The new U.S. Census Bureau publication “Poverty in the United States: 2001” shows an increase in poverty and a tie for the highest level of income inequality ever (if not a new record high, depending on the measures used). This should not be a surprise given the policies of the administration and the recent economic downturn.

It comes as no surprise that the budget review issued by the Office of Management and Budget on July 19, 2002, shows a higher deficit for 2002 than predicted in its February 2002 report—from a $106 billion to a $165 billion deficit. In spite of the increasing deficit, OMB is optimistic about a quick return to budget surpluses in 2005, which are estimated to continue to increase over the next decade. In other words, according to OMB, this has been a rough time, but the President’s economic and fiscal policies, particularly the tax cut, insure that the long-term outlook couldn’t be better.

By now it should be obvious to everyone, including Congress, that it is not possible to adhere to the budget limits (caps) on discretionary spending and pass realistic spending bills for FY 2000, at least not without resorting to accounting gimmicks and trickery. Sticking to the caps means drastic and politically unfeasible cuts. This should be good news for advocates who have been arguing all along that staying within the budget caps would severely slash important spending needs, including education, health, environmental protection, housing, and a score of other beneficial programs, especially those upon which low to mid-income Americans depend.

The Administration's "superwaiver" proposal that passed the House on May 16 as part of welfare reform (H.R. 4737) would provide cabinet secretaries with new, far-reaching authority to approve state applications to waive federal laws and regulations affecting a number of programs -- even more than earlier versions indicated.