|
[Home] [Up] [Next]
| |
|
BUSH-WATCH |
|
Return to US Pres Watch Page |
Keeping Track
of President Bush |
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE
PROGRESS REPORT
Bushonomics
A
new Center for American Progress report released today -- Understanding
Bushonomics: How We Got Into This Mess In the First Place -- documents
"the extraordinary transfer of wealth that took place between ordinary
households and the extremely well-to-do and the effort by this administration
to address the consequences of that problem without addressing the root
cause." Senior Fellow Scott Lilly argues that while the "economy
did in fact grow at a reasonably strong pace through most of the Bush
presidency" and "the hourly productivity of American workers"
increased by "more
than 19 percent," average Americans did not reap the benefits of
economic expansion. Instead, President Bush's economic policies redistributed
wealth to the richest Americans and left the majority with stagnating
wages and declining household incomes. The transfer "drained the
American consumer of the resources needed to keep the economy humming"
and led the administration to stimulate the economy by expanding credit -- an
action that only
weakened "our long term capacity for growth," he
concludes.
WEALTH GOES TO THE RICH: The Bush administration directed its
economic policies and the benefits of economic growth towards a narrow
segment of the population, the wealthiest Americans. Looking at the
effects of the first three Bush tax cuts, the Congressional Budget Office
concluded that "the percentage by which the effective tax rate was
cut for high-income families was nearly
twice the rate cut for those in the middle of the income spectrum."
Meanwhile, the administration's failure to raise the minimum
wage coupled with its poor enforcement of federal wage and hour laws,
trade agreements, and union
rights further undermined
the economic security of middle and lower-income Americans. Consequently,
between 2000 and 2006, "those among the top 10 percent of all households
on average increased their income by about 2 percent, while those in the
bottom 90 percent lost
more than 4 percent." The "biggest beneficiaries of
U.S.
economic growth that occurred between 2000 and 2006 were U.S.
corporations," the report concludes. While corporate profits grew
"at a little less than two-thirds the growth rate of the gross domestic
product" during the second half of the 20th century, between 2000 and
2006, "corporate profits grew nearly four times as fast as GDP," increasing
by an estimated 66 percent.
NO TRICKLE DOWN: The newfound prosperity of the top 10 percent of
families, "which accounted for 95.3 percent of the nation's income growth
between 2002 and 2006," did
not trickle down the economic spectrum, and left most Americans incapable
of absorbing the rising output of consumer products. Recognizing the
precarious condition of the U.S. consumer, corporations retained their extra
profits, invested
little in new commercial structures such as factories and office
buildings, bought back their own stock, and "increased dividends rather
than expand capacity." High-income individuals absorbed some of the extra
output by consuming
luxury items, but most of their "increased income went
to savings rather than consumption," Lilly writes.
A POOR FIX FOR DEMAND: With
families unable to absorb the extra production, the Bush administration tried
to keep the economy growing by ordering the Federal Reserve to drastically
lower the Reserve's Discount Rate, "the interest rate charged by the
Federal Reserve to member institutions for
short-term lending." By 2002, the Fed Reserve Discount Rate dropped
to 0.75
percent and "the dramatic reduction
in the cost of money to member banks began a frenzy of economic
activity." The biggest effect was in-home mortgage refinancing.
"Extremely low interest rates...made it possible for hard-pressed
consumers to maintain
and even improve their living standards by taking equity out of their homes,"
Lilly notes. But "the dramatic expansion of credit created excessive debt
and distorted the price of housing. It also weakened
the dollar, pushing up oil prices."
|
|
USW/MEXICO-LABOR-RIGHTS
AP
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
PITTSBURGH--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 16, 2008--News From USW: The United
Steelworkers (USW) today called for congressional hearings on President
George W. Bush's proposed "Merida Initiative" to provide $1.4
billion to Mexican security forces after federal and state police attacked
striking workers at Grupo Mexico's Cananea copper mine in Sonora, where ten
union members were injured. A thousand federal police are now occupying the
mine and the surrounding area.
In a letter to Rep. Tom Lantos, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs
Committee, and Rep. David Obey, chairman of the House Appropriations
Committee, USW International President Leo W. Gerard urged both committees
to convene hearings on labor rights violations in Mexico as part of their
examination of the administration's funding request; that they develop
specific labor rights benchmarks that Mexico must meet in order to receive
funding; and that the entire funding package be directed toward
strengthening human rights and the rule of law.
"The attack on the Cananea miners is just the most recent in a
series of repressive actions by the Mexican government," Gerard wrote.
"The Calderon administration's flagrant violations of workers'
fundamental rights to organize and bargain and its continuing use of
security forces to assault unarmed workers, raise serious questions about
the desirability of providing Mexico with additional security funding."
Gerard pointed out that the USW is second to none in defending our
nation's security, but added that our security is best preserved by
defending human rights before lambasting the Mexican government for its
unnecessary brutality in trying to repress the striking workers.
"Mexico cannot be allowed to violate workers' human rights with
impunity under the pretense of securing borders and combating narco-trafficking,"
he said.
The USW represents 850,000 workers in the United States and Canada
employed in the metals, rubber, chemicals, paper, oil refining and other
industries as well as the service and public sectors.
Note to Editors: There should be an accent over the "o" in
"Calderon" above.
--30--JAM/cl
CONTACT: USW
Tony Montana, 412-562-2592
KEYWORD: UNITED STATES MEXICO NORTH AMERICA CENTRAL AMERICA PENNSYLVANIA
INDUSTRY KEYWORD: PUBLIC POLICY/GOVERNMENT CONGRESSIONAL NEWS/VIEWS
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LABOR LAW ENFORCEMENT MANUFACTURING PUBLIC POLICY WHITE
HOUSE/FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STEEL NATURAL RESOURCES MINING/MINERALS
SOURCE: United Steelworkers Copyright Business Wire 2008
LABOR
Regulatory
Assault On Unions
The
Bush administration's assault
on organized labor is well-known, as the current union organization system
is tilted against
America
's workers. Each year, over
20,000 U.S. workers are illegally fired, demoted, laid off, suspended
without pay, or denied work by their employers as a result of union activity. In
2000, 13.5
percent of all wage and salary workers were unionized. In 2006, just
12 percent of workers were in unions, as existing
laws -- and the administration's interpretation of them -- make joining
a union a Herculean task that few want to undertake, even though half of
all
U.S.
workers say they would vote to join a union. While the Bush administration has
been lax on most regulatory enforcement throughout most of government, a new report
from Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Scott
Lilly points out that the Labor Department's Office of Labor Management
Standards (OLMS) has embarked on a path of "rigorous" and
"pernicious" regulatory enforcement of organized labor. This
regulatory assault has resulted in a "political misinformation
campaign" aimed at damaging organized labor.
BURDENING AND SLANDERING UNIONS:
The Landrum-Griffin
Act of 1959 "tasks the Labor Department with enforcing
union financial reporting requirements and investigating their
finances." In 1992, former Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA) urged Labor
Secretary Lynn Martin to direct OLMS to significantly increase union reporting
requirements because it would "weaken our opponents and encourage our
allies." The Bush administration followed suit, revising the so-called
LM-2 reporting form, resulting in a "radical
increase in paperwork requirements placed on unions." Unions
were thus forced to spend considerable sums in purchasing new software to
comply with the record-keeping burdens. "Most workers don't
have the time or ability to satisfy the requirements," observed Bill
Samuel, director of legislation for the AFL-CIO.
