The House Adopts Spending Allocations for T-HUD and Agriculture/Rural Development Subcommittees
On Tuesday, May 21st, the House Appropriations Committee approved the FY 2014 302(b) allocations, for its 12 individual subcommittees. A 302(b) allocation functions like a spending cap for each subcommittee. Every fiscal year, the Appropriations Committee receives a single 302(a) allocation for all of its programs. It then decides how to divide this funding among its 12 subcommittees by creating the 302(b) allocations. For FY 2014, the 302(b) allocations must equal a top-line spending allocation (302(a)) of $967 billion for all 12 subcommittees; this is the level set by the sequestration law and in the FY 2014 budget resolution adopted by the House (Paul Ryan’s Budget). Below are the 302(b) allocations for T-HUD and Ag-Rural Development subcommittees:
T-HUD Subcommittee
The FY 2014 302 (b) allocation is $44.1 billion:
- This is $7.5 billion, or 15 percent, less than the Subcommittee’s FY 2013 allocation;
- The allocation is approximately $4 billion less than the final FY 2013 appropriated total after sequestration; and
- $7.5 billion less than the Obama Administration’s FY 2014 Budget request.
Agriculture – Rural Development Subcommittee
The FY 2014 302(b) allocation is $19.5 billion,
- This is approximately equal to the FY 2013 appropriated level and the Administration’s FY 2014 Budget request.
During the markup for the 302(b) allocations, committee chairman Hal Rogers used his opening statement to criticize sequestration, stating that “we all agree that [sequestration’s] consequences have been, and will continue to be, very harmful, and it should be replaced in the very near term”. He continued that the committee must push forward with these allocations if they want to successfully pass all 12 appropriations bills by the end of the fiscal year (Sept. 30th).
The Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Nita Lowey (D-NY) offered an amendment to restore overall FY2014 funding to $1.058 trillion, the level to which Democrats and Republicans agreed in the Budget Control Act of 2011, and the level of President Obama’s budget request and Senate Appropriations bills. The amendment largely reflects the President’s budget request. However, the amendment rejects the President’s underfunding of project-based Section 8 housing contracts. Also she submitted an amendment to postpone consideration of 302(b) allocations to June 21, 2013. Both Amendments were rejected with recorded votes of 22 to 26 and 21 to 26, respectively.
To review the 302(b) allocations,
please click here.
To read the opening statements by Hal Rogers,
please click here.
A Redefinition of Rural Areas in the Senate’s Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013
A massive agricultural reform bill, numbered S. 954, was first introduced on May 14 by Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). The bill, entitled the Agricultural Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2013 includes a proposal to amend the definition of a rural area in the Housing Act of 1949 by increasing the population threshold from 25,000 to 35,000 for an area to be considered rural.
Currently, the Rural Housing Service (RHS) determines which areas will be eligible for its programs by applying the rural area definition requirements in the Housing Act of 1949. The definition largely focuses on population with a population cap of up to 25,000 people. Certain communities must also be “rural in character,” meaning they are not part of a metropolitan statistical areas (MSA), which is defined as a county or counties associated with a city or urbanized area that has a population of at least 50,000. This information is found through the census, which is preformed every ten years. This legislation would use census data from 2000 and 2010 for determination.
To view this bill,
please click here.
