house republicans eliminate funding for job training (again!)

8/3/2019 House Republicans Eliminate Funding for Job Training (Again!)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republicans-eliminate-funding-for-job-training-again 1/10



2 Center or American Progress | House Republicans Eliminate Funding or Job Training (Again!)

Te Senae Appropriaions Commitee should rejec his disasrous atemp o disman-

le he workorce developmen sysem. Insead o eliminaing job-raining programs, he

commitee should rearm is commimen o employmen and job-raining programs

so ha our workorce remains compeiive in an innovaion-based global economy.

Tis policy brie will explain how he House Appropriaions Commitee’s bill, i

enaced, would creae a $3.1 billion unding shorall in he Employmen and raining Adminisraion wihin wo years. Given he curren budge oulook—and he deb ceil-

ing agreemen—such a massive unding shorall would lead o a permanen disman-

ling o he workorce developmen sysem.

House leadership’s first attempt to eliminate job-training programs

Earlier his year, House leadership passed an appropriaions bill (H.R. 1) ha ried o

cu more han $4 billion rom job-raining programs, including:3

• Eliminaing $3 billion or Workorce Invesmen Ac employmen and raining

programs• Eliminaing $200 million or Dislocaed Worker employmen and raining programs• Eliminaing $125 million o rain unemployed workers hrough communiy colleges• Eliminaing $100 million o educae and rain a-risk youh• Eliminaing $100 million o educae and rain ex-oenders• Eliminaing $100 million or addiional job-raining programs• Rescinding $300 million rom he Job Corps• Rescinding $75 million rom oher employmen and raining programs

Forunaely hose shorsighed and devasaing cus were rejeced. Bu House leader-

ship didn’ abandon heir plans o eliminae job-raining programs. Tey simply changed

heir sraegy. Now hey are rying o cu $2.2 billion in unding or employmen and

job-raining programs in FY 2012 behind he preense o “ransiioning agency budges

o correspond wih he regular scal year.”

Don’ believe i.

House leadership’s second attempt to eliminate job -training programs

Te House Appropriaions Commitee’s FY 2012 dra bill slashes unding or workorce

developmen programs by $2.2 billion, a cu o 36 percen in comparison o FY 2011.




Only the beginning of the assault

Cuts to workforce development programs in FY 2012, in millions

And ye House leadership shamelessly claims ha hey are no cuting job-raining unds. According o he ocial press release, hey ry o explain hese massive unding cus as an

atemp o ransiion he Deparmen o Labor’s budge o he “regular scal year.”4

Apparenly i is merely a coincidence ha heir budgeing sleigh o hand involves cu-

ing $2.2 billion rom employmen and job-raining programs.

Don’ be ooled. Tis is simply a reread o previous eors o eliminae job-raining

programs—his ime under he auspices o shiing he budgeary calendar.

Accounting gimmicks will lead to huge cuts in FY 2014

House leadership is relying on the fact that budgeting is often complicated. Most

constituents are not interested in technical details. By suggesting that huge fund-

ing cuts are actually plausible-sounding procedural changes, House leaders are

Department / programFY 2011

CR

FY 2012

House billDifference % change

Department of Labor

WIA adult employment and training $770.9 $207.5 -$563.4 -73%

WIA youth employment and training $825.9 $413.8 -$412.1 -50%

WIA dislocated workers employment

and training$1,063.4 $101.7 -$961.7 -90%

WIA Dislocated Worker National

Reserve$224.1 $64.6 -$159.5 -71%

-100%WIA innovation fund $124.8 $0.0 -$124.8

Native Americans $52.7 $27.1 -$25.6 -49%

Migrant and seasonal farmworkers $84.5 $43.3 -$41.1 -49%

YouthBuild $79.8 $40.0 -$39.8 -50%

Reintegration of ex-offenders $85.4 $45.0 -$40.4 -47%

Jobs Corp $1,706.2 $2,223.9 $517.8 30%

Senior Community

Service Employment Program$450.0 $450.0 $0 0%

Employment service $702.2 $351.8 -$350.4 -50%

One-Stop career centers $63.6 $31.8 -$31.8 -50%

Total, ETA workforce

development programs$6,233.4 $4,000.5 -$2,232.9 -36%

available at http://appropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/FY_2012_Final_LHHSE.pdf.




trying to deect the conversation away from their repeated attempts to eliminate

job-training programs.

