White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney holds up a copy of President Donald Trump’s proposed 2018 federal budget as he speaks to members of the media in the Press Briefing Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., Tuesday. (Associated Press)

White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney holds up a copy of President Donald Trump’s proposed 2018 federal budget as he speaks to members of the media in the Press Briefing Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., Tuesday. (Associated Press)

Editorial: Trump budget offers harmful cuts, magical thinking

By The Herald Editorial Board

Where to begin?

President Trump’s budget proposal to Congress — helpfully titled “A New Foundation for American Greatness” in case the public and lawmakers need any convincing — is such a cluster bomb of idealogical cuts to progams, unnecessary tax benefits for the rich and magical thinking, it’s difficult to know where to start.

We got a glimpse earlier of what the president’s full proposal would look like in March when the White House’s “skinny” budget was released. It showed plans to increase military spending an additional $52 billion, add $4.4 billion to expand veterans health services, provide $2.8 billion for the border wall and other Homeland Security programs and divert $1.4 billion for charter schools, private school vouchers and other school choice initiatives. Those increases were paid for with damaging reductions for 19 other federal agencies and other programs, the deepest at the State Department and EPA.

Previously we’ve outlined what those cuts would mean in Washington state and Snohomish County, with the elimination of federal cleanup funds for Puget Sound, complete elimination of the Community Development Block Grant programs and elimination and cuts to transportation initiatives.

The full budget only brings sharper focus to the cuts, details of which can be reviewed at The Washington Post’s website at tinyurl.com/WaPoTrumpBudget18.

To list just a few lowlights:

Cuts to food assistance for low-income families and individuals, including the Women, Infants and Children program; the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program (also known as food stamps); and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.

Reduced availability of health services for women with elimination of Medicare reimbursements for non-abortion services provided by Planned Parenthood.

A decrease in funding for Medicaid that would deny nursing home and long-term care for some elderly poor and force some in Social Security’s disability program back into the workforce.

Cuts for funding for teacher training, after-school and summer programs.

Cuts to college education aid, such as Pell Grants and subsidized student loans.

Decreased funding for the medical research work of the National Institutes of Health.

Elimination of programs that help low-income seniors find work and closing of some Job Corps centers that help train young adults.

Cuts to loan guarantees and technical assistance grants for small business owners.

And deep cuts to the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Institute for Museum and Library Services and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Trump’s budget adds insult with a forecast that his proposal would by 2027 balance the budget and reduce the national debt. To get there it rosily assumes the budget cuts and the reductions in taxes will spark sustained annual economic growth of 3 percent.

That’s an estimate of growth far more optimistic than can be expected, according to the Congressional Budget Office and others, including the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The CRFB called such a level of growth, not seen since the 1990s, “highly unlikely … and not to be counted on.” The budget compounds the error by earmarking that expected growth to pay for the tax cuts themselves and to pay down the deficit at the same time.

President Trump’s budget director Mick Mulvaney justified the budget cuts with this:

“We’re no longer going to measure compassion by the number of programs or the number of people on those programs, but by the number of people we help get off those programs.”

Mulvaney is wrong on two counts.

He confuses booting people off anti-poverty programs as a method of ending poverty, as if eliminating assistance will end the need for assistance.

It represents a misunderstanding of the nature of poverty and the effectiveness of programs in lifting families and individuals out of poverty. Children in poverty, for example, who are provided assistance and an opportunity to do well in school and advance to college or training and careers are less likely to become adults mired in poverty.

And he’s wrong that compassion is what’s being measured; although compassion for a hungry child or low-income senior seems reason enough to offer it.

The goals of such programs — food stamps and other nutritional assistance, after-school programs, student loan aid, housing assistance, job training, help for small businesses, medical research, environmental protection and cultural enrichment — are the foundation for American greatness.

Congress, just weeks ago, largely rejected the president’s budget proposal for the current fiscal year and reached a reasonable and bipartisan budget agreement that provided for the nation’s military and security needs while preserve that foundation. It should take that path again.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Thursday, July 3

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Editorial: Using discourse to get to common ground

A Building Bridges panel discussion heard from lawmakers and students on disagreeing agreeably.

Schwab: Taking pride in our own independence from tyranny

Many of us are Americans by luck of birth here; real pride requires commitment to democratic values.

Comment: Supreme Court removes another presidential guardrail

It’s ruling invalidating nationwide injunctions will require more lawsuits to afford general protections.

Why have intelligence services if Trump already knows?

Why on earth any intelligent person would squander their credibility as Donald… Continue reading

Can Democrats be taken seriously?

Same question, different answer: Ask a Republican have they witnessed the decline… Continue reading

Why can’t moderates appeal to voters?

I see a democratic socialist may possibly be the next mayor of… Continue reading

toon
Editorial cartoons for Wednesday, July 2

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on Friday, June 27, 2025. The sweeping measure Senate Republican leaders hope to push through has many unpopular elements that they despise. But they face a political reckoning on taxes and the scorn of the president if they fail to pass it. (Kent Nishimura/The New York Times)
Editorial: GOP should heed all-caps message on tax policy bill

Trading cuts to Medicaid and more for tax cuts for the wealthy may have consequences for Republicans.

Burke: Assessing dangers to democracy, knowing how to respond

In judging a threat consider Trump’s intent and his ability to carry out his intentions.

Oppose passage of ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ in Congress

The so-called “Big Beautiful Bill” threatens half of America’s children. (“Medicaid cuts… Continue reading

Stand up to oppose cuts to Medicaid and more

I am a senior citizen, having believed for the years of my… Continue reading

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.