying and grassroots coalition gather dust under Democratic rule.
Specifically, members of ECAP are siding with House Democrats in a disagreement with their Senate counterparts over how much to spend next year on domestic programs such as food stamps, children’s health insurance, education and job training.
Labor groups say they will lobby lawmakers on increasing spending levels and will also educate their members on the issue so they in turn can contact their members of Congress.
They are beginning to mobilize because Democratic leaders have alerted them that the budget and appropriations process will be at the top of the congressional agenda over the next several months.
Democratic leaders, who strongly criticized the GOP-led Congress last year for not passing a budget, have vowed to reconcile the differences and pass a final measure. But both the House and Senate budget measures narrowly passed their respective chambers and reaching a compromise that will attract a majority in both chambers will be a challenging task for Democratic leaders.
Politically, Democrats must walk the line of increasing spending in certain areas, but also abiding by their campaign promises to be fiscally responsible.
Nearly 70 labor and human welfare organizations are expected to sign a letter that organizers will send to every member of Congress today advocating for higher spending levels for next year. Signatories include the AFL-CIO, the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the Service Employees International Union, the Coalition on Human Needs, the National Council of Churches, the National Low Income Housing Coalition, and Lutheran Services in America.
“It is the current position that we’re looking for no less than the House non-defense discretionary figure,” said Deborah Weinstein, the executive director of the Coalition on Human Needs.
“We appreciate the fact that both the House and Senate budgets increased domestic discretionary funding,” wrote labor and liberal groups who signed the letter. “Nevertheless, both the House and Senate included far less funding than needed to rebuild and move forward from recent past failures to invest adequately in education, housing, nutrition, health care, workforce, and other important domestic programs.”
“Therefore we strongly urge that no less than the House’s non-defense discretionary figure — about $7 billion more than the Senate’s level — be adopted in the final budget resolution conference agreement.”
But Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he is firmly committed to pushing his chamber’s total spending limit forward. The Senate has planned for nearly $7 billion less in discretionary spending than the House in its annual budget. The Senate has called for $447 billion in non-defense discretionary spending; the House has set a level of $453.9 billion, according to Jim Horney at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which tracks the federal budget.
“My obligation is to represent the Senate position as vigorously as I can,” said Conrad. “I am firm on all the Senate positions.”
Asked whether the Senate’s domestic spending number would be increased to the House level, Conrad replied: “That’s not going to happen.”
Conrad’s position entering talks with the House, however, will be weakened by the fact that many of his party’s most active and politically effective allies are siding with House negotiators. It is difficult to predict how long it will take to resolve the dispute; House and Senate Democratic leaders have not yet appointed conference negotiators.
Charles Loveless, the director of legislation for AFSCME, said that it would be wrong to think of the dynamic as labor and progressive groups siding with the House against the Senate. Instead, he said, the groups are focused on pushing for a domestic spending number that is as high as possible.
“We are lobbying and reaching out to the district level and pushing for the highest number for discretionary spending that we can,” said Loveless. “We need to get the highest number possible and most of us are cognizant that we’re operating under severe fiscal constraints.”
The presence of labor in the coalition of groups pushing for higher spending means that real political pressure can be brought to bear on lawmakers.
“The House budget takes as important step in [the right] direction and the Senate goes in that direction but not as far,” said Bill Samuel, the director of legislation at the AFL-CIO. “We’re educating our grassroots leaders and the leaders of the various international unions that lobby on this in Washington and among our rank and file members.”
“We’re urging people to get involved in this debate,” he said.
|
