Bradley's Brushback

March Reading List

2012-02-21T06:00:00.000-05:00

I spent this past weekend figuring out my reading list for March. I have three books selected. While I worry two of the three may depress me, I am really looking forward to reading all three of them. The first is Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation inAmerican Politics by Morris P. Fiorina.

The second book comes up a lot in conversations lately. This book has created a buzz around the country, certainly within conservative circles. The second book is the latest book by Charles Murray called Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010. Charles Murray is the author of The Bell Curve and Losing Ground. He is one of the influencers of conservative thought and political thought.

After reading those two potentially depressing books, I look forward to reading The Last Great Senate:Courage and Statesmanship in Times of Crisis by Ira Shapiro. This book covers the senate from the late ‘60s to the 1980. This is the time period when the Senate was served by giants like Kennedy, Muskie, Robert Byrd and Howard Baker. That is the Senate I long for. That is the Senate I have not seen in decades. I was just starting out in my professional like during this time period and I was aware of the giants up in Congress. I look forward to reading this book to reminisce about that period and about that Senate. This is the last book on my list, but I am so anxious to read it I might just get through it this weekend.

If you have read any of these books, send me a line. I would like to hear your opinion.

Jeopardy Fun

2012-02-19T06:00:00.000-05:00

We have a conference in a couple of weeks. The attendance looks good right now. I am especially excited about our Jeopardy Game for CAP PAC. Topic areas will include Presidential Campaigns, Civil Rights, Music of the 60s, History of the War on Poverty, and Geography. I will be MC’ing the game which I think will be fun. Although, I have never watched the program so I am a bit nervous about getting the show right. I spoke with a few of the bands that will be playing at the event and asked if any of them could play the theme song for Jeopardy. Apparently, I am not the only one who has never seen the show. We are going to try to make the event as professional and entertaining as we can. I have run across a couple teams around the country that are studying for the event. I am hoping it is great fun.

"Super" Money Impact on Democracy

2012-02-17T06:00:00.000-05:00

If I have any notoriety or am recognized for anything, I think it might be for my ability to understand and explain the intersection of politics, public policy and Congress. I understand and am able to relate the three dimensions to one another, and in particular, how they impact social services. I enjoy understanding how the political impacts the legislative and how they impact social services. It is important to understand how these different arenas impact one another. One thing I am struck with recently is the absolute bewilderment on behalf of both Democrats and Republicans alike in grasping what impact “super” money and outside interest groups will have on the November elections. Yet, everyone agrees that it is going to be humongous.

I recently visited with a state Senator running for reelection. He is currently up by about ten points in his reelection race. He has about $1 million more in the bank than his opponent. I was surprised when he said to me that these two factors do not mean anything for the outcome of his race. He suggested there will be about $20 or $30 million coming into the state for the campaign against him. I am hearing the same thing from Democrats and Republicans alike. Many of these folks don’t know what the impact of this outside money will be, but they expect it will be huge.

I think it will be incredibly detrimental to our electoral process. What I fear, and what I have been hearing, is that the amount of outside money could drive Members to get out of politics, even if they do win this election. For the first time in my life, I am really worried about the electoral process and what it means to our Democracy.

Hoping to Get a Picture of Appropriations

2012-02-16T06:00:00.000-05:00

Last week, I spent a lot of time with Senators. This week I am spending a lot of time with all House House Members. I am attending a series of meeting with both Democrats and Republicans in the House. Despite all the partisan bitterness, I enjoy these meetings. I find many Members are good people interested in finding solutions that work for people. My meetings include party leaders on both sides. These meetings provide me good insight into how appropriations will look. What I am anxious to hear is an expectation that the people’s business will be dealt with this year. What I am afraid to get a glimpse of is some indication that this year will be nothing more than politics. I will keep you updated.

