New Federal Budget Cuts Are “Here”

by

And by “here,” I mean New York City.

Back in May I wrote about the gathering indications, despite all the compassionate campaigning, that the Bush Administration is planning for some significant budget cuts in “virtually all agencies in charge of domestic programs.” At that time, the administration was dismissing the alarm bells people were ringing as much ado about nothing…they were simply doing some math and scenario planning: Go back into your houses, folks, nothing to see here.

***Well, as is usually the case with the Bush administration, what you fear they’re really up to is mild compared to what they’re really up to.*** What’s especially disturbing about their latest efforts is that they seem to be specifically screwing some key Blue states.

The Bush administration has proposed reducing the value of subsidized-housing vouchers given to poor residents in New York City next year, with even bigger cuts planned for some urban areas in New England. The proposal is based on a disputed new formula that averages higher rents in big cities with those of suburban areas, which tend to have lower costs.
The proposals could have a “significantly detrimental impact” in some areas by forcing poor families to pay hundreds of extra dollars per month in rent, according to United States Representative Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican. That extra burden could be too much for thousands of tenants, “potentially leaving them homeless,” Mr. Shays wrote in a recent letter to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

and there’s more

The rent drop in New York also echoes the projected drop in Medicare payments to the city’s hospitals, under new national boundaries drawn up by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and recommended for all federal agencies. Those new boundaries would add Bergen, Passaic and Hudson Counties, where costs are lower, to New York City, where costs are higher, thereby lowering the city’s average portion.

This being a presidential year, some housing groups have noted that many predominantly Democratic states, including New York and Massachusetts, fare poorly under these new proposals, while Republican states, like Texas and Georgia, tend to benefit.

At this rate, we’re gonna need new words for “petty” and “faithless.”

But Dennis Shea, assistant secretary for HUD’s office of policy development and research, said it was “absolutely false” that politics colored the calculations. In fact, he said that career civil servants prepared the fair market rents in accordance with technical requirements, as required by law.

Yet Mr. Shea did strike a conciliatory tone in reiterating that the proposals were just that – proposals, which were published for comment in the Federal Register last month. He said that HUD was working closely with the White House Office of Management and Budget to review the proposed rents before the publication of the final rules on Oct. 1.

I refer to you the sentence flanked with *** above

As a resident of New York, I can tell you, for most of us, the cost of living is rising much, much faster than area salaries are. This so-called recovery, as “evidenced” mostly by increased sales in luxury items (something that should tell you that those with more money to spend do not include your average Section 8 family), is a bit classist, it seems.

The real fear here is that landlords will no longer have an incentive to participate in the Section 8 program and very quickly entire families will become homeless:

Unless the proposed cuts are changed, some landlords say that they will have little incentive to continue to participate in the Section 8 program, a program long appreciated for its reliability.

Vincent S. Castellano, a real estate broker specializing in Section 8 who owns a few apartments in Queens, says that he owns a two-bedroom apartment in Rockaway Beach that he had been planning to rent to a Section 8 tenant for $1,000 a month. Under the new proposals, the Section 8 fair market rents for two-bedroom apartments, minus utilities, would be $944; under the existing one, it would be above $1,000.

“I’m going to go without Section 8,” he said. “And there are going to be guys who pull out of the market, there are going to be fewer Section 8 apartments available, and there are going to be more people in the shelters.”

Ahh, the fresh stench of compassion.

11 thoughts on “New Federal Budget Cuts Are “Here””

  2. Hey, Bush is finally addressin’ the deficit:)
    Good enough, and now I’m looking forward to him campaigin’ on it, Navy!

  4. Oh, gee, another chapter in the “Bush to NYC: drop
    dead” story, which is going to be as long as War and Peace if there’s a second term. From the Times article:
    “For a four-bedroom apartment in New York City, HUD has proposed that the fair market rent be reduced from $1,504 a month to $1,286, a drop of more than 14 percent.”
    $1286. For a 4-bedroom. In New York City.
    I don’t know anyone paying less than $1300, OR anyone who has a 4-bedroom. Now, the people I know are mainly in Brooklyn and Manhattan, and I’m sure the Bronx and Queens are a bit cheaper. But that number is insane.
    Before anyone suggests that poor people should just move to the suburbs if it’s cheaper: for the most part they don’t have cars and can’t afford them.

  5. Navy Davy wrote:

    Hey, Bush is finally addressin’ the deficit:)

    Would that that were true, now if we can only start means testing Medicare and Social Security, repealing the farm subsidies, and abolish a few federal departments (Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, HHS, and HUD) we could make some serious progress.

  6. But wait, there’s more:

    “Headstart is a proven success for low-income preschoolers, but 3 million eligible kids can’t participate because there’s a $23 billion funding gap.
    In next year’s budget, the White House actually plans to cut Headstart funds by almost $200 million. Nearly half of all 3- and 4-year-olds are not enrolled in any kind of preschool program, and the United States still lacks universal kindergarten.
    After-school programs are crucial to help working parents and to make sure that kids are in safe learning environments rather than in custodial daycare or on the street. The administration promised to deliver after-school programs for 1.4 million kids, then short-changed them by a billion dollars.
    Next year’s budget would provide $11 billion less than what was promised for children with disabilities.
    The administation proposes a $7.2 billion shortfall in education aid to kids in poor communities and no money for school renovation and modernization even though the cost of deferred repairs and construction now exceeds $300 billion. One school in three uses trailers.
    The United States faces the greatest wave of teacher retirements ever, but the administration is actually cutting funds for teacher training and for recruitment and mentoring programs. (…)
    And while the administration fails to offer adequate funding, what does it emphasize? Over the objections of its own panel, the admistration is going forward with a plan to require Headstart to test children as young as 3 and 4, even though virtually every reputable expert concludes that very young children cannot be reliably tested and that testing results are a nonsensical way to evaluate the quality of Headstart programs.”

  7. now if we can only start means testing Medicare and Social Security, repealing the farm subsidies, and abolish a few federal departments (Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, HHS, and HUD) we could make some serious progress.
    At the risk of inducing an echo-based avalanche in here: let’s see a little campaiging on that platform, shall we?

  8. “Consistently Compassionate Conservatives”: the “CCC”. Pronounced, of course, with the hard “c” sound.
    Read these two NY Times articles:
    “Study Finds Accelerating Decline in Corporate Taxes”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/business/23income.html
    and
    “Deal in Congress to Keep Tax Cuts, Widening Deficit”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/politics/23tax.html
    Sen. Don “Woody” Nickles of OK gets the Marie Antionette Award for:
    “The tax credit is for taxpayers,” said Senator Don Nickles, Republican of Oklahoma. “If you want to change the welfare system, then change the welfare system.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/politics/23tax.html

Comments are closed.