HEAVILY DOCTORED DATA: OLMS and
its right-wing allies appear to knowingly propagate misleading data in order
to drum up allegations of union corruption. Using "double-counting"
(where the Department lists an individual case multiple times by reporting as
a separate "case" the date of indictment, charge, date of plea, and
date of sentencing), OLMS doubled the total number of "convictions"
in their data on criminal actions involving labor unions. Much of those
records did not even involve union members per se, but accountants, lawyers,
and business owners, observed John Lund of the
University
of
Wisconsin
. This doctored data was also picked up by the right-wing anti-union group Center
for Union Facts. Furthermore, OLMS reporting on court-ordered
restitution to labor unions is also misleading, reporting $23 million in
court-ordered restitutions in fiscal year 2005. But, as Lilly observed, only
10 percent of that amount actually involved unions: "embedded" in
the data were "cases in which perpetrators were not members of unions and
the target of their crimes were not union treasuries."
"President
Bush is using the Department of Labor as a weapon to undermine the labor
movement. ... The Bush administration's goal
is harassment, plain and simple," said Sen. Hillary Clinton
(D-NY).
POLITICAL APPOINTEES RUN OLMS:
The Bush administration's injection of politics over the rule of law is
well-documented. From the U.S.
Attorneys scandal to Karl Rove's politicization
schemes, the administration has used political appointees to create
an arm
of the Republican party in the federal government. OLMS was run
by a career civil servant for most of President Clinton's tenure;
under Bush, political appointee Don Todd -- neither an attorney nor an
individual with labor experience -- was chosen to run OLMS. Todd, who led
opposition research at the Republican National Committee in 1988, "is
credited with helping
George H.W. Bush win the presidency in 1988 by convincing Lee Atwater to
use a television ad featuring a furloughed murderer." (Todd was named
"RNC
Man Of The Year" for this tactic.) Several other campaign operatives
moved into the office. Todd's special assistant came to the Labor Department
from the Republican Senate Campaign Committee, along with another assistant,
Patrick Bosworth. Sean Redmond, also special assistant to Todd, was on the
advance staff of Bush-Cheney 2000. Todd and his staff used their campaign
communications experience to discredit unions, uploading millions of pages of
data on finances of unions to the OLMS website and creating databases of legal
actions taken in courts against union members. This data was conveniently
picked up by right-wing groups like the Center for Union Facts, who publicized
"the
data that Todd had added" in their own anti-union ad campaigns.
Jim
Coleman
USPA
Secretary Treasurer
USW Communications Department
|
|
Dear Jeff,
|
Tell
Congress:
Pass a CLEAN Minimum
Wage Increase
|
|
Yes,
they did it again.
The Senate defeated
a clean minimum wage
increase that is
nearly 10 years
overdue.

Click
to tell congress:
Pass
a CLEAN Minimum Wage
Increase
|
|
|
Yes, they did it again. The Senate
defeated a clean minimum wage increase that
is nearly 10 years overdue.
A majority of senators—54—voted to
raise the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to
$7.25 without handing out more business
tax breaks. But the mostly Republican
opponents of a clean minimum wage increase
filibustered the measure, and it takes 60
votes to end debate on a filibustered bill.
Now the Senate will take up a minimum wage
bill that includes tax breaks and other
giveaways President Bush wants—and it’s
expected to pass.
So, once again, millions of minimum wage
workers have to wait for a raise while the
House (which passed a clean minimum wage
increase) and Senate work out the
differences between their versions of the
legislation.
Low-wage workers have been at the
back of the line long enough. Tell your U.S.
representative and senators: Pass a clean
minimum wage increase with no more business
handouts. Click
here to send your message.
Tuesday night, in his State of the Union
Address, President Bush claimed the economy
“is on the move” and growing. Not for
minimum wage workers, that’s for sure. The
real buying power of their paychecks is at
the lowest point in more than 50 years.
Today, a full-time minimum wage worker makes
just $206 a week, $10,712 a year—far below
the poverty line for even a small family.
Businesses have gotten $300 billion in
tax breaks since the last time minimum wage
workers got a raise. It’s time to demand a
clean minimum wage increase.
Tell your U.S. representative and
senators: Pass a clean minimum wage increase
with no more business handouts. Click
here to send your message:
http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/CleanWageRaise
Thank you for fighting for working
families.
In solidarity,
Working Families e-Activist Network,
AFL-CIO
P.S. Help spread the word. Please forward
this e-mail to at least 10 other working
family activists you know and urge them to
send messages to Congress, too.

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Sisters &
Brothers of USW Local 608-712
Businesses have gotten $300 billion in tax breaks
from previous Congresses and the Bush administration
since the last time minimum wage workers got a raise
nearly 10 years ago. Right now, the U.S. Senate is
debating a bill to raise the minimum wage from $5.15
an hour to $7.25—with no strings attached. But
some senators are once again trying to load the bill
down with business tax breaks and they could act as
early as Wednesday.
Low-wage workers have been at the back of
the line long enough. Tell your senators: Pass a
clean minimum wage increase now with no more
business hand-outs. Click
here to send your message:
http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/PassHR2
While minimum wage workers have been waiting for
a raise, the former Republican-controlled Congress
also awarded itself nine pay raises worth a total of
$31,600 per member. That’s three times the
full-year pay for a minimum wage worker. Now
Republican opponents of a clean minimum wage
increase say they’re going to filibuster the
measure—blocking it unless at least 60 of the 100
senators vote to end the filibuster. If at least 60
senators don’t vote to end the filibuster, they'll
take up an alternative bill loaded with business tax
breaks.
This is a serious effort to deny minimum wage
workers a very long-overdue raise unless businesses
get even more than the $300 billion in tax breaks
they’ve already received since the last minimum
wage increase.
Tell your senators “No.” Not again.
This time, pass a clean minimum wage raise. Click
here to send your message.
Minimum wage workers have waited nearly 10 years
for a raise. That’s an outrage. It’s time for a
Congress that cares about working people to move
them to the front of the line for action.
Thank you for fighting to raise the minimum wage.
In solidarity,
Working Families e-Activist Network, AFL-CIO
P.S. Get the word out. Please forward this e-mail
to at least 10 other working family activists you
know and urge them to send messages to their
senators, too.

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bush Makes Backdoor Appointment to Wage and Hour Office
President Bush this afternoon made another
backdoor appointment to his administration. He used a recess
appointment to install a lawyer
who represented Wal-Mart with a long record of urging restrictions
to the Fair Labor Standard Act’s (FLSA’s) overtime
pay and other provisions to head up the U.S. Department of
Labor’s Wage and Hour Division.
Paul DeCamp, who was grilled at an August Senate confirmation
hearing, backed the Bush administration’s move to gut the FLSA’s
overtime pay protections saying it presented:
a window of opportunity, particularly in light of the federal
elections of 2002, for the business community to achieve positive
results that can bring the FLSA into the 21st century.
He even warned that if the overtime laws were not changed, millions
more workers could become eligible for overtime. Strangely enough, he
also said that it would not be “in the interest” of the workers
who might earn overtime eligibility.
It is time to bring the FLSA into line with current notions of
public policy. If reform does not come, then the risk and expense
of collective and class action litigation may compel employers to
reclassify millions of workers as non-exempt [i.e., eligible for
overtime], a change that is in the interest of neither the employees
nor their employers.
A recess appointment can be made when Congress is out of session.
With the House and Senate due back to work next week, Bush was running
out of time to circumvent congressional approval for DeCamp. Sen.
Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) was expected to use Senate rules to block
DeCamp’s nomination. At an Aug. 1 hearing on DeCamp’s nomination,
Kennedy said DeCamp’s work for Wal-Mart
…raises troubling questions. His record clearly demonstrates
that he does not have the commitment to workers’ rights that is
necessary to fulfill the goals of these important laws.
Kennedy also raised questions about DeCamp’s work as a senior
policy adviser to the Labor Department’s Employment Standards
Division and the division’s failure to “stop rampant wage theft”
involving wage and hour violations by employers engaged in Gulf Coast
recovery work following Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma. Kennedy said
immigrant workers were especially targeted by employers.
Rep.
George Miller (D-Calif.), ranking Democrat on the House Workforce
and Education Committee says:
As a lawyer, Paul DeCamp has never represented American workers in
a single case. He has worked on behalf of Wal-Mart—a company with an
abhorrent record of labor relations—and other companies against
the interests of American workers and consumers in numerous cases. Yet
he is the man that President Bush has chosen as one of the nation’s
top enforcers of workplace rights. It’s no surprise that President
Bush would appoint a corporate lawyer to a position intended to
safeguard workers against corporate abuses. This recess appointment is
one more reminder that the President does not care about making sure
that workers are treated fairly on the job or enforcing laws that he
doesn’t happen to like.
Click
here to read more about DeCamp’s record.
The DeCamp appointment is just the latest such Bush backdoor
maneuver. Earlier
this summer, Bush pulled an end-run on congressional opponents of
former coal industry Richard Stickler’s nomination to head the Mine
Safety and Health Administration (MSHA).
The Senate refused
to confirm Stickler because of concerns about his record on and
commitment to mine safety and health. The Bush administration then
quietly hired Stickler as a consultant to MSHA. But Bush may send
Stickler’s nomination to run the mine safety agency back to the
Senate next week. We’ll let you know.
by Mike
Hall | Other posts by Mike
Hall | Digg
it
|
|
|
|
|
ENERGY
Price
Gouging -- Don't Get Fueled Again
Under
pressure to take immediate action to curb the rapid rise of gas
prices, President Bush has only recently ordered
an investigation into whether the price at the pump is being illegally
manipulated. Yesterday, Bush said, "We'll make sure that the
energy companies are pricing their product fairly. If we catch them
gouging, if we catch them -- unfair trade practices, we'll deal with
them at the federal government. That's
what you expect the federal government to do." While these
recent actions are a welcomed effort to demonstrate national
leadership on the issue, Bush has for too long sat idly by as
Americans have come under increasing strain from burdensome gas
prices. A new CNN poll reports that 69 percent of Americans
believe the price of gas is causing
financial hardship to their families. When Bush came into office
in January 2001, the average price of a regular gallon of gas was
$1.46. Today, the price is $2.91,
a 100 percent increase over the course of the Bush presidency. In just
the last year alone, gas prices have increased more
than 30 percent. Lawmakers have repeatedly called on Bush over
the past year to investigate and punish price gouging. But because
Bush has been resistant to those calls for so long, it is doubtful whether
his recent pledges to act on price manipulation are merely political
overtures or sincere efforts that will be carried through.
BUSH ADMINISTRATION LOOKS THE OTHER WAY ON PRICE GOUGING: Ninety
percent of Americans, including members of Congress from both
parties, say they believe price gouging is occurring at the pumps.
Last week, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called for a federal
investigation. On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist
(R-TN) and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) followed Schumer by
sending a letter
to the White House "asking Bush to direct the Justice Department
and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate
possible price gouging by oil companies." Bush will instead
ask the Justice Department and the FTC to send a letter to all 50
state attorneys general asking them to "stay
on top of the issue." Under the Bush administration, the FTC
has had a record of disregarding claims of price manipulation by gas
retailers. Despite evidence in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina that
retail gas
prices were rising unnecessarily faster than crude oil prices, the
FTC investigation into price gouging "found
no evidence of collusion among oil companies in the 2005 gas price
surge. It said the culprits were high crude oil prices, record world
demand and government regulations." The FTC Chair, Deborah
Majoras, represented Chevron-Texaco and "other
major oil and gas interests" prior to joining the
administration. The FTC has acknowledged that there is
"squishiness" in defining price gouging, an ambiguity that
gas retailers are seemingly exploiting without much fear.
IN ABSENCE OF NATIONAL LEADERSHIP,
STATES ARE TAKING THE LEAD: Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales and the FTC will be sending letters to all 50 states "to
remind them to stay on top" of the issue of price gouging.
Many of the states don't need such a reminder. In the absence of
national leadership, many state governments have been exercising
whatever authority they have to control surging gas prices. In March,
Missouri Atty. Gen. Jay Nixon concluded a
six-month investigation by four Midwestern states that found
gas customers were paying $5
billion a month more than they should. "They are
getting ripped off," Nixon said. Just recently, the Foundation
for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights released a study of rising
gasoline prices in California that found corporate
markups and profiteering were responsible for spring price spikes,
not rising crude oil costs. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has directed
the California Energy Commission to investigate. Wisconsin Gov. Jim
Doyle is asking
his state legislature for a bill that would make price
gouging a crime. New York Atty. Gen. Eliot Spitzer is suing
three gas stations in his state for price gouging in the wake of
Katrina. In
South Carolina
, Atty. Gen. Henry McMaster has compelled several gas stations to pay
a fine for price gouging. Maryland Atty. Gen. Joseph Curran has confirmed
price gouging is going on in his state and is looking to take action.
Twenty-eight states already have price gouging laws on the books. What
is needed, as Spitzer has said, is more federal oversight and "greater
federal scrutiny of possible market manipulation practices."
BUSH HAS PASSED UP OPPORTUNITIES TO
ACT: For over a year, the administration and the leadership
in Congress have disregarded numerous opportunities to act on price
gouging, but have failed to do so. In September 2005, during the
aftermath of Katrina (when the average price of gas was at the same
level it is today), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) offered legislation to
improve the FTC's ability to protect consumers from price gouging.
Cantwell tried to pass the legislation again in November but failed
to attract sufficient bipartisan support, and has recently tried again
to solicit
Bush's support. Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) has led a
similar effort in the House. Also last September, Sens. Jeff
Bingaman (D-NM) and Bill Nelson (D-FL) introduced
a bill that would have given federal authorities power to
prosecute oil and gasoline suppliers who overcharge for motor fuels in
a declared disaster area. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) has introduced similar
legislation in the House. The leadership in Congress refused to
endorse or improve upon these recommendations until recently. "Feeling
the political heat," Frist and Hastert have finally decided
to take some action by sending a letter to Bush.
OIL COMPANIES BENEFITING: While retailers overcharge at the
pump, oil executives continue to rake in tremendous profits. Last
year, ExxonMobil recorded the highest profit of any company in
history, over
$36 billion. Retiring Exxon chairman, Lee Raymond, is
collecting "one
of the most generous retirement packages in history," nearly
$400 million. Royal Dutch Shell collected $23
billion in profits last year, a record amount for a British
company. American Progress will issue an in-depth analysis tomorrow
detailing the oil industry's profits. The profits have come from
soaring crude oil prices at a time when supply is at an 8-year
high. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) explained that the rising prices
are due to "too many companies to get[ting] together to reduce
competition. ... They get together, reduce the supply of oil, and that
drives up prices." Should these practices continue, Specter
suggested that he may consider a tax on the oil companies' excessive
profits. Sens. Carl
Levin (D-MI) and Harry
Reid (D-NV) joined his call. "If the greedy oil companies
won't invest their billions in profits in delivering affordable
domestic fuels for
America
, then maybe
America
needs to take some of the windfall profits and put them to better
use," Reid said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bush
FY 2007 Budget Calls for Major Cuts
and Consolidation in All Major Employment and Training Programs:
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
|
The Bush Administration's
FY 2007 Budget
|
|
| Overview:
Good
jobs that support families are the foundation of a strong economy and
a strong nation, and creating and sustaining good jobs is the number
one economic priority for Americans. Effective
and meaningful job training programs and income support for jobless
workers combined with job search assistance are key components of a
comprehensive good jobs strategy. This
has never been truer, as the nation has struggled with two years of
job loss followed by three years of inadequate growth, real wages that
are lower today than they were four years ago and the loss of millions
of good paying jobs to trade and off shoring.
