Trump’s budget ruse

by | Mar 17, 2017 | Editor's Blog, Politics, Trump | 3 comments

Donald Trump rolled out his budget yesterday, causing howls of protests from Democrats and progressives. The budget would cut the EPA and State Department by about 30% each. It eliminates funding for Meals on Wheels, PBS, after-school programs and other liberal favorites. Even Republicans are shying away from it.

The budget isn’t meant to pass, though. It serves two purposes for Trump. First, it’s targeted to his supporters who elected him to turn government upside down. Second, it provides cover for Republicans in Congress when the real cuts come down.

Trump’s core supporters elected him to cause massive disruption in the system. He’s keeping his word to them. He’s proposing deep and damaging cuts and the liberal establishment is howling. The louder they howl, the more his supporters like it. When the cuts fail to materialize, Trump will blame it on Democrats or maybe Republicans in Congress. The point is, he’s taking on the system and his supporters are eating it up.

Trump is also playing politics. His cuts look so draconian, he’s setting up Congressional Republicans to look rational when they propose slightly fewer cuts that still reshape much of the federal government. Conservative activists weighed in applauding the cuts to social programs, including Meals on Wheels. In a tweet, conservative blogger Erick Erickson brought back the mantra of “personal responsibility,” a phrase we heard a lot back in the welfare reform debates of the 1990s and 1980s.

Ironically, Trump’s cuts would disproportionally hurt the rural residents who made up the core of his base. His budget would slash the Department of Agriculture by 20%. It would eliminate loan programs for rural businesses as well as loans and grants for rural water and sewer treatment facilities. It also eliminates subsidies for rural airports. All of these services help economic development in the more distressed areas of the country where his base resides.

Trump is a showman. He’s less interested in results than applause. For instance, he probably doesn’t really care if his Muslim ban is actually implemented as long as his supporters know that he proposed it. He got headlines a few weeks ago for rounding up and deporting immigrants. The scream from the left just amplified the message he was sending to his base. Likewise, he’s less concerned with passing his budget than letting his fans know that he’s submitted it. The louder the protests, they happier they’ll be.

At the same time, the GOP leaders in Congress get to look like the responsible players to people less enamored with Trump. They’ll save high-profile programs like Meals on Wheels while making deep cuts in less prominent programs. They can still reshape government while looking like they’re protecting favored programs.

It’s all a big ruse. Trump lives by the rule, “You can fool some of the people all of the time.”

3 Comments

  1. Jay ligon

    What the proposed presidential budget reveals is how vindictive, short-sighted, and mean-spirited the new Administration plans to be.

    We have just learned that Trump wants to stuff his daughter’s husband’s pockets with as much as $1 billion in profit with a formerly prohibited sale of a building to Communist China. Trump’s wife who doesn’t want to live under the same roof with him costs us roughly $1 million per day for her comfort and safety. His children burn through millions of tax dollars when they move about the world pursuing their various businesses.

    The US government pays rent in Trump Towers so that security can be maintained.

    His weekends in Florida run about $3 million each while causing shut down local businesses in Florida. His leisure travels and his visits to his penthouse in the Big Apple burden both Florida and New York police departments who must employ burn up overtime pay to provide extra security.

    That guy wants starving senior citizens to stop eating so much. When the uninsured and the seniors are all dead, will that make American Great Again?

    The budget makes plain that we are buying bullets and nukes and sending diplomats home. Our defense budget already exceeds the combined budgets of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, Japan, India, and France by $30 billion. Who is he afraid of? There is no comparable super power.

    Lying Donald wants some people dead, here and abroad.

  2. Donna

    You have some excellent points but what’s a liberal to do? Sit back and watch in horror and silence?
    Is this budget really what his supporters asked for? Better/cheaper healthcare and jobs were also promised and these are the bread and butter issues that are at the core of most voters insecurities and voting patterns. The budget reflects the bogeymen (immigrants, “entitlements”, etc.) that Republicans have long paraded out as the cause for what ails the middle class.
    And if better/cheaper healthcare and better job opportunities do not materialize, will his supporters care that PBS was de-funded? Will the lies be exposed or will the President and Republicans somehow figure out a way to blame Democrats? I’m sure they will try.
    The budget seems more like what Bannon, Miller, and the Freedom Caucus want.

    • Norma Munn

      Your concerns are justified, and I don’t think liberals (or any rational person) should stay silent. It is, however, essential to understand the underlying political strategy behind this budget, which is precisely what is described by the Thomas. One of the oldest ploys in the political arena is to insist on the most outrageous, knowing full well it will not be achieved, but one will end up closer to the outrageous than if one started at a rational mid-point. I have to plead guilty to having used it, but never for something that would damage or harm others. It works, and with the divisions in this country so deep, and most of the cuts balanced against the increase in military spending, my bet is that a lot of those cuts will go through to some extent.

      The question for all who do not want the “cuts” is to find a strong, easily articulated argument against the military increase. Not my area of in-depth knowledge, but I do recall something that General Mattis is reported to have said in support of the “soft” spending at the State Dept, foreign aid, etc. I can’t find the quote, but the statement was that more, not less, of the soft support was needed in places like Iraq and Afghanistan to work with the military. He basically said that soft work was essential and implied that otherwise military force could never really win. I doubt he is the only military person who believes that. As the newly appointed Sec of Defense, he won’t openly oppose the Trump budget, but he also will not deny prior remarks which are clearly on the record and smart questioning at any hearings can elicit statements that make a case against at least some of the proposed budget cuts.

      The other argument is math. $148 million per year for the Arts Endowment is $1.35 per tax payer. The annual cost to for extra security for Trump Tower/etc. is $183 million. There are lots of other comparisons for the costs of Trump family members traveling on the tax payer dollar for private business.

      It is definitely a Bannon, Miller and Freedom Caucus budget. The “zombies” and Twilight Zone combined. Stuff of nightmares.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!