VOCA Caps, New Earmarks
Create Uncertainty, Unease

President proposes $575 million cap on VOCA spending for 2002

[Print Version]

On the one hand, the President's proposal-which still must be acted on by Congress—provides for a 7% increase in VOCA spending from this year's $537.5 million cap. The increase is exactly the same amount that the cap was increased from last year.

On the other hand, new earmarks for Dept. of Justice staff positions—and rumors that more federal agencies are seeking their slice of VOCA funds—are creating some anxiety over whether cap increases actually will result in more money for state grants. Adding to the uncertainty is a new OVC-operated international compensation program that also has the potential for taking significant amounts of VOCA funds that otherwise would be available to the states. Some advocates are increasingly concerned about these new uses or Fund resources that previously had been reserved almost exclusively for states to use in compensating victims and supporting essential services.

Finally, a new potential reality exists that is almost the reverse of the situation faced in the previous two years, when Congress took money away because deposits into the Crime Victims Fund exceeded the cap. This year, deposits into the Fund are lagging behind what would be necessary to reach the spending limit proposed by the President. If collections stay low, will Congress allow money that has been held back the past two years to be used to boost up the Fund to the spending cap? (While it's too early to tell what the final total
this year will be, deposits into the Fund so far are coming in at about a $440 million annual pace.)

And if future-year's collections do remain lower than the record highs of 1999 and 2000, is a cap such a bad idea? If Congress really does reach into the $724 million held back in the past two years to beef up the Crime Victim; Fund in future years, the effect of the caps will be to protect and manage the Fund, evening out the flow of money to the states, rather than allow grants to rise and fall so dramatically each year.

With so much up in the air, what is clear is that VOCA, rather suddenly, is in uncharted territory. Victim-service professionals and advocates must look to Capitol Hill and to OVC for answers to questions that did not even exist two short years ago. And it's making some of them rather nervous.

Why a Cap?
What's driving the desire in Washington to place a cap on VOCA? Congress' expressed rationale for imposing a cap is to stabilize the Fund and protect the states from being flooded with huge increases that will be difficult to spend. The first cap, imposed on spending last year, came when annual Fund collections more than tripled, reaching a record $985 million. If all this money had been released, state VOCA assistance grants would have quadrupled from the year before. FY 2000 saw the second highest collection level of $777 million, and Congress once again held money back, while allowing a small increase in overall spending.

While it can be argued that the caps are a positive step toward stability and protection of Fund assets, few professionals in victims services agree that the money couldn't be wisely managed if the Fund was uncapped. Many also believe that substantial unmet needs exist that should be addressed now.