|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. Appendix D
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
Page 261 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 261
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
Appendix D
Defense and Other Domestic Spending: Program Options
As described in Chapter 7, the committee adopted a twofold approach for distributing spending across the defense, domestic discretionary, and other mandatory categories for the four illustrative options. First, it set targets for other mandatory spending (which excludes Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security). In Options 1 and 2, devolution-related cuts, reductions in commercial subsidies and “low-value” activities, and the use of a smaller inflation adjustment in indexed programs would bring other mandatory spending from 2.8 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2008 to 2 percent in 2019. The latter number can be compared with 2.1 percent in the study baseline for that year. In Options 3 and 4, other mandatory spending in this category simply follows the baseline.
Second, the committee allocated spending among the defense (nearly all of which is discretionary) and domestic discretionary categories. According to baseline projections, defense spending will stabilize at approximately 53 percent of total discretionary spending by 2019, with domestic discretionary spending constituting the remaining 47 percent. The committee decided that a plausible approach would be to roughly reproduce that ratio in Options 1, 2, and 4. Given Option 3’s emphasis upon public investments, however, the committee decided to allocate extra resources to the domestic discretionary category by having defense spending follow the study baseline. Table D-1 presents spending details for the defense, domestic discretionary, and other mandatory categories.
Once the committee determined its share-of-GDP targets for 2019, it created plausible spending trajectories for 2012-2019; see Tables D-2, D-3, and D-4.
OCR for page 262
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
After 2019, total defense and domestic discretionary spending fluctuates slightly as a share of GDP in the study baseline (see Table F-1 in Appendix F). Correspondingly, spending also fluctuates slightly for Options 1-4, with the defense, domestic discretionary, and other mandatory
TABLE D-1 Defense, Domestic Discretionary, and Other Mandatory Spending, as a Percentage of GDP
Spending Category
2008
2019
Actual
Study Baseline
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Defense
4.3
3.4
2.6
3.1
3.4
4.2
Domestic Discretionary
3.7
3.0
2.3
2.8
3.5
3.7
Other Mandatory
2.8
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
Total
10.8
8.5
6.9
7.9
9.0
10.0
TABLE D-2 Defense Spending, 2008-2019
Year
Baseline
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
In Billions of Dollars
2008a
609
NA
NA
NA
NA
2009
671
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
734
NA
NA
NA
NA
2011
755
NA
NA
NA
NA
2012
717
692
707
717
775
2013
684
637
665
684
794
2014
670
601
643
670
812
2015
673
581
637
673
827
2016
683
566
637
683
842
2017
693
551
638
693
856
2018
705
536
639
705
869
2019
717
545
650
717
881
As a Percentage of GDP
2008a
4.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
2009
4.8
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
5.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
2011
5.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
2012
4.5
4.4
4.5
4.5
4.9
2013
4.1
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.8
2014
3.9
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.7
2015
3.7
3.2
3.5
3.7
4.6
2016
3.7
3.0
3.4
3.7
4.5
2017
3.6
2.8
3.3
3.6
4.4
2018
3.5
2.7
3.2
3.5
4.3
2019
3.4
2.6
3.1
3.4
4.2
NOTE: NA = not applicable.
aActual spending.
OCR for page 263
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
TABLE D-3 Domestic Discretionary Spending, 2008-2019
Year
Baseline
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
In Billions of Dollars
2008a
524
NA
NA
NA
NA
2009
576
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
640
NA
NA
NA
NA
2011
623
NA
NA
NA
NA
2012
584
564
577
640
644
2013
584
544
571
657
665
2014
589
528
570
672
685
2015
596
514
571
686
704
2016
610
505
577
699
722
2017
623
494
583
711
741
2018
634
481
586
723
758
2019
635
482
587
734
776
As a Percentage of GDP
2008a
3.7
NA
NA
NA
NA
2009
4.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
4.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
2011
4.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
2012
3.7
3.6
3.7
4.1
4.1
2013
3.5
3.3
3.5
4.0
4.0
2014
3.4
3.1
3.3
3.9
4.0
2015
3.3
2.9
3.2
3.8
3.9
2016
3.3
2.7
3.1
3.7
3.9
2017
3.2
2.5
3.0
3.7
3.8
2018
3.1
2.4
2.9
3.6
3.8
2019
3.0
2.3
2.8
3.5
3.7
NOTE: NA = not applicable.
aActual spending.
categories; they have the same relative shares in 2020 and beyond as they did in 2019 (see Tables F-4, F-6, F-8, and F-10 in Appendix F).
