U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Funding Federal Civil Rights Enforcement: 2000Ė2003

April 2002


INTRODUCTION

The Office of Civil Rights Evaluation reviewed data relevant to civil rights enforcement funding for FYs 1994Ė2003 for:

Since 1957, Congress and the President have greatly expanded the federal civil rights effort through the creation of additional substantive rights and other enforcement agencies. Today, the major statutes and executive orders affecting civil rights enforcement are:

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

This review augments earlier Commission reports that analyzed the budget requests of the Clinton and Bush administrations from FY 1994 to FY 2002 by presenting the FY 2002 actual appropriations and the FY 2003 Presidentís request. All references to real funding are expressed in constant 1994 dollars. Expression in constant dollars accounts for inflationary trends and more accurately reflects the actual purchasing power of the funds. In previous Commission reports, as well as this one, adjusted values have been referred to as ďreal fundingĒ or ďreal spending power.Ē The deflators used are the same as those used by OMB in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States: Historical Tables, Fiscal Year 2003, Table 2.3, p. 25. The deflators have been used in other analyses performed by the Commission, including its 1995 Funding Federal Civil Rights Enforcement report and its 2001 report Funding Federal Civil Rights Enforcement: 2000 and Beyond.

In its 1995 and 2001 reports, the Commission measured agency workload (pending inventory, complaints processed, compliance reviews, etc.) and staffing levels. Since these measurements were taken recently and the trends were found to be consistent during the period studied, the Commission did not measure workload and staffing levels again. Additionally, through ongoing monitoring, the Commission discovered no sweeping changes during the past year that would have altered workload trends. Unless otherwise indicated, documents produced by the agencies and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) are the major sources for information in this review.

ANALYSIS

The Commissionís 1995 report on funding levels for federal civil rights enforcement concluded that ďreductions in funding and staff continue to undermine our national enforcement of civil rights.Ē[1] The Commission reviewed civil rights funding again in 2001 and concluded that ďthe nationís civil rights laws remain, in large measure, unfunded mandates.Ē[2] In these reports, the Commission concluded that civil rights laws have significantly affected the workloads of all the agencies studied. The reductions in civil rights agenciesí budgets occurred at a time when the civil rights enforcement responsibilities of the agencies had grown substantially. The data, which follow, demonstrate that since the 1995 report, the nationís enforcement of civil rights laws continues to be threatened by insufficient funding for federal civil rights agencies.

For FY 2003, after accounting for inflation, the Presidentís request amounts to increases for four of the six enforcement agencies reviewed. The largest increase represented in the presidential requests is for HUD/FHAP, which is 10.9 percent, followed by DOEd/OCR in which the President requested a 9.7 percent increase. The Presidentís largest request for decreased funding is a 14.9 percent reduction for HUD/FHIP (see Summary Table).

For FY 2002, President Bush requested budget increases for all civil rights enforcement offices reviewed except EEOC, FHIP, and OFCCP. However, DOEd was the only agency in FY 2002 in which Congress approved funding commensurate with the Presidentís Request (see Summary Table).


Summary TableóCivil Rights Enforcement Funding, FYs 2001Ė2003 (1994 inflation-adjusted dollars)

Civil Rights Enforcement Agency

Presidentís Request

Congressional Appropriation

                    FY 2001Ė2002 Change

DOEd/OCR

3.2 % increase

3.0 % increase

EEOC

5.7 % decrease

0.1 % decrease

OFCCP

2.3 % decrease

0.2 % decrease

DOJ/CRD

1.1 % increase

7.3 % increase

HHS/OCR

16.2 % increase

8.6 % increase

HUD/FHEO

                    (Data not available)

HUD/FHAP

6.6 % increase

13.7 % increase

HUD/FHIP      

22.3 % decrease

17.3 % decrease

 

                   FY 2002Ė2003 Change

DOEd/OCR

9.7 % increase

EEOC

2.2 % increase

OFCCP

0.2 % decrease

DOJ/CRD        

1.8 % increase

HHS/OCR

1.5 % decrease

HUD/FHEO

                      (Data not available)

HUD/FHAP

10.9 % increase

HUD/FHIP

14.9 % decrease


Furthermore:

Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education

Although President Clinton requested increases in OCRís budget for FY 1995 and FY 1996 (compared with the FY 1994 request and appropriation), the budget requests for FY 1997 and FY 1998 were lower than the FY 1996 request in both actual and constant dollars (see tables 1 and 2). However, between FY 1994 and FY 1997 Congressional appropriations for OCR gradually decreased, from $56.6 million to $54.9 million (see table 1). The next year, Congress met the Presidentís request of $61.5 million, which increased OCRís budget by 12 percent over its FY 1997 appropriation.

