Trump Releases His First Budget Blueprint: Here Are The Winners And Losers

Tyler Durden's picture

Update: echoing comments made by Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the top House Democrat said that the Trump budget proposal is "dead on arrival."

* * *

Today at 7am, Trump released his "skinny budget", his administration's first federal budget blueprint revealing the President's plan to dramatically reduce the size of the government. As previewed last night, the document calls for deep cuts at departments and agencies that would eliminate entire programs and slash the size of the federal workforce. It also proposes a $54 billion increase in defense spending, which the White House says will be offset by the other cuts.

“This is the ‘America First’ budget,” said White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, a former South Carolina congressman who made a name for himself as a spending hawk before Trump plucked him for his Cabinet, adding that “if he said it in the campaign, it’s in the budget.”

In a proposal with many losers, the Environmental Protection Agency and State Department stand out as targets for the biggest spending reductions. Funding would disappear altogether for 19 independent bodies that count on federal money for public broadcasting, the arts and regional issues from Alaska to Appalachia. Trump's budget outline is a bare-bones plan covering just "discretionary" spending for the 2018 fiscal year starting on Oct. 1. It is the first volley in what is expected to be an intense battle over spending in coming months in Congress, which holds the federal purse strings and seldom approves presidents' budget plans.

Trump wants to spend $54 billion more on defense, put a down payment on his border wall, and breathe life into a few other campaign promises. His initial budget outline does not incorporate his promise to pour $1 trillion into roads, bridges, airports and other infrastructure projects.  The budget directs several agencies to shift resources toward fighting terrorism and cybercrime, enforcing sanctions, cracking down on illegal immigration and preventing government waste.

The White House has said the infrastructure plan is still to come.

That said, Congress controlled by Trump's fellow Republicans, is likely to reject some or many of his proposed cuts with some republicans calling the budget "dead on arrival." Some of the proposed changes, which Democrats will broadly oppose, have been targeted for decades by conservative Republicans. Moderate Republicans have already expressed unease with potential cuts to popular domestic programs such as home-heating subsidies, clean-water projects and job training.

Trump is willing to discuss priorities, said Mulvaney. "The president wants to spend more money on defense, more money securing the border, more money enforcing the laws, and more money on school choice, without adding to the deficit," Mulvaney told a small group of reporters during a preview on Wednesday. "If they have a different way to accomplish that, we are more than interested in talking to them," Mulvaney said.

The defense increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit. Mulvaney acknowledged the proposal would likely result in significant cuts to the federal workforce. "You can’t drain the swamp and leave all the people in it," Mulvaney said.

A visual summary of the proposed budget changes is shown below, courtesy of Reuters:

The biggest losers:

Trump asked Congress to slash the EPA by $2.6 billion or more than 31 percent, and the State Department by more than 28 percent or $10.9 billion. Mulvaney said the "core functions" of those agencies would be preserved. Hit hard would be foreign aid, grants to multilateral development agencies like the World Bank and climate change programs at the United Nations.

Trump wants to get rid of more than 50 EPA programs, end funding for former Democratic President Barack Obama's signature Clean Power Plan aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, and cut renewable energy research programs at the Energy Department. Regional programs to clean up the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay would be sent to the chopping block.

Community development grants at the Housing Department - around since 1974 - were cut in Trump's budget, along with more than 20 Education Department programs, including some funding program for before- and after- school programs. Anti-poverty grants and a program that helps poor people pay their energy bills would be slashed, as well as a Labor Department program that helps low-income seniors find work.

Long reviled by conservatives, the Internal Revenue Service would get a $239 million cut, despite Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s request for more funding. The Education Department would receive $1.4 billion to invest in public charter schools and private schools, even as its overall budget is cut by 14 percent. But other numbers appear to contradict some of Trump’s top priorities. One of his campaign pledges was to work to cure diseases, but the National Institutes of Health will reportedly see $5.8 billion slashed from its budget.

Trump calls for a 13 percent cut to the Transportation Department, which would ostensibly play a big role in Trump’s promised infrastructure overhaul. That includes $500 million from the TIGER grant program, which provides funding for road and bridge projects.

