[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

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

Tell Your Senators: Pass a CLEAN Minimum Wage Increase

Click here to send your message.

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.

 

 
The Bush Administration's FY 2007 Budget 
Print
E-mail

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.

 
Chart
 
See chart for an overview of the funding cuts to WIA and employment service programs.
 
   

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]

 

Chart
 
See chart comparing per capita dislocated worker spending.
 
   

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. 

Chart
 
See chart for cuts in the Trade Adjustment Assistance program.
 
   

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

 
FY 2001
FY 2006
FY 2007
 
Appropriation
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
Appropriation
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
Budget Request
 
OLMS
Funding
$30,500,000
$35,680,201
$45,737,010
$46,740,460
$52,400,000
Staff (FTEs)
290
 
384
 
406
 
OIG
Funding
$54,700,000
$63,990,394
$71,400,000
$72,966,485
$74,100,000
Staff (FTEs)
428

 

 
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

 
FY 2001*
FY 2006**
FY 2007**
 
Appropriation
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
Appropriation
Inflation Adjusted Appropriation
Budget Request
 
OLMS
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

 
FY 2001
FY 2006
FY 2007
 
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.

[iv] U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration, www.doleta.gov/tradeact/training.cfm

[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