These
troubling labor market trends have only re-emphasized the importance
of and the need for aggressive investment in our national job training
and jobless worker programs. Unfortunately,
President George W. Bush’s 2007 budget proposal not only fails to
make these pro-jobs programs a priority, it once again calls for major
cuts and consolidation in the nation’s major employment and training
programs.
Key
features of the Bush cut and consolidation plan for job training and
employment programs include:
- Cutting
total inflation-adjusted funding for job training and placement
programs for adults, dislocated workers and youth, including the
70-year-old Employment Service, by 14.3 percent over the prior year
and more than 31 percent since he took office.
- Dismantling
the Employment Service program—the backbone of our nation’s
employment security system aimed at connecting workers needing jobs
with employers who need workers.
- Eliminating
funding for Workforce Investment Act (WIA) programs designed to help
unemployed workers, disadvantaged adults, and at-risk young people.
- Diverting
the funding for the eliminated Employment Service and WIA programs to
pay for unproven individual Career
Advancement Accounts (CAAs) that will provide less, not more,
help to workers in need.
- Imposing
changes to the federal-state unemployment insurance (UI) program that
will undermine the safety net for unemployed workers and lead to the
contracting out of important UI functions.
- Cutting,
once again, funding for Trade Adjustment Assistance programs that
benefit workers who have lost their jobs due to trade.
|
| WIA
and Employment Service Programs:
Cuts
to Current WIA and Employment Service Programs
- Total
inflation-adjusted cuts during the Bush Administration:
- $2.4 billion (-31.3 percent)
- Total
inflation-adjusted cuts compared to FY 2006: -$895 million
(-14.3 percent)
The
U.S. Department of Labor invests in job training and provides
assistance to unemployed workers through a number of important
broad-based and targeted programs administered by the Employment and
Training Administration. The
president’s fiscal year (FY) 2007 budget will eliminate several of
these programs and cut the total commitment to all training and
assistance programs immediately.
Additionally, the president is asking Congress to eliminate
many of the remaining programs and divert the reduced funding amounts
to new individual Career Advancement Accounts.
If
his FY 2007 budget is adopted, President Bush will have cut
inflation-adjusted investment in training and assistance programs to
help unemployed and underemployed workers by 31.3% ($2.4 billion)
since he took office, including cuts in WIA programs for adults and
dislocated workers and youth as well as the Employment Service.
Despite
the administration’s recent rhetoric about increasing job training
resources, the president’s FY 2007 budget cuts total
inflation-adjusted funding for job training and Employment Service
programs by $895 million (14.3 percent) compared to FY 2006, even
taking into account those few programs for which additional or
restored funding is proposed.
- For
example, funding for state dislocated worker grants under WIA that
provide Rapid Response, job search and training assistance to
companies and workers facing plant closings would be slashed by 27
percent in 2007 (inflation adjusted).The Bush budget also calls for
reducing the WIA National Emergency Grants that have been so important
in helping workers affected by natural disasters such as Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita by 16.4 percent compared to FY 2006.
WIA programs that help disadvantaged adults, including welfare
recipients, are cut by $163 million in real dollars in the FY 2007
budget.
- Our
nation’s Employment Service, the bedrock of our workforce system,
helped over 14 million workers look for jobs in 2005.
The Bush budget calls for reductions of $42.5 million in real
dollars in FY 2007, further eroding the ability of our workforce
system to help employers seeking workers and workers seeking jobs.
These
cuts are having and will have a profound impact on disadvantaged and
unemployed workers.
Impact
of Cuts on Disadvantaged Workers:
Our
nation’s workforce training programs are often the last resort for
low income and disadvantaged workers who have been neglected by their
employers and the underfunded student financial aid system.
Unfortunately,
since President Bush has taken office the number of adults who have
received WIA training has declined and, of particular concern, the
share of training recipients who are low-income adults has declined.
From 2000 to 2003 there was a 14-percentage-point decline in the share
of low-income, disadvantaged adults receiving training, from 82.4
percent in 2000 to 68.4 percent in 2003.[i]
Impact
of Cuts on Unemployed and Dislocated Workers:
The
president’s continued cutting of job training funding and assistance
for unemployed workers compounds the labor market problems working
families have experienced since 2001 and worsens their economic
anxiety. Contrary to
official rhetoric that paints a picture of a strong economy, American
workers have faced a weak job market, increased long-term unemployment
and significant declines in living standards for those who have been
displaced.
Millions
of Americans who want to work do not have jobs.
Seven million Americans are officially unemployed—1 million
more than when President Bush took office—and 5.1 million additional
people want jobs, but are not counted among the unemployed.
Another 4.1 million people work part time because of the weak
job market. The unemployment rate would be 8.4 percent if those
workers were included in the unemployment rate.
Long-term
unemployment has nearly doubled under President Bush.
About one in six unemployed workers (1.2 million workers) has
been jobless for more than 26 weeks, the maximum number of weeks for
receiving regular unemployment insurance benefits.
Displaced
workers continue to struggle.
The consequences of job loss are profound for workers and their
families. The
majority—particularly those who lose long-held jobs—will see their
living standards decline substantially—some permanently.
Those laid off from good-paying manufacturing jobs suffer
particularly long lasting economic hardship.
- Two-thirds
(66.3 percent) of the long-tenured workers (3+ years) who lost jobs
between 2001 and 2003 but subsequently found a full-time job were
being paid less than that they had been at their prior job.
Over one-third (36.4 percent) took a pay cut of 20 percent or
more at their new job.
- In
the manufacturing sector, almost one in ten long-tenured workers (9.8
percent) lost a job between 2001 and 2003.
Almost three quarters
(73.2 percent) of re-employed full-time manufacturing workers
experienced a real-wage cut at their new job, and nearly 40 percent
saw their inflation-adjusted weekly earnings drop 20 percent or more.[ii]
Funding
for training unemployed workers is declining.
Despite the jobs crisis of the last few years, the Bush
administration has invested less in helping unemployed workers find
new positions. In 2004
only 94,672 dislocated workers received training through WIA, compared
to 102,415 in 2003. Under
the president’s FY 2007 budget, average inflation-adjusted
expenditures for WIA job training and job search assistance will be
$136 less per dislocated worker than in FY 2001, when unemployment was
markedly lower.
|
| Career
Advancement Accounts (CAAs):
- FY
2006 funding for WIA and Employment Service and related programs to be
replaced by CAAs: $4,033,900,000
- Proposed
FY 2007 Funding for CAAs: $3,412,600,000
- Total
cut: -$621,300,000
The
Bush administration has asked Congress to eliminate current WIA
programs for adult workers, dislocated workers and youth as well as
the Employment Service and transfer the funding for those programs to
state block grants to pay for unproven Career
Advancement Accounts (CAAs).
