The Democrats' Favorite Economists Really, Really Hate Trump's Budget
- Author: Zachary Reyes May 25, 2017,
May 25, 2017, 11:36
Subsidies for commercial air travel in rural areas would be cut by more than half.
Muvlaney argued that numerous proposed cuts would be applied to programs that often provided benefits to recipients whose eligibility was at times questionable.
The plan - titled A New Foundation for American Greatness - takes a hatchet to federal programmes for the disadvantaged, such as food stamps, disability payments and healthcare.
"The president's budget will give the wealthiest a lift to the penthouse". The bill would need 60 votes in the Senate, and Democrats have strongly opposed any changes to the program. But the proposed cuts to science also demand a rallying cry in response, from scientists and from all who value our ability to make public decisions based on the best available evidence.
Republican Representative Tom Cole, who represents an Oklahoma district that the Almanac of American Politics described as "countrified", predicted "Congress would look at some of those things differently" from the Trump administration's budget.
A report by the International Monetary Fund last month projected that while the US economy will expand at a faster pace this year and next than it did in 2016, that growth is forecast at 2.3 percent and 2.5 percent, respectively, for the next two years.
"I think that 1996 study is probably outdated", he said. Under those funding levels, the success rate for grant applications is estimated to fall to 19% from 24% in 2016, the most recent year data were available.
Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., praised Mulvaney for presenting a plan that tries to balance the budget within 10 years - then criticized the same proposal for cutting the budgets of the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. These programs provide health insurance for millions of poor families. But numerous states where residents rely most heavily on food stamps are also states where support for the president is strongest.
Programs that tend to benefit women would see an 8 percent decrease in spending, while programs that tend to benefit men would only see a 2 percent decrease. Federal aid to states would be reduced by 3 percent.
Liberal California would be hit hardest, with a 9.8 percent drop.
Democratic lawmakers have savaged the budget, and even fiscally hawkish Republicans seem taken aback by the magnitude of the cuts.
Trump's budget keeps to his campaign pledge to leave Medicare and Social Security pension benefits alone and contains spending increases for the military and veterans, but it treats most of the rest of the government as fair game. Sen. Lindsey Graham called the plan "terrible" because of cuts to the State Department. The outline says the $2 trillion will pay for Trump's tax reform, while simultaneously saying that same money will be used to balance the budget.
Trump's balanced-budget goal depends not only on 3 percent growth projections that most economists view as overly optimistic but also a variety of accounting gimmicks, including an nearly $600 billion peace dividend from winding down overseas military operations and assuming that overhauling the tax code in a way that provides no net tax cuts would spark that growth and generate more than $2 trillion in higher revenues. "The revised plan purports to offer six weeks of paid leave to any new parent; but because it passes the logistical and financial responsibility of implementing any new program on to the states, it's very unlikely to ever amount to universal coverage, even if it manages to pass through Congress".