“On January 21st of 2017, the day after I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced. We are going to be considerate and compassionate to everyone,” Donald Trump said in an RNC draft speech in July 2016. “But my greatest compassion will be for our own struggling citizens.”
January 21 has passed, and it seems that Trump’s promised empathy to the struggling citizens — the working families, the elderly, the disabled, agricultural workers, students — has yet to be demonstrated. The newest edition to this lack of compassion for the American people is seen in the Trump administration’s budget proposal, released Tuesday, May 23. Drastic cuts in federal programs created to aid struggling American citizens and exponential increases in federal defense spending emphasize the Trump team’s priorities and contradicts the basis of Trump’s campaign.
Perhaps the hardest hit would be taken by federally-funded programs with the motive of financially aiding low-income families. Medicaid would be the most heavily affected, with a $600 billion cut in addition to the $800 billion cut to low-income health care programs enabled by the American Health Care Act of 2017. As a result, approximately 24 million citizens would be deprived of health coverage. Although Medicare and Social Security remained largely untouched in comparison to Medicaid, cuts to those previously insured under the Social Security Disability Insurance would be implemented under the new budget proposal. Following with cuts to social programs is a quarter of a trillion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the program that regulates food stamps. These new cuts would affect the people and the economy nationwide, but critics underline the relation of those affected, many of whom overwhelmingly supported Trump during his campaign. While Trump, preceding his presidency, focused his rhetoric on fighting for the good of the people and for those who are devastated by the current economy, his proposed budget seems to be excluding his targeted audience.
Along with programs designed to help low-income necessities, agricultural, student financial aid, and environmental programs experienced severe cuts in expenses as well. With Congress already cutting $100 billion in agricultural programs, rural areas would face heavy economic devastation. And as if repaying student loans wasn’t already burdening millions across the nation, the Trump administration seeks to administer $143 billion in cuts to student financial assistance programs and end the public-service loan forgiveness for federal loans, an establishment ultimately benefiting graduate students. This would grant the Department of Education permission to open-endedly define what qualifies as public service. Furthermore, despite it being no secret of the Trump administration’s ignorance towards environmental causes, the EPA would be cut to a historically unprecedented budget, resulting in approximately 3,800 jobs lost.
Though it seems that nearly every federally-funded program is experiencing dramatic decreases in budgets, defense spending would see an increase of 10 percent. While most Republicans demonstrate approval of increased military spending for foreign affairs and an increase of security on the U.S. and Mexican border, the 29% cut in the State Department budget being overshadowed is deemed by many critics as a serious safety concern. Agencies not connected to the federal government that the State Department supports for international human welfare and other works would be threatened with these mass cuts.
“At a time when poverty, human rights abuses, famines and conflicts are wreaking havoc globally, the United States must not abdicate its long bipartisan tradition of providing development assistance and diplomatic support to the most vulnerable people around the world,” the American Jewish World Service, an organization heavily influenced by the Department of State, said in a statement regarding the federal cuts.
All things considered, the budget has almost no chances being passed, as executive budget proposals to Congress mainly reflect a wish-list rather than probable instances. Even Barack Obama’s budget proposal was rejected by Congress.
Still, the underlying ideology cannot be ignored. Donald Trump based the entirety of his campaign rhetoric on populism: appealing to the struggling citizen, to the ignored. And yet, with the publication of his desired budget proposal, contradicting ideas have been promoted. In an era where income equality has reached an all-time high since the 1920s, Trump only advocates for further separation between the top 10% and the remaining 90%.