Obama's Budget

2012-02-14T19:00:00.000-05:00

President Obama released his budget this week. While I was not surprised by the document, I was disappointed. On a number of fronts. First, I do not know of any program that has fallen further and faster than weatherization. Three years ago, the Administration was pushing for $6.5 billion in funding for weatherization. The program was a poster child for the green economy, a shining example of a career path for entering into the field of energy efficiency, energy conservation and healthy communities. Three years ago, Congress settled on $5 billion funding for the program. And despite all the hurdles – Davis Bacon, Historical Preservation, DOE slowness, state bureaucracies – Community Action agencies, the Weatherization network, overall did a damn good job. To repay these efforts, the Administration requested $135 million in this year’s budget. From $6.5 billion to $135 million. And yet, while the amount is not enough to sustain a program, it is actually more money than I feared the Administration would request for the program. What keeps running through my mind is why and how are we going to reverse this lack of support for the program?

Second, it appears from the budget that the Administration does not understand LIHEAP. The numbers are above the President’s request last year, but Congress drew the bottom line for the program during the last appropriations process at $3.47 billion. For LIHEAP, there is a minimum at which the program can function even in a milder winter. There continue to be long lines for the program. The Administration’s request of $2.8 billion (plus the $200 million contingency funding) is just not going to be sufficient. This is disappointing and sets up a fight in Congress.

Third, the Administration stuck to its 2012 request of $350 million for CSBG funding and that makes sense to me. I would not have been surprised had they zeroed out the program in their budget, but deep down I was thinking that the $350 million request makes political sense. I do not think the Administration respects us but I also think they understand it would not be a smart move to zero us out during a reelection. The savings in the budget would not be worth the response. While CSBG funding was not zeroed out, the budget makes it clear that the Administration wants to hasten the defunding of the network, to open up the funding to competition and allow new agencies to compete for these funds.

This budget is a political document. Now that it has been released, it is dead on arrival in Congress. We knew this before the document was released. What the document does do is identify that there will be fights in Congress. House Republicans and some House Democrats will respond. Senate Democrats and some Senate Republicans will respond. For us, we have a base of support in Congress for most of our programs, particularly CSBG. We have worked across party lines, developed good relationships, and Members like our programs.

The program that puzzles – or worries me – is weatherization. Of course at a time like this, one wonders if the program was housed in a different agency, perhaps it would make a difference. I don’t think so but that thought always crosses my mind. It is just a mystery to me in terms of how quickly DOE and the Administration have turned their back on this program. One thing I am satisfied with is that I am finding supporters of the program in Congress. Among those that support the program there is a general consensus that, while there may be bumps in the road, the intention of the program is worthwhile. The Members that support the program understand that no program is perfect but that the value weatherization provides a community is worth investing in. The problem is that the majority of the Members who have expressed support for the program are not in decision making positions. They are not part of appropriations or on the budget committee. I am in the process of reassembling a coalition of support for weatherization.

We have much work ahead of us this year.

What Arguments Work for Our Programs

2012-02-08T06:00:00.000-05:00

I have mentioned this before but we continue to go through the exercise of rethinking Weatherization. The old tried and true arguments of the past 30 years are not working. If people have ideas on how to improve Congress’ idea of weatherization, particularly the skeptics in Congress, please let me know. I can tell you that it is not sufficient to say the program employs six people in one congressional district or that x-amount of energy was saved in ten years. We need different arguments. The Administration also remains squishy at best and we need to change opinions.

A few House democrats have visited with the White House Administration recently to deliver a strong message in defense of LIHEAP and CSBG. I know their meetings were with individuals at high levels within the Administration. I have breakfast this week with one of those messengers. I am anxious to see how she describes the response from the White House.

Books: Steve Jobs

2012-02-04T06:00:00.000-05:00

I finished Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs. I highly recommend this book. Jobs was a very complicated man with a complicated personality who, in a lot of ways, had simple tastes. He seems to have been a difficult person to work for. His goal in creating Apple was to “put a dent in the universe.” He wanted to create something significant. And he succeeded.

