RI Would Lose $40M in Federal Cuts
A report released Sunday by the Obama administration details extreme cuts to education and military spending the state would see if the federal government fails to prevent sequester.
Rhode Island would lose nearly $40 million in federal funds from several programs if Congress fails to act this week to avoid sequester, part of an overall $85 billion federal spending cut, the Obama administration said Sunday.
In a move designed to pressure Republicans into accepting new revenues as part of a deal to prevent the sequester from taking effect on Friday, the White House released reports that outlined how those cuts would impact individual states, The Huffington Post reported.
In Rhode Island, education and military spending would take the greatest hit, the report reads. The state would lose $2.4 million in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 30 teacher and teacher aide jobs at risk. Rhode Island also would lose about $2.1 million in funds for about 120 teachers, aides and staff who help children with disabilities, the White House said.
The largest single cut would be to military spending. In Rhode Island, about 5,000 civilian employees of the Department of Defense would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $31.5 million. In addition, Army base operation funding would be cut by about $1 million.
The report detailed other programs and services on the chopping block in Rhode Island, including:
- About 340 fewer low income students in Rhode Island would receive aid to help them finance the costs of college and around 280 fewer students will get work-study jobs that help them pay for college
- Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminated for approximately 200 children, reducing access to critical early education.
- Rhode Island would lose about $1.2 million in environmental funding to ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste. In addition, the state would lose another $359,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.
- Rhode Island would lose about $68,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement, prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim and witness initiatives.
- The state would lose about $126,000 in funding for job search assistance, referral, and placement, meaning around 4,550 fewer people will get the help and skills they need to find employment.
- In Rhode Island, around 530 fewer children will receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $36,000.
- Rhode Island would lose $101,000 to help upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including infectious diseases and natural disasters.
- The state would lose about $330,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse, resulting in around 400 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs. The Rhode Island Department of Health would lose about $61,000 resulting in around 1,500 fewer HIV tests.
- Rhode Island would lose $188,000 in funds that provide meals for seniors.
- Rhode Island could lose up to $22,000 in funds that provide services to victims of domestic violence, resulting in up to 100 fewer victims being served
After the reports were released, congressional Republicans criticized the Obama administration for the PR move, The Huffington Post reported.
“Rather than issuing last-minute press releases on cuts to first responders or troop training or airport security, he should propose smarter ways to cut Washington spending. After all, Washington spending, even with the sequester, is bigger than it was when he got here,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said."If I was the governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, I'd probably be freaked out," Walker told the Journal Sentinel, referring to that state's huge defense presence. "But we don't have big military bases (and) our military contractors have already started to account for this."
Unless Congress intervenes, the law requires the Obama administration to impose $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts to military and domestic programs on Friday, according to The New York Times. Those cuts would be the start of $1 trillion in cuts over the next decade.
Jack Baillargeron
5:48 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Having read the report last night, it is the biggest bunch of you know what. None of this would happen and none of this has ever happened when the Government has shut down things.
Just more scare tactics from the current administration as usual, who think people are ignorant. Never has a single program or employee lost money on any Government shut down they have had in the last 60 years.
Why you may ask? Because they do it at the beginning of the pay period and never go past that 2 week pay period so there is no lose in pay for all this scare tactics. Also all essential services continue to run period. These numbers are lies plain and simple.
All these entities especially the Defense Department have their budget in place already till October the end of the fiscal year, they will not have money lost nor will any other entity until then. Those are the facts. I know because I was working for the Federal Government at one point or another, during every shut down that happened between 1974 and 2006. So there!!! lol.
Jack Baillargeron
5:48 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
The main problem with this administration letter is that it is nothing more than a propaganda campaign to brainwash people into thinking they are saviors of some kind, by lying though their teeth about something that will never happen in any way shape of form on this Sequester poop thing that Obama created plain and simple. It was his idea and no-one else is to blame for such a stupid idea but his administration.
This type of political game has been played many times and has never worked and never will in my opinion. Same old football game different players is all.
Ray Andrews
8:42 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
HR 5652 - Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of 2012 - Voting Record
http://votesmart.org/bill/votes/39857#.USwR_TDU_Tp
The bill passed on May 10 by a vote of 218-199
Republicans 218 for 16 against
Democrats 0 for 183 against
Jack Baillargeron
9:44 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
You forgot the part where that Bill never became law Ray. Nice try though.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr5652
H.R. 5652 (112th): Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of ...... 2012
Introduced:May 09, 2012 (112th Congress, 2011–2013)Sponsor:Rep. Paul Ryan [R-WI1]Status: Died (Passed House)
Jack Baillargeron
9:50 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Can't blame the GOP for something that did not pass Ray. It was both parties that caused this and the idea was all Obama's. You might write about how Obama rejected his own hand picked Simpson/Boles Budget Commitee plan totally. That is what lead to this so called "oh my God we are all going to die" scare tactics his administration is putting out..
