Trump budget plan slashes food stamps, healthcare for poor

[webfact]

Trump budget plan slashes food stamps, healthcare for poor

By Roberta Rampton

REUTERS

 

FILE PHOTO - President Donald Trump's FY2018 budget is seen printed at the Government Publishing Office in Washington, U.S. on May 19, 2017. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House is set to deliver President Donald Trump's first full budget to lawmakers on Tuesday, a plan that would slash funding for healthcare and food assistance programs for the poor while it trims the deficit.

 

The plan would cut $3.6 trillion in government spending over 10 years, balancing the budget by the end of the decade. More than $800 billion would be cut from the Medicaid programme for the poor and more than $192 billion from food stamps.

 

Presidential budgets are often ignored by the U.S. Congress, which controls federal purse strings. Lawmakers are expected to shy away from at least some of the many politically sensitive cuts proposed by Trump.

 

The budget, which covers the fiscal year that starts in October, is being delivered as the White House tries to push ahead on its pro-business economic agenda while grappling with the political fallout from Trump's firing of former FBI Director James Comey.

 

Comey was leading a probe of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election and possible ties to the Trump campaign.

 

Republicans, who control the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House, are looking for ways to cut federal spending as they pursue massive tax cuts, the cornerstone of the Trump administration's pro-business economic agenda.

 

"If Congress has a different way to get to that endpoint, God bless them, that's great," said White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, who will defend the plan to lawmakers in hearings set for Wednesday and Thursday.

 

Trump, currently travelling in the Middle East and Europe on his first foreign trip since assuming office in January, will miss the unveiling of his plan.

 

FOOD STAMPS, FARM SUPPORTS

 

Trump's biggest savings come from the Medicaid programme The cuts were part of a Republican healthcare bill passed by the House in early May, which aims to gut the Obama administration's 2010 law that expanded insurance coverage and the government-run Medicaid programme.

 

But the bill faces an uncertain future in the Senate, which is writing its own law.

 

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps, would be changed to require more childless people to work and would shift more of the costs to state governments. Mulvaney said those changes would need to be made by lawmakers in the next farm bill legislation a year from now.

 

"We are no longer going to measure compassion by the number of programs, or the number of people on those programs," Mulvaney told reporters on Monday.

 

"We’re going to measure compassion and success by the number of people we help get off of those programs and get back in charge of their own lives," he said.

 

The White House also proposed radically slashing farm supports by $38 billion over 10 years, including new limits on premiums for crop insurance and caps for commodity payments.

 

The plan would impose user fees of $660 million per year to help pay for U.S. Agriculture Department inspectors at meat and poultry plants.

 

Another politically fraught line item is a proposal to cut $46 billion over a decade from the U.S. Postal Service.

 

The plan would also sell off half of the nation's emergency oil stockpile to raise $16.5 billion and open up the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling to raise $1.8 billion.

 

There is some new spending. The budget includes $25 billion for a plan to give parents six weeks of paid leave after the birth or adoption of a child.

 

It also proposes $200 billion in funding to encourage state and local governments to boost spending on roads, bridges, airports and other infrastructure programs - even as it elsewhere cuts $95 billion from a highway funding programme.

 

And there is $1.6 billion budgeted in the next fiscal year to begin building a wall on the southern border with Mexico.

 

ROSY ECONOMIC FORECAST

 

Trump's budget relies on forecasts for economic growth of 3 percent a year by the end of his first term - an increase that many economists and the Federal Reserve regard as unlikely.

 

Central bankers have pencilled in trend U.S. growth of around 1.8 percent over the long run, while some Wall Street analysts think Trump's tax cuts could push growth to 2.3 percent in 2020.

 

Trump upheld his promise - for the most part - that his budget would not cut Medicare and Social Security, two social programs that deficit hawks have long targeted for reforms.

 

The plan eyes cuts for Social Security Disability Insurance, but Mulvaney argued that was not a core "mainline" part of the retirement savings programme.

 

The budget does, however, seek steep cuts to retirement benefits for federal workers as part of $63 billion in savings over 10 years for the Office of Personnel Management.

 

Most departments would see cuts under the plan, some of the deepest coming to foreign aid delivered by the State Department, and programs at the Environmental Protection Agency programs.

 

The White House provided an initial look at its proposed cuts in a "skinny budget" released in March - a document that received a tepid response from Congress.

 

Some budget-watchers wrote off Trump's full budget as a wish list that would be "dead on arrival" at Congress.

 

But budget expert Robert Greenstein said it would be a mistake to ignore Trump's budget because Republicans are under pressure to deliver promised tax cuts and could use the budget reconciliation process to achieve that goal.

 

That process would require a simple majority in the Senate, meaning Republicans would not need to count on any votes from Democrats and could more easily make the cuts, said Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

 

"We expect this budget to be the most aggressive proposal by any modern president to shift large amounts of income and resources from low- and modest-income households struggling to get by, to those at the top," Greenstein told reporters.