For FY 1999, the President requested 10.6 percent more funding than was appropriated for OCR in FY 1998. Although Congress did not grant the Presidentís request, OCRís appropriation of $66 million for FY 1999 was 7.3 percent higher than in FY 1998 (see table 1). In real terms, the appropriation represented a 5.6 percent increase between FY 1998 and FY 1999 (see table 2). In FY 2000, OCR received another increase from Congress, raising its budget to $71.2 million. However, in real spending power the FY 2000 increase was only 5 percent above the FY 1999 appropriation (see figure 1).

Overall, between FY 1994 and FY 2002, despite the decline in appropriations between FY 1994 and FY 1997, OCRís budget increased by $23.3 millionóa 41.2 percent increase. In real spending power, however, the budget increased by only 20 percent.

For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting $89.7 million in funding, which is 12.1 percent more than was requested in FY 2002 (see table 1). In real spending power, the Presidentís request would provide only $74.6 million in funding, which represents a 10 percent increase over what was requested in FY 2002 (see figure 1). The Presidentís FY 2003 request is level with the FY 2002 Congressional appropriation. In real spending power, if the Presidentís FY 2003 funding is granted, it will be the largest increase that OCR has received since FY 1998.


Table 1óDepartment of Education/OCR Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

 

 

 

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

56.6

56.6

1995

58.2

61.5

1996

55.3

62.8

1997

54.9

60.0

1998

61.5

61.5

1999

66.0

68.0

2000

71.2

73.3

2001

76.0

76.0

2002

79.9*

80.0

2003

 

89.7**

 

* The 2002 Congressional appropriation figure was provided by the Office for Civil Rights.
**Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2003, p. 381.


Table 2óDepartment of Education/OCR Funding History 
(in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

 

 

 

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

56.6

56.6

1995

56.9

60.0

1996

52.8

59.9

1997

51.3

56.1

1998

56.8

56.8

1999

60.0

61.8

2000

63.0

64.9

2001

65.9

65.9

2002

67.9

68.0

2003

 

74.6



U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

As established in earlier Commission reports, the passage of new legislation and the expansion of existing civil rights statutes over the past decade have increased EEOCís responsibilities and, consequently, its workload. However, the agencyís funding has not increased in accordance with its rising workload. Funding requests decreased between FY 1996 and FY 1998 (see table 3). In fact, after adjusting for inflation, the FY 1998 request was lower than the FY 1994 request by 3 percent (see table 4 and figure 2). In addition, the FY 1998 request was lower, in actual dollars, than the FY 1997 request by more than $20 million. Between FYs 1999 and 2002, the President requested increased funding for EEOC (see table 3).

In the past nine years, Congress met the Presidentís request only twice (see table 3). In FY 1999, the Congressional appropriation matched the request of $279 million. However, in FY 2000 and FY 2001 Congress again funded the agency by an amount substantially lower than that requested. The FY 2000 appropriation was 10 percent below the Presidentís request for that year, and the FY 2001 appropriation was 5.6 percent less than the President requested. Further, in real terms, the FY 2000 appropriation represented a 1.9 percent reduction in spending power. Congressional appropriation was matched for the second time in FY 2002, when EEOC received $310 million in funding.

For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting $323.5 million in funding for EEOC (see table 3). In real spending power, this amount is equal to only $269.0 million (see table 4 and figure 2).


Table 3óEEOC Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

230.0

234.8

1995

233.0

245.7

1996

233.0

268.0

1997

239.7

268.0

1998

242.0

246.0

1999

279.0

279.0

2000

280.9

312.0

2001

304.0

322.0

2002

310.0*

310.0

2003

 

323.5**

* The 2002 Congressional appropriation figure was provided by the Budget Division.
**Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2003, p. 1109.


