[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 26, 2013)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E193-E195]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 DANGEROUS IMPACT OF SEQUESTRATION CUTS

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 26, 2013

  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with my colleagues 
two documents that outline both the dangerous impact of sequestration 
cuts and how we could replace them in a way that helps, not hurts, the 
American people.
  The report, ``Protecting Our Nation from Bad Federal Budget 
Choices,'' from the Coalition on Human Needs, includes these key facts 
about the sequester's impact:
  600,000 children and mothers will lose nutritional aid under WIC (the 
Women, Infants, and Children program).

[[Page E194]]

  125,000 low-income families will lose rental housing vouchers.
  70,000 children will be denied Head Start.
  4 million fewer Meals on Wheels meals served to seniors.
  373,000 adults and children with serious mental illness will lose 
treatment.
  I would also like to draw my colleagues' attention to, ``Faithful 
Alternatives to the Sequester,'' from the Interreligious Working Group 
on Domestic Human Needs. I would like to quote from their document:

       ``We are alarmed at the growing economic divergence between 
     rich and poor, creating permanent inequalities that are 
     neither just nor socially sustainable. Over the past thirty 
     years, tax policy has too often been used to perpetuate 
     rather than address these inequalities. It is our 
     responsibility, both individually and collectively, to 
     respond to those who are in need--people living in poverty 
     have sacrificed more than enough on the altar of deficit 
     reduction. We need a more progressive tax code, where all 
     members of the community carry their fair share of the 
     responsibility, not only to ensure that we can meet immediate 
     need while simultaneously reducing our deficits, but also to 
     begin to address the astronomical growth in disparity over 
     the last thirty years. . . .
       ``There are core challenges facing our nation: rising 
     income inequality, persistent unemployment, historically high 
     rates of poverty and anemic economic growth. These challenges 
     must be addressed with justice. . . .
       ``Our approach to upcoming sequestration needs to be rooted 
     in our values--a balanced approach that addresses the deficit 
     crisis with justice and compassion. On the one hand, we need 
     to be good stewards of the resources we already have, making 
     judicious cuts to defense, earmarks, and other wasteful 
     spending, while preserving that which is most important for 
     the good of all. On the other hand, we must increase revenue, 
     in order to ensure that this nation can meet our need to 
     operate a fair and just economy, which serves all of our 
     human community. The nation's deficit crisis cannot be solved 
     through spending cuts alone--new revenues must be part of the 
     solution. The need is great and the resources are abundant. 
     The budget choices we make must reflect this reality.''

  I hope my colleagues will read these important studies and act to 
stop these harmful cuts. We should ask those who can afford it to 
contribute more, not jeopardize the well-being and futures of low-
income and middle-class families.