Under President Bush’s plan, each eligible individual will
receive a maximum yearly CAA contribution of $3,000 but no longer have
access to the more valuable existing training programs and employment
services.
| Career
Advancement Accounts Mean Cuts to Current Employment and Training
Programs |
| Current
Programs |
FY
2006 (current dollars) |
FY
2007 |
| |
|
|
| WIA
Dislocated Worker Employment and Training Activities* |
$1,463,600,000 |
|
| WIA
Adult Employment and Training Activities |
$857,100,000 |
|
| WIA
Youth Activities |
$940,500,000 |
|
| Employment
Service Grants to States |
$715,900,000 |
|
| Workforce
Information |
$39,100,000 |
|
| Work
Opportunity Tax Credit |
$17,700,000 |
|
| Current
Program Total |
$4,033,900,000 |
$0 |
| |
|
|
| Career
Advancement Accounts |
|
$3,412,600,000 |
| |
|
|
| Total
Cut (current dollars) in Employment and Training Programs in FY 2007 |
|
-$621,300,000 |
| |
|
|
| *
Includes $125 million from the Katrina/Rita Supplemental Appropriation |
|
|
CAAs steal
resources from current programs.
The
Bush Labor Department is shifting existing WIA and Employment Service
funds to create CAAs despite the fact that earlier legislative
proposals to establish similar accounts have gone nowhere in Congress.
This is the fourth budget in which President Bush has proposed
eliminating these worker benefits and creating individual accounts.
CAAs
provide fewer benefits. The
benefit from CAAs would be very limited, and workers receiving CAAs
would actually experience reduced rather than expanded services and
benefits relative to what they get now.
- Current
law imposes no caps on reemployment services or job training
services unemployed workers may access through the WIA system.
For the first time, CAAs create a $3,000 federal cap on the
combined amount of reemployment services and job training.
Under the current WIA system, states offer job training
help through training accounts of up to $10,000 with an average value
of roughly $5,000 to $6,000.[iii]
- Bush
Administration officials have touted CAAs as a program that will
triple the number of workers receiving training.
This maneuver is really a cruel ruse. Fewer dollars will be
spread among more workers–leaving workers with less funding and less
help.
- Workers
who chose WIA individual training accounts under current law receive
intensive counseling and support services so they can make appropriate
training choices. Such
intensive counseling and support services would be eliminated under
the Bush CAA proposal.
CAAs
eliminate Rapid Response Programs for companies and displaced workers.
Rapid Response services
under the Workforce Investment Act would be eliminated in favor of
CAAs. States and
communities would no longer have the resources to provide early
intervention assistance to companies and workers facing mass layoffs
and plant closings.
CAAs
will severely restrict industry and workplace based training programs.
Current WIA funding can
be used to support sector partnerships with employers, unions and
educational institutions to identify skill needs and develop
customized training programs that meet worker and employer needs.
The Bush proposal requires that at a minimum states spend 75
percent of their funding on CAA individual training vouchers, which
would preclude the use of these funds to support work-based training
programs.
CAAs
are a back door to school vouchers.
Current WIA programs
for high school dropouts, the homeless and runaway youth would be
eliminated. The in-depth counseling and linkages to alternative
education and training programs would be eliminated. Instead, these
most vulnerable at-risk youth would be given CAA vouchers to purchase
education and/or training with no support systems available to ensure
they connect with quality secondary and post-secondary education
programs.
|
|
Cuts
to the Trade Adjustment Assistance Programs:
- Total
inflation-adjusted TAA cuts since FY 2004: -$589,537,523 (-38.6
percent)
- Total
inflation-adjusted TAA cuts compared to FY 2006:
-$48,602,390 (-4.9 percent)
Rrenewed
in 2002, and
combined with the NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance Program,
the new Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program combined
NAFTA-TAA and TAA, and significantly increased the number of
workers potentially eligible for training and,
income support when they lose jobs because of international trade.
It also extended some health care coverage to eligible
participants. Lack of
resources and ineffective administration, however, have resulted in
significant problems in the adequacy and efficacy of the program.
The President’s FY 2007 budget proposal will only worsen
those problemsand lacks The
The.
The
Bush Administration has presided over the worst job growth since the
Hoover Administration more than 70 years ago. The manufacturing
sector, a source of some of our nation’s best jobs, has lost nearly
2.9 million jobs since the start of the Bush Administration.
Bad
trade policies are shrinking the middle class and fostering the flight
of good jobs overseas. The TAA program was designed to provide income
support and training to workers who lose their jobs due to trade, but
failure to adequately fund it and poor administration of it are
crippling the program’s capacity to ameliorate the impact of trade
policies on working families.program,
The
demand for TAA services is increasing. The number of workers
in TAA training doubled from 2001 to 2004 (from 24,843 to 50,929) and
the number of workers receiving Trade Adjustment Allowances almost
tripled during that same period – from 31,459 to 81,246.[iv]
Yet, many states exhaust their training funds before the end of
each fiscal year, precluding numerous workers from being able to take
advantage of training programs to which they are entitled.
According to GAO, 35 states expected that available TAA
training funds for FY 2004 would not cover the amount they would
obligate and spend for TAA-eligible workers (18 states estimated the
gap at over $1 million).
TAA
resources are decreasing.
With the country facing large trade-related job losses, President
Bush should be calling on Congress to amend the TAA legislation to
provide for greater assistance for trade-affected workers.
Instead, his FY 2007 budget proposes inflation-adjusted cuts of
$48,602,390 in TAA training and benefits funding—a nearly five
percent cut in funding over the prior year and an almost two-fifths
reduction since FY 2004.
Despite
the increase in trade related layoffs, TAA certifications have dropped
by half since 2002. Despite
the increasing need for TAA, the Bush Labor Department has
consistently declined to push for adequate resources or to conduct
effective outreach to train state agencies and ensure that workers are
aware of and receive needed benefits.
- The
number of TAA certifications has declined by half.
In 2002 there were 243,957 workers certified for TAA. In 2005,
only 116,586 workers were certified for TAA
- This
is at odds with the loss of nearly 2.9 million manufacturing jobs over
the same period and the explosive growth in the nation’s trade
deficit, which will likely reach well over $700 billion in 2005.
There
is little question that the TAA certification numbers reflect DoL’s
inadequate program administration.
In the past 5 years, courts have entered numerous
orders directing the Department of Labor to reconsider erroneous
denials of TAA income and training assistance to hundreds of
trade-affected workers. Workers
have suffered protracted delays in getting assistance as a result of
these errors. Many more
are too discouraged or lack the resources to pursue appeals.
Help
for secondary workers is minimal.
The new TAA program was expanded to cover secondary
workers, such as parts manufacturing workers who lose their jobs when
a client-manufacturing firm moves its operations to another country.
Poor program design and inadequate guidance to identify
affected workers, however, have meant that few secondary workers are
receiving benefits.
- Just
over 2 percent of workers covered by TAA were secondary workers in FY
2003.
- No
state has developed procedures
to identify workers who are secondarily affected by a trade-related
layoff in another state.[v]
|
|
New
Funding for the Community College Program Comes at the Expense of
Other Job Training Programs:
The
Bush budget proposes an inflation-adjusted increase of $23.5 million
in funding for training programs administered by community colleges.
While community
colleges undoubtedly need more resources, this additional
funding is paid for with cuts to WIA adult programs, leaving this
important program severely short of funds to help hard-pressed workers
and communities.