DEVOLUTION POLICIES: OPTIONS 1 AND 2
The committee identified illustrative candidates for devolution and budget reduction by selecting from a list of federal grants to state and local governments (U.S. Office of Management and Budget, 2009). The committee’s candidates are in education, training, employment, and social services.
Indian education: supports the efforts of local educational agencies and tribal schools to improve teaching and learning for the nation’s Native American children
OCR for page 264
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
TABLE D-4 Other Mandatory Spending, 2008-2019
Year
Baseline
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
In Billions of Dollars
2008a
397
NA
NA
NA
NA
2009
1108
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
566
NA
NA
NA
NA
2011
488
NA
NA
NA
NA
2012
400
397
397
400
400
2013
414
407
407
414
414
2014
399
389
389
399
399
2015
397
384
384
397
397
2016
405
389
389
405
405
2017
404
385
385
404
404
2018
399
377
377
399
399
2019
444
419
419
444
444
As a Percentage of GDP
2008a
2.8
NA
NA
NA
NA
2009
7.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
2010
3.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
2011
3.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
2012
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2013
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2014
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2015
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
2016
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
2017
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
2018
2.0
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.0
2019
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
NOTE: NA = not applicable.
aActual spending.
impact aid: provides money to school districts that are financially burdened by the presence of tracts of land that do not pay property taxes (such as military bases or Indian lands)
education for the disadvantaged: allocates funds for local programs that provide extra academic support to help raise the achievement of eligible students in high-poverty schools or, in the case of school-wide programs, help all students in high-poverty schools to meet challenging state academic standards
school improvement programs: includes funds for improving teacher quality, developing and implementing state assessments, rural education, and other activities
innovation and improvement: funds charter school grants and magnet school assistance, the teaching of American history, teacher incentives, and other activities
OCR for page 265
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
safe schools and citizenship education: funds alcohol abuse reduction, mentoring, character education, elementary and secondary school counseling, physical education, civic education, and other activities
English-language acquisition: provides formula grants to states to improve services for limited-English-proficient and immigrant students
special education: assists state and local educational agencies to provide children with disabilities with access to high-quality education, helps states provide a comprehensive system of early intervention services, and links states, school systems, and families to best practices to improve results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities
rehabilitation services and disability research: funds vocational rehabilitation, assistive technology, and rehabilitation research, and other activities
American Printing House for the Blind: supports the production and dissemination of free educational materials for students below the college level who are blind, research related to developing and improving products, and advisory services to consumer organizations on the availability and use of materials
career, technical, and adult education: provides formula grants to states to help eliminate functional illiteracy among the nation’s adults, to assist adults in obtaining a high school diploma or its equivalent, to promote family literacy, and other activities
promoting safe and stable families: funds a broad range of child welfare services, including family preservation and family support services
children and families services programs: funds Head Start, child welfare services, abstinence education, and other activities
aging services programs: provide nutrition, supportive services, and caregiver support services throughout the aging network
operation of American Indian programs: provides a wide range of services and benefits to Native Americans in the areas of tribal government, human services, natural resources management, education, public safety and justice, and community and economic development
training and employment services: funds adult employment and training, dislocated worker employment and training, youth services, reintegration of ex-offenders, Job Corps, and other activities
community service employment for older Americans: provides part-time work experience in community service activities to unemployed, low-income persons aged 55 and older
OCR for page 266
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
state unemployment insurance and employment service operations: provides administrative grants to state agencies that pay unemployment compensation to eligible workers, and collects state unemployment taxes from employers, and funds a nationwide system that provides no-fee employment services
unemployment trust fund: provides support for the financial transaction of the federal-state and railroad unemployment insurance systems
federal unemployment benefits and allowances: funds the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program, which provides weekly cash benefits, training, and job search and relocation allowances to certain workers displaced by international trade; and the Alternative Trade Adjustment Demonstration Program of wage insurance for older workers
Corporation for National and Community Service operations: provides funds to foster civic engagement and responsibility by working with nonprofit organizations, faith-based groups, schools, and other civic organizations to engage Americans in community service
school improvement for Washington, DC: supports efforts to improve the quality of kindergarten through high school education in the District of Columbia
social services block grants: funds such services as day care, protective services for children or adults, special services to persons with disabilities, adoption, case management, health-related services, transportation, foster care, substance abuse, housing, home-delivered meals, independent and transitional living, and employment services
To generate cost savings relative to the baseline by 2019, the committee inflated the 2009 budget authority for these programs (taking into account the presumably temporary nature of some of the stimulus spending) at a rate of 2 percent and estimated the lagged outlay effects of cutting the programs by 50 percent starting in 2012.
