The bill also contains a provision blocking the pay of House and Senate members if their respective chambers do not produce a budget resolution, as required by law.  House leaders included this provision because the Senate has failed to adopt a budget resolution for three years.  Budget resolutions, while not carrying the force of law, help both chambers set spending priorities and enable a more predictable and efficient appropriations process.  When the annual spending bills are not completed and the government relies on continuing resolutions, long-term planning for any agency or organization that receives federal funding is extremely difficult.  The Senate has indicated it will pass H.R. 325 and President Obama has indicated that he will sign the legislation. Click here to view the full text of H.R. 325.

Appropriators have made significant progress in working out differences between the House and Senate spending bills and they had hoped several bills could be rolled into a FY2013 spending omnibus. However, passage is unlikely because Congressional leaders are focused on a deal to avoid the fiscal cliff and emergency spending relief for states and communities affected by Hurricane Sandy. The new Congress is likely to focus attention on the FY2014 budget process come January.

According to the memo, “Agencies should continue normal spending and operations” in early fiscal 2013, which officially began on October 1. This message came as part of a document OMB normally issues each year in late September detailing how federal agencies should operate under stopgap continuing resolutions (or “CRs”). However, this year is more complicated as the CR (H. J. Res. 117) signed into law by President Obama last week extends most federal operations for six months, a longer period than most CRs.

In a separate notice issued to agencies on the FY2013 CR, OMB also urged Congress to pass a “balanced package of deficit reduction” so that the automatic, across-the-board cuts built into last year’s debt-limit deal (P.L. 112-25) can be replaced with a more targeted approach to budget cutting. In mid-September, OMB released a report that projected sequester cuts of 9.4 percent to non-exempt defense discretionary spending and 8.2 percent to non-exempt domestic discretionary spending.

Unless Congress acts to avert or postpone the sequester before the January 2 deadline, OMB will need to trigger the actions needed to make $109 billion in cuts for the fiscal 2013 accounts of most federal programs. Both Republicans and Democrats have criticized this method for making cuts, and there have been calls from lawmakers and stakeholder groups across the political spectrum to prevent the sequester.

It remains unclear whether Congress will be able to reach a compromise on the sequester after the November elections. Republicans want to replace the cuts with alternative reductions, and the GOP-led House passed a budget resolution this year that included extensive cuts to domestic spending while eliminating the cuts to the Defense Department that would come under sequester. Democrats want an approach that would include higher tax revenues and alternative cuts to replace the sequester.

The CR reflects the $1.047 trillion cap set for discretionary spending in the 2011 Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25), which is approximately $8 billion over current federal government spending and represents about a 0.621 percent increase for most federal agencies and programs.

The CR followed an agreement negotiated by the Administration and Congressional leaders before the August recess who were anxious to avoid a government shutdown so close to the November elections. Although it remains unclear how and when Congress will complete the fiscal 2013 appropriations process, Appropriators in both the House and Senate hope to complete work on FY2013 spending during the lame-duck session with an omnibus package (which would combine all or several  appropriations bills into one large measure).  However, with the CR now guaranteeing funding for federal programs through late March, leaders may choose to delay finalizing FY2013 appropriations and instead focus on issues like the expiring tax cuts and the automatic, across-the-board spending cuts known as the “sequester.”

The measure (H. J. Res. 117), also called a Continuing Resolution or “CR,” will fund the federal government for the first half of fiscal year 2013 (from October 1, 2012 through March 27, 2013), and reflects the $1.047 trillion cap set for discretionary spending in the 2011 Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25). This is approximately $8 billion over current federal government spending and represents about a 0.6 percent increase for all federal agencies.

According to a new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report released this week, the small increase is unlikely to translate into additional dollars for federal agencies. As happens regularly with emergency spending laws, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will issue instructions to agencies on how to ration, or apportion, the funds for the first half of fiscal 2013. Agency leaders will most likely be even more careful than usual, due to the many uncertainties surrounding the upcoming sequester.

But the CR agreement does provide a brief break from the large-scale battles over spending that have consumed Congress, postponing the tough decisions that House and Senate leaders must tackle next year. Although Congress now faces further accusations of “kicking the can down the road,” both parties are anxious to avoid a repeat of a government shutdown so close to the election.  Democrats, betting on President Obama’s re-election and congressional victories that will help them fight what they consider draconian cuts, agreed to the CR instead of pushing for a shorter measure that would have forced decisions on spending in the lame-duck session. House Republicans, on the other hand, will allow Democrats a small increase in spending through the CR, hoping for a win by GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney which would position them to make more substantial changes to federal spending next year.