                                  DHN

          Interreligious Working Group on Domestic Human Needs


                 faithful alternatives to sequestration

       From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be 
     required; and from one to whom much has been entrusted, even 
     more will be demanded.--Luke 12:48
       Rabbi Abba said in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish: the 
     person who lends money [to a poor person] is greater than the 
     person who gives charity; and the one who throws money into a 
     common purse [to form a partnership with the poor person] is 
     greater than either.--B. Shabbat 63b
       As people of faith, we believe that our economic 
     arrangements with each other should serve to support God's 
     creation and should help the human community to flourish. We 
     therefore challenge the current economic reality that traps 
     families in poverty for generations. The widening gap in 
     income and wealth, as well as the persistence of poverty, 
     especially among children, are inconsistent with God's 
     intention for this world.
       Our community seeks to advance the values of cooperation, 
     social justice, and equal opportunity, while restraining 
     those of greed, speculation, and inherited privilege. At the 
     root of our economic system must be fairness and justice. 
     Without these values, our economy is, quite literally, 
     demoralized.
       Crushing poverty in a world of abundance is insufferable 
     and our nation has allowed too much injustice and greed to 
     govern our current economic structures. Instead, we seek to 
     increase equity and equality in this nation. We are alarmed 
     at the growing economic divergence between rich and poor, 
     creating permanent inequalities that are neither just nor 
     socially sustainable. Over the past thirty years, tax policy 
     has too often been used to perpetuate rather than address 
     these inequalities. It is our responsibility, both 
     individually and collectively, to respond to those who are in 
     need--people living in poverty have sacrificed more than 
     enough on the altar of deficit reduction. We need a more 
     progressive tax code, where all members of the community 
     carry their fair share of the responsibility, not only to 
     ensure that we can meet immediate need while simultaneously 
     reducing our deficits, but also to begin to address the 
     astronomical growth in disparity over the last thirty years. 
     As one of our traditions so eloquently says, `from everyone 
     to whom much has been given, much will be required.''
       It is from this place of concern for the common good, right 
     relationship, and the just working of the economy, that we 
     seek a balanced approach to deficit reduction. Sequestration 
     was developed as a backstop--a last resort if Congress failed 
     to act in a more thoughtful and balanced way. Whether 
     Congress uses sequestration or some alternative as a means of 
     achieving deficit reduction, Congress can and must act in a 
     way that reflects our shared values. There are core 
     challenges facing our nation: rising income inequality, 
     persistent unemployment, historically high rates of poverty 
     and anemic economic growth. These challenges must be 
     addressed with justice.
       Therefore, we refuse to accept additional spending cuts to 
     programs that serve ``the least of these,'' and we support 
     extending the tax cuts for low and middle-income families. In 
     particular, we support a strong, refundable Earned Income Tax 
     Credit and Child Tax Credit, as they are some of this 
     nation's most effective tools for alleviating poverty.
       Our approach to upcoming sequestration needs to be rooted 
     in our values--a balanced approach that addresses the deficit 
     crisis with justice and compassion. On the one hand, we need 
     to be good stewards of the resources we already have, making 
     judicious cuts to defense, earmarks, and other wasteful 
     spending, while preserving that which is most important for 
     the good of all. On the other hand, we must increase revenue, 
     in order to ensure that this nation can meet our need to 
     operate a fair and just economy, which serves all of our 
     human community. The nation's deficit crisis cannot be solved 
     through spending cuts alone--new revenues must be part of the 
     solution. The need is great and the resources are abundant. 
     The budget choices we make must reflect this reality.
       Therefore, we urge members of Congress to enact a 
     comprehensive, balanced, and bipartisan deficit reduction 
     package that:
       1. Continues the precedent established and maintained for 
     the past three decades--including in the Budget Control Act--
     that deficit reduction should not increase poverty;
       2. Protects from budget cuts discretionary and mandatory 
     programs that make a real difference in the lives of poor and 
     vulnerable people, and preserves the bi-partisan agreement to 
     exempt low-income mandatory programs from such cuts;
       3. Maintains the integrity and structure of low-income 
     mandatory programs, such as SNAP and Medicaid, so they can 
     continue to serve as effective tools for reducing poverty and 
     countering economic downturns;
       4. Accounts for the fact that, since 2010, non-defense 
     discretionary spending has already contributed hundreds of 
     billions of dollars toward deficit reduction--these programs 
     should not have to sacrifice anymore;
       5. Raises new revenues in ways that will allow us to meet 
     this nation's needs by:
       a. Increasing the progressivity of the tax code;
       b. Continuing current tax credits for low-income working 
     households, proven effective at alleviating poverty and 
     rewarding work, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the 
     Child Tax Credit;
       c. Generating new revenue with a simpler, more progressive 
     tax code from a broader tax base (including capital gains, 
     dividends, and estate taxes) and increasing rates, if 
     necessary;
       d. Not relying only on anticipated economic growth to 
     generate new tax revenue;
       e. Eliminating tax expenditures not proven to influence 
     behavior, such as subsidies to established corporations that 
     no longer need government support.
       6. Reduces health care costs system-wide so as to:
       a. Retain and implement the important improvements to 
     access and cost containment strategies enacted in the 
     Affordable Care Act;
       b. Prevent cost-shifting to people who cannot afford it;
       c. Refrain from putting further strain on states;
       7. Includes significant cuts in military spending as 
     recommended by several bipartisan commissions and non-
     governmental organizations, such as the Bowles-Simpson 
     Commission, the Sustainable Defense Task Force, the 
     Bipartisan Policy Center, and the Committee for a Responsible 
     Budget.
       8. Declines to shift defense cuts to non-defense 
     discretionary and mandatory programs, which have carried the 
     heaviest burden of spending reductions already enacted.
       In a time of continuing, deep economic uncertainty, our 
     faith gives us strength to face unemployment, poverty, and 
     anxiety--not simply as individuals, but as a community with 
     an ethical memory rooted in our shared sacred texts. Today's 
     fiscal debates not only miss what should be the goal of the 
     economy--the common good--but also, they fail to ensure that 
     the functioning of the economy will, indeed, serve this 
     purpose. As Congress considers replacing the sequester 
     mechanism, it must pursue a balanced approach that ensures 
     that our collective responsibility to each other can and will 
     be met.
       American Friends Service Committee
       Bread for the World
       Church World Service
       Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism
       Conference of Major Superiors of Men
       Disciples Justice Action Network
       Ecumenical Advocacy Days for Global Peace with Justice
       The Faithful Budget Campaign
       Faithful Reform in Health Care
       Franciscan Action Network
       Friends Committee on National Legislation
       Leadership Conference of Women Religious
       Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office
       National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good 
     Shepherd

