$2.86 Billion, $67 Million more than 2016 2017 Enacted Budget: $2.86 Billion, $67 Million more than 2016 2018 Administration Budget: $2.49 Billion, $375 Million Below 2017 Enacted   2019 Administration Budget: Proposed Cut of $500 Million, or More, Above 2017 Enacted? Last May Congress enacted the BIA budget at $2.86 billion, which was $67 million above the 2016 level. Considering the environment we are in, this was pretty good. President Trump has proposed a 2018 budget of $2.49 billion, which is $375 million below the 2017 enacted level, a 13.1% overall cut and the largest in history. BIA submitted a 2019 BIA budget that we think adds another $125 to $150 million in cuts, over and above the 2018 proposed cuts. So the 2019 budget request may be $500 million or more less than the 2017 level. The Administration appears to be taking no notice of the actions of Congress. This will make budget negotiations much more complicated going forward.

This chart shows the President’s 2018 proposed cuts, with the largest going to the two largest agencies, NPS and BIA

This chart shows the presidents 2018 proposed cuts as a percentage This chart shows the presidents 2018 proposed cuts as a percentage. It does at least show that BIA was not singled out for a larger percentage cut, which we’ve seen in the past

Small Sampling of 2018 Proposed Cuts Road Maintenance cut $2.2 million, or 7.1%   Social Services cut $17.4 million, or 33% ICWA cut $4 million, or 22% Human Services collectively cut $35.2 million, or 22% Trust Natural Resources overall cut $35.5 million, or 14% Law Enforcement cut $27.6 million, or 8% Tribal Courts cut $8.8 million, or 29% Scholarships & Adult Education cut $9.6 million, or 28% JOM cut $4.6 million, or 31% Although it’s not possible to detail all of the 2018 proposed cuts, here is a sampling of significant cuts to critical tribal programs that serve our children and families, provide public safety, and assist our youth with their education

This chart shows the top 2019 budget rankings, developed by the BIA regions and presented at the March TIBC meeting. Most of the highest ranking tribal priorities are those that serve families, education, and public safety, yet these were the areas hit hardest in Trump’s first budget.

Many BIA Programs Proposed to be Eliminated: Tribal Government: -Small & Needy Tribes Human Services: -Tiwahe Initiative -Domestic Violence Initiative -Methamphetamine Initiative -Housing Program Trust Natural Resources: -Tribal Climate Resilience Trust Real Estate Services: -Alaska Native Programs -Litigation Support/Attorney Fees Public Safety & Justice: -Recidivism Reduction Initiative -Tribal Justice Support for tribes subject to P.L. 83-280 Indian Education: -Juvenile Detention Education -Special Higher Education Scholarships -Science Post Graduate Scholarships -Replacement School Construction -Replacement Facility Construction In addition to the many budget line cuts, there are at least 15 important tribal programs that were proposed to be eliminated entirely! You can see from this list that these programs impact small and needy tribes, programs that serve our children and families, and programs that educate our youth! Even though Congress will save us from much of the Trump cuts in 2018, it is important to be aware of them because Trump is moving forward in 2019 as if Congress did nothing, adding more cuts on top of his 2018 proposal

Comparison of the BIA Budget: 2017 Enacted, 2018 Trump Proposal, & 2018 House Interior Appropriations Committee Bill, July 18, 2017 Enacted Trump The House appropriations Committee rejected the Trump budget proposal and recommends a 2018 BIA budget of $2.87 billion, an increase of $10.9 million above 2017. For the most part what they did was to restore the Trump cuts, and provide a few modest increases in areas like law enforcement, road maintenance, economic development. The Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee still has to markup their version of the bill, and we should note that they sometimes recommend a smaller amount for BIA than the House. One of our strategies should be to write to the appropriations committees and thank them for what they did. House

This chart, which we’ve shown before, illustrates an ongoing problem, in that in terms of the total percent budget increase over time, the BIA has not fared as well as several other Interior agencies. We’ve done better the last few years, as we were at the bottom of the list as recently as 2013. But we still seem to have trouble competing with other Interior agencies for our share of the Interior pie.