The
proposed funding is also grossly inadequate when measured against the
needs of a nationwide community college system that until recently was
staggering under the weight of the worst state budget crises in 60
years. States dealt with their crises by cutting funds for community
colleges and universities, leading to hikes in tuition and fees,
reduced admissions and more limited course offerings.
|
|
Proposed
Cuts and Policy Changes Weaken our Nation's Employment Security and
Unemployment Insurance Safety Net:
Inflation-adjusted
Cuts in Employment Service Programs Compared to FY 2006
- Grants to States: -$42.6
million
- National Activities:
-$1.2 million
The
Employment Service and Unemployment Insurance programs are
federal-state partnerships created more than 70 years ago to provide
income protections and job search assistance to unemployed workers.
The federal government funds the Employment Service to match
job seekers to employers looking for workers and provides the UI
system with administrative resources.
The president’s 2007 budget cuts Employment Service programs
and proposes policy changes that would erode the integrity of the UI
system.
Large
cuts in Employment Service programs are proposed for FY 2007.
President Bush is proposing to cut Employment Service programs
that support state Job Service activities, national activities and
one-stop/labor market information programs.
(See Chart 1, above.) These
inflation-adjusted cuts will total $63 million in FY 2007.
Such cuts will significantly impair the ability of our
nation’s workforce system to provide career information to jobless
workers and reduce the capacity to link effectively employers and
jobseekers.
Eliminating
the U.S. Employment Service will hurt millions of jobless workers.
The
Employment Service is a 70-year-old federal-state partnership that
helps match job seekers to employers looking for workers and whose
operation is fundamental to the U.S. labor market.
Despite consistent budget cuts, the Employment Service provides
help to millions of job seekers.
In 2005, the Employment Service helped 14 million workers look
for jobs.
- President
Bush’s plan to eliminate the Employment Service will undermine the
principle of an unbiased, nonpartisan agency to administer job
referrals and assist in the payment of UI benefits
- The
president’s plan will lead to the privatization and contracting out
of vitally important employment security functions, thereby
compromising control over and accountability for federal resources.
Proposed
re-employment and eligibility assessments privatize important UI
functions.
The Bush administration
proposes to shift responsibility for major unemployment insurance
activities, such as eligibility assessments, to the WIA One-Stop
System, using $30 million in proposed funding.
- This
move would transfer resources available through the Unemployment
Insurance Trust Fund to privatized WIA operations, setting the stage
for outsourcing of UI administration to private contractors instead of
reserving them to public agency staff.
Proposals
to prevent and detect UI fraud must be balanced.
Monitoring
the UI system to ensure that jobless workers receive their UI benefits
and employers pay UI taxes is appropriate.
- Erroneous
overpayments of benefits to workers and deliberate or negligent
failure to make employer contributions on behalf of covered employees,
along with erroneous underpayments and mistaken denials should be
tracked and corrected.
- The
Bush FY 2007 budget, however, lacks important details on how it plans
to achieve a balanced approach that addresses workers, employers and
programmatic error.
States
need adequate administrative resources.
- At
a time when UI administrative budgets are regularly cut, states should
receive the full administrative resources necessary to help detect
employer fraud and claimant overpayments.
- The
Department of Labor should provide funding to states to track down
employers who are cheating. It should give states more tools to
detect fraud on the part of employers and their accounting firms,
including employer misclassification of employees as independent
contractors.
Collecting
UI overpayments should be done appropriately.
- The
Department of Labor should not require states to use the federal
income tax system to recover overpayments, as the FY 2007 budget
proposes.
- Many
states have implemented overpayment collection systems that reflect
the unique circumstances of the overpayment and individual workers’
financial situations. Mandating
reliance on the federal tax system would undermine these carefully
tailored programs and unfairly penalize workers.
Collection
of overpayments should not be privatized.
- The
president’s plan to allow states to use private collection agencies
to collect “uncollectible” fraud overpayments and delinquent
employer taxes is also deeply troubling.
- Privatizing
the collection function, coupled with the powerful financial incentive
the budget proposes for private collection agencies, will lead to
abusive and potentially fraudulent collection practices that
compromise the privacy of UI claimant and employer records and
undermine the work of the state workforce agency.
- States
should receive adequate resources for collection activities, and they
should be allowed to dedicate a portion of their overpayment funds to
support increased detection and auditing functions.
|
| Labor
Department Programs to Audit, Investigate and Prosecute Unions:
As it has since FY 2002, the Bush Labor
Department seeks funding increases in its FY 2007 budget for programs
that audit, investigate and prosecute unions. Increases would go
to the department’s Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS),
which has union oversight and investigation authority, receives and
publishes statutorily required union reports, sets standards governing
union elections and finances and conducts both civil and criminal
investigations into unions’ finances and elections. The
Department has also asked for increased funding for its Office of
Inspector General (OIG).
Office of Labor–Management
Standards (OLMS)
The FY 2007 budget proposal of $52.4 million
would provide a $6.7 million increase in funding for OLMS. This
represents a 14.6 percent increase from FY 2006 (a 12.1 percent
increase in real dollars) and an increase of 71.8 percent from the
beginning of the first Bush administration in FY 2001 (a 46.9 percent
increase in real dollars).
|
Comparison
of FY 2001 and FY 2006 Appropriations and the FY 2007 Budget Request
|
| |
| |
Appropriation
|
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
|
Appropriation
|
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
|
Budget Request
|
| |
|
| Funding |
$30,500,000
|
$35,680,201
|
$45,737,010
|
$46,740,460
|
$52,400,000
|
| Staff
(FTEs) |
290
|
|
384
|
|
406
|
| |
|
| Funding |
$54,700,000
|
$63,990,394
|
$71,400,000
|
$72,966,485
|
$74,100,000
|
| Staff
(FTEs) |
|
|
450
|
|
450
|
The significant increase in proposed funding
for the FY 2007 OLMS budget highlights the priority placed by the Bush
administration on investigating and prosecuting unions. Overall,
the Bush administration has proposed an inflation-adjusted 7.3 percent
cut in discretionary spending for the Department of Labor, and
OLMS’s 12.1 percent increase in inflation-adjusted funding
far outstrips proposed changes in funding for other important
enforcement agencies and functions.
- At a time when workers face serious concerns
about their retirement and health security, enforcement of programs
protecting workers’ pensions and health benefits would receive only
a 5.9 percent increase in FY 2007 funding, in inflation adjusted
terms.
- Funding for workers’ safety and health
enforcement would increase by only 2 percent, and funding for
enforcement of mine workers safety and health in coal mining would
increase by only 0.6 percent, after accounting for inflation.
|
Comparison
of Proposed OLMS Funding Increase Between FY 2006 and FY 2007 to
Proposed Changes in Funding for Labor Department Discretionary
Spending and for Selected Enforcement Agencies or Functions
|
| OLMS |
+12.1%
|
|
EBSA Enforcement of Pension and
Health Plan Protections
|
+5.9%
|
|
Wage and Hour
|
4.9%
|
|
OSHA Federal Enforcement
|
+2.0%
|
|
OIG
|
+1.6%
|
|
OFCCP Enforcement of Rules for
Federal Contractors
|
+0.7%
|
|
MSHA Metal/Non-metal Enforcement
|
+0.7%
|
|
MSHA Coal Enforcement
|
+0.6%
|
|
Total Department of Labor
Discretionary
|
-7.3%
|
|
Note: Comparison is between
inflation adjusted FY 06 Appropriation (with a 1% rescission) and the
FY 07 Budget Request.
|
The FY 2007 budget request would increase the
number of OLMS Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions by 40 percent over
its FY 2001 level, from 290 in FY 2001 to 406 in FY 2007. In
comparison, MSHA staffing will have been cut by 9.4 percent over the
same period, from 2,357 FTEs in FY 2001 to 2,136 FTEs in FY 2007.