Additional CR Resources:

• Click here to view the full legislative draft CR
• Click here to view the House Appropriations press release, list of anomalies (or exceptions), and summary of the CR
• Click hereto view the Congressional Budget Office report on CR spending

RETAIN FUNDING FOR LOCAL DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS

ACTION NEEDED: Urge your members of Congress, especially those serving on the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies (T-HUD), to support the HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program as part of the final FY2013 Transportation-HUD Appropriations bill.  The members of NADO support retaining CDBG formula funds as a flexible, locally driven resource that provides valuable assistance for local community and economic development initiatives, including infrastructure and job creation projects supported by the CDBG state small cities program. 

ISSUE: The HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program continues to face cuts each year.  The program was reduced from $3.99 billion in FY2010 to $3.34 billion in FY2011 to $2.94 billion in FY2012. This continues a recent downward trend in CDBG funding since the program reached a high of $4.36 billion in FY2003.

On June 19, the House Appropriations Committee approved a FY2013 T-HUD appropriations measure (H.R. 5972) that would fund the CDBG program at $3.34 billion, approximately $400 million above FY2012 and level with the Administration’s FY2013 request.  During House floor debate of the T-HUD measure, an amendment offered by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) to eliminate all funding for CDBG grants in FY2013 was soundly defeated with a 80-342 vote.

Of interest to regional development organizations, the House Appropriations Committee included report language that would examine how grantees use CDBG funds as matching dollars for other federal programs.  Specifically, the report directs HUD to detail the percentage of CDBG funds used to match other federal programs; which federal programs are being matched; the local match requirements of such federal programs; what portion of the local match requirements are being met using CDBG, by federal program; and what legal authority allows the use of CDBG as a local match, by federal program.

On April 19, the Senate Appropriations committee approved a FY2013 T-HUD appropriations measure (S. 2322) that would fund the CDBG program at $3.1 billion, approximately $150 million above FY2012 and the Administration’s FY2013 request.  It is unclear when the Senate will move the bill to the floor.

KEY TALKING POINTS:

• CDBG is an important tool used by state and local officials as they tackle their most serious community and economic development challenges, such as providing affordable housing, upgrading and building essential public infrastructure and water systems, creating small business development loan funds for local entrepreneurs and industries, and addressing local planning and technical assistance needs.
• At a time when local governments and communities are striving to overcome intensifying global economic competition, upgrade aging public infrastructure, and address the severe housing crisis, it is vital that federal policy makers continue to maintain support for the CDBG program.
• The cornerstone of the CDBG program is its locally driven, flexible, and bottom-up approach.  The program provides invaluable resources for 1,180 urban counties and cities to meet locally-identified needs.  As required by law, 30 percent of CDBG formula funding is reserved for states to assist rural communities with economic development, infrastructure improvements, and other fundamental building blocks for job creation and economic development.
• State, regional, and local officials use the CDBG program to provide valuable seed capital, gap financing, and core support for a variety of projects.  In addition, CDBG funds are typically used to leverage and attract private sector investments.  Every CDBG dollar invested in communities is leveraged, on average, by three dollars in private funding, bringing much needed business investments to distressed areas.

U.S. Economic Development Administration

Summary of 2011-2012 House Floor Roll Call Votes

Updated May 11, 2012

During the 112^th Congress (2011-2012), the U.S. House of Representatives has held four floor votes on funding issues related to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration (EDA).  One House vote was part of the FY2011 Full Year Appropriations Act (an omnibus package of multiple appropriations bills) and the remaining three votes were part of the House floor debate on the FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill, one of the twelve annual spending bills that fund the annual discretionary programs of the federal government.  The votes included:

