In This Issue : Enter the 3-letter anchor name, which will link to the articles below. (2) TITLE GOES HERE: Enter the article's title --> SUBHEAD --> Reacting to the Horror What You Can Do to Help Help from Nonprofits and Other Online Resources Phony Charities Seek To Profit From Disaster Relief Efforts Defending Freedom at a Time of Crisis DOJ Must Complete Its Chemical Plant Site Security Study Taking Another Look at the Critical Infrastructure Debate Fiscal Policies: A Reflection of National Priorities Technical Matters: Emergency Spending & Tax Cuts Study Points to Stronger Arsenic Standard White House Denies Relaxed Oversight of Nursing Homes Reader Response: Tax Cuts and Government Correction: Reg Accounting Change SIDE BAR: Budget: The Austerity Trap REGS: OMB: Use E-gov to Cut Budget; New Role for Gov't Reacting to the Horror The following statement appeared on OMB Watch's website on September 13, 2001: The OMB Watch Board of Directors and staff are deeply saddened by the loss of life resulting from the unconscionable and abominable terrorism on September 11, 2001. Even though these deplorable acts may have caused the bloodiest day in American history, it will not diminish the American spirit. A quiet fury will continue to build in each of us, and we must find ways to channel it. We caution against unfounded acts of retaliation carried out against people because of race or ethnicity -- such as those that have already been directed to Arab Americans. The wrongful reprisals against Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor must not be replicated. We must channel our anger in constructive ways. Here are three things we will be doing:

• Giving Blood. You can also give blood by contacting the American Red Cross chapter near you to schedule a time to give. While there be enough blood right this minute, blood donor programs are encouraging donations next week and beyond. (They still need type O and Rh negative blood right now.) To find a local chapter, access the online Red Cross chapter listing or call 1-800-GIVE-LIFE (448-3543).
• Giving Donations. A number of organizations are providing critically important services. You can help them too by giving money. This can be done online through http://www.helping.org/. 100% of your contribution will go to the organization.
• Moving Forward. Our prayers will be with the families and friends of the people who have suffered, along with the emergency responders who continue to risk their lives and the government officials who must lead us through the coming days. At the same time, we will channel our energies into the work we do best -- carrying out the mission of OMB Watch: working to strengthen democracy, social justice and our civil society. We will also support appropriate and meaningful efforts to prevent events like this from ever occurring again.

The nonprofit community has responded with speed in providing services to those in need. The Independent Sector, an organization representing many national charities, has developed a web site that provides information about how some of their members are responding to this emergency. In light of the tragedy on September 11, this issue of the OMB Watcher primarily examines those arenas where OMB Watch work overlaps with the issues and communities impacted by Tuesday's devastation. Among such issues are the many ways nonprofits are contributing to the recovery efforts, how you can join in these efforts, how we must again find a balance between a free society and a secure society, and how a national tragedy may help us refocus on our nation's priorities. As always, we welcome your comments. Back to Top What You Can Do to Help Table: How You Can Help Back to Top Help from Nonprofits and Other Online Resources People from all over the world watched in horror as the human toll of Tuesday, September 11, 2001 became awful reality. We have also watched displays of courage and compassion, as well as an unprecedented level of response to the resulting crisis. Behind the scenes, a number of charities and nonprofit agencies have been working to provide constant support, relief, and recovery services to individuals, families, and communities in New York, Pittsburgh, Washington, DC, and other affected areas. The enormous public outpouring of support has, at times, outpaced the administrative and programmatic capacity of organizations working around the clock to meet every need imaginable. But it also serves as a reminder of the strength of citizen participation and deep sense of social obligation in our country. The American Red Cross, while known to most Americans only for blood donation services, has been at the forefront of addressing health and disaster recovery at the sites almost immediately, along with medical supply provision efforts from AmeriCares, and counseling support services from Mercy Corp International. Organizations like Second Harvest have also been coordinating food collection and distribution networks from across the country to aid rescue and relief workers, as well as families and communities. People from all walks of life have put their differences aside to engage in informal and coordinated volunteer activities. Established volunteer efforts and service/relief agencies have logged an enormous number of requests to help, so much so that they are overwhelmed and filled to capacity for immediate tasks. Many are asking individuals and groups to add their names to reserve listings for opportunities to help throughout the coming weeks, and to assist with the collection and distribution of goods and supplies, by first checking with local agencies for their needs. Online volunteering and charity donation portal Helping.org, has served a source of news and information on how to assist a range of nonprofit agencies. VolunteerMatch, a national volunteer registration service using zip-code based matching to help individuals and organizations connect to opportunities in their area. City Cares is a national alliance of metro-area volunteer organizations and networks -- including New York Cares, Pittsburgh Cares, and Greater DC Cares -- that coordinates and engages individuals and groups in projects benefiting nonprofits, schools, and libraries. In addition to providing vital logistics support for volunteers, a number of