Drumpf Diary 3/22/17 - Much Ado About Budgeting

1. Much has been made of the Drumpf budget proposal. It has made headlines for proposals to dramatically cut the EPA budget by 31%, as well as cuts to National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities, Public Broadcasting, and other programs that aid the poor, disadvantaged, and sciences. Defense and the military are the big winners, with proposed spending increases. It's also been noted that Drumpf is wasting millions in government funds with his frequent visits to his Mar-a-Logo resort and allowing his wife to remain living in New York City, two actions that cost taxpayers millions. Vox provides some gory details specific to cuts to science.

Sources usually observe that the budget is unlikely to pass as proposed, there are cuts which both Republicans and Democrats find unpopular. It is useful as a reflection of Drumpf's priorities, however. In that respect, it is ugly. It is almost certain that, with congress under Republican control, many unsavory cuts to science and aid programs will pass.

Mother Jones observes, hopefully:

Thanks to the landmark 2007 Supreme Court decision, Massachusetts vs. EPA, the EPA is obligated by law to come up with a way to regulate greenhouse gasses from vehicles, power plants, and other sources. The decision stated: "Under the Act’s clear terms, EPA can avoid promulgating regulations only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do."

Snopes reviews some details on the budget, clarifying that the budget calls for complete elimination of funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, as well as the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities. What the federal government spends on those programs is incredibly small. It makes an almost completely imperceptible dent in the debt, especially compared to the tens of billions to be spent on Drumpf's wall. The Snopes article points out that the budget is inspired deeply by a Heritage Foundation 2016 budget proposal which also called for elimination of these programs. The Heritage Foundation didn't necessarily promote the cuts based on the grounds that it would solve debt problems, moreso on philosophical grounds that "actors, artists, and academics are no more deserving of subsidies than their counterparts in other fields; the federal government should refrain from funding all of them."

Drumpf budget director Mike Mulvaney has taken flak from opponents for saying that it's OK to cut funds to Meals on Wheels and after-school lunch programs because "there's no evidence they're helping results."