Specically, the Majority’s bill attempts to shift funding for job-training pro-

grams from a “program year” funding schedule to a “scal year” funding sched-

ule. That sounds like an innocuous change. But in fact it would lead to a domino

effect of funding cuts that would result in a $3.1 billion shortfall in FY 2014.

And that’s their goal. House leaders are intentionally putting job-training pro-

grams into a huge budget hole. Once they have articially manufactured a $3.1

billion shortfall for job-training programs, they will throw their hands up, say

“the country is broke,” and claim that we cannot afford to pay for these programs.

In the following sections this policy brief will clarify the long-term impact of

these accounting gimmicks. First, it will look at the House leadership’s unneces-

sary technical changes—shifting job-training programs from a “program year”

funding schedule to a “scal year” funding schedule. And second, it will dem-onstrate how those technical changes would lead to a $3.1 billion shortfall that

would cripple our nation’s investment in job training in the next two years.

Workforce development programs should stay on a “program year”

funding schedule

As previously menioned, House leaders propose o shi unding or job-raining pro-

grams rom a “program year” schedule o a “scal year” schedule. Tis does no sound like

a signican change in policy. Bu i would have serious long-erm consequences.

Mos ederal programs and agencies are unded on a “scal year” calendar, which begins

Ocober 1 and runs hrough Sepember 30 o he ollowing year. For insance, scal year

2012 began earlier his monh and will coninue hrough Sepember 30, 2012.

In conras, many job-raining and educaion programs unded hrough he

Deparmen o Labor or Deparmen o Educaion are unded on a “program year”

calendar, which begins July 1 and runs hrough June 30 o he ollowing year. For

insance, program year 2011 began on July 1, 2011, and runs hrough June 30, 2012.

Tis alernae unding schedule is inenional. Many job-raining programs, like many

educaion programs, begin in Augus or Sepember. So i makes sense o provide und-

ing one monh or wo monhs in advance o he beginning o a course. By providing

unding in advance, sae and local workorce invesmen boards—which are business-

led groups in charge o job-raining unds—are able o spend July and Augus coordina-




ing wih eligible raining providers and communiy colleges o nalize raining conracs

or he upcoming year.

Shiing o a “scal year” schedule ha begins on Ocober 1, as House leadership proposes,

would creae subsanial challenges or job-raining programs. Delaying availabiliy o

unds unil Ocober would mean ha job-raining programs couldn’ sar unil November

or December. Tis delay in unding would lead o unnecessary scheduling problems andminimize he viabiliy o in-school programs, weakening heir eeciveness.

And ha’s a bes-case scenario. In mos years, Congress doesn’ ge around o nalizing

appropriaions bills unil November or December. Tis year he scal year 2011 appropria-

ions bill wasn’ passed unil April 9, 2011—more han six monhs ino he scal year. I

he Majoriy’s plan were in place his year, i would have resuled in a six-monh delay in

saes receiving job-raining unds—which means ha nobody could have enrolled in a

job-raining program during he 2010-11 school year. Many unemployed workers would

have been orced o wai a ull year beore enrolling in programs o improve heir skills.

I job-raining programs are shied o a “scal year” unding schedule, workorce inves-

men boards would need o modiy heir bidding process o ensure imely approval o

conracs wih eligible raining providers and communiy colleges. And raining pro-

grams would have o be modied down o shorer imerames—which is counerpro-

ducive since longer raining programs will be necessary o address our naion’s skills

shorage in many high-growh indusries.

For sae and local workorce boards ha coninue o enroll sudens in longer raining

programs, shiing o a “scal year” unding schedule would likely increase he unding

balances ha saes “carry in” o subsequen years. According o WIA saues, sae andlocal workorce boards have hree years o expend employmen and raining unds. Tis

long-erm fexibiliy allows workorce boards o direc workers oward raining pro-

grams ha are closely ied o local labor markes, including longer raining programs. In

addiion, unds are oen paid ou only aer he raining has been provided, delaying he

ocial expendiure by one or more quarers, semesers, or raining cycles.