charity efforts have been set up, in the immediate wake of the tragedies, to help channel desperately-needed resources to victims and the surrounding communities. A number of religious organizations are collecting online donations for disaster and emergency relief funds, including Catholic Charities USA and United Jewish Communities. There are also large-scale contribution efforts like the September 11th Fund. Established and underwritten by United Way and The New York Community Trust, and supported by the Council on Foundations, this fund will direct 100% of contributions towards nonprofit health and human service efforts in New York City, Washington, DC, or other affected areas -- at the discretion of each individual donor. The Tides Foundation's Tides 9/11 Fund is providing support for emerging philanthropic activity in addition to directing funds to immediate relief efforts. A number of corporate-charity partnerships have also directed significant amounts of individual donations to relief efforts. Give for Change, the online donation service of the progressive-oriented telecommunications and financial service firm Working Assets, is offering to contribute double the amount of individual donations over $10 made through its service to charities- up to $1 million total -- including donations made through its tax rebate program. The American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund is receiving online donations through affiliate donation pages courtesy of online shopping portal Amazon.com, online payment service PayPal, and online search directory Yahoo!. Each of these companies has waived their administrative costs and fees for this effort. The results have been staggering. By noon Friday, according to several media accounts, at least $100 million was raised through various efforts, including $1.7 million from some 18,000 individual donations through Helping.org, and some $70 million (including $10 million from 30,000 online donors) for the September 11th Fund. The donation efforts coordinated through Amazon.com yielded some $5 million, while Yahoo.com raised $8 million for charities. America Online generated a reported $7 million in the first 40 hours after the attack. This is in addition to continued corporate donations, including:

• $1 million from companies like Avon, Toyota, and Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. Ford Motor Company donated $1 million, in addition to donations of rescue vehicles and dollar-for-dollar matching donations toward employee contributions. AT&T Foundation donated $1 million, as well as $10 million in pre-paid phone cards
• $3 million from Sony Corporation and Hewlett-Packard (not including the latter's matching fund of up to $2 million for employee donations to the Red Cross and September 11th Fund)
• $5 million through Amazon.com for the Red Cross, as well as $5 million from IBM and AOL Time Warner
• $10 million each from General Electric to help families of emergency personnel, firefighters, and police officers killed in the New York City efforts, the Lilly Endowment and DaimlerChrysler. Microsoft's contribution comes to $10 million, including $5 million each to the September 11th Fund and technology service efforts
• $12 million from Coca-Cola to aid Washington, DC and New York
• $15 million from Citigroup
• Significant donations of food products from Kellogg's and Anheuser-Busch, and equipment from Ace Hardware, Michelin Tire Company, and defense industry firm Hughes.

Individuals have also held fundraisers, community food and clothing drives, and even local businesses and utilities from as far away as the West Coast have donated equipment and personnel to provide power and communication lines to areas without them. At this time, organizations are continuing to encourage volunteers and donors to continue to their support for the long, difficult road ahead. While the resources, services, and civic and national pride delivered in response to the need is awe-inspiring, it is important to remember that nonprofits and charities perform these services daily and year-round, often with little large-scale public or media fanfare. Medical supplies and services, food, shelter, clothing, relocation, financial recovery, crisis support and counseling, and other roles filled by our nation's vital nonprofit and voluntary sector often go unnoticed until disaster strikes close to home. And though well-intentioned, uncoordinated responses to crises can result in an overabundance of goods and goodwill that may not be utilized and deployed where they can be most effective. Support for charity and nonprofit activity which has the ability to craft appropriate responses is needed on a ongoing basis in order to ensure that no person and no community is left to suffer in the most critical of times. Back to Top Phony Charities Seek To Profit From Disaster Relief Efforts While the vast majority of organizations soliciting donations to help victims of the September 11 terrorist attack are legitimate, a small number of sham groups have sought to profit from people's desire to contribute to relief efforts. These fraudulent groups are using the Internet to send unsolicited emails and post websites that accept credit cards. The most visible example was reported late last week when a spam email message circulated claiming donations would be forwarded to the Red Cross, but did not identify the sender or link directly to the Red Cross. Two nonprofits concerned with spam issues, The SpamCon Foundation [www.spamcon.org] and the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUSE) [www.cauce.org], issued a warning to potential donors advising caution against emails asking for "Express Relief Funds" or "Victims Survivor Fund" in the subject line. They also suggested that donors verify a the identity of any group soliciting donations by telephone or other means, such as checking website URLs to ensure a direct link to a legitimate organization. Other tips from consumer groups include:

• Give to organizations you know
• Avoid giving credit card information over the phone
• Check the name of the organization carefully to ensure it is not modified to look like the name of an established group
• Ask about how the money will be used and get information about the organization seeking the donation.