[[Page E195]]

       National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA
       National Council of Jewish Women
       NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
       New Community Project
       Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Office of Public Witness
       RESULTS Faith in Action
       Sisters of Mercy Institute Justice Team
       The Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
       United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries
       The United Methodist Church--General Board of Church and 
     Society
                                  ____


                        Coalition on Human Needs


         Protecting Our Nation from Bad Federal Budget Choices

       A new round of federal budget cuts is slated to start on 
     March 1. If nothing is done, the cuts will deny food to young 
     children, turn low-income families out of their homes, and 
     reduce funds for education and training. These indiscriminate 
     across-the-board cuts (called ``sequestration'') come on top 
     of an average 7.6 percent cut in federal funds to states 
     since 2010. The looming federal cuts would make things worse, 
     hurting vulnerable people, shifting burdens to states and 
     localities, and threatening economic growth.
       This does not have to happen. Increased revenues from 
     wealthy individuals and profitable corporations as well as 
     savings from reducing waste in the Pentagon and elsewhere can 
     prevent these cuts. In fact, Senate Majority Leader Harry 
     Reid (D-NV) and other senators outlined a plan on February 14 
     (the American Family Economic Protection Act) that would 
     replace the 2013 cuts by setting a minimum tax rate for 
     millionaires, closing other loopholes, gradually cutting the 
     Pentagon and ending certain farm subsidies. It will be up for 
     a vote during the week of February 25. House Democrats have 
     also introduced a balanced alternative.
       These cuts will hurt our nation. The indiscriminate cuts 
     have the potential to stall the beginnings of economic 
     recovery because lost jobs and reduced assistance mean people 
     will have less to spend. The recovery still had not reached 
     the 7.9 percent of the U.S. workforce unemployed in January 
     2013. We should be investing in rebuilding our communities 
     and training for workers, not throwing 10,000 teachers and 
     aides in low-income schools out of work, with about 700,000 
     jobs expected to be lost overall because of sequestration. 
     And the real hardships caused by 600,000 young children and 
     mothers losing WIC food assistance and between 110,000-
     125,000 families losing their housing vouchers nationwide do 
     not just hold back our economy this year. They threaten the 
     health and development of children and the stability of 
     families in ways that will cost all of us for years to come.
       Revenues, Not Cuts. Closing loopholes for corporations and 
     the wealthy can generate well over $2 trillion in federal 
     revenue over the next 10 years. In order to stop the deficit 
     from growing as a share of the economy, economists estimate 
     that another $1.5 trillion is needed over the next decade, 
     either from new revenues or cuts in spending. Millionaires, 
     who have gained more than $1 million each from the Bush tax 
     cuts since 2004, can afford to pay more. A 5.6 percent surtax 
     on income over $1 million could raise more than $450 billion 
     over 10 years--enough to cancel most of the decade of 
     domestic cuts slated to begin with this March's 
     sequestration. Taxing the profits of corporations sheltered 
     offshore at the same rate as profits made in the U.S. can 
     raise as much as $600 billion over 10 years.
       Don't Touch SNAP and Medicaid. Congress should act now to 
     stop the needless cuts in vital programs that will begin 
     March 1, but should not replace them with cuts to essential 
     services such as Medicaid or SNAP/food stamps. We have seen 
     harsh proposals to cut these programs in the budget passed by 
     the U.S. House for FY 2013 (but rejected by the Senate). The 
     House budget would have slashed $134 billion from SNAP over 
     10 years, and $810 billion from Medicaid. If the SNAP cut 
     were to be applied by reducing benefits equally across all 
     households, a family of four would be expected to lose $90 a 
     month in FY 2016 dollars. (This year, the national average 
     monthly SNAP benefit for a family of four is $508.) Or, if 
     the extreme cut were applied by making people ineligible, 8 
     million people nationwide would be denied all SNAP benefits. 
     If the House budget's extreme Medicaid cut had been in place 
     from 2001-2010, most states would have received at least 35 
     percent less in 2010 than they actually did, such a huge cut 
     that millions of people nationwide would either be denied 
     coverage altogether or would see their benefits slashed. 
     Taking food and medical care from our state's poorest people 
     is a wholly unacceptable alternative to the cuts about to be 
     imposed.
       The Pentagon Can Be Cut. The deficit reduction legislation 
     now in place requires nearly $1 trillion in cuts between now 
     and FY 2021, half from defense and half from domestic and 
     international programs. Many experts believe that the 
     Pentagon can be cut $500 billion or more over the next 