Trump's rural base did not escape cuts. The White House proposed a 21 percent reduction to the Agriculture Department, cutting loans and grants for wastewater, reducing staff in county offices and ending a popular program that helps U.S. farmers donate crops for overseas food aid.

And the winners

White House officials looked at Trump's campaign speeches and "America First" pledges as they crunched the numbers, Mulvaney said. "We turned those policies into numbers," he said, explaining how the document mirrored pledges to spend more on the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal, veterans' health care, the FBI, and Justice Department efforts to fight drug dealers and violent crime.

The Department of Homeland Security would get a 6.8 percent increase, with more money for extra staff needed to catch, detain and deport illegal immigrants. Trump wants Congress to shell out $1.5 billion for the border wall with Mexico in the current fiscal year - enough for pilot projects to determine the best way to build it - and a further $2.6 billion in fiscal 2018, Mulvaney said.

The estimate of the full cost of the wall will be included in the full budget, expected in mid-May, which will project spending and revenues over 10 years. Trump has vowed Mexico will pay for the border wall, which the Mexican government has flatly said it will not do. The White House has said recently that funding would be kick-started in the United States.

The voluminous budget document will include economic forecasts and Trump's views on "mandatory entitlements" - big-ticket programs like Social Security and Medicare, which Trump vowed to protect on the campaign trail.

“There is no question this is a hard-power budget,” said Mulvaney. “It is not a soft-power budget.”

The budget requests $1.5 billion to detain and remove undocumented immigrants, and $314 million to hire 500 new Border Patrol officers and 1,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
XC Skater's picture

More war for OPEC and Israel. 
Goldman Sachs as economic team... 

What's really changed with this president?

He just doesn't share well with the other elites, which is why he's being opposed so strongly by press, politicians and even celebrities. His agenda seems pretty well standard for a US president.
Very maybe a bit less war with Russia and China which would be helpful. 

unnamed enemy's picture

at some point in the near future the USA will be left with only one tool: the military.

when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem (foreign or domestic) looks like a nail.

 

 

mary mary's picture

I think that started in 1913, when the FED was created.  The FED considers the USA nothing but a its private military/police agency, its personal jackboot, to plant on anyone, anywhere, at any time, in the world, it wants, and at no cost to itself.

pr0digy's picture

Bruh - we need to increase NASA budget...not decrease it. I vote republican but completely disagree with all the science bashing. Stop it already!

mary mary's picture

Yes.  Science is conservative.  Period.  And when it comes to natural resources, 99.99999% of our solar system's resources are "out there".  Let's go get them.

TheLastTrump's picture

You mean FALSE SCIENCE BASHING.

 

Because when you say science bashing you're parroting mainstream media talking points about dumb conservatives that don't "believe" in science.

 

When in actuality conservatives are pointing out the volumes of fraud & cheating going on to get "science" to say what the left wants it to.

 

Never heard of fake temperature readings, have you? That's because of what you choose to read. Because you're dishonest.

Sokhmate's picture

To @TheLastTrump, +EntireFakeScienceBudgetInUSA

Let em push you around's picture

Here are the whiners and losers...

Seriously, is this the CNN comment section?  All your comments R belong to us...

ZH has always been a forum for flogging govt workers and you don't like this budget?  Either you are all a bunch of hippies who think that all is well in this troubled world or a bunch of Russia sympathizers pissed that the kingdom will be defended properly.  Bottom line is, it's a budget proposal and is being labelled as DOA... what did you think drain the swamp meant? 

If the budget were to pass I could end up out of work and I'm ready to stand on the porch without any encouragement, when I get inside I'd better not find a dilapidated house full of special snowflakes.  As for me, I shoot to kill any Russian paratroopers coming to the homeland...Red dawn bitchez

mary mary's picture

I have had government jobs.  Even though I tried to be diligent and energetic, I always figured I was actually slacking, by not taking my chances in the Free Market, and doing something that required willing buyers to willingly pay me for my service.  As long as one's salary is paid by people who have only the choice of paying taxes or having government take their property and put them in jail - which is the case with every government job - then I don't think one has much standing to complain.  You don't like it, start your own small business.