 

(Additional reporting by Yasmeen Abutaleb, David Shepardson, Timothy Gardner, Ginger Gibson, Jason Lange, Julia Edwards Ainsley in Washington and PJ Huffstutter in Chicago; Editing by Paul Simao and Cynthia Osterman)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-05-23

[darksidedog]

Throw crazy money at the military, spend billions on an unwanted wall and pay for it by taking food from the mouths of the hungry? Is this what Making America great again, is all about?

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, darksidedog said:

Throw crazy money at the military, spend billions on an unwanted wall and pay for it by taking food from the mouths of the hungry? Is this what Making America great again, is all about?

Simple answer, yes. If you believe that everyone on food assistance in the USA is hungry then you are someone that knows nothing about the massive fraud that occurs throughout this system.

[impulse]

22 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Simple answer, yes. If you believe that everyone on food assistance in the USA is hungry then you are someone that knows nothing about the massive fraud that occurs throughout this system.

 

The problem being, of course, that the fraudsters will be the last ones cut out of the budget, long after the politically powerless but honest poor people with kids to feed.

 

Edited May 23, 2017 by impulse

[funandsuninbangkok]

Last trip home I learned my sister got food stamps. She has a well paid job, owned a home and has a tenant paying rent for her back yard cottage. 

 

Obama got everyone on the dole. Time to toss out the leaches(love you sis)

Edited May 23, 2017 by funandsuninbangkok

[Credo]

19 minutes ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Last trip home I learned my sister got food stamps. She has a well paid job, owned a home and has a tenant paying rent for her back yard cottage. 

 

Obama got everyone on the dole. Time to toss out the leaches(love you sis)

So, your sister commits fraud and you do nothing about it?    But you blame Obama.   Let's see if Trump gets her off food stamps, it's for sure you aren't doing anything about it.   

[YetAnother]

the anti-trumpsters , whose numbers seem to be swelling, will be all over this

[pegman]

I know a couple Trump supporters who are on disability pensions in Sin City. Get ready for a hair cut boys.

[KarenBravo]

Cut farm subsidies?

I actually think that's a good idea, but, I doubt whether many of the farmers in "fly-over country" that voted for Trump will agree.

[Berkshire]

50 minutes ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

Last trip home I learned my sister got food stamps. She has a well paid job, owned a home and has a tenant paying rent for her back yard cottage. 

 

Obama got everyone on the dole. Time to toss out the leaches(love you sis)

This is the problem with America...not these entitlement programs or Obama, but crooks like your sister.  I guess that makes you an accomplice. 

[worgeordie]

Starve the poor,and the ill,but cut Corporation tax,give more perks

for the rich,thats immoral.

regards Worgeordie

[puck2]

Trump vehemently kicks his foot into the @r... of those (poor) people in the rust belt who decided the US election 2016.

Having a pity? No. Already in the election campaign it was obvious that this characterless dummy was an extreme liar and denier of facts. You get what you deserve. Of course, I have a pity with those who didn't elect him. And that was not the majority of the US voters.

But that is another problem in the so called US-democracy.

[mtls2005]

14 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

Cut farm subsidies?

I actually think that's a good idea, but, I doubt whether many of the farmers in "fly-over country" that voted for Trump will agree.

 

An amazingly high percentage of people in red counties/states are on some sort of government public assistance. For some reason they only 'hear' what they want when Trump makes campaign promises. They assume they can keep their benefits (they're white), but all those illegal immigrants and lazy welfare mothers 'stealing' food stamps need to be taken off the dole.

 

Farm/commodity subsidies have been around for ages (~ 75 years) and once in place never, ever go away owing to lobbies/donations. These tend to benefit a few, and harm (sugar) many.

 

 

[Thakkar]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Simple answer, yes. If you believe that everyone on food assistance in the USA is hungry then you are someone that knows nothing about the massive fraud that occurs throughout this system.

 

That's like saying they should close down the internet because a lot of pervs send dick pics to minors.

[pegman]

28 minutes ago, puck2 said:

Trump vehemently kicks his foot into the @r... of those (poor) people in the rust belt who decided the US election 2016.

Having a pity? No. Already in the election campaign it was obvious that this characterless dummy was an extreme liar and denier of facts. You get what you deserve. Of course, I have a pity with those who didn't elect him. And that was not the majority of the US voters.

But that is another problem in the so called US-democracy.

That would be doing nothing different than Bill Clinton did.

[ilostmypassword]

He also proposed massive cuts to disability which is part of Social Security.  Despite his promise not to touch Social Security.

[iReason]

3 hours ago, Ahab said:

If you believe that everyone on food assistance in the USA is hungry then you are someone that knows nothing about the massive fraud that occurs throughout this system.

Federal Anti-Poverty Programs Primarily Help the GOP's Base

Republicans want to shrink government. But their core voters benefit from assistance, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the most. (sub-title)

 

"Even as congressional Republicans mobilize for a new drive to retrench federal anti-poverty efforts, whites without a college degree—the cornerstone of the modern GOP electoral coalition—have emerged as principal beneficiaries of those programs, according to a study released Thursday morning."

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/gop-base-poverty-snap-social-security/516861/

 

Then, according to you, this is where the massive fraud lies. With the Trumpeteers.

