[House Report 112-96] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] 112th Congress Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 112-96 _______________________________________________________________________ Union Calendar No. 53 R E P O R T on the SUBALLOCATION OF BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 together with MINORITY VIEWS SUBMITTED BY MR. ROGERS, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONSJune 1, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed ? COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky, Chairman C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida\1\ NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington JERRY LEWIS, California\1\ MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana JACK KINGSTON, Georgia NITA M. LOWEY, New York RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New JerseyJOSE E. SERRANO, New York TOM LATHAM, Iowa ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia JO ANN EMERSON, Missouri JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts KAY GRANGER, Texas ED PASTOR, Arizona MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California DENNY REHBERG, Montana SAM FARR, California JOHN R. CARTER, Texas JESSE L. JACKSON, Jr., Illinois RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania KEN CALVERT, California STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey JO BONNER, Alabama SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio BARBARA LEE, California TOM COLE, Oklahoma ADAM B. SCHIFF, California JEFF FLAKE, Arizona MICHAEL M. HONDA, California MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania STEVE AUSTRIA, Ohio CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming TOM GRAVES, Georgia KEVIN YODER, Kansas STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas ALAN NUNNELEE, Mississippi ---------- 1}}Chairman Emeritus William B. Inglee, Clerk and Staff Director (ii) LETTER OF SUBMITTAL ---------- House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations, Washington, DC, June 1, 2011. Hon. John A. Boehner, The Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker: By direction of the Committee on Appropriations, I submit herewith the Committee's report on the suballocation of budget allocations for fiscal year 2012. As required by section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this report subdivides the allocation of fiscal year 2012 spending authority to the House Committee on Appropriations. Sincerely, Harold Rogers, Chairman. (iii) Union Calendar No. 53 112th Congress Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 112-96 ====================================================================== REPORT ON THE SUBALLOCATION OF BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 _______ June 1, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed _______ Mr. Rogers, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following REPORT together with MINORITY VIEWS SUBALLOCATION OF BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report on the suballocation of budget allocations for fiscal year 2012 pursuant to section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. (1) SUBALLOCATION TO SUBCOMMITTEES FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET AUTHORITY AND OUTLAYS [In millions of dollars] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subcommittee Discretionary Mandatory Total ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration: Budget authority........... 17,250 116,916 134,166 Outlays.................... 20,950 104,805 125,755 Commerce, Justice, Science: Budget authority........... 50,237 272 50,509 Outlays.................... 62,446 284 62,730 Defense: Budget authority........... 530,025 514 530,539 Outlays.................... 596,349 514 596,863 Energy and Water Development: Budget authority........... 30,639 ........... 30,639 Outlays.................... 44,578 ........... 44,578 Financial Services and General Government: Budget authority........... 19,895 21,455 41,350 Outlays.................... 23,523 21,450 44,973 Homeland Security: Budget authority........... 40,850 1,440 42,290 Outlays.................... 45,313 1,402 46,715 Interior, Environment: Budget authority........... 27,473 456 27,929 Outlays.................... 30,766 456 31,222 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education: Budget authority........... 139,218 536,436 675,654 Outlays.................... 153,179 537,939 691,118 Legislative Branch: All except Senate: Budget authority........... 3,326 110 3,436 Outlays.................... 3,437 110 3,547 Senate items: Budget authority........... 988 26 1,014 Outlays.................... 960 26 986 Total Legislative: Budget authority........... 4,314 136 4,450 Outlays.................... 4,397 136 4,533 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs: Budget authority........... 72,535 67,916 140,451 Outlays.................... 78,492 67,726 146,218 State, Foreign Operations: Budget authority........... 39,569 159 39,728 Outlays.................... 46,060 159 46,219 Transportation, HUD: Budget authority........... 47,655 ........... 47,655 Outlays.................... 118,272 ........... 118,272 Grand total: Budget authority..... 1,019,660 745,700 1,765,360 Outlays.............. 1,224,325 734,871 1,959,196 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SBDV 2012-1