• Michaud Amendment to H.R. 1, FY2011 Full Year Appropriations Act. The amendment (#22) offered by Rep. Mike Michaud (D-ME) proposed to restore an $80 million cut to EDA as part of the long-term Continuing Resolution for FY2011 with an $80 million funding offset from the Census Bureau’s periodic census account.  The Michaud amendment was adopted with a strong bipartisan support on 305-127 vote (1 absent).  (Roll Call Vote 50, February 16, 2011)
• Michaud Amendment to H.R. 5326, FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Act.  The amendment (#1038) offered by Rep. Mike Michaud (D-ME) proposed to restore a $38 million cut to EDA as part of the FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill with a $38 million funding offset from the Census Bureau’s periodic census account.  The Michaud amendment was defeated by a 190-218 vote (23 absent / 3 vacancies).  (Roll Call Vote 205, May 8, 2012)
• Pompeo Amendment to H.R. 5326, FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Act.  The amendment (#1039) offered by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) proposed to eliminate EDA as part of the FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill.  The Pompeo amendment was defeated by a bipartisan vote of 129-279 (23 absent / 3 vacancies).  (Roll Call Vote 207, May 8, 2012)
• Scalise Amendment to H.R. 5326, FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Act.  The amendment (#1041) offered by Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) proposed to reduce the salaries and expense line items for three U.S. Department of Commerce accounts, including EDA’s operations account by $7.5 million, as part of the FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill.  The Scalise amendment was defeated by a vote of 174-233 (24 absent / 3 vacancies).  (Roll Call Vote 207, May 8, 2012)

Following is a summary of the voting trends and key findings.

OVERALL:  ANALYSIS OF 4 KEY EDA HOUSE FLOOR APPROPRIATIONS VOTES

• 181 House members voted in support of the Michaud amendment to restore the proposed $38 million cut to EDA’s FY2013 budget and against the Pompeo amendment to eliminate EDA. This total includes 142 Democrats and 39 Republicans.
• 150 House members voted in favor of EDA on all 4 key votes in 2011 and 2012, including 126 Democrats and 24 Republicans.
• 99 House members voted against restoring EDA’s FY2013 budget to the current level, YET also opposed eliminating the agency as part of the Pompeo amendment.  This total includes 33 Democrats and 66 Republicans.
• 62 House members voted against EDA on all 4 key votes in 2011 and 2012. All were Republicans.
• 14 House members voted against EDA under H.R. 1 in 2011, but these same members voted in support of EDA as part of the Michaud and Pompeo amendments in 2012.
• 9 House members voted BOTH to restore the proposed $38 million cut to EDA’s FY2013 budget as part of the Michaud amendment and to eliminate the agency as part of the Pompeo amendment.             All of these members were Republicans. (Note: One explanation may be the member wanted to reduce funding for the Census Bureau’s periodic census account.)

Michaud Amendment to H.R. 1, FY2011 full-year appropriations act

Amendment #22 by Rep. Mike Michaud (D-ME) to restore proposed $80 million funding cut from EDA’s FY2011 budget with $80 million funding offset from the Census Bureau’s periodic census account.

• Amendment was adopted with strong bipartisan support on 305-127 vote (1 absent) (Roll Call 50, February 16, 2011)
• Supported Restoring EDA FY11 Funding
  • 145 of 240 Republicans (60% of Republican Caucus)
  • 160 of 192 Democrats (83% of Democratic Caucus)
•  Opposed Restoring EDA FY11 Funding
  • 95 of 240 Republicans (40% of Republican Caucus)
  • 32 of 192 Democrats (17% of Democratic Caucus
• Noteworthy Findings
  • House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) and 8 of the 12 Appropriations subcommittee chairmen (known as the Cardinals) supported the EDA amendmen
  • Of the 50 members of the House Appropriations Committee
    • Total:  36 supported passage of EDA amendment while 14 opposed the amendment
    • 29 Republicans:  21 voted in support of EDA while only 8 opposed the amendment
    • 21 Democrats:  15 voted in support of EDA while 6 opposed the amendmen
• Voting Records of House Freshman Class
  • Republicans
    • 49 of 86 House Republican Freshmen supported restoring EDA funding (57%)
    • 37 of 86 House Republican Freshmen opposed restoring EDA funding (43%)
  • Democrats
    • 8 of 9 House Democratic Freshmen supported restoring EDA funding

EDA amendment received second highest vote total in support of restoring funding as part of long-term FY2011 Continuing Resolution - second only to amendment to restore FEMA’s firefighter grant program. 

Michaud Amendment to H.R. 5326, FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Act

Amendment #1038 by Rep. Mike Michaud (D-ME) to restore proposed $38 million funding cut from EDA’s FY2013 budget with $38 million funding offset from the Census Bureau’s periodic census account.