I found the Isaacson book a fascinating look at the man. Once again, here is the story of a leader, a visionary, who most of the time sailed against the wind and often times did so alone. I have read a number of books about leaders and visionaries. The majority of them share the experience of having to preserver through setbacks in order to succeed. They continually got back up off the mat and tried again and again. This was Steve Jobs experience as well. Jobs basically left Apple in 1985 because he could not get along with anybody. His vision was not compatible with that of the Board or the CEO John Sculley. Yet he persevered. If his Act I was the founding of Apple and Act II was his leaving Apple, Act III was returning to the company. He was a brilliant man. I admit I found some of this habits strange, such as his enjoyment of acid and LSD. While he was quirky, he knew what he wanted.

Walter Isaacson’s biography is about 600 pages which will take you a few days to get through. It is one of those books, when you finish reading, you put it down and think to yourself, thank heavens Steve Jobs graced the earth for 56 years. What a difference he made. I highly recommend the book.

Legislators Aware of Community Action

2012-02-03T06:00:00.000-05:00

I was with Harry Reid last week. I spent time with the Majority leader and a woman running for Senate in North Dakota - Heidi Heitkamp. Some of you may remember Heidi’s uncle – Dennis Heitkamp was a CAP Director in Minnesota. I have been meeting a number of candidates running in this year’s election and it has given me a great sense of satisfaction that a number of them know Community Action and CSBG. They have had good experiences with our agencies. The most recent example of this is Heidi.

Spending time with Senator Reid also gives me a sense of satisfaction. He is still engaged with our programs and continues to ask about how we are doing and about problems in general regarding our programs. When Senator Reid asked me about general program issues, I admit I was tempted to talk with him about the slowness in CSBG funding going to the states. I decided to wait until after a series of meetings I have this week on the Hill with other Members. I want to see how Members respond to this issue in these meetings before going to the Senate Majority Leader. It is good to know that he is keeping up with how we are doing though.

Women Legislators

2012-02-01T06:00:00.000-05:00

I think the press has done very little to cover the growing clout of women legislators in Congress. For much of the past year, I have spent considerable time with women legislators. I have two observations and I admit both are generalizations. Be they Republicans or Democrats, House or Senate Members, by in large women are more interested in poverty than their male counterparts. In general, women seem more concerned with the lowest economic rung. I am finding, generally speaking, issues around inequality, poverty, and lack of opportunity, particularly economic opportunity, is very much on the minds of women Senators and some House Members. These issues are legislative priorities for women, decidedly more so than their male counterparts. They very much want to address these issues in Congress.

Secondly, women legislators coordinate policy and issues among their fellow women legislators. While these two characteristics are seen in both House and Senate female legislators, I see this latter quality particularly in the Senate side.

I have yet to be disappointed in meeting women candidates or current members from both parties on this subject. How these female legislators individually want to address poverty may differ. I have noticed their specific proposals reflect their own awareness of poverty, income, inequality and lack of opportunity. I have noticed that these issues come up though in conversations with female legislators in a natural and feeling way. While I have felt this for a number of years, lately it is being reinforced.

Anxiously Awaiting the Budget

2012-01-31T06:00:00.000-05:00

As Congress comes back to session, we are getting into the swing of things here in our office. January went by too quickly with it still feeling like it was just Christmas. We are awaiting the President’s budget in order to move ahead full steam. Coming up I have meetings with appropriators, budget committee members and people on authorizing committees. These feel like big meetings and I hope to have Obama’s budget out before these meetings.

There are many questions for our programs that will be impacted by President Obama’s budget. Everything we are involved in has unresolved questions. Will CSBG funding be cut 50% or potentially be eliminated all together? Will the Administration recognize that LIHEAP funding is too low? Will the Administration demonstrate any type of support for the Weatherization program? Will there be a funding increase for Head Start? Can we expect any increase in funding when the Administration is cutting defense and consolidating other programs, such as on the workforce side?