[Dagnabbit]

So, your sister commits fraud and you do nothing about it?    But you blame Obama.   Let's see if Trump gets her off food stamps, it's for sure you aren't doing anything about it.   

You'd report your own sister to the police?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[habanero]

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

He also proposed massive cuts to disability which is part of Social Security.  Despite his promise not to touch Social Security.

Disability , SSDI comes from federal income taxes. It is only managed by the Social Security Administration. No money comes out of the Social Security Fund. So, those that pay federal income taxes are paying for it. 

[DM07]

A true champion of the people!

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, iReason said:

Federal Anti-Poverty Programs Primarily Help the GOP's Base

Republicans want to shrink government. But their core voters benefit from assistance, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the most. (sub-title)

 

"Even as congressional Republicans mobilize for a new drive to retrench federal anti-poverty efforts, whites without a college degree—the cornerstone of the modern GOP electoral coalition—have emerged as principal beneficiaries of those programs, according to a study released Thursday morning."

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/gop-base-poverty-snap-social-security/516861/

 

Then, according to you, this is where the massive fraud lies. With the Trumpeteers.

Interesting.  That article seems to suggest that the modern day Republican Party is made up primarily of poor, uneducated white folks. 

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, habanero said:

Disability , SSDI comes from federal income taxes. It is only managed by the Social Security Administration. No money comes out of the Social Security Fund. So, those that pay federal income taxes are paying for it. 

You are wrong about disability. 

"Disability Insurance is funded by payroll tax contributions from workers and their employers. Workers currently pay a tax of 0.9 percent of their wages up to $113,700, and their employers pay an equal amount. These tax contributions go into the Disability Insurance trust fund."

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/reports/2013/05/30/64681/the-facts-on-social-security-disability-insurance-and-supplemental-security-income-for-workers-with-disabilities/

[phantomfiddler]

The Walmart movies clearly illustrate that not too many americans are starving to death, What is wrong with the age-old method of going out to work for wages, and using the wages to support yourself ? This system works very well in S.E.Asia :) The bludgers have had it too easy for too long.

[KarenBravo]

4 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

The Walmart movies clearly illustrate that not too many americans are starving to death, What is wrong with the age-old method of going out to work for wages, and using the wages to support yourself ? This system works very well in S.E.Asia :) The bludgers have had it too easy for too long.

What if there are no jobs. What if you have a low paying job and bills like mortgages, fuel costs etc. take up all the money?

Edited May 23, 2017 by KarenBravo

[soalbundy]

So the idiots who voted him in are going to suffer, good

[soalbundy]

2 hours ago, Berkshire said:

Interesting.  That article seems to suggest that the modern day Republican Party is made up primarily of poor, uneducated white folks. 

No, just red necks and the 1% of course, play the patriot card, support indiscriminate gun ownership and give the rich a big tax break and you are in.  

[Godolphin]

50 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

The Walmart movies clearly illustrate that not too many americans are starving to death, What is wrong with the age-old method of going out to work for wages, and using the wages to support yourself ? This system works very well in S.E.Asia :) The bludgers have had it too easy for too long.

Yes, the bludgers in Wall St and the thieves who own the pharma, insurance and arms rackets that have sucked the life out of the economy and impoverished millions of decent people.

 

Going out to work? What work? A lot of jobs have been deliberately relocated so that companies can make increased profits pure and simple. Where are the jobs?

 

I find it sad that people are rejoicing in the attacks on the most vulnerable while conveniently ignoring the further advantages being bestowed on the super rich.

 

 

[boomerangutang]

Anyone surprised?  What do you expect from a pampered egotistical billionaire who never did any real work in his life.  Trump fans should have seen it coming, but they're not the brightest bulbs on the Xmas tree.  

[KarenBravo]

21 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Anyone surprised?  What do you expect from a pampered egotistical billionaire who never did any real work in his life.  Trump fans should have seen it coming, but they're not the brightest bulbs on the Xmas tree.  

Not really fair. The Democrats had abandoned one component of their traditional base, the white, working class and courted the Wall Street fat-cats instead.

They already knew that HRC was never going to actually fight for their interests, just mouth platitudes. Business as usual.

They voted for Trump because he promised them jobs and "tremendous" health care. Or, they voted for him to throw a spanner in the works; revenge for all the inaction that they could see in their unchanging situation.

The Democrats created the conditions that allowed Trump to win the Republican nomination.

Edited May 23, 2017 by KarenBravo

[impulse]

19 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Anyone surprised?  What do you expect from a pampered egotistical billionaire who never did any real work in his life.  Trump fans should have seen it coming, but they're not the brightest bulbs on the Xmas tree.  

 

We took a chance.  Looks like we may have been hoodwinked (but not really).  

 

The choice was a 100% guaranty of the same-o same-old from HRC or a non-zero (albeit small) chance of reform if we elected an outsider.  Just because a bet didn't go our way, doesn't mean it was a bad bet.

 

Gotta wait and see if electing Trump in 2016 opened the door for decent candidates in 2020 and beyond.  It's a long game and it's way too early to call the results.