• Amendment failed in the House with a vote of 190 to 218
  • Supported Restoring EDA’s FY13 Funding
    • 48 of 242 Republicans (8 did not vote) – (19% of the caucus)
    • 142 of 190 Democrats (15 did not vote) – (74% of the caucus)
  •  Opposed Restoring EDA’s FY13 Funding
    • 185 of 242 Republicans – (19% of the caucus)
    • 33 of 190 Democrats – (16% of the caucus)
  •  Did Not Vote
    • 8 of 242 Republicans
    • 15 of 190 Democrats
    • 3 vacancies
•  House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) and 2 of the 12 Appropriations subcommittee chairmen (known as the Cardinals) supported the EDA Amendment.  Ranking Member Norm Dicks (D-WA) also supported the amendment to restore EDA’s funding.
  • Cardinals Supported: Reps. Rogers (R-KY), Rehberg (R-MT), and Latham (R-IA)
  • Cardinals Opposed: Reps. Aderholt (R-AL), Crenshaw (R-FL), Culberson (R-TX), Emerson (R-MO), Frelinghuysen (R-NJ), Granger (R-TX), Kingston (R-GA), Simpson (R-ID), Wolf (R-VA), and Young (R-FL)
•  Of the 50 members of the House Appropriations Committee
  • Total: 19 supported passage of EDA amendment while 28 opposed
  • 29 Republicans: 7 supported passage of EDA amendment while 21 opposed.  Rep. Bonner (R-AL) did not vote.
  • 21 Democrats: 12 supported passage of EDA amendment while 7 opposed and 2 did not vot
• Voting Records of the House Freshmen Class:  There are 94 new freshman members
  • Total:  33 freshmen supported the Michaud amendment to restore EDA’s budget
  • 85 Republicans:  Only 25 Republican freshmen supported the amendment
  • 9 Democrats: 8 Democrat freshmen supported the amendment

POMPEO Amendment to H.R. 5326, FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Act

Amendment #1039 by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) to eliminate any FY2013 program funding for the U.S. Economic Development Administration.

• Amendment failed in the House with a vote of 129 to 279 (23 did not vote)
• Supported Elimination of EDA
  • 129 of 233 Republicans (8 did not vote) – (55% of the caucus)
  • 0 of 175 Democrats (15 did not vote) – (0% of the caucus)
• Voted Against Eliminating EDA
  • 104 of 233 Republicans (8 did not vote) – (45% of the caucus)
  • 175 of 175 Democrats (15 did not vote) – (100% of the caucus
• Did Not Vote
  • 8 of 241 Republicans
  • 15 of 190 Democrats
  • 3 vacancies
• Noteworthy Findings
  • House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) and 8 of the 12 Appropriations Subcommittee chairs (known as the Cardinals) voted against the Pompeo amendment to eliminate EDA.  Ranking Member Norm Dicks (D-WA) also opposed Pompeo’s amendment.  Four of the 12 Cardinals voted to eliminate EDA.
  • 8 Cardinals Supported EDA:  Reps. Aderholt (R-AL), Crenshaw (R-FL), Emerson (R-MO), Frelinghuysen (R-NJ), Latham (R-IA), Rehberg (R-MT), Simpson (R-ID), and Wolf (R-VA)
  • 4 Cardinals Voted to Eliminate EDA:  Reps. Culberson (R-TX), Granger (R-TX), Kingston (R-GA), and Young (R-FL
• Of the 50 members of the House Appropriations Committee
  • Total:  10 voted “yes” to eliminate EDA while 37 opposed (3 did not vote)
  • Of the 29 Republicans:  10 supported passage of Pompeo’s amendment to eliminate EDA while 18 opposed.  Rep. Bonner (R-AL) did not vote.
  • Of the 21 Democrats: 19 opposed eliminating EDA and 2 did not vote.
• Voting Records of the House Freshman Class:  There are 94 new freshman members
  • Total:  41 freshmen supported the amendment—all were Republican
  • 52 freshmen opposed Pompeo’s amendment (one freshman did not vote)

TO RESTORE FUNDING FOR THE U.S. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

ACTION NEEDED: Urge your Representatives to vote “yes” on the Rep. Michael Michaud (D-ME) amendment to restore a proposed $38 million cut to the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) as the House considers the FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill. This year, the U.S. House of Representatives has proposed to cut EDA’s FY2013 budget to $219 million, $38 million below FY2012 and level with the President’s FY2013 budget request.  The amendment offered by Rep. Michaud would restore the $38 million cut.