Office of Inspector General (OIG)
The FY 2007 budget proposal would increase
OIG funding by $2.7 million dollars, to $74.1 million, up from $71.4
million in FY 2006. The FY 2007 proposal represents a rise of
15.8 percent since FY 2001, in dollars adjusted for inflation.
While the president’s FY 2007 budget would not change the number of
positions (450) over the prior year, OIG has received an additional 22
FTEs since FY 2001, a 5.1 percent increase.
|
| Wage
and Hour: Basic Labor Standards Enforcement:
The Wage
and Hour Division enforces basic worker protection laws that cover
virtually every American workplace and apply to nearly all workers.
Enforcement responsibilities include the nation's minimum wage,
overtime, child labor and other employment standards under the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act, the
Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, certain
provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act and other basic
worker protection statutes.
The FY 2007
budget request for the Wage and Hour Division is $177.6 million [vi],
an increase ($11.9 million) in current dollars over the FY 2006
appropriation and an $8.3 million increase when adjusted for
inflation. However, the
FY 2007 budget request is still lower than the FY 2001 funding level,
after accounting for inflation. The
FY 2007 budget request is 0.3 percent less than the FY 2001 funding
level. [vii]
|
Comparison
of FY 2001 and FY 2006 Appropriations and the FY 2007 Budget Request
for the Wage and Hour Division
|
| |
| |
Appropriation
|
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
|
Appropriation
|
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
|
Budget Request
|
| |
|
| Funding |
$152,300,000
|
$178,167,038
|
$165,685,410
|
$169,320,475
|
$177,578,000
|
| Staff
(FTEs) |
1,528
|
|
|
|
1,339
|
|
*$13.1 million in
H1-B fees are not included in the FY 2001 appropriation.
**$31 million in H1-B L fraud fees are not included in the FY 2006
appropriation the FY 2007 budget request.
|
|
Although
the Bush administration requests an increase of 39 FTEs, this request
for 1,339 FTEs in FY 2007 represents a 12.4 percent cut in staffing
over FY 2001 levels, when staffing was at 1,528 FTE positions.
The Wage and Hour Division budget request
does not appear to include any additional funds to increase
enforcement in the Gulf Coast region, where there have been many
troubling reports of wage and hour violations by contractors
performing post-Katrina reconstruction work.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Immigration
Justice Project, which has filed class action lawsuits on behalf of
thousands of immigrant workers employed by these contractors, the
Department of Labor’s enforcement efforts in New Orleans “are
completely ineffective.”(Link to the SPLC news release at: http://www.splcenter.org/legal/news/article.jsp?aid=160&site_area=1
)
The
Labor Department's FY 2007 budget calls for increased civil penalties
for willful violations of child labor laws.
Workers need far stronger enforcement of all aspects of the
FLSA, including minimum wage and overtime rules.
Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has taken a narrow and
selective approach to this critical issue.
OFCCP: Federal Contractor Equal
Employment Opportunity
The Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Programs (OFCCP) is responsible for administering a range of laws and
executive orders that prohibit employment discrimination and require
affirmative action by businesses contracting with the federal
government. Collectively, these laws ban discrimination based on race,
sex, religion, color, national origin, disability or veteran status.
Bush proposes to fund OFCCP at $83.7 million in FY 2007. The FY 2007
proposal is a slight increase over the FY 2006 appropriation but a
real dollar cut of $5.5 million from the beginning of President Bush's
first term in FY 2001. The budget proposes 670 Full-Time Equivalent
(FTE) employees for FY 2006, a 17.6 percent staffing cut since FY
2001, when OFCCP had 813 FTE employees.
|
OFCCP:
Comparison of FY 2001 and FY 2006 Appropriations and the FY 2007
Budget Request
|
| |
| |
Appropriated Amount
|
Inflation-Adjusted Amount
|
Appropriated Amount
|
Inflation-Adjusted Amount
|
Budget Request
|
| Funding
Level |
$76,200,000
|
$89,142,011
|
$81,284,940
|
$83,068,296
|
$83,657,000
|
| Staff
(FTEs) |
813
|
|
|
|
670
|
The Bush Budget
for Worker Safety and Health Programs:
Overview
President Bush’s FY 2007 budget for worker
safety and health is in large measure a status quo budget compared to
FY 2006. Adjusting for inflation, the FY 2007 budget proposal
maintains the same level in overall funding and program activity for
OSHA and MSHA, compared to FY 2006.
No provisions are made for increased
enforcement activities at OSHA or MSHA, not even in coal mining in
response to the recent mining disasters. No request has
been made for additional inspectors to provide oversight at the
nations mines or other workplaces.
For FY 2007, the Bush budget proposes to cut
the NIOSH budget to $250 million, significantly cutting the nation’s
commitment to preventing workplace injuries, diseases and deaths.
For FY 2007, the Bush Administration has
proposed the following funding levels for the job safety agencies:
- $484 million for OSHA
- $288 million for MSHA
- $250 million for NIOSH
With this combined budget request of $1,022
million for the federal job safety agencies, in FY 2007, the Bush
Administration proposes to spend less than $7.25 per worker to protect
American workers from job injuries, illnesses and death.8
The FY 2007 budget reflects the Bush
Administration’s priorities and policies that favor employers over
workers and voluntary compliance over enforcement. At OSHA, the
President proposes to eliminate all funding for worker safety training
programs ($10.1 million appropriated by Congress in FY 2006), at the
same time seeking increases for employer assistance programs. A
total of $130 million is proposed for programs to provide compliance
assistance to employers compared to zero funding for programs to
provide outreach to workers.
Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA)
($ in thousands)
|
Fiscal Year
|
Budget Request
or Appropriation
|
Positions in
FTEs
|
|
FY 2001 Enacted
|
$425,886
|
2370
|
|
FY 2002 Request
|
$425,835
|
2276
|
|
FY 2002 Enacted
|
$443,651
|
2300
|
|
FY 2003 Request
|
$437,000
|
2217
|
|
FY 2003 Enacted
|
$453,000
|
2233
|
|
FY 2004 Request
|
$450,000
|
2236
|
|
FY 2004 Enacted
|
$460,786
|
2236
|
|
FY 2004 Rescission
|
$457,500
|
2236
|
|
FY 2005 Request
|
$461,600
|
2238
|
|
FY 2005 Enacted
|
$464,224
|
2208
|
|
FY 2006 Request
|
$466,981
|
2208
|
|
FY 2006 Enacted
|
$472,427
|
2173
|
|
FY 2007 Request
|
$483,667
|
2173
|
- The FY 2007 budget proposes $483.7 million
in funding for OSHA compared to $472.4 million appropriated in the FY
2006.
- Adjusting for inflation, the FY 2007
proposed OSHA budget provides similar overall funding as the FY 2006
appropriation. But since FY 2001, when the Bush Administration
took office, there has been an erosion in federal job safety programs.
In real dollar (inflation adjusted terms), the OSHA budget has been
cut by $14.5 million (3%), with the standard setting and state
enforcement programs taking major hits. At the same time, the
Bush Administration has favored employer voluntary efforts, increasing
the budget for federal compliance assistance for employers by nearly
$20 million ($11 million in real dollar terms), at the same time once
again proposing to eliminate all funding for outreach and training of
workers.
