President Donald Trump’s budget proposal went to Congress
last week, while Trump was on his first overseas trip visiting Saudi Arabia,
Israel, the Palestinians, the Vatican and NATO. Trump’s $4.1 trillion plan is
titled “A New Foundation for American Greatness.”
Predictably, upon release of the proposal Democrats burst
forth to condemn the budget. A couple of Congressional Democrats eagerly, and
with as much flourish as they could muster, termed the proposal “dead on
arrival” which, like so much of what they say, is much ado about nothing. Every
budget proposal from every president is “dead on arrival,” the word “proposal”
being the operative word. A president’s proposal is merely a starting point.
Since you can’t swing a dead cat without seeing the negative
coverage of everything Trump says or does, this article will summarize the
positive elements of the proposal.
Trump’s proposal focuses on national defense areas by
boosting spending on the military and border security. This focus is what Trump
campaigned on, budget director Nick Mulvaney said.
As reported on foxnews.com, Mulvaney said, “There’s not a
single thing [cut] from Social Security or Medicare. Why? Because that’s what he
promised.” However, other programs such as Medicaid and food stamps will see
cuts.
"We look at spending differently," Mulvaney
explained. “We are not going to measure compassion by the number of programs or
[the number of] people on them.”
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said in support of the
budget plan that “We can finally turn the page on the Obama era of bloated
budgets that never balance.” “President Trump has proven his commitment to
fiscal responsibility with a budget that … prioritizes American taxpayers over
bureaucrats in Washington.”
Focusing on national defense through restoring the military
and tightening our borders are badly needed corrections to critical failures of
the Obama administration. The last eight years saw serious weakening of the
military and policies that encouraged illegal entry into the country.
While Obama foolishly reduced the size and strength of all
military forces, the Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano tells us that the “most
neglected of all U.S. national security elements are our strategic forces.
Here, President Obama has reined in development and deployment of ballistic
missile defenses,” and “cut all advanced missile defense programs designed to
keep the United States ahead of the ballistic missile threat in the future.” And,
“to curry favor with Russia, he pulled the plug on planned missile defense
installations in Poland and the Czech Republic, simultaneously alienating those
allies while displaying weakness to Moscow.”
The plan addresses the dangerously high national debt of
nearly $20 trillion and takes a fiscally responsible approach aimed at
beginning the process of reducing the large annual deficits to zero in ten
years, and perhaps produce a relatively small surplus by 2027.
While this year’s deficit will be a little higher than last
year’s, the initiatives contained in the plan will turn the habit of annual
deficits around, if they are successful. Trump depends upon producing growth in
our economy, although many economists say his goals are too optimistic.
Modifications to the tax system are an important part of
Trump’s plan, and include reducing tax brackets from seven to three with rates
of 10, 25 and 35 percent, and will eliminate tax breaks to balance the loss of income
to the Treasury from lower tax rates.
Lower rates are a good thing; they leave taxpayers with more
spendable dollars, which increases consumer spending and spurs economic
activity that produces jobs, and new jobs produce additional taxpayers and increase
tax collections.
Big government types, which include most Democrats and
liberals, believe cuts in federal spending are always a bad thing. But cuts can
be made without hurting people who truly need the government payments they
receive.
The Trump proposal cuts almost $3.6 trillion from an array
of benefit programs, domestic agencies and war spending over the coming decade,
including Medicaid, student loan subsidies, food stamps, and the highway
formula for the states.
“We are not kicking anybody off any program who needs it,”
said Mulvaney, who explained that the proposal doesn’t cut Medicaid, just grows
it more slowly over 10 years.
However, while cutting some federal spending, the plan
features one major new domestic initiative: paid parental leave estimated to
cost $25 billion over the next decade.
But in this discussion of cuts let us not forget that waste,
fraud and abuse account for billions of dollars of federal spending annually that
accomplish nothing.
GovTechWorks.com reports on federal estimates showing “Improper
payments account for about 5 cents of every Medicaid dollar, … or about $29.1
billion of the $547.7 billion program in 2015 alone,” through intentional
deception or misrepresentation; inappropriate use of services and resources;
and practices inconsistent with sound fiscal, business or medical practices.
And that is just one federal program. Ending or reducing those
problems will go a long way to counter spending cuts.
fs
Those who believe the federal government cannot spend less
and accomplish just as much good are living in Fantasy Land. Too many people
automatically believe the scare mongering of those who profit politically from
supporting high levels of spending.