For hese reasons, saes do no spend 100 percen o heir budges in he rs year.

I Congress shis workorce developmen o a “scal year” unding schedule, many

workorce invesmen boards would accumulae larger-han-inended “carry-in” bal-

ances each year because hey would no be able o plan ahead. Republican policymak-

ers requenly cie “carry-in” balances as a sign ha programs are no ecien. Bu in

an ironic wis, heir proposal would acually make his problem worse.

Forunaely, none o hose uninended consequences occurred his year because job-

raining programs were unded on a “program year” basis. Workorce invesmen boards

ound ou in April 2011 how much unding would be available beween July 2011 and

June 2012. Tey were able o plan in advance wih relaively minor inconveniences.




In realiy, he Majoriy’s proposal o shi workorce developmen programs o a “scal

year” unding schedule is a açade. I is an accouning gimmick inended o undermine

hese programs over he long erm. Bu as his explanaion has shown, shiing work-

orce developmen programs o a “scal year” unding schedule is also bad policy ha

would do more harm han good.

The House bill creates a massive funding shortfall in two years

So i is obvious ha House leadership is no proposing o shi he budge calendar o

improve he eeciveness o job-raining programs. In ac, heir proposed policy shi is

counerproducive.

Insead, heir proposal is a clever accouning gimmick ha will aricially creae a $3.1

billion budge shorall in FY 2014. A ha poin, he deb ceiling agreemen ha man-

daes cus o annual appropriaions over he nex decade will place immense pressure on

appropriaors o nd billions in savings. One obvious choice or hose savings will be oavoid closing he $3.1 billion unding shorall or workorce developmen programs.

Te ollowing able illusraes how a $3.1 billion shorall would be creaed in he nex

wo years. Te able includes likely unding levels or FY 2012 o FY 2014, based on he

House majoriy proposal, along wih he resuling shorall in FY 2014. I is ollowed by

an explanaion o he assumpions ha were used o consruc he able.




How the House Republican bill drains billions from training workers

Workforce development programs, FY 2011 to FY 2014

Department/agencyFY 2011

CRFY 2012

House billFY 2013 FY 2014

FY 2014

Shortfall% change

Department of Labor

WIA adult employment and

training

$770.9 $207.5 $578.2 $770.9 $192.7 33.3%

WIA youth employment

and training$825.9 $413.8 $619.4 $825.9 $206.5 33.3%

WIA dislocated workers

employment and training$1,063.4 $101.7 $797.6 $1,063.4 $265.9 33.3%

WIA dislocated worker

national reserve$224.1 $64.6 $168.1 $224.1 $56.0 33.3%

WIA innovation fund $124.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 NA

Native Americans $52.7 $27.1 $39.5 $52.7 $13.2 33.3%

Migrant and seasonal

farmworkers$84.5 $43.3 $63.3 $84.5 $21.1 33.3%

YouthBuild$79.8 $40.0 $60.0 $79.8

$19.833.1%

Reintegration of

ex-offenders$85.4 $45.0 $64.0 $85.4 $21.3 33.3%

Jobs Corp $1,706.2 $2,223.9 $0.0 $1,706.2 $1,706.2 INF

Senior Community Service

Employment Program$450.0 $450.0 $0.0 $450.0 $450.0 INF

Employment service $702.2 $351.8 $596.8 $702.2 $105.3 17.6%

One-Stop career centers $63.6 $31.8 $47.7 $63.6 $15.9 33.3%

Total, ETA workforce

development program$6,233.4 $4,000.5 $3,034.7 $6,108.6 $3,074.0 101.3%

Education, available at http://appropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/FY_2012_Final_LHHSE.pdf.

Fiscal year 2012

Overall, in FY 2012 he House bill cus workorce developmen programs by $2.2 bil-

lion. Tis is supposedly done o shi hese programs o a “scal year” unding schedule

in uure years. Since curren program year 2011 unding is available hrough June 30,

2012, ha leaves a hree-monh gap a he end o scal year 2012 ha needs o be lled

in he FY 2012 appropriaions bill. Te House bill provides unding o bridge his gap.