- In FY 2007, the Bush Administration proposes
to totally eliminate funding for worker safety and health training and
education programs, as it did in FY 2006. (Indeed every year
since taking office, the Administration has sought to slash or
eliminate funding worker training). But each year the Congress
rejected these proposed cuts and maintained funding for worker safety
training programs. At the same time, the Administration has
proposed increases in funding for compliance assistance programs for
employers. In FY 2007, the budget proposes a $4 million increase
in the federal compliance assistance program, bringing total funding
for all compliance assistance programs to $130 million in FY 2007.
Funding for OSHA
Worker Safety Training Programs Verses Employer Compliance Assistance
Programs
($ in thousands)
|
Fiscal Year
|
Worker Safety
and Health Training
|
Employer
Compliance Assistance (Federal and State)
|
|
FY 2001 Enacted
|
$11,175
|
$105,089
|
|
FY 2002 Request
|
$8,175
|
$106,014
|
|
FY 2002 Enacted
|
$11,175
|
$109,804
|
|
FY 2003 Request
|
$4,000
|
$112,800
|
|
FY 2003 Enacted
|
$11,175
|
$115,274
|
|
FY 2004 Request
|
$4,000
|
$120,000
|
|
FY 2004 Enacted
|
$11,102
|
$119,968
|
|
FY 2004 Rescission
|
$10,500
|
$119,200
|
|
FY 2005 Request
|
$4,000
|
$125,200
|
|
FY 2005 Enacted
|
$10,500
|
$124,200
|
|
FY 2006 Request
|
$0
|
$127,000
|
|
FY 2006 Enacted
|
$10,100
|
$125,902
|
|
FY 2007 Request
|
$0
|
$130,000
|
- The $10 million cut in worker training is
being shifted to pay for increases in compliance assistance programs
targeted to Hispanic workers and improvements in OSHA’s Integreted
Management Information System (IMIS). The worker training
program being cut already provides significant training to Hispanic
and immigrant workers. Improvements in OSHA’s data management
may be needed, but should not come at the cost of providing
information and training to workers.
- The proposed budget requests $16.9 million
in funding for safety and health standards, compared to $16.4 million
appropriated in FY 2006. Instead of developing new protections,
the Bush Administration has set as its priority the review of existing
rules. According to the Administration’s latest Regulatory
Agenda issued in October 2005, the only significant final standard
planned is a rule on hexavalent chromium that OSHA is under court
order to issue. Instead of developing and issuing needed
protections, the Bush Administration overturned OSHA’s ergonomics
standard, killed pending final rules on indoor air quality and
tuberculosis and withdrew or delayed dozens of other important safety
and health rules.
- Since the Bush Administration took office in
2001, they have reduced OSHA staff by 197 positions, from 2370 Full
Time Equivalents (FTEs) in FY 2001 to 2173 FTEs proposed for FY 2007.
The majority of these staff cuts have been in the standards and
federal enforcement programs.
- No specific funds or activities are proposed
to address ergonomic hazards or to implement the Administration’s
Comprehensive Approach to Ergonomics that was announced in April 2002.
Since that time federal OSHA has issued only three voluntary
guidelines – for nursing homes, retail grocery and poultry - and
issued 17 general duty citations for ergonomic hazards.
Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA)
($ in thousands)
|
Fiscal Year
|
Budget Request
or Appropriation
|
Positions in
FTEs
|
|
FY 2001 Enacted
|
$246,306
|
2357
|
|
FY 2002 Request
|
$246,306
|
2310
|
|
FY 2002 Enacted
|
$254,768
|
2310
|
|
FY 2003 Request
|
$254,300
|
2264
|
|
FY 2003 Enacted
|
$271,741
|
2310
|
|
FY 2004 Request
|
$266,800
|
2334
|
|
FY 2004 Enacted
|
$270,826
|
2172
|
|
FY 2004 Rescission
|
$268,800
|
2172
|
|
FY 2005 Request
|
$275,600
|
2187
|
|
FY 2005 Enacted
|
$279,198
|
2187
|
|
FY 2006 Request
|
$280,490
|
2187
|
|
FY 2006 Enacted
|
$277,685
|
2136
|
|
FY 2007 Request
|
$287,836
|
2136
|
- The FY 2007 budget proposes $287.8 million
in funding for MSHA compared to $277.7 million appropriated in FY
2006.
- Adjusting for inflation, the FY 2007
proposed MSHA budget represents a 1.4% increase over the FY 2006
appropriations.
- There are no proposals or funding in the FY
2007 MSHA budget to step up enforcement at coal mines or issue new
standards on rescue teams, emergency air and breathing equipment and
enhanced communications, as have been adopted by the State of West
Virginia following the Sago mine disaster.
- Funding requested for enforcement covers
inflation increases in these programs. For Coal Enforcement
activities, $120.4 million is requested for FY 2007 compared to $117.1
million appropriated in FY 2006. But since the Bush
Administration took office in 2001, the coal enforcement budget has
been cut $13.6 million (10%) in real dollar terms.
- For Metal/Non-Metal Enforcement activities,
$70.1 million is requested, compared to $68.1 appropriated in FY 2006.
- For MSHA standard setting, $2.66 million is
requested, compared to $2.5 million appropriated in FY 2006.
- Since the Bush Administration took office in
2001, they have reduced MSHA staff by 221 positions, from 2357 Full
Time Equivalents (FTEs) in FY 2001 to 2136 FTEs proposed for FY 2007.
National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
($ in thousands)
|
Fiscal Year
|
Budget Request
or Appropriation
|
|
FY 2001 Enacted
|
$260,134
|
|
FY 2002 Request
|
$266,135
|
|
FY 2002 Enacted
|
$276,400
|
|
FY 2003 Request
|
$247,318
|
|
FY 2003 Enacted
|
$274,899
|
|
FY 2004 Request
|
$246,000
|
|
FY 2004 Enacted
|
$278,900
|
|
FY 2004 Rescission
|
|
|
FY 2005 Request
|
$278,900
|
|
FY 2005 Enacted
|
$285,357
|
|
FY 2006 Request
|
$286,071
|
|
FY 2006 Enacted
|
$254,401a
|
|
FY 2007 Request
|
$250,000a
|
TAP for
administrative services eliminated. $34.8 million
transferred to CDC business services.
For FY 2007, the Bush Administration has
proposed a $250 million budget for NIOSH - $163 million for program
activity and an additional $87 million to fund the National
Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). This funding request is
$4.5 million less for NIOSH program activities than appropriated in FY
2006, but in inflation adjusted terms represents nearly a $10 million
cut for the job safety and health research agency.
[i]
Abbey Frank and Elisa Minoff, Declining Share of Adults Receiving
Training under WIA are Low-Income or Disadvantaged, Center
on Law and Social Policy, 12/14/05.
[ii]
John Schmitt, Center for Economic and Policy Research, Statement to
E-hearing “The American Automobile Industry in Crisis: Threats to
Middle-Class Jobs, Wages, Health Care and Pensions,” 12/5/05.
[iii]
Nisha Patel and Steve Savner, Implementation of Individual Training
Account Policies under the Workforce Investment Act, Center on Law
and Social Policy, 05/01.
[v]
GAO, Trade
Adjustment Assistance: Reforms Have Accelerated Training Enrollment,
but Implementation Challenges Remain,
GAO-04-1012,
9/22/04.
[vi]
The FY 2006 appropriation of $165.7 million and the FY 2007 budget
request of $177.6 million do not include $31 million in H1-B L fraud
fees.
[vii]
The FY 2001
appropriation does not include $13.1 million in H1-B fees.
[viii]
According to BLS, in 2005 there were an average of 141,730,000 workers
employed in the United States. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|