Post by bot on Mar 26, 2017 16:28:32 GMT -5
Editorial Boards Slam Trump’s Budget Proposal
Last Thursday, President Trump sent Congress his initial budget proposal, which was short on detail and makes radical disinvestments in job creation, economic growth, and efforts to keep America safe. Since then, editorial boards across the country have come out in strong opposition to the proposal:
Washington Post: Trump’s budget is utterly unrealistic
“Once the uproar over Mr. Trump’s misguided, unworkable and essentially demagogic proposal dies down, Congress will have to take up the work of hammering out a real fiscal policy.”
New York Times: Mr. Trump’s Tear-Down Budget
“As he pledged, Mr. Trump would spend heavily on the military and border security — but only, as it turns out, by spending far less in areas like education and infrastructure that he had once deemed important.”
USA Today: Trump's alternative budget
“Trump's budget isn’t so much bold action as wild flailing. He seems to think that there is political gain in breaking as many things as he can get his hands on. Even a Congress controlled by Republicans is unlikely to agree.”
Akron Beacon Journal: Where the money is not, or the president’s misplaced budget priorities
“President Trump wouldn’t leave even $10 million for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The budget outline he put forward last week would reduce the initiative from the current $300 million a year to zero — in a word, elimination. The shortsightedness is breathtaking, as are many elements in the plan.”
Ashbury Park Press: Whose side is Trump really on?
“Donald Trump won the election because he convinced Americans who felt they had been left behind that he would make their lives better. The budget he proposed last week, a clear reflection of his priorities, builds on the evidence that his supporters may have been duped.”
Billings Gazette: EPA budget cuts put Montana at risk
“Before budget votes are taken on Capitol Hill, Montana Sens. Steve Daines and Jon Tester must listen to their constituents: Crippling the EPA will hurt Montana communities waiting for massive cleanups that will take years. The alternative – doing nothing – leaves local residents holding the bag for messes made mostly by large out-of-state corporations. Polluters should be held accountable, regardless of who’s in the White House or which party controls Congress. Montana desperately needs a resurgence of the bipartisan cooperation that enacted our federal clean air and clean water laws.”
DecaturDaily.com (Alabama): Trump administration's budget out of touch
“President Donald Trump is proposing some eye-popping cuts in federal agencies that will have direct, negative effects on communities across the country, including north Alabama.”
The Des Moines Register: Make America cold and hungry again?
“Many Trump supporters suspected he couldn't deliver on such grandiose promises, and the president's budget blueprint simply confirms that suspicion. But even those Trump supporters would have to acknowledge that some elements of the budget raise questions about the president's commitment to the ‘struggling families’ and ‘forgotten men and women’ referenced in his inaugural address.”
The Denver Post: Democrats and Republicans should reject Trump’s irresponsible budget
“Trump’s budget blueprint fails to meet the basic test of reducing the federal deficit in a meaningful way. What’s more, it will continue to add to the national debt.”
Everett Washington Herald: Trump’s EPA budget cuts an insult to Puget Sound
“Among the cuts most concerning to Washington state residents are to the EPA and its grant funding. Overall, Trump seeks to slash the federal agency’s budget by 31 percent and lay off about 3,200 employees. His budget also makes cuts to climate change research and its programs…But locally, the $28 million allocated last year for Puget Sound projects would be cut completely, zeroed out…That’s an insult to Puget Sound and the state.”
The Fresno Bee: President Trump’s budget is bad news for California
“What does the president propose to do? His plan would rob from the poor, the pollution-wracked and the peaceful to boost military spending.”
The Kansas City Star: President’s budget proposal hits Trump voters the hardest
“Between cuts to agriculture, job training, road projects and programs that help low-income families with affordable housing and heating and weatherizing their homes, forgotten America would only fall further behind… [R]eaders should be clear: If enacted, the budget cuts would have a direct and dramatic impact on dozens of programs in and around Kansas City.”
Mass Live: Trump's first spending plan: A blueprint without a design
“When it comes to diplomacy and foreign aid, the Trump blueprint is penny wise and pound foolish.”
Miami Herald: Trump’s budget makes the unkindest cuts of all
“President Trump’s recently unveiled budget further clarifies his vision for this great country. It’s a dark one. It’s a nation where even more Americans are hungry; where they, after breathing freely for decades now become reacquainted with smog; where a high-quality public education, especially for low- and middle-income kids, is further out of reach …”
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Donald Trump's budget makes clear he doesn't care about the Great Lakes
“Last week, we wrote that ‘cutting Great Lakes funding from $300 million to $10 million, as the Trump administration reportedly is considering, is unacceptable.’ Turns out that $10 million figure was optimistic.”
NorthJersey.com: Trump’s budget harsh on Jersey
“The elimination of federal community development block grants, in particular, would be devastating for low-income communities across North Jersey and would also mean the loss of the popular Meals-on-Wheels program that has been a godsend for thousands of seniors and homebound residents.”
Raleigh News & Observer: Trump budget would slash vital funding for arts, science
“It’s hard to know how much President Trump had to do with specifics, both because he’s not a ‘details guy’ and he has few entrenched political beliefs. But the right-wing conservatives around the president are getting their way, cutting out funding for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities. As a result, there will be cuts at the Smithsonian Institution and the National Gallery of Art.”
The Roanoke Times: Trump backhands Appalachia
“Appalachia voted for Donald Trump more enthusiastically than almost any other part of the country….Trump has an odd way of returning the favor.”
The Sacramento Bee: Transcend Trump’s budget? It’s our only hope
“We can only hope that President Donald Trump’s travesty of a federal budget is, as with so many things Trump, less a serious threat than a pose and an opening bid.”
St. Louis Post Dispatch: In the war on science, the EPA is the first casualty
“Most of EPA’s spending isn’t on climate change research, though that will certainly be gone. Most of its money is spent on grants to state and local governments for a variety of clean water, clean air and environmental cleanup programs. Grants to small-town and big city water and sewage systems and industrial site cleanups would be reduced… Out where people live, they like clean air and water. If Republicans gut the EPA budget, they’ll find that out.”
The San Francisco Chronicle: The dark message of Donald Trump’s budget
“A budget, according to political axiom, is a statement of values, and President Trump’s first spending plan is more of a statement than most. Bearing the blustery title “America First: A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again,” it’s even lighter on fiscal detail, heavier on political rhetoric and freer of practical aspiration than its forebears. But it states its values clearly: war over diplomacy, border fortification over virtually everything else and paranoid style over substance.”
The Santa Fe New Mexican: A budget that diminishes us
“This budget is small in vision and reach, much as Trump is small in the petty appeals to fear that he successfully rode into office.”
Tampa Bay Times: Trump budget cuts put Florida coast at risk
“President Donald Trump is now saying the border wall that he promised Mexico would pay for will be paid for another way — by stripping away the defenses that protect Florida and the entire Gulf Coast from the threat of hurricanes, drug trafficking and natural disasters. This is one of the most irresponsible ideas from the new administration, and Congress should insist on a smarter approach that doesn't endanger national security in the guise of promoting it.”