The Labor-HHS Conference: A False Positive?

The Labor-Health and Human Services-Education (Labor-HHS) conference agreement is on the House and Senate floors this week. The conference agreement was reached Thursday.

As expected, Chairmen David Obey and Tom Harkin have crafted a bill with key investments in many Community Action priorities. The agreement splits the difference between the House and Senate versions, boosting the Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) with a $665 million increase, bumping up Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) funding and leaving Head Start in relatively good shape.

Normally, I would be celebrating right now. While I feel on one hand that we have made progress, delivering a good year for Community Action Agencies, I can’t help but wonder if this is a false sense of security.

The President will certainly veto the Labor-HHS bill. Democratic leaders fear they will lose in a face-off with the White House, with the 1995 showdown between Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich’s Republican Congress and the subsequent government shutdown fresh in their minds.

I’m afraid the Labor-HHS compromise is a false positive. While the conference outcome shows good support for Community Action programs, it is still in the early innings in at least a nine-inning ball game. In fact, this game will probably stretch until the third week of December and, in the end, all the momentum will likely favor the White House in keeping spending down.

After a conversation I had Friday with the chief of staff of a Democratic Senate leader, I am worried that Democrats will define their success as avoiding a year-long continuing resolution, finishing appropriations in December and having a bill with some earmarks to which the White House can agree. To do this will require some very tough appropriations spending decisions, and I’m concerned about what they will be willing to settle upon.

For example, if they compromise on a 6 percent cut across the board, we end up with a CSBG that is below funding levels from a year ago! Or, there could be a painfully bloody process in which individual programs are pitted against each other.

Either way, if the Labor-HHS votes are not there to override the veto -- I think they are, but I’m in a minority -- I’m afraid the impending decisions by leadership will be very painful for a lot of social service programs, including Community Action programs.

We have had a good 11 months; we’re nearing home plate, but we may never cross it.