NEW: White House Issues Report on Sequestration’s Impact on RI

Sunday, February 24, 2013

GoLocalProv News Staff

In an report issued by the White House Press Office, it outlined the impact of the sequester will have on a range of businesses and programs in Rhode Island.

According to the White House, the impacts on Rhode Island this year alone are:

Education:

¾ Teachers and Schools: Rhode Island will lose approximately $2.4 million in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 30 teacher and aide jobs at risk. In addition about 3,000 fewer students would be served and approximately 10 fewer schools would receive funding.
Education for Children with Disabilities: In addition, Rhode Island will lose approximately $2.1 million in funds for about 20 teachers, aides, and staff who help children with disabilities.
¾ Work-Study Jobs: Around 340 fewer low income students in Rhode Island would receive aid to help them finance the costs of college and around 280 fewer students will get work-study jobs that help them pay for college.
¾ Head Start: Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminated for approximately 200 children in Rhode Island, reducing access to critical early education.

Environment:

¾ Protections for Clean Air and Clean Water: Rhode Island would lose about $1,253,000 in environmental funding to ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste. In addition, Rhode Island could lose another $359,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.

Defense:

¾ Military Readiness: In Rhode Island, approximately 5,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $31.5 million in total.
Army: Base operation funding would be cut by about $800,000 in Rhode Island.

Public Safety:

¾ Law Enforcement and Public Safety Funds for Crime Prevention and Prosecution: Rhode Island will lose about $68,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement, prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim and witness initiatives.

Jobs:

¾ Job Search Assistance to Help those in Rhode Island find Employment and Training: Rhode Island will lose about $126,000 in funding for job search assistance, referral, and placement, meaning around 4,550 fewer people will get the help and skills they need to find employment.

Childcare and Health:

¾ Child Care: Up to 100 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could lose access to child care, which is also essential for working parents to hold down a job.
¾ Vaccines for Children: In Rhode Island around 530 fewer children will receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $36,000.
¾ Public Health: Rhode Island will lose approximately $101,000 in funds to help upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including infectious diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological events. In addition, Rhode Island will lose about $330,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse, resulting in around 400 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs. And the Rhode Island State Department of Health will lose about $61,000 resulting in around 1,500 fewer HIV tests.
¾ STOP Violence Against Women Program: Rhode Island could lose up to $22,000 in funds that provide services to victims of domestic violence, resulting in up to 100 fewer victims being served.
¾ Nutrition Assistance for Seniors: Rhode Island would lose approximately $188,000 in funds that provide meals for seniors.

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Email to a friend Permalink

Comments:

Scott Dickerson

10:37pm on Sunday, February 24, 2013

Could, Could, Could, Could, = scare tactics. You are being told the worst case scenario! How about someone at Golocal doing some real research? Most of these cuts aren't actually cuts. They are reductions in increases for the 2012-2013 budget. Of course you are not being told that part of the story. The sequester cuts are projected cuts for the future budget expenditures of $3.803 trillion as requested by President Barack Obama. In fact it came through President Obama and his own budget director at the time. If you do the simple math $3.803 trillion reduced by $85 billion is 2.235 percent in cuts. Didn’t every working family just get hit with a 2% increase in Social Security taxes? Plus we are getting hit with higher gas prices, and new healthcare taxes. We have had to tighten our belts by more than that percentage so why can’t the federal government? Government can’t tax its way into prosperity, there must be spending cuts. Does anyone doubt that there is wasteful spending in our government? President Obama only wants to increase taxes. It seems to me the republicans capitulated and gave him his tax increase to avoid going over the fiscal cliff. How about getting the whole story so that an informed voter can believe what you are selling?

pearl fanch

8:11am on Monday, February 25, 2013

If there's anything more pathetic than RI leadership, it's federal leadership.

The public has been screaming for govt cuts for years now. We're finally getting it, and the fed govt is making this look like a bad thing. It's amazing how screwed up the democratic party is, yet they keep getting re-elected.
Bring on the cuts, and make them deeper!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gary Arnold

8:45am on Monday, February 25, 2013

Horror house, not white house. This president that RI so affectionately endorsed is a complete failure. He is the farthest from a leader that we have ever had.
This is a result of a no plan, no leadership attitude.

jon paycheck

11:18am on Monday, February 25, 2013

leadership? what's that?

Donald Galamaga

11:22am on Monday, February 25, 2013

Theses stats look like the same kind of data that supported "shovel ready" projects. Truth has become an "anachronism" for this White House, which NEVER proposed sequestration.

Wuggly Ump

3:39pm on Monday, February 25, 2013

First this was President Obama's idea, now he's back peddling 'cause the Republicans have called him on it. Notice the Obama media seems to leave this out of their stories.

Second this is only a cut in projected increases in spending, not the actual spending.

Third we have to stop sending Reed, Whitehouse, Cicilline and Langevine. They take the money and send it back to us as grants, as documented in several GoLocalProv articles. These are just giveaways to their campaign base for next election.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.