Donald Trump's budget, spending cuts are 'moral,' Mulvaney says

It may be considered political suicide to reduce spending and balance the budget within 10 years, but isn't it economic suicide if we continue on the present course? And it's where those cuts are coming from that has some lawmakers anxious.

Trump's balanced-budget goal depends not only on the growth projections that most economists view as overly optimistic but also a variety of accounting gimmicks, including an nearly $600 billion peace dividend from winding down overseas military operations and "double counting" $2.1 trillion in revenues from economic growth - using them to both pay for tax cuts and bring down the deficit.

-The Disabled: Trump's budget calls for cutting Social Security disability benefits by almost $70 billion over the next decade by encouraging and, in some cases, requiring people receiving the benefits to re-enter the workforce. However, this proposal would produce savings of $627 billion in Medicaid over 10 years. I agree with them that cutting funding for health research, environmental protection, housing programs and diplomacy initiatives - just to name a few examples - is damaging and wrong.

Tuesday's budget blueprint faces a skeptical reception from Congress, where Republicans and Democrats oppose Trump proposals to cut domestic agencies and foreign aid by 10 percent and are recoiling from a $1.7 trillion cut over the coming decade from mandatory government benefit programs. Some $200 billion in federal infrastructure investments are promised to leverage another $800 billion in private investment, though the idea has yet to get much traction. Under the program, mothers and fathers could take up to six weeks of paid leave after the birth or adoption of a child.

"Trump's budget results in an economy that is out of balance, one that takes away school lunches from hungry kids and food assistance for struggling families". But the Congressional Budget Office is projecting 1.9 percent growth, while the Fed projects 1.8 percent.

White House budget director Mick Mulvaney warned lawmakers on Wednesday that they may have to vote to increase the government's borrowing authority sooner than previously thought. Who is going to pay for all the stuff you just mentioned? Us?

But other economic fundamentals, including the slow growth of the labor force and the strong likelihood of a recession sometime in the next decade, push against these assumptions, and without them federal revenue will not grow fast enough to cover federal spending growth, even under Mr. Trump's austere spending plan. All federal programs should be continually evaluated for effectiveness and affordability, and that must include Social Security and Medicare, regardless of the politics. Since 1965, Medicaid has operated as an open-ended "partnership" with the states. If states with responsible leaders have to pick up the burden, taxes will rise locally. In some states where leadership is enlightened, the poor might be somewhat protected.

Other cuts in Trump's budget include $63 billion in cuts to pension benefits for federal workers by eliminating cost-of-living adjustments for most workers and requiring employees to make higher contributions.

Many rank-and-file Republicans recoiled from the cuts, however, which would squeeze foreign aid and domestic programmes funded annually by Congress by about 10% next year and 1.4 trillion United States dollars £1.1 trillion) (over the coming decade. So there will be haggling ahead. Administration officials say that the limitation proposed in the budget would focus taxpayer money on families who need it the most. Given how critical the moment is for American innovators, we are disappointed to see the president's budget request suggests drastic cuts to programs with strong track records in job creation, economic growth and energy security that are critical to capturing future opportunities. But Congress must not lose sight of the most important part of the American treasury: Americans.

Overall, however, his budget is very bad for women.

The following editorial appeared in The Record (Hackensack, N.J.) on Wednesday, May 24.