• Check with state consumer protection agencies or the Better Business Bureau for information on charities.

The Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance has said fraudulent charities are "only a small part of the activity taking place." Their website has a list of charities it has evaluated that interested donors can check if they have doubts. The Red Cross online donation system is available on the American Red Cross website, as well as through a few other select portal systems. In a September 13 press release, they announced five online partners that will accept and forward donations for them: Amazon.com, AOL Time Warner, PayPal.com, Wells Fargo Bank and Yahoo!, Inc. and stated their intention of seeking criminal prosecution of anyone using their name or emblem without their permission. For a more complete list of verified sites for online donations to the Red Cross and other aid organizations, see box and story above. Back to Top Defending Freedom at a Time of Crisis On Friday, September 14, over 100 individuals representing more than 80 organizations across the political spectrum came together to grieve the terrible loss of life and the awful toll on the families of the victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Our government can and will respond to these attacks, and these organizations share a strong commitment to an appropriate response. Many organizations are deeply concerned, however, that in the wake of these attacks, some will call for measures that unduly restrict liberty without actually increasing safety. These organizations also share an apprehension about government initiatives that would infringe on civil liberties, diminish immigrants' rights, unduly increase surveillance, promote racial profiling, erode privacy, increase government secrecy, and eat into the right to due process under the law. These organizations hammered out a brief and general joint statement on defending freedom at a time of crisis. That statement and instructions for endorsing it can be obtained from OMB Watch Information Policy Analyst Patrice McDermott. The statement is embargoed until noon on Thursday, September 20, and should not be released to the press until then. The statement, and the signers to date, will be released at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on Thursday, September 20 at 12:00 noon. OMB Watch is proud to be a part of this effort. Back to Top DOJ Must Complete Its Chemical Plant Site Security Study There will be great energy in the aftermath of September 11 to make air travel more secure. At the same time, we should be on guard for other types of vulnerabilities, such as at our chemical and utility plants. More than two years ago, chemical manufacturers launched a fear-based campaign against disclosing information about dangerous chemicals being used in communities across the country. Under the 1990 Clean Air Act, chemical companies were required to submit Risk Management Plans (RMPs) that included information about worst case scenarios in the case of an accident. The worst case scenarios, along with the entire RMP, was to be made available through the Internet in a manner similar to the Toxics Release Inventory. Industry became quite concerned over the fact that the worst case scenarios would have information about death and injuries that could be caused by company accidents. To avoid disclosure, the industry raised concerns about terrorism if information were made available through the Internet. They were able to get the FBI to weigh in with concerns about terrorism even though there was no evidence of such concerns. Ultimately Congress passed a law, the Site Security and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act of 1999, that limited public access to such information. During debate over the bill, there was recognition that limiting the public's right-to-know can be dangerous in a democracy. Alternatively, Congress discussed site security and reducing the use of extremely hazardous chemicals. The Department of Justice (DOJ) acknowledged that extremely hazardous substances at industrial facilities present attractive targets for criminal activity. And the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry confirmed that site security at chemical-using industries ranges from fair to very poor. For these reasons, Congress directed the (DOJ), in consultation with government, industry, and the public, to report on "actions, including the design and maintenance of safe facilities, that are effective in detecting, preventing, and minimizing the consequences of releases of regulated [extremely hazardous] substances that may be caused by criminal activity." Congress further directed the Department to make "recommendations…for reducing vulnerability of covered stationary sources to criminal and terrorist activity". Congress directed the Department to produce an interim report by August 5, 2000. (The General Accounting Office (GAO) is also required to do a similar study which is due next year.) DOJ did not meet this deadline, and apparently has not even begun the mandatory study of potential terrorism and site security at chemical plants -- two years into the intended study period. In the aftermath of the September 11 attack, we must balance the benefits of public access in our democratic society with the necessary steps to make certain our lives are secure. The simplest solutions are always to cut back on the public's right-to-know. But we believe this would be very dangerous. During the RMP debates, OMB Watch argued that public disclosure would spur industries to reduce chemical hazards, and pointed out that there is otherwise no program to require industries to even conduct a review of inherently safer options. Such safer options include, for example, replacing chlorine gas at water treatment plants with sodium hypochlorite, ozone, or ultraviolet light -- none of which have the same potential as chlorine gas to