Table 4óEEOC Funding History (in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

230.0

234.8

1995

227.6

240.0

1996

222.4

255.8

1997

224.1

250.6

1998

223.4

227.1

1999

253.5

253.5

2000

248.7

276.2

2001

263.5

279.1

2002

263.3

263.3

2003

 

269.0



Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, U.S. Department of Labor

Although OFCCPís budget requests have increased almost 38 percent in actual dollars since FY 1994, Congress has consistently appropriated an amount lower than was requested (see table 5). Although OFCCPís budget has increased 17 percent in real terms since FY 1994, this increase has not been consistent. Between FY 1994 and FY 1997, Congressional appropriations decreased by 2 percent in real terms (see table 6).

While OFCCP has experienced an increase in funding since FY 1997, the agencyís budget may not keep up with inflation in the future. For example, the FY 1999 request was lower than the FY 1998 request in both actual and real dollars (see table 5 and figure 3). Further, in both actual and real dollars, the Presidentís FY 2001 request was below the FY 2000 request. In FY 2002, in both actual and real dollars, the Congressional appropriation exceeded the Presidentís request (see tables 5 and 6 and figure 3).

For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting only 2 percent more in funding than was requested in the previous year. For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting $77.5 million, but after adjusting for inflation this funding amount is equal to only $64.5 million (see table 6 and figure 3). If this request is granted, OFCCP will receive a decrease in funding of less than 1 percent.


Table 5óOFCCP Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

56.4

55.4

1995

58.9

59.9

1996

56.9

63.8

1997

59.1

65.5

1998

62.3

68.7

1999

65.5

67.8

2000

73.3

76.4

2001

76.0

76.3

2002

77.7*

76.0

2003

 

77.5**

 

*The 2002 Congressional appropriation figure was provided  by the Budget Section.
**The 2003 Presidentís Request was obtained from the Daily Labor Report, Feb. 5, 2002.


Table 6óOFCCP Funding History (in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

 

 

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

56.4

55.4

1995

57.6

58.5

1996

54.3

60.9

1997

55.2

61.2

1998

57.5

63.5

1999

59.5

61.6

2000

64.9

67.7

2001

65.9

66.1

2002

66.0

64.6

2003

 

64.5



Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice

Between FY 1994 and FY 1998, CRD budget requests fluctuated from year to year while Congressional appropriations for the Division remained relatively stable (see table 7). In addition, Congressional appropriations remained below the Presidentís budget request between FY 1995 and FY 1998.

Although $71.9 million was requested for CRD in FY 1995, Congress approved only $62.2 million (see table 7). The amount represented a 4 percent increase over the FY 1994 appropriation. In FY 1996, Congress again increased CRDís budget by $2 million in actual dollars. However, in terms of real spending power, CRDís budget remained level (see table 8). In real dollars, the budget provided by Congress in FY 1997 was again lower than the previous yearís, and 2.3 percent lower than the Divisionís FY 1994 appropriation. Further, the FY 1998 budget appropriation equaled the FY 1994 appropriation in real dollars (see figure 4). This relatively flat pattern of appropriations prior to FY 1999 is alarming considering that the Divisionís budget appropriations had increased substantially between FY 1981 and FY 1993.[3]

Between FY 1999 and FY 2001, the Presidentís requests for CRD funding have increased by more than $10 million each year. Nonetheless, funding for CRD is insufficient. In July 2000, then-acting Assistant Attorney General Bill Lann Lee stated that the FY 2000 budget increase ďhas not made up for the fact that for many years, the Civil Rights Division has basically been running on empty.Ē

In both real and actual dollars, CRDís FY 1999 budget was considerably higher than the budget appropriations between FY 1994 and FY 1998 (see tables 7 and 8). However, more than $8 million of the FY 1999 budget was reprogrammed for the administration of Y2K modifications and Japanese redress payments, and thus, did not go toward Division civil rights enforcement. The Presidentís request for FY 2002 was only $4 million more than was requested in FY 2001 (see table 7). The FY 2002 request was the highest request made during the entire period between FY 1994 and FY 2002.

For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting $105.1 million in funding for CRD. If granted, the requested funding would result in a 4 percent increase from the previous yearís appropriation (see table 7). In real dollars, the Presidentís budget request would amount to only $87.4 million (see table 8 and figure 4).


Table 7óDepartment of Justice/CRD Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

 

 

 

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

60.0

59.0

1995

62.6

71.9

1996

64.5

65.3

1997

62.4

69.6

1998

64.7

67.5

1999

77.3

71.6

2000

82.2

82.2

2001

92.0

97.9

2002

100.6

101.0*

2003

 

105.1*

* Figures for 2002 and 2003 were provided by the Civil Rights Division.