Is there plenty of blame to go around? You betcha! But i this a big deal? Nope. Wasn't when it happened under Clinton and won't be this time either. It is all smoke and mirrors playing on fears and disgusting.
But hey the 1st Lady presented an Oscar last night woo hoo. (not).
Jack Baillargeron
9:58 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Then of course there is this Ray.
By JENNIFER EPSTEIN |
8/7/12 2:50 PM EDT
President Obama on Tuesday signed the Sequestration Transparency Act, which requires his administration to detail just how painful the sequester's cut will be.
"Congress must act to avoid these devastating cuts & ask wealthiest to pay fair share," White House deputy press secretary Amy Brundage wrote on Twitter, announcing the president's signature.
Obama had until Wednesday to sign the bill, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent and cleared the House in a 414-2 vote. The Obama administration must lay out specifics about the $1.2 trillion in cuts to domestic and defense programs that will take place at the start of 2013 if Congress is unable to agree on another deficit-reduction plan before the end of the year.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/08/obama-signs-sequestration-transparency-act-131356.html
Notice who in the final bill makes the choices. (Obama) Notice the Vote (Unanimous Consent in the Senate and house 412 yea 2 nea) Sound Bi-partisian to you. Sure does to me. ;-}
Ray Andrews
10:06 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Jack, I didn't blame anyone, or claim that it was made into law. I just posted a link showing who voted for it and who voted against it
Jack Baillargeron
10:34 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Come on Ray, why did you post a vote that showed only the GOP voting for something that has nothing to do with sequestor. What was I suppose to think? lol
The link does not tell you anything other than the vote. Thats why I use the Gov links. It is decieving or at least it was to me, for you to post that like it was an actual bill that passed into law, which also insinuated it was what is now being discussed. It is not. The one I posted is however.
Also how can you post a vote of only the House when you know that the Senate must also vote or there is no Bill?
Ray Andrews
10:23 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Jack, could you clarify
Is it, as you said " It was his idea and no-one else is to blame for such a stupid idea but his administration."
Or is it as you said "Sound Bi-partisian to you. Sure does to me"
?
Jack Baillargeron
10:53 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Oh and yes it was Obama's idea as he has said in my appearences in the media. Though now he says he had hoped it would force compromise. Well that was stupid logic. Can't compromise with a baseball bat to your head. Never worked in history and sure won't now. All games and lies.
Jack Baillargeron
10:41 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Seems pretty clear to me. It was passed by a bi-partisian vote and the bill itself gave Obama all the rope he needs to take the blame eventially on every cut, so both sides of the aisle can blame him in 2014. Plain and simple to me on that. Thats why the vote was over whelming, leaving the cuts to Obama and him alone.
Look at his scare tactics the last week well he tours the Country trying to scare people. Do you know that all those cuts add up to 85Billion and that we spend 85Billion every 28 days. It means nothing. It will take place after the 1st of the month and at the end of a pay period like it always has. That way there is no interruption money to SS,Medicare, or anything else.
Only cost are that lay off notices or furloughs must be processed that they may happen is all. I recieved those notices 14 times in my life and not once did I lose money or have my pay effected at all. The Government system is set up to avoid all that period.
Again my Problem is scaring people who do not know how the system works for nothing. It is dispicable to me Obama is doing that as are many politicians on both sides, just plain shamefull.
Jack Baillargeron
10:46 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
PS; The reason it was done by unanimus concent for the senate in my opinion was so they would not have to show how those up for re-election in 2014, how they voted since many of the DEMS are up in States with military contractors or bases. Would no bode well for them having a vote to approve using the military as a football or entitlement services disruption even if it won't happen.
Doesn't really apply to the GOP since they are totally demonized on entitlements but not defense, though people are trying lol.
DownTown
10:53 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Government worker unemployment has been at 4.2% or less since the crash. The $831 billion in stimulus spending went to keep government workers in their jobs while the rest of the country had to deal with the lousy economy. Everyone has to pay it back though.
The sequester would be the best thing that could happen to the country.
Jack Baillargeron
10:58 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Problem Downtown, is that in the end it means nothing. Sequestor is merely the new word for "Government shutdown" when the government use to obey the budget law of having a budget by Oct 1st. Now they just do continuing resolutions. The 2 times they did a shut down on Fiscal year end they asked all banks to honor any and all government payments even if the check or electronic fund transfer had not occurred. They all did.
The government is mandated by law to keep all essential services running no matter what. So this is all just Poopola.lol
Wish they would do real cuts though.
Jack Baillargeron
11:02 pm on Monday, February 25, 2013
Should have added last time the Senate passed a budget was on April 29, 2009