     decade, and that such reductions will actually enhance our 
     national security by ending wasteful expenditures and freeing 
     up the funds for more productive uses or for deficit 
     reduction. Even if $500 billion were cut, the U.S. would 
     still be spending more on the military than the next 14 
     nations combined, most of whom are our allies. Some examples 
     of possible Pentagon savings with expert support: reducing 
     the number of troops assigned to overseas bases by 25 percent 
     (not counting troops in war zones) would save $80 billion 
     over the next ten years; reducing deployed nuclear warheads 
     to 1,000-1,100 would save $28 billion over the same period; 
     buying a reliable, cheaper jet rather than the problem-
     plagued F-35C would save close to $17 billion.
       But Investments in Our Future--and Vulnerable People--Must 
     Be Protected. More than 1 in 5 children in the U.S. were poor 
     in 2011. 13.2 percent of people between 18-24 nationwide had 
     not finished high school. For poor children and young adults 
     to succeed, we need to invest in all levels of education. But 
     the sequestration cuts would deny Head Start to 70,000 
     children this year, and cut Title I K-12 education funding 
     for schools in low-income communities by nearly $726 million, 
     an amount equal to dropping services for 1.2 million low-
     income children. For our economy to grow, workers must be 
     able to increase their skills, but federal job training funds 
     will be cut by more than $160 million nationwide if the 
     sequester reductions occur this year, and more than 75,000 
     workers with disabilities will not be able to enroll in 
     vocational rehabilitation services. In a time of rising 
     inequality and more people falling out of the middle class 
     into poverty, we need more routes out of poverty. But the 
     impending cuts would deny Work-Study aid to 33,000 students. 
     Struggling workers will be hit repeatedly: if they are among 
     the long-term unemployed, cuts in federal emergency 
     unemployment compensation will force an up to 9.4 percent cut 
     in benefits, estimated at an average loss of $400 for the 
     rest of this year. If they are parents working or looking for 
     work, they may lose child care assistance; the cuts are 
     expected to end child care subsidies for 30,000 children 
     across the country.
       We cannot sustain and expand economic recovery while 
     pushing our most vulnerable people into more desperate 
     straits. The cuts about to take effect will take away rental 
     assistance vouchers from between 110,000-125,000 families 
     nationwide. These vouchers limit the families' rent payments 
     to 30 percent of their income. If they were abruptly expected 
     to pay market rents, large numbers of these families will be 
     forced out of their apartments, with increasing homelessness 
     a certainty. At the same time, sequestration will end housing 
     assistance to approximately 100,000 formerly homeless people 
     nationwide, including veterans. To add to poor families' 
     struggles to afford housing, home energy assistance will be 
     cut an estimated $180 million. Even without this cut, rising 
     heating costs mean that aid under the Low Income Home Energy 
     Assistance Program (LIHEAP) is expected to average only $375 
     per household served in 2013, down from $405 in 2012.
       Even though there is ample evidence that adequate nutrition 
     is vital for brain development in the first years of life, 
     the impending indiscriminate cuts would deny WIC nutrition 
     aid to 600,000 mothers, infants, and young children. The cuts 
     will also jeopardize the health of seniors, with 4 million 
     fewer meals delivered nationwide.
       Cuts That Increase Joblessness and Disinvest in Our People 
     Will Weaken the Nation. Congress should stop the mindless 
     across-the-board sequestration cuts. Instead, it should enact 
     a balanced package with enough revenues from the wealthy and 
     corporations and sensible Pentagon and other savings to 
     protect our children, our workers, and our seniors.
       Those who oppose any new revenues or Pentagon savings 
     should be asked why they think it is more important to 
     preserve, for example, hundreds of billions in corporate tax 
     incentives to shift jobs and profits offshore or to waste 
     hundreds of billions in unneeded weapons and bases than to 
     prevent cuts in education, housing, nutrition, environmental 
     protection, public health, child care, rebuilding 
     communities, and many other investments.


                            Sequester Damage

       Children and mothers losing WIC nutrition aid: 600,000.
       Low-income families losing rental housing vouchers: 
     125,000.
       Formerly homeless people losing housing: 100,000.
       Children denied Head Start: 70,000.
       Funding cut from Head Start: $406m.
       Children denied affordable child care: 30,000.
       $ cuts deep enough to end services to these many low-income 
     K-12 children: $1.2b.
       Fewer people with disabilities served by Vocational Rehab: 
     75,700.
       Fewer meals on wheels served to seniors: 4m.
       Adults and children with serious mental illness losing 
     treatment: 373,000.
       Unemployment benefits cut for long-term unemployed: 9.4%.
       Jobs lost because of sequestration: 700,000.

                          ____________________