I am anxious to see how many of the questions we have will be addressed with the Obama budget. That said, no one is taking the budget seriously. In Congress, the House and the Senate adopt their own budget resolutions and they do not seem to be expecting a budget resolution completed for 2013 any time soon. On the House side, I expect we will see a replay of the Ryan House budget resolution which will be difficult on domestic discretionary spending. We need to see appropriations increase, particularly Weatherization and LIHEAP. Members are not interested in hearing that right now though.

Weatherization

2012-01-27T06:30:00.000-05:00

These days, I am getting ready for the Legislative Conference and preparing for the release of the Administration’s budget. I spend all my time thinking about weatherization though. There are a lot of people participating in the advocacy arena in support of weatherization. When things are going well, these advocates work on getting our money or taking credit for our work. When the stimulus bill was passed, they wanted in on that funding. They wanted some of the regular appropriations. They went to Congress and took credit for the work. But when things get though, as they are now with the 2012 appropriations or with the Administration, suddenly no one is around. Yet, everyone is pointing at me and telling me to do a better job, telling me I have not done enough of this or that. This happens in Washington all the time.

Between Hill visits while walking between the Cannon House Building and my office or wherever I find myself, weatherization inevitably creeps into my mind. It is a strange thing and it seems as though it never ceases. During short breaks in my day, I want to be thinking of other things like baseball, the coming of spring, the political season. But Weatherization comes creeping to the forefront of my mind.

I have been thinking about how to take a few steps back, take more responsibility for weatherization, reframe the arguments and approach our lobbying efforts differently. I think the arguments for the weatherization program that we currently use are tired and not effective. A CAP agency can say that they are laying off four or six people in one congressional district as the result of funding cuts, but those numbers are not enough to turn a Member around. We need to be thinking about all the value we bring to a community. We need to find a way to describe that to Members. It is going to take a new approach, new arguments, and a new legislative strategy.

Part of Community Action's History

2012-01-26T05:30:00.000-05:00

Anyone who has attended my history seminar or has been in Community Action for a number of years knows that in 1994, House Republicans unveiled a campaign document known as the Contract with

America

. That document laid out the Republican goals for reducing government and eliminating a number of domestic programs. CSBG was number one on their hit parade. Yet, in 1996, Speaker Newt Gingrich and other key House Republicans reversed their position and actually invested substantially in CSBG and the Community Action network. It would be the largest domestic increase of any program in 1996.

For some time, I have watched the ebbs and flows of Newt Gingrich’s fortunes. His recent participation in the Republican nominating process for president is the latest. In the back of my mind this entire time, I had a thought that at some point someone from the press would ask me about the events in 1996. I don’t know why I had this thought. It seems like a long time ago and such a minor point in Congressional budgeting. But yesterday, the day arrived when I was asked about the threatened budget cuts and subsequent investments in our program in 1996. I received calls from not one but many members of the press wanting to know about Newt’s involvement with our network, and in particular the funding of CSBG in 1996. This is tricky. It was a long time ago. Now we are being interjected into a hyper sensitive and volatile Republican nominating process. The risk of being misunderstood by the press and by others worries me. The risk of being construed as supporting Gingrich or not supporting the Obama Administration worries me. This is a tough situation.

Situations like this come up when one gets involved in new things, when one seeks out new experiences. Weatherization was part of the 2008 Democratic nominating debate during the primaries. Clinton introduced the program into the dialogue and soon others, including Obama, were talking about it. Now I think about the program and wonder what are the up sides to being included in these dialogues? What are the down sides? What if there are similar opportunities for CSBG, Community Action, and poverty? It is interesting in life, even when you feel you have been around the track a couple of times, how new experiences continue to arise. What I discover for myself about some of these recent experiences is that there are few people who I can turn to for advice. At times, I do not know who to contact. I wonder what you think about this current situation of the press inquiring about the relationship that Newt had with CSBG funding in 1996. How would you handle this?

