|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Congress approves lean spending measure On December 8th, President Bush signed into law a $388 billion omnibus appropriations package, which included discretionary spending for thirteen government agencies and various departments for fiscal year 2005. Total discretionary spending increased by only one percent overall, the lowest increase in nearly a decade. Included in the bill is a provision that applies an 0.8% across the board cut to all discretionary funding (excluding homeland security). Individual federal agencies are to determine how this cut will be applied to the funding levels outlined below. Fiscal year 2005 began on October 1st, and the federal government had been operating on a continuing resolution. HighlightsThe package includes $143.09 billion for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, a 3% increase over FY2004 spending levels. Congress awarded $250 million for President Bush's Community-Based Job Training Grants program. This program will train workers in high demand industries by funding partnerships between employers and community colleges. Congress also approved funding for Perkins Vocational Education programs at levels higher than FY2004. The President, in his FY2005 budget request released in February, recommended the elimination of Perkins basic state grants, Tech Prep, national programs and other vital Perkins-funded programs. The President called for a $1 billion block grant program to states, the Secondary & Technical Education State Grants program. Fortunately, there was little support for this proposal on Capitol Hill, and due to the work of groups like Women Work!, this loss in funding and dramatic shift in the delivery of career and technical education was prevented. Another provision would allow the Department of Education to update the formula for the Expected Family Contribution (EFC), a calculator for Pell Grant eligibility. The EFC estimates the student's and the family's total income and living expenses to determine an amount a family/student should contribute to the student’s education. Currently the EFC is based on 1988 state income tax rate data, and if updated, would calculate students families as paying less in state income taxes. Therefore students families would be expected to contribute more to education costs. Approximately 1 million prospective Pell Grant recipients are estimated to have their eligibility reduced by an average of $300. Another 84,000 who previously had been eligible to receive aid would be completely ineligible. The update would save the Pell program about $300 million annually. Most students hurt by the update come from families earning around $40,000 annually. More than half of all Pell grant recipients report family incomes of less than $15,000. The Economic Equity Insider first reported on this issue in August 2003.
The 2004 Elections and Women's Vote A survey commissioned by Votes for Women 2004, a nonpartisan organization, found that the gender gap is alive and well in both voting behavior and opinions on policy issues. As is the norm, more women than man voted— 54% percent of voters were women and only 46% were men. Yet, there was a 7 point gender gap in votes for the President. Fifty-five percent of men voted for Bush while only 48% of women did. This gap is slightly smaller than the 10 point gap of the 2000 election when 53% of men and 43% of women voted for Bush. The gender gap was also evident within racial groups. White men and women tended to favor Bush, but white men especially so— white men favored him by 25 points while white women favored him by only 11. On the other hand, non-white men supported Kerry by a 37 point difference and non-white women supported him by a 51 point difference. This year, fewer women voted for the Democratic candidate. The decline was evident with white women, working women, married women and older women. In 2004, 44% of white women voted for Kerry, but in 2000 Gore got 48% of their vote. Also, this year working women voted 51% democratic as compared to 58% in 2000. There was also a significant difference between married and unmarried women’s voting. Married voters tended to vote for Bush and the unmarried for Kerry. Fifty-five percent of married women voted for Bush while 62% of unmarried women voted for Kerry. This compares to 60% of married men who favored Bush and 53% of unmarried men who voted for Kerry. Women's priorities tended to split along party lines. On average, 64% of women believed that equal rights for women would lead to a higher level of economic well-being. Specifically, however, 76% of Democratic women saw a connection between these two issues, while only 48% of Republican women held this view. Only 43% of men believed this connection to be true. DOL Announces PRA Project, Many Women Workers Won't See Benefits In October, U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao announced a $9 million demonstration project to implement the Personal Reemployment Accounts program (PRAs). The Personal Reemployment Accounts bill (H.R. 444) was passed by the House of Representatives in June. The bill authorized a program which provides up to $3,000 for job training or supportive services to a newly unemployed individual. Allowable services include career and literacy counseling; job training; reimbursement for childcare and transportation; and, in limited cases, income support. However, the bill met little support in the Senate, and did not become law. The Department of Labor will instead implement a demonstration in up to nine states. The recently unemployed will be provided with career information on high growth jobs, as well as funds to purchase approved services. If a PRA recipient finds employment within thirteen weeks they will receive a cash employment bonus – 60% received at the commencement of employment and the remainder after six months of employment. Unfortunately, PRAs fail to aid many unemployed women workers. An applicant is eligible for a PRA when s/he has exhausted her/his unemployment insurance (UI). Yet, displaced homemakers entering the workforce for the first time or after an extended absence are ineligible for unemployment benefits because they have not lost a paid job. Further, most states require a minimum length of employment or minimum amount of earnings to qualify for UI, thereby excluding low-wage and part-time workers; sixty percent of low-wage workers are women. For more information on the PRAs and the House-passed legislation, please refer to the July issue of the Economic Equity Insider, or visit the Department of Labor's website. Congress Extends Higher Education Act Through 2005 After failed attempts to reauthorize the Higher Education Act (HEA), Congress passed the Higher Education Extension Act of 2004 in early October. The bill was signed into law on October 25th, effectively extending the law and continuing funding for financial aid programs through September of 2005. As reported in the June and October issues of the Economic Equity Insider, both the House and Senate have introduced numerous bills to reauthorize the Act, but none met great support. HEA reauthorization is expected to be taken up during the 109th Congress. Report Shows Low-Income Mothers Face Particular Difficulty in Job Market The Institute for Women's Policy Research recently released Work Supports, Job Retention, and Job Mobility among Low-Income Mothers, a report that examines key factors that relate to job retention and advancement among low-wage workers, specifically mothers. Overall, the findings are not surprising, and indicate that the most influential factors in keeping and advancing in a job are employer-provided health insurance, child care and postsecondary education. According to the report, low-income mothers have a high rate of job turnover compared to higher-income mothers. But when employers provide health insurance, low-income mothers are nearly three times more likely to retain their job than women who have other types of insurance or lack employer-provided benefits. Low-income mothers are more likely to reduce child-care costs by having relatives take care of their children, while higher-income working mothers normally pay for organized child care. This is not surprising considering only 7% of the low-income working mothers studied in the report received monetary aid for child care. After leaving the labor force, a barrier to reentry is also lack of child care. The report also found that post secondary education increases the likelihood of a low-income mother obtaining a higher-wage job. In fact, wage increased by approximately 25% for those with some degree of college education and about 10% for those with high school degrees. The study shows that job retention and promotion are particularly difficult for low-income women. It suggests that improved job placement strategies, job training, child care and education are imperative for low-income women in the labor force.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