drift off site and kill or injure people. We argued that the real issue should be improving site security or reducing use of dangerous chemicals where possible. Congress listened with half an ear – it both restricted public access and required studying site security. Now more than ever, Congress should make sure that DOJ completes the site security study and that rather than restrict core democratic principles, take a steady course of action to improve security in chemical and utility plants. This includes resources for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy to implement security improvements. Back to Top Taking Another Look at the Critical Infrastructure Debate On September 12, one day after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, although most hearings were cancelled, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee convened a hearing on America's critical information infrastructure. The hearing was originally scheduled to examine the security of the critical cyber-infrastructure and to allow the Committee to hear the challenges that remain in government's efforts to secure the critical information infrastructure, which includes telecommunications and transportation, under Presidential Decision Directive 63. The Directive, signed by President Clinton in May 1998, requires agencies to protect both the cyber and physical infrastructure, and much of the attention has been on the protection of information systems. While the events of September 11 were not an attack on information systems, the members of the Committee examined what terrorist threats exist to these systems, and what should be done to minimize the risks. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), the Chairman of the Committee, presided. Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN), the ranking Republican also participated. Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) was present throughout the two hour hearing. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY), Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), and Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN), also participated. The full story is available on OMB Watch's Information Policy Page. Back to Top Fiscal Policies: A Reflection of National Priorities In the wake of the September 11 tragedy, much of the ordinary business of government, including the appropriations process, has been pretty much on hold during the past week. We are saddened by the loss of so many lives in the September 11 attack and by the pain of their family, friends, and companions. We wrestle with the broad implications for each of us, personally, as global citizens, and as a nation. As we return to "normalcy" and the business of government -- the policy decisions and the appropriations process that will be resuming, now is perhaps a good time to again examine the budget as a reflection of our underlying values and judgments. The federal budget is the way we allot our nation's resources -- the money we as taxpayers contribute -- for various projects to accomplish certain goals. The budget is the clearest expression of what our priorities as a country are. Just as our everyday acts add up to what our lives are all about, the annual appropriation of resources -- deciding who gets what -- adds up to what our country is all about. There was relatively swift passage on Friday, September 14, of an emergency allocation of $40 billion (H.R. 2888), double the President's request, in the wake of the events on September 11 (see related story). The vote was unanimous. While, according to many, in the light of such a huge national tragedy, "money was not an object," determining who would control the use of the money did raise some issues. This will likely be a continuing theme as legislators determine the allotment of resources for two very different goals: increased security measures and "counterterrorism" efforts on the one hand, and rescue, recovery and victim assistance on the other hand. Besides preventative measures against future acts of violence, we are also faced with the intention to proceed against the perpetrators, and any country that harbored them, through military means and through the rule of law. This will require more resources. All of these new spending needs take place when the cost of President Bush's tax cut has reduced the anticipated surplus substantially, when an increase in "defense" spending of $18 billion has already been requested, and before the expenses for prescription drug coverage for Medicare recipients or increased federal contributions for education have been figured in. Most of the emergency spending allotted during the past few years has been for natural disasters, but we are now faced with considerable emergency spending for another kind of unanticipated disaster. This will likely bring back the "guns or butter" debate in full force -- many thoughtful people see this tragedy as a wake-up call for us to consider our obligation as the richest nation in the world to address the inequality and injustice that may result in this kind of violence; while others see the strongest imperative to retaliate, to find and punish the perpetrators, and to use our military might "to rid the world of evil;" and yet others fall somewhere in between. It seems very likely, however, that those of us who advocate increased investment in people and communities, whether domestic or international, will need to make our message stronger. The sudden abandonment of any pretense of preserving the so-called "Social Security lockbox" represents a realization that, in light of urgently pressing needs, the political wrangling about who is going to spend the Social Security surplus first will thankfully be set aside. This is good news, but it makes some of us wonder why the pressing needs that existed in this country and internationally before September 11 had so little power over the budget purse strings. While we