Enacted BIA budget increases/decreases over the prior year enacted level - Dems control house in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 - Repubs control house in 2004-2006, and 2011-present - Bush’s last budget was 2009, Obama’s first budget was 2010 2010 was Obama’s 1st budget, & all branches under Dem control, Congress added $82 million on top of PB request of $161M increase 2013 was sequestration 2014 restored same amount taken in 2013, but Congress left it to the administration on how to spend; the administration didn’t restore the base sequestration cuts, & instead used it to fund their priorities 2016 was Obama’s big increase for BIA, $323 M, Congress warned they could not fund it, but, they still managed one of the largest increases ever at $195 million Assuming the 2018 House version is close to what is enacted, we can breath a sigh of relief, But compared to recent Congressional increases, are we entering a period of austerity? Bush budgets Dems controlled House

Amount of President’s budget request above/below the prior year enacted level The PB request in 2010, Obama’s first budget, was good, as were his 2016 & 2017 budgets. But the other 5 Obama budgets were bad, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, & 2015. The 2014 PB was higher, to offset sequestration effects, but it did not include restoring the sequestration cuts to Base programs. This situation is partly explained by the republican takeover of the House, and passage of the budget control act. 2018 is the House bill only Bush budgets Dems controlled House

The difference between what the President requested, and what Congress enacted, each year Some of the Bush budgets had requested large decreases, like $100M in 2009, so Congress provided more. 2013 was sequestration 2015 was interesting, Obama requested only a $35 M increase, but Congress doubled it to $70 million In 2016 Obama got the message and requested a $323 million increase, largest ever, Congress warned they could fund it, but, they still managed one of the largest increases ever at $195 million! Somewhat like 2016, Obama requested a $138 m increase in 2017, but congress did not fully fund the request, they added $67 million. 2018 is the House bill only, not enacted Bush budgets Dems controlled House

BIA Fixed Costs/Pay Costs “Requirements” FY 2008-2019 Trump? Bush Obama This chart presents some information on pay costs, which has been an SG strategy item for years because pay costs represent one of the only ways TPA Base programs receive increases anymore. A few things to point out here, Fixed Costs and Pay Costs really started getting shorted when Bush became president. But actually, his last two budgets were pretty good, partly because of pressure from Congress to fully fund fixed costs. But under the Obama administration, Fixed Costs and Pay Costs were greatly underfunded, in part because of republican takeover of the House and the Budget Control Act, they were looking at ways to save money. The “trump” section at the upper right has some humor built in, but the numbers shown are more in line with what they should be. But here is something interesting, one of the few bright spots in the FY 2018 budget request is that Fixed Cost are $17.3 million, about 3-times the FY 2017 request. And, BIA informed us the FY 2019 Fixed Costs estimate will be $25 million. So Fixed Costs, which include Pay Costs, may be one area that SGAC and TIBC may want to focus on, since this Administration seems to be open to better numbers. Source: Department of Interior Budget in Brief documents, FY 2008-2017

Rescissions & Sequester Across the Board Rescissions (%) Imposed on BIA and Tribes, FY 2000-2016 Year Description Individual Total 2000 General Reduction 0.4685 2001 ATB 0.22 2002 No Rescission 2003 ACB 0.65 2004 BIA-IT 0.24 Omnibus ATB 0.59 0.646 1.476 2005 0.8 Interior ATB 0.594 1.394 2006 0.476 ATB Hurricane & Other 1 2007 2008 1.56 2009 2010 2011 0.2 2012 0.16 2013 Rescissions Subtotal 7.8045 Sequester 5.04 12.8445 2014 Rescissions & Sequester 2015 2016 This table shows all of the rescissions tribes have suffered from going back to 2000 – at least 15 different rescissions if you include sequestration! They all represent permanent cuts to tribal Base programs! It is our belief that most members of Congress do not even realize that these rescissions are permanent, they think they are only for one year! I thought I’d throw this in because, most of the rescissions ocurred under the Bush administration. I fear we may be facing more of those. In 2006 there was a 1% Hurricane Katrina rescission, could we be facing another with Hurricane Harvey? These rescissions are permanent, they should have had an expiration for Katrina.

In closing, we are facing dire times for the BIA budget In closing, we are facing dire times for the BIA budget. It appears that our only hope to avoid severe budget cuts lies with Congress, not the Administration. This will make the job of the SGAC & Tribal Interior Budget Council much more difficult.   The Administration claims they want to preserve Core Tribal Programs, but the Administration does not understand what the Core programs are, and SGAC & TIBC must try and make them understand, that many BIA budget lines contain Core funding for tribes. In closing, we are facing dire times for the BIA budget. It appears that our only hope to avoid severe budget cuts lies with Congress, not the Administration. This will make the job of the SGAC & Tribal Interior Budget Council much more difficult.   The Administration claims they want to preserve Core Tribal Programs, but the Administration does not understand what the Core programs are, and SGAC & TIBC must try and make them understand, that many BIA budget lines contain Core funding for tribes.