COMMERCIAL SUBSIDIES AND “LOW-VALUE” ACTIVITIES: OPTIONS 1 AND 2
In addition to possible candidates for devolution to state and local governments, the committee considered candidates for eliminating or reducing commercial subsidies (as well as raising user fees) for a range of programs and activities and for eliminating or reducing “low-value” activities. For its illustrative candidates, the committee drew on a list of potential budget
OCR for page 267
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
savings identified by the Congressional Budget Office (2009). They are presented here by agency.
Overseas Private Investment Corporation
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)—elimination: offers private U.S. companies subsidized financing for foreign investment and insurance against political risks to those investments, including nationalization
National Science Foundation
National Science Foundation (NSF) spending on elementary and secondary education—elimination: supports advanced teacher training and continuing education and is also used for development of instructional and assessment materials
Department of Homeland Security
research and development programs in the Science and Technology Directorate—reduction: includes basic and applied research; development and testing of standards, prototypes, and preproduction hardware; and procurement of products, systems, and equipment
Department of Energy
applied research for fossil fuels—elimination: funds research into applied technologies for finding and producing petroleum, coal, and natural gas
ultra-deepwater and unconventional natural gas and other petroleum research programs—elimination: funds applied research using federal revenues from old and gas leases
nuclear energy research and development—elimination: three programs seek to develop new ways to generate and harness nuclear energy while reducing radioactive waste and guarding against the potential for nuclear proliferation
FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership—elimination: a joint effort of the federal government and private industry to promote research on fuel cells in energy-efficient vehicles
applied research on energy-efficiency and renewable-energy technologies—elimination: support for the development of technology to increase energy conservation and efficiency in the transportation, building, and industrial sectors of the economy and to make greater
OCR for page 268
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
use of such renewable resources as solar, wind, and geothermal energy and biomass-based fuel
grants to states for energy conservation and weatherization—elimination: support for state and municipal efforts in energy conservation and building weatherization
nuclear waste fund fee—index to inflation: funds the disposal of the radioactive wastes of civilian nuclear power plants through a fee per kilowatt-hour of electricity that they generate
power marketing administrations—increase rates: generate electricity, mainly from hydropower facilities constructed and operated by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, with rates to customers that are much lower than those of other utilities
Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) and related power-generating assets—sell: generate and sell electricity from hydropower facilities constructed and operated by the Army Corps of Engineers
Tennessee Valley Authority
parts of the electric power assets—sell: now one of the largest producers of electricity in the nation in contrast to original function of managing the region’s hydropower resources
Army Corps of Engineers
permits for dredging—increase fees: needed to dredge or place fill material in navigable waters
federal funding for beach replenishment projects—eliminate: operations designed to counter beach erosion, typically by dredging sand from offshore locations and pumping it onshore to rebuild eroded areas
Department of the Interior
authority to collect maintenance and location fees for hard rock mining on federal lands—permanently grant: mineral production on federal lands is less costly than on private lands unlike the extraction of other minerals or fossil fuels from public lands, royalties are not charged on the value of hard rock minerals
grazing fees for federal lands—use state formulas: grazing fees for federal lands differ from those for state-owned lands
OCR for page 269
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program—reassign reimbursable costs to the beneficiaries it serves: provides subsidized service because customers receive benefit from but do not pay for the extra capacity that was built into the federal facilities that support irrigation
Environmental Protection Agency
federal grants for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure—eliminate: provides funds to the states to help communities build or replace municipal wastewater and drinking systems to meet federal standards
Energy Star Program—eliminate: product-labeling and certification program whose goal is to help consumers and organizations save energy and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by choosing products or management practices that are energy efficient or that rely on clean forms of energy
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program—eliminate: provides grants to scientists and fellowships for graduate work in environmental sciences
Department of Agriculture
timber sales that lose money—reduce funding: management of federal timber sales from national forests
Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP)—scale back: provides agricultural producers financial and technical help to promote the conservation and improvement of soil, water, air, energy, and plant and animal life on lands used for agricultural purposes
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)—limit enrollment: promotes soil conservation, improved water quality, and protection of wild-life habitat by removing land from active agricultural production
payments to producers of certain agricultural commodities— impose limits: supports producers of various farm commodities (including cotton, feed grains, oilseeds, peanuts, rice, and wheat) through direct and countercyclical payments and loan benefits
acreage payments—reduce by 1 percentage point: direct and countercyclical payments to agricultural producers, calculated as 85 percent of a producer’s base acreage times an assumed yield per acre times a payment rate per unit of production
reimbursement rate paid to private insurance companies in the Crop Insurance Program—reduce: this program protects farmers from losses caused by drought, flooding, pest infestation, and other natural disasters
OCR for page 270
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
Foreign Market Development Program—eliminate: provides partnerships in joint ventures with “cooperators”—such as agricultural trade associations and commodity groups—to develop markets for U.S. exports
Market Access Program—reduce funding: provides funds to trade associations, commodity groups, and for-profit firms to help them build markets overseas for U.S. agricultural products
export credit guarantees—limit the repayment period: protects exporters and banks in the United States against default on financing they provide to foreign importers and banks to cover purchases of U.S. goods
financing of rural water and waste disposal—create revolving fund: assists rural communities through a program that provides loans, loan guarantees, and grants for water and water-disposal projects
Department of Commerce
trade promotion activities of the International Trade Administration—eliminate or charge the beneficiaries: trade development programs that assess the competitiveness of U.S. industries and promote exports and U.S. and foreign commercial services, which counsel U.S. businesses on issues related to exporting
Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership and the Baldrige National Quality Program—eliminate: improve the performance of U.S. businesses by providing them with technical assistance
Federal Communications Commission
authority to auction licenses for use of the radio spectrum—ermanently extend: licenses for all circumstances in which more than one private applicant has sought a license (thereby increasing the role of competitive bidding in license assignment)
Small Business Administration
secondary market guarantees—impose fees: guarantees for 50 to 85 percent of the principal amount of qualifying loans to small businesses
Department of Transportation
highway trust fund—reduce highway funding to maintain positive balances: provides grants to states for highways and other
OCR for page 271
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
surface transportation projects through the Federal Aid Highway Program
New Starts Program—eliminate: provides funding for the construction of new rail and other “fixed-guideway” systems and for the expansion of existing systems
Amtrak—reduce subsidy: provides federally subsidized rail passenger service
grants to large and medium-sized hub airports—eliminate: provides grants to airports to expand runways, improve safety and security, and make other capital investments under the Airport Improvement Program
aviation security—increase fees: covers a greater portion of the federal government’s costs for aviation security
Saint Lawrence Seaway—impose fees on users: through the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, operates and maintains the U.S.-controlled portion of the seaway between the Port of Montreal and Lake Erie
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Community Development Block Grant Program—drop wealthier communities: provides annual grants to communities to help them aid low- and moderate-income households, eliminate slums and blight, or meet emergency needs by rehabilitating housing, improving infrastructure, and carrying out economic development activities
NeighborWorks America (Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation)—eliminate: oversees a network of locally initiated and operated groups called NeighborWorks Organizations engaged in activities involving housing, neighborhood revitalization, and community building
Treasury Department
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund—eliminate: expands the availability of credit, investment capital, and financial services in distressed communities
Appalachian Regional Commission, the Denali Commission, and the Delta Regional Authority
regional development agencies—eliminate: federally funded regional development agencies that attempt, among other things,
OCR for page 272
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
to create jobs, improve rural education and health care, develop utilities and other infrastructure, and provide job training
Federal Emergency Management Agency
flood insurance subsidy on selected older structures—eliminate or reduce: through the National Flood Insurance Program, charges premiums to insure buildings and their contents
Department of Education