During the U.S. House debate on the Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 (H.R. 1), Rep. Michaud successfully offered a similar amendment to restore a proposed $80 million cut, or 33 percent reduction, in EDA’s FY2011 funding.  The House overwhelmingly adopted, by a strong bipartisan vote of 305 to 127, to retain EDA’s funding at the FY2010 enacted level.  With 60 percent of the Republican caucus and 83 percent of the Democratic caucus supporting full funding for EDA, this was a clear demonstration of the agency’s results over the years and the need for future strategic public investments to lower the unemployment rate and generate high-quality private sector employment opportunities.

BACKGROUND: On April 19, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a FY2013 Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) Appropriations bill that would provide $238 million for EDA, approximately $20 million below FY2012 and $19 million above the President’s FY2013 budget request. On April 26, the House Appropriations Committee approved their version of the FY2013 CJS Appropriations bill that would provide $219 million for EDA, $38 million below FY2012 and level with the President’s FY2013 budget request.  The FY2012 appropriation for EDA included $200 million for disaster assistance for areas that received a disaster designation in fiscal year 2011.

KEY TALKING POINTS:

• EDA is unique among federal programs.  While other federal programs often support broader community development activities, EDA focuses strictly on private sector job creation and economic growth.
• By federal law, EDA projects typically require a 50 percent local cost share and significant private sector investment, ensuring that local leaders and businesses are committed to the project’s success.  In addition, EDA investments are focused on high quality jobs, especially in advanced manufacturing, science and technology, and emerging knowledge-based industries and sectors.
• By federal law, EDA project investments must be tied into a regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) developed and vetted by local officials (including Economic Development Districts)—this helps ensure projects have significant local support and are part of a broader regional strategy.
• EDA invests in public assets that private companies are reluctant to fund themselves.  These assets are often lacking in the nation’s most distressed areas, yet they are a prerequisite for private industry to remain or locate in these areas.  As we have witnessed in recent years, private companies will relocate to places with these basic yet vital public infrastructure assets, including outside of the United States.

Contact your members in the U.S. House of Representatives and urge them to continue to support the HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program during floor consideration of the House FY2013 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (T-HUD) appropriations bill.

If you are concerned about other programs funded under the T-HUD appropriations bill including HUD’s HOME Program (House proposes $200 million increase) and the Sustainable Communities Initiative (similar to last year, the House proposes no funding), or programs funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation, now is the time to weigh in with your House Representatives.

BACKGROUND ON CDBG AND LEGISLATIVE UPDATE:

Tomorrow (June 27), the U.S. House of Representatives will consider the FY2013 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (T-HUD) appropriations bill (which funds programs under the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies).

The HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program has faced drastic cuts over the last several years.  The program was reduced from $3.99 billion in FY2010 to $3.34 billion in FY2011 to $2.94 billion in FY2012. This continues a recent downward trend in CDBG funding since the program reached a high of $4.36 billion in FY2003. For FY2013, the Administration proposed to fund CDBG at $2.9 billion which is the lowest amount recommended for CDBG since the late 1980s.

So far this year, things are looking more positive for the CDBG program.

On June 19, the House Appropriations Committee approved a FY2013 T-HUD appropriations measure that would fund the CDBG program at $3.34 billion, approximately $400 million above the FY2012 level and the Administration’s FY2013 request. Of interest to regional development organizations, the House Appropriations Committee included report language that would examine how grantees use CDBG funds as matching dollars for other federal programs.  Specifically, the report directs HUD to detail the percentage of CDBG funds used to match other federal programs; which federal programs are being matched; the local match requirements of such federal programs; what portion of the local match requirements are being met using CDBG, by federal program; and what legal authority allows the use of CDBG as a local match, by federal program. To view the House FY2013 T-HUD appropriations report, click here.

On April 19, the Senate Appropriations committee approved a FY2013 T-HUD appropriations measure that would fund the CDBG program at $3.1 billion, approximately $150 million above the FY2012 level and the Administration’s FY2013 request.  It is unclear when the Senate will move the bill to the floor. To view the Senate FY2013 T-HUD appropriations report, click here.

NOTE:  It is important to remember that the upcoming sequestration (automatic, across-the-board cuts to all federal discretionary programs), which is scheduled to occur starting January 2, 2013, would make additional cuts to the CDBG program.

