Democrats offer details of budget cuts' impact on agencies

House Budget Committee Democrats estimate President Bush's fiscal 2002 budget blueprint would require average cuts of 6.6 percent-- and as much as 46 percent--from federal agencies "that protect our nation's farmers, workers and small businesses."

In a report released Tuesday, Democrats counter Bush's argument that the 10-year, $1.6 trillion tax cut would not sacrifice national priorities.

Democrats contend that the tax cut and budget would force reductions of 8.6 percent at the Agriculture Department, 8.8 percent at the Justice Department, 15 percent at Transportation, 16.6 percent at Commerce, 11.3, at HUD, 20.2 percent at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 16.9 percent at the Army Corps of Engineers and 46.4 percent at the Small Business Administration.

The report, written by House Budget ranking member John Spratt, D-S.C., is based on CBO's inflation-adjusted baseline in the budgets of the agencies, not from the enacted fiscal 2001 levels.

It assumes implementation of the Bush proposal to cap total spending growth at 4 percent and still boost funding for priorities such as education and defense.

The Spratt analysis compares the agency-by-agency levels of discretionary budget authority proposed in Bush's fiscal 2002 budget blueprint to the inflation-adjusted discretionary baseline CBO recently released.

In contrast, Bush's own budget compares the fiscal 2002 spending levels it proposes to OMB's estimates of fiscal 2001 spending, producing less dramatic cuts than the Budget Committee Democrats' report. The Bush budget proposes setting the total fiscal 2002 budget authority level at $660.7 billion, up from the fiscal 2001 level of $635 billion.

Democrats say the inflation-adjusted baseline represents "the amount needed, according to CBO, to maintain purchasing power for current services."

Spratt's report also takes issue with Bush's proposal to use only $2 trillion of the $2.6 trillion Social Security surplus that OMB projects for debt reduction, as well as Bush's inclusion of the $500 trillion Medicare Part A trust fund surplus in his $1.4 trillion, 10-year reserve fund.

Such proposals, coupled with Bush's tax cut, would "undermine the long-term viability of Social Security and Medicare by depleting the resources both programs need to extend their solvency," Spratt charged.

Democrats have been nearly unanimous in saying that Bush's budget plan would shortchange spending for several crucial domestic programs, such as transportation, environmental protection and agriculture.

Among Republicans, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has said 4 percent total growth may not be enough--especially when the Pentagon's strategic review of defense priorities could further pump up the administration's requested fiscal 2002 defense increase.

House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, has endorsed the 4 percent discretionary spending growth figure as "more than fair," according to his spokeswoman. The spokeswoman said Bush's budget does not replicate billions in congressional earmarks and one- time expenses from fiscal 2001.

She rejected what she called Democrats' notion "that if you don't significantly grow the budget for a program or a department, then you're cutting it. It's more than reasonable to grow the budget by inflation and then [add] 4 percent [more]."

A Senate Budget spokesman said Domenici "will offer a budget that mirrors the President's blueprint, and the Senate will work its will."

The Senate's 50-50 split, and the sway GOP moderates hold in the chamber, could produce a budget resolution that provides for a larger discretionary spending total than Bush's budget plan envisions.

But if the congressional budget resolution hews to the President's admonition to limit the growth of spending to 4 percent, House Budget Democrats estimate that beyond increases for the departments of Defense, Education and HHS, several agencies would be in for sizable cuts.

For example, Democrats charge that Bush's fiscal 2002 request of $3.9 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers is 16.9 percent, or $800 million, below the inflation-adjusted baseline, as well as $600 million below the fiscal 2001 enacted level of $4.5 billion.

The Export-Import Bank, Democrats write, would be cut 25 percent, or $220 million, below the amount needed to maintain fiscal 2001 purchasing power, while the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission would get $9 million less than CBO estimates it would need to keep pace with inflation.