My Impressions of the State of the Union

2012-01-25T18:23:00.001-05:00

I thought President Obama’s State of the Union address was a terrific speech. The rhetoric matched his 2008 presidential campaign. It was a strong reminder of why I like this President. I thought he touched on a number of good themes. It was clearly delivered in campaign mode but it was a very strong speech.

That said, I would have been stunned had the President mentioned any of our programs. I know some of you were wondering and I received a lot of questions from within our network speculating as to whether the President would go after CSBG or any of our other programs. It would have surprised me if our programs were in his speech for a second year in a row. I think his point was well made – and well taken – in 2011.

Now we are waiting for the February 13^th release of Obama’s budget (it has been delayed a week). The budget will be very interesting for all our programs: CSBG, LIHEAP, Weatherization and Head Start. There will be important things in this budget. We recognize that the budget is a campaign document, but it will provide insight and act as a guide to what the Obama administration prioritizes for his second term.

Then, we are off to the races.

My reading for the month….

2012-01-24T16:00:00.000-05:00

Right now, I need to finish the Steve Jobs biography. So far it is a phenomenal book. I am really enjoying it. Next I have two books I am looking forward to reading. First, I want to read Chris Matthews latest book, Jack Kennedy: Elusive Hero. I am also looking forward to starting Daniel Yergin’s book on the future of energy, The Quest: Energy, Security and the Remaking of the Modern World.

As I think about tonight's State of the Union though, I keep coming back to the idea of poverty in America today. I am interested in reading a good book about this issue. Do you have any recommendations? Please share

Off to the Races

2012-01-24T06:30:00.000-05:00

All eyes are on the State of the Union. After tonight, the next mile marker is the Administration’s budget which will be released on February 6^th. Then we are off to the races. By February, Congress will be in full political mode and back to work with whatever they are going to get done this year. We will see sprouts of political strategy from both parties. These will impact spending quite a bit.

I know it is going to be a hell of a year. I am ready for it. I think it is going to take everyone in the network giving 110 percent. Without that effort, it could be the most consequential year with a serious downside. Congress is going to be cutting billions and tens of billions from domestic spending. I hear Democrats saying they will go along with the cuts. There will be a rush to make deep cuts. Just look at defense cuts. Domestic discretionary is under attack. Congressional Research told me a week ago they consider CSBG the most vulnerable program in the entire federal budget.

State of the Union

2012-01-22T19:36:00.000-05:00

I expect to be invited to the State of the Union again this year. I keep thinking to myself that, if I am invited, I don’t think I want to go. The last time I attended the State of the Union – the only time I attended the State of the Union – the President singled out our programs in a surprising way. When I think about attending the State of the Union, I am reminded of the corny statement, “Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?” I am thinking I will not attend. I am sure that ten years from now I will revisit my thinking around why I did not attend. But today, I am not sure I am interested.

Poverty in America

2012-01-21T06:30:00.000-05:00

The current understanding of poverty in America has been on my mind lately. Over the holiday break, I spent time with a couple of Congressional Members. One Republican, one Democrat. Both are senior Members of the House. They were around during the break, so we took advantage of the extra time we had. We had relaxed meetings while we talked poverty, politics, and a little baseball. I laid out what I thought was a persuasive case as to why Congress should be investing more in our programs right now. I argued that we should not be thinking about elimination of our programs at a time when the poverty business is booming. I realize there is a disconnect between what people are facing in their daily lives and how elected officials understand those struggles. Families are falling out of the middle class and are turning to our agencies in record numbers for a lifeline. Yet there continues to exist a general impression of poverty that is very different from what people experience – and many elected officials seem to not care. Many elected officials seem to not really care about poverty. Why is poverty not part of the Administrations agenda? Why are we not concerned about what is happening to one out of every two Americans?

I am convinced now that we need to be integral in advancing the conversation about poverty in America. We need to be seen as relevant to whatever attacks, solutions, responses are discussed. We need to part of the discussions. These are huge issues facing our country and our communities. We need to advance America’s awareness of poverty and fuel their desire to civic response. How does Community Action play a role in that?