MINORITY VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE NORM DICKS The most recent Commerce Department report showed that economic growth slowed to an annual rate of 1.8 percent in the first quarter of 2011, down from the fourth quarter of 2010, when real GDP increased by 3.1 percent. As David Leonhardt wrote in the New York Times (May 26, 2011): ``The economy is struggling to emerge from the aftermath of a terrible recession. The one thing not to do is to turn to deficit reduction too quickly after a crisis, as Europe is painfully learning.'' From the beginning of this Congress, my Democratic colleagues and I have warned: you can't balance the budget simply by cutting discretionary spending. The numbers don't work. Yet the Committee adopted 302(b) allocations for Fiscal Year 2012 that would, in my judgment, cause real harm to the economy and devastate programs that represent vital investments in people and infrastructure all across the nation. Yet, these cuts would do next to nothing to balance the budget. Our message has been amplified many times over in the past few months by the Bowles-Simpson Commission, the Rivlin- Domenici deficit reduction plan and by leading economists, including Dr. Kenneth Rogoff, who advised Senator John McCain's presidential campaign. Rogoff said earlier this month: ``You just can't do this overnight. If we tighten too fast, we would slam growth. The economy will implode on itself. We didn't get here in two years; we shouldn't try to get out of it in two years. And it's not just about cutting spending. The tax take needs to go up too.'' (AP, May 17, 2011) The Bowles-Simpson Commission issued a stern warning against ``shocking the fragile economic recovery'' by enacting spending cuts too quickly. Alice Rivlin and Pete Domenici, chairing the Bipartisan Policy Center's debt reduction task force, said if you cut too quickly more Americans will lose their jobs. All of these people are right. But the spending levels in these 302(b) allocations ignore all sensible advice; are dangerously inadequate to fund the needs of the nation, particularly at this time when signs point to a fragile economic recovery; and would reverse the recent gains in job growth. Further and deeper cuts at the federal level will undoubtedly delay our nation's economic recovery and will actually work against the efforts to reduce the deficit because they diminish revenues coming into the Treasury by slowing economic growth. This allocation will cause real harm to people in need; make it harder to get an education; provide too little for law enforcement, for environmental protection and for homeland security; and in doing so push recovery further into the future so balancing the budget will be harder to achieve. These allocations, if implemented, would make it impossible to support the investments we as a nation need to make. The Homeland Security bill is a perfect example. Funding front-line federal personnel--CBP, ICE, TSA, Coast Guard and Secret Service--and adding needed funding for disaster relief, doesn't leave enough to support our state and local partners, including the first responders who must react to terrorism threats and natural disasters. On the Energy and Water bill, the allocation is nearly $6 billion below the President's budget request and $1 billion below the current year. In the context of historic flooding in the Mississippi River basin, an area that makes up 41 percent of the continental United States and encompasses all or part of 31 states, this allocation will probably mean inadequate funding to meet the nation's needs. Several years ago we spent more federal money rebuilding one community, New Orleans, than we did in nearly three years on every other water project in the country because we had not made the proper initial investments. With this allocation, we continue down that path, having learned nothing from the tragedy. Approximately half of the Energy and Water bill is defense related, including the nuclear weapons program and non- proliferation activities. Given instability in the Middle East and elsewhere, these programs are more important than ever. At this allocation, we may not be able to provide the level of national security we need. The Labor, HHS, Education bill will be cut by $18.2 billion below last year and $41.6 billion below the request level. This represents not a return to FY 2008 levels but a return to FY 2004 levels. Pell grants, Head Start, NIH all will face disturbing cuts. The Transportation/HUD bill and the Agriculture bill will each be cut by more than 13 percent below last year's level. The Commerce, Justice, Science bill faces deep cuts also, despite the need to increase funding for FBI, federal prisons and detention, and restore funding for weather satellites or risk a gap in weather data. In 2006, the Bush Administration committed to double the funding for certain science investments over a period of seven years. The Obama Administration renewed that commitment; for the first time, we in Congress fell off track in last year's bill and I am concerned that this allocation will only take us farther off-track. I appreciate and completely support Chairman Rogers' commitment to regular order in committee and on the floor. I renew my pledge to provide whatever procedural support the minority can offer. However, when the starting point is an unrealistic and dangerous allocation, I fear that we cannot complete the process. At these numbers, many of these bills will be extremely difficult to pass in the House and impossible to pass in the Senate or be signed into law. I cannot support this allocation. Norm Dicks.