are seen by others (and hated by some) as the richest and most powerful country on the face of the earth, many of our own citizens live in poverty, our children go hungry and cannot afford health care, and some of us even lack such basics as air that is healthy to breathe and water that is safe to drink. Many people in this country live in poverty, and poverty correlates with limited social, economic and political power and thus reduced opportunity on all fronts. Yet we have been unable to come together to work towards national purposes that would improve the lives of our people and communities. Perhaps this tragedy can make us realize the importance of pulling together and of realizing our shared values about the worth of each person's life and our commitment to insuring that every person in the United States has the opportunity to succeed. Just saying the words doesn't accomplish ideals of equal opportunity and social justice -- it also requires money. Now, when we are in a space where pure political maneuvering seems a little silly and much of what was being hotly debated only a week ago seems inconsequential, might be a good time to reexamine our budget priorities. We must do so in light of the terrible events of September 11, but we could also begin to think in terms of making a positive difference in the lives of ordinary Americans. Back to Top Desperate Times Call For Technical Matters Emergency Supplemental Bill Turning back to the task of sorting out the nation's budget policy, members of Congress last week certainly had an entirely new driving force for quick action. Last Friday, the Senate, by a vote of 96-0, and the House, by a vote 422-0 approved a $40 billion emergency supplemental spending bill (H.R. 2888). The $40 billion will provide the funding necessary to "provide support to counter, investigate, or prosecute domestic or international terrorism," enable Federal agencies to continue their operations, provide emergency assistance to New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, and to allow for the increased security measures implemented following Tuesday's devastation. To help ease reported tension over who would have the authority to distribute the $40 billion, Congressional and White House negotiators have agreed on a three-part system for allocating the emergency funds and a number of reporting requirements. The goal of the negotiations was to ensure that, despite an additional Congressional authorization of a use of force, it remained clear that the emergency supplemental did not become a blank check for the White House to use at its own discretion. In addition, further budget wrangling was temporarily dispensed with since all of the $40 billion will be considered "emergency" funding, with half counted under FY 2001 expenditures and half under FY 2002 expenditures - thus the spending will not count against the limits set by the budget resolution agreed upon by Congress last year and earlier this year. (For further discussion of what this temporary relief from misdirected budget debates could mean, see related piece.) The "2001 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States" makes $10 billion available immediately for the rescue efforts in Manhattan and at the Pentagon, the revised transportation security measures, and other vaguely-worded "Federal and state local preparedness" for response to, and alleviation of, the results of Tuesday's attacks. Another $10 billion will be held for 15 days for Congressional review while the White House provides more details of its intended use of the funds it requested immediately following the attacks. Members of Congress will appropriate the remaining $20 billion in a subsequent emergency appropriations process, based on the additional specific requests of Federal agencies. Finally, the bill stipulates that at least $20 billion of the total funds must be directed toward recovery efforts in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. In addition, according to usbudget.com, Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) has proposed a bipartisan commission to join in the efforts of the General Accounting Office (GAO) to ensure that all of these funds are used in accordance with the bill's guidelines. Tax Measures The House also passed, by a vote of 418-0, H.R. 2884, the "Victims of Terrorism Relief Act of 2001," which extends to the victims of Tuesday's terror and their families a provision of current tax law that applies to members of the military who die in combat or in terrorist attacks abroad. The bill exempts the families of those who died in Tuesday's attacks from paying income tax for this year. For victims whose estates were valued high enough ($675,000 or more) to file an estate tax return, it will extend the usual 6-month exemption period and also reduce the total estate tax owed. These tax measures are in addition to those that automatically went into effect in New York, Arlington, Virginia, and Pennsylvania when these areas were declared Federal disaster areas. It is not clear when the Senate will vote on this bill, but no votes of any kind are scheduled until Thursday of this week when Congress returns from the Jewish holidays. According to BNA, Rep. William Thomas (R-CA) has also raised the possibility of introducing further tax cuts in response to Tuesday's attacks. Among his proposals is one to enact a permanent capital gains tax cut from 20% to 15%. Remember that two weeks ago, Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) and other Republican leaders had suggested that a 2-year capital gains tax cut would help stimulate the economy without costing the Federal government lost revenue. Lott's suggestion was met with some resistance from many Congressional Democrats and only modest support from the White House. Such a reaction would suggest that Thomas' proposal will also have difficulty gaining wide Congressional support. Indeed, Rep. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), while stating that it is very important to provide immediate relief to the victims, both individual and corporate, of last week's tragedy, has apparently already warned against using it as an opportunity to set broader, long-term tax or budget policy. Back to Top Study Points to Stronger Arsenic Standard The National Academy of Sciences released a report September 11 finding that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has greatly underestimated the cancer risks of arsenic in drinking water. EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman requested the report in March upon dropping the arsenic standard, promulgated by the Clinton administration, of 10 parts per billion (ppb). The report reveals that a risk of cancer is present at levels even lower than the 10 ppb standard. According to the report, men and women who daily consume water with 3 ppb of arsenic have approximately a 1 in 1,000 increased risk of developing bladder or lung cancer over their lifetime. At 5 ppb, the report found an estimated risk of bladder or lung cancer to be 1.5 in 1,000; at 10 ppb the risk was estimated to be greater than 3 in 1,000; and at 20 ppb the risk was estimated to be greater than 7 in 1,000. The current standard is 50 ppb. After receiving the report, HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6816-2001Sep10.html">an EPA official told the Washington Post there was no chance the agency would adopt a standard less stringent than 10 ppb. And indeed, there is now pressure to produce a standard even tougher than that. See this previous Watcher story on Congress' reaction to the repeal of the Clinton arsenic standard. Back to Top White House Denies Relaxed Oversight of Nursing Homes The White House recently denied a report in the September 7 New York Times that it intended to ease regulatory requirements on nursing homes by reducing the frequency of inspections and lessening or eliminating some penalties. Bush Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said this idea came up at a meeting, but that it was rejected "out of hand." The National Citizens' Coalition for Nursing Home Reform (NCCNHR) believes the Times report, which the paper stands by, was accurate. In this alert, NCCNHR notes that Tom Scully -- the administrator of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) -- has said he favors reduced oversight of some nursing home facilities. In fact, Scully drew a strong rebuke from Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) when he called annual inspections of good nursing homes "nutty." Moreover, NCCNHR says that a document is circulating on Capitol Hill that provides further details on how the administration would relax oversight of nursing homes. The Washington Post reports that the Times article was based on internal documents prepared nearly two months ago at CMS, which Scully claims he has never seen. In April, the White House similarly disavowed a proposal to eliminate testing of salmonella in school lunches after it was first reported in the media to great public outcry. Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman claimed that it was a mistake by a "low level" employee, and that she had never reviewed the proposal. Back to Top Reader Response: Tax Cuts and Government Your watchdog group disappoints me. The best way to stimulate an economy and build for the future is to put money back into the hands of those who earned it. Hence, a tax cut. The government does nothing for US citizens that cannot be done with more skill and better results in the private sector. The only exception to this rule would be defense. Just look at our educational system, our Medicare and Medicade disaster and the department of motor vehicles for examples. I say take all the money back from Washington that we can. Finally we have people in charge willing to recognize that government is not the great provider - that job should be left to the American people not those bureaucrats in Washington! Adam Hartmann Premier Technical Sales, Inc. Back to Top Reg Accounting Change Due to an editorial error, the September 4 Watcher piece on the costs and benefits of Federal regulation contained incorrect links to the AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies and George Mason University's Mercatus Center. The online version of the September 4 issue reflects the corrections. We apologize for any confusion. Back to Top Notes and Sidebars The Austerity Trap The Electronic Policy Network and The American Prospect have a new web feature about the making of the budget-titled "The Austerity Trap." A New Role for Government: Airport Security This also may be a time to recognize the importance of government in our lives that goes beyond national defense and national security. While we have heard for years now that the private sector can almost always do better than government in almost every way, suddenly there is talk of turning the airport security process over to government regulation. We discover that the people who move us through airport security get little training, low wages and poor benefits, in spite of their importance -- after all, the goal of private business is the bottom line of profit. In areas where the bottom line is people's safety and health and well-being, government, it seems, may do better. OMB: Use E-Gov to Cut Budget The day that agencies turned in their fiscal 2003 budget requests, the Office of Management and Budget sent out a memo asking them to use e-government and other reform initiatives to cut 5 percent off those requests. In a September 10 memo, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mitchell Daniels, Jr. cited changes in the economy as the reason he is asking agencies to help develop a 2003 budget that spends less than the one currently going through Congress. The alternate requests are due to OMB by September 28. For the full story, see this Federal Computer Week article.