Table 8óDepartment of Justice/CRD Funding History 
(in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

60.0

59.0

1995

61.1

70.2

1996

61.6

62.3

1997

58.4

65.1

1998

59.7

62.3

1999

70.2

65.1

2000

72.7

72.8

2001

79.7

84.9

2002

85.5

85.8

2003

 

87.4



Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

In actual dollars, OCRís budget remained relatively stable throughout the last half of the 1990s. However, in terms of real spending power, both the budget requests and appropriations for OCR decreased during this time (see figure 5). From FY 1996 to FY 2000, the budget requests for the Office for Civil Rights, in actual dollars, have consistently remained lower than the FY 1994 request (see table 9). Correspondingly, the real spending power of the FY 2000 budget request for OCR was nearly 12 percent below the FY 1994 figure (see table 10). In addition, Congressional appropriations from FY 1995 to FY 1999 have been consistently lower in actual dollars than the FY 1994 appropriation (see table 9).

When looking at the past two decades and accounting for inflation, the FY 2000 budget is more than 60 percent below the real spending power of the FY 1981 budget. The Commission noted in 1999:

OCR operates under severe budgetary constraints . . . OCRís responsibilities and workload have increased over the past several years, yet its funding and staffing have decreased. OCRís budget has fluctuated around $20 million since 1981, and has not kept up with inflation.[4]

For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting level funding for OCR (see table 9). In actual dollars, the President is requesting $32.3 million. But in real terms, this request, if granted, will provide OCR with a budget of only $26.8 million, resulting in less than a 2 percent increase from the previous yearís appropriation (see table 10 and figure 5).


Table 9óDepartment of Health and Human Services/OCR Funding History 
(in
millions of actual dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

22.2

22.2

1995

22.1

21.9

1996

21.2

21.3

1997

19.5

21.8

1998

19.7

20.5

1999

20.6

20.7

2000

22.1

22.2

2001

28.0

27.0

2002

31.1*

32.0

2003

 

32.3**

* The 2002 Congressional appropriation figure was provided by the Office for Civil Rights.
** Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2003, p. 466.


Table 10óDepartment of Health and Human Services/OCR Funding History (in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

22.4

22.2

1995

21.6

21.4

1996

20.2

20.4

1997

18.2

20.4

1998

18.2

19.0

1999

18.7

18.8

2000

19.6

19.6

2001

24.3

23.4

2002

26.4

27.2

2003

 

26.8



U.S. Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentóOffice of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP), and Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP)

FHEO

Overall requested funding for FHEO fell in actual dollars between FY 1994 and FY 2000 (see table 11). In terms of real spending power, the amount of funding requested by the President for FHEO decreased 12 percent during this period (see table 12). Between FY 2000 and FY 2001, Congressional appropriations in both actual and real dollars increased by 8.3 percent and 5.9 percent, respectively. In FY 2001, FHEO received $51.4 million in funding (see table 11), but in real terms the amount was much lower, $44.5 million (see table 12 and figure 6).

Between FY 1995 and FY 1998, a series of program adjustments and buyouts adversely affected funding levels for FHEO. As a result, during this period FHEOís budget fell by nearly $4.6 million in actual dollars and $6.9 million in real dollars (see tables 11 and 12). In FY 1999, the requested and appropriated budgets for FHEO increased slightly, compared with the previous year (see figure 6). However, the FY 2000 appropriation was lower than the FY 1999 appropriation in both actual and real terms.


Table 11óDepartment of Housing and Urban Development/Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

49.4

51.1

1995

50.1

52.2

1996

45.5

48.8

1997

46.3

49.5

1998

45.5

48.7

1999

47.6

49.9

2000

47.5

50.8

2001

51.4

 *

2002

 

 **

2003

 

 **

 

 

*The 2001 Congressional figure was provided by the Budget Office.
**Data were unavailable for 2002 and 2003.


Table 12óDepartment of Housing and Urban Development/Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) Funding History (in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

49.4

51.1

1995

48.9

51.0

1996

43.4

46.6

1997

43.2

46.3

1998

42.0

45.0

1999

43.2

45.3

2000

42.0

45.0

2001

44.5

 

2002

 

 

2003

 

 



FHAP

In contrast to FHEO, in both actual and real dollars, the budget for FHAP increased between FY 1994 and FY 1997 (see tables 13 and 14). In FY 1994, FHAP received its requested amount of $4.5 (see table 13). Between FY 1994 and FY 1999, the FHAP budget appropriation more than doubled in real dollars (see table 14 and figure 7).