KEY TALKING POINTS FOR CDBG:

• CDBG is an important tool used by state and local officials as they tackle their most serious community and economic development challenges, such as providing affordable housing, upgrading and building essential public infrastructure and water systems, creating small business development loan funds for local entrepreneurs and industries, and addressing local planning and technical assistance needs.
• At a time when local governments and communities are striving to overcome intensifying global economic competition, upgrade aging public infrastructure, and address the severe housing crisis, it is vital that federal policy makers continue to support the CDBG program.
• The cornerstone of the CDBG program is its locally driven, flexible, and bottom-up approach.  The program provides invaluable resources for 1,180 urban counties and cities to meet locally-identified needs.  As required by law, 30 percent of CDBG formula funding is reserved for states to assist rural communities with economic development, infrastructure improvements, and other fundamental building blocks for job creation and economic development.
• State, regional, and local officials use the CDBG program to provide valuable seed capital, gap financing, and core support for a variety of projects.  In addition, CDBG funds are typically used to leverage and attract private sector investments.  Every CDBG dollar invested in communities is leveraged, on average, by three dollars in private funding, bringing much-needed business investments to distressed areas.

The House Labor-HHS Appropriations Subcommittee, which has not yet introduced a draft bill, is expected to mark up its version next week, with full Appropriations Committee consideration possible the following week. The House Republican leadership has allocated nearly $9 billion less than the Senate for programs funded under FY2013 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations.

The following are a few highlights of the Senate FY2013 appropriations bill:

U.S. Department of Labor Programs

• Employment and Training Administration (ETA): The bill provides $3.176 billion for the Training and Employment Services account, which funds most activities under WIA.  ETA programs are currently funded at $3.192 billion.
• Grants to States: The bill includes $2.60 billion for grants to states, level with FY2012 funding. As proposed in the Administration’s budget request, the Committee retains bill language that allows local workforce boards to transfer up to 30 percent between the adult and dislocated worker assistance State grant programs, if such transfer is approved by the Governor. In addition, a local board may award a contract to an institution of higher education or other eligible training provider if the board determines that it would facilitate the training of multiple individuals in high-demand occupations, if such contract does not limit customer choice.
• Adult Employment and Training: For adult employment and training activities, the bill includes $770.81 million, level with current funding.
• Youth Training: For youth training programs, the bill includes $824.35 million, just slightly below the current funding level of $825.91 million.
• Dislocated Worker Assistance: For dislocated worker assistance, the bill includes $1.008 billion, level with current funding.
• Governor’s Reserve Fund:  The bill would modify current law regarding the amount of WIA State grant funding that may be set aside by Governors.  As requested by the Administration, the Committee continues bill language authorizing the Governor of a State to reserve not more than 5 percent of the funds allotted to a State through the WIA State grant programs for statewide workforce investment activities.  The percentage was lowered from 15 percent to 5 percent in FY2011, and then maintained at that level in FY2012. The Committee adds new bill language allowing Governors to reserve up to 10 percent of WIA State grant program funding if half of the total set-aside is used to support on-the-job and incumbent training to improve the skills of workers, avert layoffs, or lead to employment, and is delivered on a local or regional basis for in-demand occupations or industries.
• YouthBuild:  The bill includes $79.68 million, level with current funding and the Administration’s request.
• Workforce Innovation Fund: The bill includes $49.90 million, level with current funding for competitive awards for workforce innovation activities.
• Job Corps:  The bill includes $1.673 billion for Job Corps, instead of $1.706 billion level in FY2012.
• Community Service Employment for Older Americans (COESA):  The bill includes $488 million for CSEOA, basically level with current funding.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Programs

• Head Start:  The bill includes $8.039 billion for Head start, $70 million above the current level.  In FY2012, HHS began implementing new regulations that will require Head Start grantees that do not meet certain performance standards to re-compete for funding.  This year, over $1.2 billion in grants will be re-competed.  The bill supports the implementation of the re-competitions as well as an increase for each grantee to help defray rising operational costs.
• Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP):  The bill includes $3.472 billion for LIHEAP, level with FY2012 funding.  The administration had proposed a decrease of $452 million.
• Community Services Block Grant (CSBG):  The bill includes $677 million for CSBG, level with FY2012 funding.  The administration had proposed a cut of $327 million.
• Community Economic Development:  The bill includes $29.94 million, level with FY2012 funding level and the administration’s request.
• Rural Community Facilities:  The bill includes $5.98 million for the rural community facilities program, an increase of $1 million over current levels.  The administration had proposed to eliminate funding.
• Social Services Block Grant:  The bill includes $1.7 billion, level with FY2012 funding and the slightly lower than the Administration’s request.