In a cynical move, however, House leadership claims ha limied unding provided

in FY 2012—o bridge he hree-monh gap—is in ac sucien o cover workorce

developmen expenses or six monhs, including he rs hree monhs o FY 2013. o

suppor heir claim, House leaders will likely poin o “carry-in” balances rom prior

years ha have no been spen ye.

Bu ha claim is misleading and wrong. In realiy, a high percenage o “carry-in” balances

have already been designaed or raining programs ha are currenly underway—such as a

longer-erm nursing program—which means hose unds are no available or uure use.




In addiion, he House bill provides an increase o $500 million or Job Corps. Bu i

isn’ really an increase because he unds are inended o las 15 monhs insead o 12

monhs. Te addiional unds are provided in he FY 2012 bill so ha zero funds will be

necessary in he FY 2013 bill.

And nally, he House bill provides fa unding or he Senior Communiy Service

Employmen Program. Bu again, i isn’ really fa unding because he unds are alsoinended o las 15 monhs insead o 12 monhs. I is really equal o a 20 percen cu.

Moreover, he ac ha SCSEP is unded hrough he enirey o FY 2013 means ha

zero funds will be necessary in he FY 2013 bill.

Fiscal year 2013

I he House is successul in shiing o a “scal year” unding schedule, he FY 2013 bill

would mos likely include an addiional cu o $500 million.

Te House Appropriaions Commitee’s FY 2012 bill provides bridge unding or work-

orce developmen programs hrough he rs quarer o FY 2013. Tis decision signalsha unding in he FY 2013 bill would likely be limied o levels ha are sucien

or he remaining hree quarers o he scal year. Assuming ha House Republicans

mainain a açade o suppor or workorce developmen programs, hey would likely

esablish FY 2013 unding levels or workorce developmen programs a hree-quarers

o heir respecive FY 2011 unding levels.

As menioned above, he FY 2013 bill would include zero funds or Jobs Corps and

SCSEP because he FY 2012 bill unded boh programs hrough he remainder o FY

2012 and he enirey o FY 2013.

Fiscal year 2014

According o he imeable esablished in he House Appropriaions bill, all workorce

developmen programs would be ully ransiioned o he “scal year” unding schedule

by FY 2014. Ta means here would be no unds rom prior years ha overlap wih

FY 2014. In oher words, all unds available or workorce developmen programs in

FY 2014 would need o be provided in he FY 2014 bill.

o ully und workorce developmen programs in FY 2014, he House billwould need

o mach respecive unding levels provided in FY 2011. Bu in order o reach hose

unding levels, he FY 2014 bill would need o boos unding by $3.1 billion over he

previous year—a 100 percen increase in a single year. Alernaely, he House could

choose o provide he same level o unding in FY 2014 as he previous year. In ha case,

however, here would be a $3.1 billion shorall in annual unding or workorce devel-

opmen programs.5

Given he scal consrains o he deb ceiling agreemen, increasing unding or work-

orce developmen programs by 100 percen in a single year is wildly unrealisic. In

oher words, i would no happen.




The debt ceiling agreement

Te Budge Conrol Ac o 2011, commonly known as he deb ceiling agreemen,

esablishes rm caps on annual appropriaions or he nex 10 years, including he ol-

lowing caps or FY 2012 o FY 2014:

• FY 2012: $1.043 rillion• FY 2013: $1.047 rillion• FY 2014: $1.066 rillion

According o he deb ceiling agreemen, annual appropriaions will increase by $23 billion

beween FY 2012 and FY 2014. For Congress o ll a $3.1 billion shorall creaed by shi-

ing o a “scal year” unding schedule, i would have o direc more han 10 percen o he

overall increase in annual appropriaions o workorce developmen programs.

As menioned above, ha simply would no happen. In ac, Congress would be more

likely o go in he opposie direcion. Workorce developmen programs would be sacri-

ced o saisy he budge hawks.