For FY 2003, President Bush has requested $26.0 million for FHAP (see table 13). This amount is significantly higher than the $22.9 million that was requested in FY 2002. In terms of real spending power, if the Presidentís requested is granted, FHAP will receive funding that is level with the FY 2002 Congressional appropriation (see figure 7).


Table 13óDepartment of Housing and Urban Development/Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

4.5

4.5

1995

7.4

7.4

1996

13.0

15.0

1997

15.0

15.0

1998

15.0

15.0

1999

13.0

23.0

2000

20.0

20.0

2001

22.0

21.0

2002

25.6

23.0*

2003

 

26.0**

 

 

*The figures for 2002 were provided by the Budget Division.
**Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2003, p. 514.


Table 14óDepartment of Housing and Urban Development/ Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) Funding History (in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

4.5

4.5

1995

7.2

7.2

1996

12.4

14.3

1997

14.0

14.0

1998

13.8

13.8

1999

11.8

20.9

2000

17.7

17.7

2001

19.1

18.2

2002

21.8

19.5

2003

 

21.6



FHIP

In contrast to FHAP, FHIP has experienced a roller coaster of funding since FY 1994. Its Congressional appropriation in actual dollars has fluctuated between $26 million and $15 million (see table 15). In addition, its appropriated funds fell far short of its requested funding in FYs 1996, 1998 and 1999.

For FY 2003, President Bush is requesting level funding at $20.0 million (see table 15). But in real dollars, the requested funding, if approved, would only be worth $16.6 million (see table 16 and figure 8). This level of funding would return FHIP to what its FY 1996 budget was worth (see figure 8).


Table 15óDepartment of Housing and Urban Development/Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP) Funding History (in millions of actual dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

20.5

16.9

1995

26.0

23.0

1996

17.0

30.0

1997

15.0

17.0

1998

15.0

24.0

1999

22.0

29.0

2000

24.0

27.0

2001

24.0

29.0

2002

20.3

22.9*

2003

 

20.0**

* The figures for 2002 were provided by the Budget Division.
**Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2003, p. 514.


Table 16óDepartment of Housing and Urban Development/Fair Housing Initiative Program (FHIP) Funding History (in millions of constant 1994 dollars)

Fiscal Year

Congressional Appropriation

Presidentís Request

1994

20.5

16.9

1995

25.4

22.5

1996

16.2

28.6

1997

14.0

15.9

1998

13.8

22.2

1999

20.0

26.4

2000

21.2

23.9

2001

20.8

25.1

2002

17.2

19.5

2003

 

16.6



CONCLUSION

This review updates and presents the Presidentís requests and Congressional appropriations of six principal civil rights agencies since FY 1994. Overcoming years of neglect requires significant commitment from Congress and the President. After adjusting for inflation, the budget trend shows that none of the civil rights offices has received continuous increases in funding during the past nine years. Since FY 1999, the budgets of DOEd/OCR and DOJ/CRD have been increasing after fluctuating for numerous years. Since FY 2000, HHS/OCRís budget has increased after continuously decreasing for numerous years. FHIPís budget has been decreasing since FY 2000. Similarly, EEOCís budget has taken a downward turn after peaking in FY 2001. FHEOís budget has remained flat since decreasing in the early 1990s. This has occurred without commensurate reduction in the agenciesí civil rights authority.

As in earlier reports, the Commission concludes that inadequate funding endures in each of these agencies, thus hindering them from sufficiently exercising their civil rights enforcement authority. As the country strives to ensure the physical safety and security of its citizens during these uncertain times, it must not neglect the responsibility to make certain that its citizensí civil rights are protected.



[1] U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR), Funding Federal Civil Rights Enforcement, June 1995, p. 4 (hereafter cited as USCCR, 1995 Budget Report).

[2] U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR), Funding Federal Civil Rights Enforcement: 2000 and Beyond, February 2001, p. 59 (hereafter cited as USCCR, 2001 Budget Report).

[3] USCCR, 1995 Budget Report, p. 26.

[4] USCCR, The Health Care Challenge: Acknowledging Disparity, Confronting Discrimination, and Ensuring Equality, September 1999, pp. 41Ė42.