grants for safe and drug-free schools and communities—eliminate: support programs to discourage violence and the use of illegal substances—such as alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs—among young people in and around schools
Even Start Program—eliminate and redirect some funds to other education programs: provides education and related services to parents who have not finished high school and to their young children
Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership Program (LEAP)—eliminate: helps states provide grants and work-study assistance to financially needy
Department of Labor
Senior Community Service Employment Program—eliminate: funds part-time jobs for people aged 55 and older who have low income and poor prospects for employment
Veterans Administration
veterans’ disability compensation—reduce to account for Social Security Disability Insurance payments: disabled veterans eligible for Social Security disability payments receive payments from both programs, with no offset
Department of Justice
grant—reduce for selected programs: provide various types of assistance to nonprofit community organizations and state and local law enforcement agencies
The Congressional Budget Office (2009) shows the budgetary effects of each option over a 10-year period, from 2010 to 2019. To generate savings
OCR for page 273
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
estimates relative to the study baseline by 2019, the committee mapped the first 8 years (2010-2017) from the CBO report onto the first 8 years (2012-2019) of the spending trajectories for Options 1 and 2. Because CBO provided annual estimates of savings only for the first 5 years, the committee relied on CBO’s estimate for overall 10-year savings to calculate what the savings reasonably might be by the eighth year. These estimates adjust for the minor overlap with programs targeted for devolution.
HUMAN CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FUNDING, AND INFRASTRUCTURE: OPTIONS 3 AND 4
This section offers illustrative examples of public investments that would be expected to have high payoffs in the future.
early childhood and postsecondary education and training: a number of policy experts have identified expanded early childhood education as a sound investment where benefits are likely to exceed costs over an extended time horizon. For example, an expansion of Head Start/Early Head Start for 3- and 4-year-olds from low-income families has been proposed by researchers and policy analysts (see Boots et al., 2008; Isaacs, 2007). The estimated costs for covering 100 percent of eligible children in 2008 would have been around $20 billion.
adult training and work assistance programs targeted at disadvantaged populations: some analysts have proposed additional spending on human capital in the neighborhood of $3-5 billion per year, as well as expansion of Pell grants and college assistance programs (see Blank, 2007; Holzer and Martinson, 2008).
research and development in areas with long-term strategic national importance: these areas are likely to change over time as the nation’s needs and strategic interests shift. At present, alternative energy sources or green environment adaptations are often mentioned as areas for public research investment. Others talk about research on effective provision of health service and alternative care options that might help reduce health costs. Plausible estimates for additional research and development funding are about $20 billion a year—$15 billion for energy and $5 billion for health services (see Holubowich and Antos, 2008; Nemet and Kammen, 2007).
infrastructure: CBO estimated that additional transportation infrastructure investments by state and federal governments of about $164 billion per year (net of higher user fees of approximately $20 billion per year) could be justified (Congressional Budget Office,
OCR for page 274
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future
2008). Expansions in other infrastructure categories also may be warranted (Association of State Dam Safety Officials, 2002).
REFERENCES
Association of State Dam Safety Officials. (2002). The Cost of Rehabilitating Our Nation’s Dams. Lexington, KY: Association of State Dam Safety Officials.
Blank, R. (2007). Improving the safety net for single mothers who face serious barriers to work. The Future of Children, 17(2), 183-197.
Boots, S.W., Macomber, J., and Danziger, A. (2008). Family Security: Supporting Parents’ Employment and Children’s Development. New Safety Net Paper 3. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Congressional Budget Office (2008). Issues and Options in Infrastructure Investment. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office.
Congressional Budget Office (2009). Budget Options, Volume 2. Washington, DC: Congressional Budget Office.
Holubowich, E.J., and Antos, J.R. (2008). Treading water: The no growth investment in health services research. American Health & Drug Benefits, 6, 34-42.
Holzer, H., and Martinson, K. (2008). Helping Poor Working Parents Get Ahead: Federal Funds for New State Strategies in Systems. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
Isaacs, J. (2007). Cost-Effective Investments in Children. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Nemet, G.F., and Kammen, D.M. (2007). U.S. energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion. Energy Policy, 35, 746-755.
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (2009a). Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2010: Analytical Perspectives. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.