Poverty in America

2012-01-20T06:30:00.000-05:00

I listened to the Tavis Smiley special on poverty in America last week. It was a two and a half hour program with half a dozen guests discussing poverty. I have not slept well since listening to that program. What a statement we make as a society that in this country today, almost one out of every two of our citizens live in or near poverty. What absolutely energizes and frustrates me is not seeing Community Action part of these conversations. Where and how do we interject Community Action into this debate?

Recent census data reports that fifty percent of Americans live in or near poverty. The gap has probably never been as wide between the "have" and "have-nots" as it is today. During the Great Depression 50 to 60% of the population was living in absolute poverty, but the gap between them and the top 1-2% was not as wide as it is today. There were more people in the same boat during the Great Depression. If you go back to the days when the republic was founded, there was obviously a gap between the “have” and “have-nots,” mostly broken down by racial lines. Today’s situation has a similar quality.

In 2011 members of the press provided me opportunities to bring awareness about our network and to raise our presence. At the time, I felt as though I was inserted into a whack-a-mole game. I chose to keep my head down and work carefully – and quietly – through Congress. I have shifted in my opinion though. Now I want to bring attention to the inter-connectedness between poverty and Community Action. Our success and our existence will be determined in part by how well we participate in this debate. We can stoke the fire in a responsible way. Yet, it is certain to be an angry debate.

I find our current situation unconscionable. Everyone in Community Action ought to lose a bit of sleep thinking about the people we serve, the state of our communities, and what we stand for as a country. We need to think about the opportunities that are simply not there for people.

How do I Respond to the Administration?

2012-01-19T06:30:00.000-05:00

I am struggling with the question of how do we deal with the Obama Administration in regard to our programs. What do we say to the Administration if their budget numbers are bad for Community Action? This is really is a quandary for me. It is something I am wrestling with at the moment. There are some very good people at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) who are involved with our program. These are people I really like and respect. How do I sit down with them and have a conversation about their proposed initiatives which I believe are not good for our network? What do I say when the Administration has basically said ours is a network they can do without?

I am not predicting with 100% accuracy that the Administration’s budget request for 2013 will eliminate CSBG funding but looking at their position and stance last year, there is not a lot of room for optimism in my forecasting. Ahead of us is a much more competitive and difficult funding environment.

I am really wrestling with what to say to the Administration. After the State of the Union last year and after the Administration came out with their budget last year, I was invited to go to meetings and to sit down with HHS. I was conflicted about it last year and I am still really conflicted about it. On the one hand, I view the Administration as having a total lack of confidence in our programs. I view the budget cuts as the end of the discussion. If that is the case, I need to prepare to battle in Congress. On the other hand, I really like many of the people working within HHS. I know they have been dealt a very difficult hand and I am really torn about not working with them. I continue to debate my response to their invitations but I am leaning heavily toward focusing on Congress. I am not comfortable intellectually with my position within this situation.

I know one of the issues that will be discussed in these meetings is accreditation. I know another discussion topic will be performance. These are controversial issues. HHS wants our network to make accommodations and yet I see no contribution to the network on our behalf. To the contrary, I understand their message to us is that Community Action is not an integral program to the priorities of the Administration. That is a tough statement.

I have been thinking about the benefits and the purpose of my participation in these meetings. I feel one purpose may be to gain my agreement to introducing competition as a means towards distributing an anticipated scarcity of CSBG dollars. I sense these meetings may result in potentially opening a pathway towards dramatically reducing the network. I am not comfortable with the back door method of introducing policies that I believe may harm our network. I worry about not participating in these meetings, though, but I am not sure of a benefit.

Congress Returns

2012-01-18T19:26:00.002-05:00

Congress is starting to come back. The House is in today. Today is my first meeting with Members. Tomorrow I meet with a couple of House Republicans and a couple of Democratic candidates for the Senate. The silver lining I see is that there are a lot of people both in Congress and those seeking Congressional seats who are aware of our programs locally and who like them. This year is all about building support for Community Action. My efforts will be spent on stitching together a much bigger fabric of support for us.