Conclusion

Our naion coninues o suer hrough an unemploymen crisis. As many as 25 million

American workers are eiher unemployed or underemployed, while businesses coninue

o sruggle o nd workers wih he righ mix o skills o ll millions o job vacancies.

Furher, economiss predic ha high unemploymen and skills mismaches will con-

inue o persis or he nex ew years.

And ye House Republicans believe i is a good ime o eliminae unding or work-

orce developmen programs ha serve millions o unemployed workers, local busi-

nesses, and regional economies.

Eliminaing unding or hese programs will leave millions o unemployed Americans

wihou access o job search assisance, skill assessmen, career counseling, and job rain-

ing. According o he Deparmen o Labor, WIA-relaed programs served more han 9

million job seekers las year, an increase o 234 percen in recen years. Bu he elimina-

ion o unding would orce nearly 3,000 One-Sop Career Ceners o close heir doors by

2014. In addiion, he eliminaion o unding will hamper employer expansion eors—a

criical par o our economic recovery—by removing a sysem ha connecs local employ-

ers wih workers who have he necessary skills o help hem achieve success.6

Hopeully House leadership was lisening o heir own exper winess a his week’s

House Educaion and Workorce Commitee hearing on WIA reauhorizaion. In

her opening saemen, Laurie Bouillion Larrea, presiden o Workorce Soluions

in Dallas, saed ha “exising unds are no adequae or he volume o job seekers.”




Laer in he hearing, Ms. Larrea was asked wha would happen i unding or he

workorce developmen sysem was eliminaed. Ms. Larrea responded ha “despera-

ion in our communiies would heighen.”7

o be sure, our naion’s workorce developmen sysem is no perec. In ac, he Cener

or American Progress has proposed numerous ideas o improve he sysem hrough he

WIA reauhorizaion process.8 Bu workorce developmen programs coninue o servea crucial purpose or job seekers and privae-secor employers. A a ime o heighened

unemploymen, members o Congress should work ogeher on a biparisan basis o

srenghen hese programs, no eliminae hem.

In he meanime, he Senae should rejec his backdoor atemp o undermine he work-

orce developmen sysem. Te Senae Appropriaions Commitee already proposed a bill,

passed by he ull commitee on Sepember 21, which mainains unding or hese vial

programs and avoids he clever accouning gimmicks used in he House bill.9 I should

serve as he saring poin or any conerence negoiaions over FY 2012 appropriaions.

Stephen Steigleder is a Policy Analyst at American Progress.

(Endnotes)

1 Departments o Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012, drat scalyear 2012 appropriations bill, available at http://app ropriations.house.gov/UploadedFiles/FY_2012_Final_LHHSE.pd.

2 The Budget Control Act o 2011, Public Law 112-25, 112th Cong, 1st sess. (August 2, 2011).

3 Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, H.R. 1, 112th Cong, 1st sess. (February 11, 2011), available at http://www.gpo.gov/dsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1pcs/pd/BILLS-112hr1pcs.pd.

4 Senate Appropriations Committee, “Appropriations Committee Releases the Drat Fiscal Year 2012 Labor, Health and HumanServices Funding Bill,” Press release, September 29, 2011, avail able at http://appropriations.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=262231.

5 The projected shortall does not reect the elimination o the Workorce Innovation Fund. I WIF unding is restored, the FY 2014bill would need to boost spending on workorce development programs by $3.2 billion.

6 Ray Uhalde, Testimony beore the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, Com-mittee on Appropriations, U.S. House o Representatives, April 7, 2011.

7 House Education and the Workorce Committee, “Modernizing the Workorce Investment Act: Developing an Efective Job Training System or Workers and Employers,” October 4, 2011, available at http://edworkorce.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=261927.

8 Stephen Steigleder, “It’s Past Time to Reauthorize the Workorce Investment Act,” Center or American Progress, July 25, 2011,available at http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/07/move_on_wia.html.

9 Senate Appropriations Committee, “Appropriations Committee Releases the Drat Fiscal Year 2012 Labor, Health and HumanServices Funding Bill.”

house republicans eliminate funding for job training (again!)

Documents