The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of the GPE Advocacy Initiative

APA Education Policy Office: September 28, 2005

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of the GPE Advocacy Initiative

We are at the end of the FY 2006 appropriations cycle and it has been a series of grueling battles. But unlike so many other federal health and education discretionary programs, it looks like the GPE program will be continued. There has been a significant loss of funding but we won our war. The Labor-Health & Human Services-Education Appropriations Subcommittee was given a conference allocation of $329 million less than FY 2005 funding for discretionary programs. This allocation is $1.145 billion less than the Senate passed bill. The House completed action on its FY 2006 Labor-Health & Human Services-Education Appropriations bill on June 24th in which it eliminated the GPE Program along with other Bureau of Health Professions programs except for nursing. Fortunately on July 14th the Senate Labor-Health & Human Services-Education Appropriations Subcommittee restored funding for the GPE Program and the other programs in the Bureau of Health Professions at the FY 2005 level. The full Senate passed the bill on October 27th. The House rejected the conference report on November 17th because of concerns over funding cuts to social programs from Democrats and moderate Republicans. The conference will have to meet again prior to the bill being reconsidered by the House and prior to the Senate taking up the conference report. During reconsideration of the conference, it is expected that our $2 million in funding for GPE will remain.

Even though we are faced with much less funding than in prior years and the fate of half the programs is uncertain (this is the ugly), there is still much to cheer about. One third of the Allied Health and Other Disciplines line was retained and out of the $4 million left, GPE got $2 million. This “win” is even more significant given that the Conferees cut the Title VII programs by almost 70%, eliminating most of them. To illustrate how tight the allocation was -- and the extent of the drastic measures taken -- all earmarked projects (i.e., favorites of legislators that are directed to specific universities, hospitals and other such entities) were eliminated.

Why was the GPE program saved? It was because of the tremendous swell of grassroots support by the psychology education and training community, and other APA members across the country (the good!). As a result we garnered enough Congressional supporters to save the program. Thanks to the quick action of our Federal Education Advocacy Coordinators (FEDAC) grassroots network and other APA Members, we witnessed the most incredible and extraordinary response we have ever received to the Action Alert, which was sent out to all relevant listservs including the Public Policy Office PPAN (Public Policy Advocacy Network), In deed, hundreds of psychologists and graduate students across the country acted on our urgent request, which asked everyone to send an immediate message to their Senators urging them to restore the $4.5 million for FY 2006 for the GPE Program. Senate staffers told us, in fact, that they were overwhelmed by the expression of interest and concern about the GPE Program and as a result many expressed support for the GPE Program to the Senate Labor-Health & Human Services-Education Appropriations Subcommittee Chair and Ranking Member. Moreover, because of the enormous grassroots response, over 20% of the Senate signed onto a “Dear Colleague” letter in support of GPE even though window of opportunity for signing-on was a short day and a half...

What else is good? The growing interest of APA Members in attending advocacy training workshops and participating in grassroots activities is another positive sign. During the APA Convention that was held in Washington , DC the Education-PPO (in collaboration with the Public Interest and Science-PPO and the APAGS Office) conducted the largest advocacy training workshop ever held. Over two hundred psychologists and psychology graduate students visited their Senators' offices and advocated for three authorizing issues: Bureau of Health Professions (Graduate Psychology Education Program) Reauthorization; the National Institutes of Health Reauthorization; and Health Disparities legislation.

In addition, following the recent Education Leadership Conference advocacy workshop and Hill visits, we received numerous emails such as the one from Sheila O'Brien Quinn, Ph.D., of Salve Regina University, President-Elect of Northeastern Psychology Association (NEPA) , which said: “I wanted to thank you for a great experience. I learned a great deal about APA, the other regional associations and political activism. I intend to make my participation in the ELC worthwhile by becoming much more politically active.” Dr. Quinn was one of over seventy-five psychology education leaders from around the country who also went to the Hill to meet with their Congressional delegation, many coming back with the good news that their legislators wanted to sign onto a “Dear Colleague” letter expressing support for FY 2006 GPE funding. Not only did these APA members garner support for GPE but they had an opportunity to further explain what psychologists do and how they are contributing to our nation by serving underserved population, including addressing the mental health needs of Katrina victims and returning military and their families.

So, despite the bad and the ugly, there has been much good accomplished this year…and with your help there will be more “good” ahead. It is without question that working all together we can definitely make a difference for psychology.