Republican Organizations are Welcoming

2012-01-16T06:00:00.000-05:00

Republican organizations, particularly those of the Senate and House, have impressed me. I have been pleasantly surprised at how a number of House and Senate Republican member organizations have reached out to work with me and made me feel welcome in their organizations. I am active with both parties and find that the Republican organizations have worked hard to make me feel welcome. I think this is primarily due to some very good Members with whom we have good relationships and who make sure we are treated very well. I find some of the party organizations that Republicans have are very user friendly. They seem confused, though, with how I fit in as an advocate for low income programs. They do not have many other people working on these issues. Despite all the harsh rhetoric of cutting spending and shrinking government, they make me feel welcome. It does not mean that there will not be attempts to scale back our programs.

Head Start Re-competition

2012-01-14T06:30:00.000-05:00

I have been getting a fairly regular steady number of calls and comments regarding Head Start re-competition. It certainly has created a nervousness amongst some of the grantees. I am anxious to see how it plays out. There are lessons to be learned from this situation. It appears there is zero tolerance with no margin for errors, mistakes or deficiencies. I think this is a big issue that is likely to get bigger within our network and other childrens’ networks.

Are you Thinking of Retiring in 2012

2012-01-13T06:30:00.000-05:00

I spoke at the Partnership conference in Miami last week Friday. A number of people grabbed me to tell me they are thinking about retiring in 2012. I am starting to run across this more often lately. I don’t know if the uncertainty surrounding our programs and the competitive environment is accelerating peoples’ decisions to retire. I don’t know if they have been planning this for some time and are just not interested in another year or two of fights and stress. Others have approached me over the last couple of months as I traveled around the country and told me the same. With the economy as uncertain as it is, I would think the opposite would be true. That is, I would have guessed that people would stay and continue to fight for another year or two until the economy emerges out of the woods. After hearing from so many in Miami, I am wondering how prevalent this is around the country. How many of you are thinking or planning on retiring in 2012?

The Story of Community Action in 2011

2012-01-12T06:30:00.000-05:00

A number of reporters have been calling our offices interested in Community Action in general and CSBG in particular. They tell me they want to do a story on the network and the programs. Some have suggested stories specifically about our legislative fight last year. Reporters called last year and I resisted because at the time I felt minimum visibility was the best policy. But people continue to be curious about what went on with our program and how a program – the only one singled out for cuts by the President in the State of the Union – managed to work its way through Congress and come out virtually whole. I had real mixed emotions last year when I was contacted and I still do. I have to admit I am disappointed with myself that I am not able to reach a satisfactory conclusion. Not being sure how to respond to this situation irritates me. But I am still weighing the possible negative consequences against the potential benefits.

CSBG Reauthorization

2012-01-11T06:30:00.000-05:00

Although Congress is not in session for a couple more weeks, this is a big week for us at NCAF. We are nearing completion of the CSBG reauthorization package. This is the end of this stage of repositioning CSBG. The good news about 2011 is that despite the bitterness and partisanship in Congress, the anger and distrust felt toward elected officials, and President Obama singling out the CA network in the State of the Union - despite all that - the awareness of the Community Action network and CSBG is very high now. Last year, I met with a lot of people, including a number of newly elected Republican Members. I liked the many meetings and the many conversations about our network. The interest and awareness of Community Action is as high as it has been in the past few years. I cannot foresee Congress taking definitive action on renewing CSBG, but the support is there.

There remain a couple of outstanding issues with the final CSBG reauthorization package. This is the week we attempt to solve those issues. Whenever you get into the discussion about the future of the program and what roles Members have in building that future, that is a good week. Republicans on the House side and Democrats and Republicans on the Senate side want to introduce the CSBG reauthorization bill. We have taken longer than I expected with this reauthorization but I think we are going to have a good package.