Utah Reauthorization Project
P. O. Box 270090 Fruitland, UT 84027-0090
(435) 548-2630 FAX (435) 548-2438
wrw@ubtanet.com     www.slcap.org/UREAP/ureap.htm

UREAP MEETING SUMMARY

Tuesday, March 23, 2004
2:30 - 4:30 p.m.
Horizonte Education and Training Center
1234 S. Main Street, SLC

In Attendance
Robin Arnold-Williams, Department of Human Services (DHS)
Helen Thatcher, Department of Workforce Services (DWS)
Sheila Walsh-McDonald, Salt Lake Community Action Program (SL CAP)
Garth Mangum, Utah Issues Board, private author
Pat Nielson, SL League of Women Voters
Lisa Carter, DWS
Kathy [sorry, we missed your name and organization]
Bob Haywood, DHS
Stan Eckersly, Legislative Fiscal Analyst Office
Jan Ferre, Legislative Coalition for People with Disabilities
Mary Beth Vogel-Ferguson, Social Research Institute, U of U
Gina Cornia, Utahns Against Hunger (UAH)
Dave Belnap, UAH
Shirley Weathers, Walsh & Weathers Research and Policy Studies (WWRPS), UREAP staff
Bill Walsh, WWRPS, UREAP staff

Via Speaker Phone: Mark Greenberg and Nisha Patel, Center for Law And Social Policy (CLASP)

Welcome
Introductions were done and Bill Walsh welcomed everyone, noting that the meeting's agenda would change to accommodate CLASP callers from Washington, D.C.

Shirley Weathers distributed a staff written letter e-mailed to Utah House members, urging them amend or vote against the 2005 House Budget Resolution being considered by the House at the time. The Resolution would cut domestic spending to provide additional tax cuts and not allow additional funds for TANF and WIA. Staff did the same thing when the 2005 Senate Budget Resolution was being debated. Staff used the UREAP Principles and past discussions to formulate the messages. They will be posted at the UREAP website.

CLASP Conference Call and Updates - TANF
Mark Greenberg reported that the TANF bill (HR 4 RS) was expected to go to the Senate Floor very soon after a very long lull without activity since the Senate Finance Committee passed the bill. It appears that action was triggered by House threats to require a change in the caseload reduction credit as a condition to agreeing to yet another extension to TANF (due March 30) unless the Senate makes progress on its bill. (This same change is a provision in the House version of HR 4 that the Senate opposes and which would put many states in jeopardy of fiscal penalties.) Mark said there are no agreements as yet on the number of amendments that will be allowed on the Senate Floor, but there is agreement that the first vote would be on Senator Snowe's $6 billion child care amendment. Probably after that would be a vote by the Senate to extend TANF without any attached policy changes (a “clean” extension). It is expected that passage of the child care amendment would be followed by negotiations on the number of additional amendments and time limits on debate. If the child care amendment fails, there will likely not be further consideration of the bill. There has been much discussion on additional amendments.

Robin Arnold-Williams pointed out that language for the Snowe amendment that she has seen would allow states to receive the new child care funds without a state match during the first three years. A match would be required during the final two years. She also said that it is looking like the amendment will include a provision that would prevent Utah from receiving any of this additional child care money. Negotiations are still going on, but it looks like states may only be eligible if they have been appropriating the full state match to draw down all CCDBG funding already available. Utah has consistently fallen short of the full state match and left around $9 million “on the table.”

Mark underscored that there is substantial work going on to ensure that all states can receive their portion of funding in the Snowe amendment. He then named possible additional amendments. 1) An amendment to extend education and training from 12 to 24 months, 2) Serving legal immigrants with TANF dollars at state option, 3) Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act (ICHIA), 4) Possible changes in the required hours of participation and state participation rates, 5) Countable activities, 6) State penalty relief, 7) An employment credit to replace the caseload reduction credit, with a provision to reward a state when a person gets a better job, 8) Funds and activities around the Healthy Marriage provision (specifics still unclear). He noted in response to a question that caring for a disabled child as a countable activity is already in the PRIDE bill but there is still some concern about strict language to qualify.

Mark said there is talk of worrisome amendments. Senator Talent has drafted one to increase state participation rates. Amendments on Charitable Choice and marriage promotion activities could be drafted. There may be an amendment to expand the limited waiver provision currently in the PRIDE bill to something more akin to what is known as the “superwaiver” in the House bill (a high Administration priority). Mark encouraged UREAP to be in close touch with Senators Hatch and Bennett during the TANF votes and follow Conference Committee developments.

WIA
Nisha Patel is the staff specialist at CLASP who is following and working on WIA reauthorization. She said that there has been little activity since the Senate passed S 1627 last fall. A Conference Committee needs to be appointed and normally the House would be the first to name conferees, but they are holding back. The Democrats were excluded from some important Conference Committees last year, so they are distrustful and are generally refusing to name conferees unless they are assured the opportunity for pre-conference agreements on key provisions they support. Majority Leadership refused to grant that. The process is stalemated. A Continuing Resolution (CR) or extension is not needed for WIA as long as the budget process continues to allocate funds for services. The funding is likely to be flat.

A question was asked about the Department of Labor (DOL) effectively implementing provisions in the House/Administration WIA bill through a mechanism called “guidance.” The incident named was a guidance memo to early implementing states (of which Utah is one) directing states to follow outcome measures and new rules for State Plans contained in the House bill without the bill having become law. Nisha said she appreciated this information because there is a debate about DOL regulations versus statute. States generally see little choice but to follow regulations.

Nisha explained some of the differences between House (HR 1261) and Senate (S 1627 or HR 1261 RS) bills. The House bill allows Governors to take federal administrative dollars to fund One-Stop Infrastructure, while the Senate version calls for negotiation and sets caps on funding levels to be used for One-Stop infrastructure.

Shirley thanked Mark and Nisha for all their help with these issues. Mark said the UREAP web site is read by many people in D.C. and complimented the group on their work with Utah Senators and their staffs.

Discussion
The group deliberated over the issues likely to become a part of the Senate PRIDE bill, prioritized the following, and instructed staff to send another email to Senators Hatch and Bennett and their staffs. Shirley said staff would do that and then follow up with phone calls with Jace Johnson and Amber Sechrist, staff to Senators Hatch and Bennett respectively, to discuss the prospects of UREAP's priorities. UREAP will encourage Senator Hatch to seek appointment to the Conference Committee.

1. Support the Snowe-Dodd-Hatch Child Care Amendment as a critical funding need and important policy direction, regardless of the possibility that Utah may not receive any of those funds.
2. Support an amendment that would increase countable months of Education & Training from 12 (in the current law—the House bill would reduce it to 3 months) and redouble efforts to obtain the support of Senator Hatch.
3. Support ICHIA and a provision allow states to use federal TANF funds for legal immigrants.
4. Support flexibility in TANF to allow states to be creative and allow families to have adequate time to work on barriers-to-work removal.
5. Support state penalty relief.
6. Resist amendments that mirror negative provisions in the House/Administration bill.
7. Support Marriage and Family Formation provisions that reflect UREAP Principles, including those that allow funding to be spent to relieve financial pressures on families.

Future UREAP Activities
Shirley explained that, after three extensions by UREAP’s understanding funders, money has run out before either TANF or WIA reauthorization has been accomplished. Nonetheless, staff believes UREAP should continue to play a role and therefore will continue to follow congressional activities, update UREAP participants through the email list and the UREAP website, and communicate with congressional staff as needed until TANF and WIA are reauthorized. Monthly meetings will be suspended until further notice. Staff welcome any ideas for additional funding.