Let em push you around's picture

I work in an industry that would be hit if the budget proposal were to pass as indicated, which it won't.  Not sure I'm doing any complaining other than about the comment section, so take your "standing" back to CNN.

HughBriss's picture

Give mary mary a break.  She is half-retarded (i.e. female) and does her best to read much too far into any and all comments she responds to.  It is nothing personal, of course, she just can't help but to project her own inadequacies onto all those she comes into contact with.

She deserves our pity, not our disdain.  :)

 

 

+1 

mary mary's picture

When I am inaugurated as President, on Day One I will announce that you have 365 days to pump a baby and get me to pay for it.  Any baby born within those 365 days still gets all the Welfare: "Earned Income Credit", 1040 Dependent Exemption, EBT, Free School Lunch, Subsidized Housing, Medicaid, ad nauseum.  But any baby born on day 366 or thereafter gets nothing.  Zero.  You want babies, you pay for your babies.  I am already $20-trillion in debt for paying for your excess babies.  No more free knish, deadbeats!

HughBriss's picture

Sorry to be so pessimistic, but you'll never be inaugurated as President, Ms. Mary.  Well, maybe -- and I do mean maybe -- you'll win the presidency of your own cozy kitchen, but certainly not of the United States of America.

I don't mean to burst your bubble, but alas, I am a realist.  :)

 

 

+1, if you make me a sandwich.  I prefer pastrami.  Thanks!

Weirdly's picture

I think you misunderstood something.  You vote for spending on your wishes today and the babies get saddled with the debt for the next 30 years.  You will be retired or dead when the loans come due.  So don't pretend you will be stuck paying the debt. You are paying off the jet fuel used in The Invasion of Panama and the First Gulf war.  

Cassandra.Hermes's picture

So Trump is giving money only to the department that lack supervision and do not need it!

Who is Trump going to fight with this budget, extraterrestrial?

A PERFECT way to cleanup the swamp!!!!!!!

Cassandra.Hermes's picture

I will but first explain me who will he fight with this army?

I'm totatly cluelles and looking into other coutries military budgets i don't see any one able to survive current one, even with just 50% of the current budget we will be able to defeat both Russia and China, so Who is he going to fight?

Let em push you around's picture

you can't make this stuff up...what an influx of newly minted posters here at ZH

There's picture

Americans who get out of line.

Cassandra.Hermes's picture

You have too short memory in 2015 in this site you were arguing about fact that the Pentagon had buried an internal study that exposed $125 billion in administrative waste, so now Trump is giving them more. NICE

me or you's picture

Just a real Revolution will drain the swamp...don't bet your future on elections and almost unachievable promises. 

* either you fight for this country or your die on your knees like cowards.

agNau's picture

Seems a recent article posted here detailed the amount of equipment needing parts/repair sitting idle.
The prior administration, being what they were, apparently used a piece of equipment until it broke, then pushed it into the backyard and picked up the next. We truly don't know the extent of disrepair.
I do not want the continuous wars used to promote our hegemony. I do want a decent defense if for no other reason than protection from those that prior administrations/MIC have angered by protecting that same hegemony.
On this item I will give Trump the benefit of a doubt.

Dismantling this mess(what our nation has become) will not be simple. Like a house of cards.

nah's picture

Little less talking and alot more action.

me or you's picture

As long as you're ruled by dual-citizens and traitors do not expect any change. 

BendGuyhere's picture

Lindsey Graham has got to be the biggest fag in the Senate (wait, there is also Milk Mustache McCain.....)

but the idiots in South Carolina keep voting him in. If he walked around in panties and a bra in public they'd STILL vote him "Yup, he's a conservative".....

micksavage2010's picture

and no fraud, waste or mismanagement with the "intelligence" parasites?

amerikka is doomed.

shutterbug's picture

NOBODY wants CUTS EVERYWHERE, and transfer all the cuts to USELESS more DEFENSE.

Trump is certainly not keeping his promises....

it's just another Obama administration with a different person in the W.H.

Well, it was worth a try. Now just destroy this political system and all government agencies.... we need a real reset.

TheLastTrump's picture

I do.

 

Trump is doing exactly what he promised. Fuck you for lying like a dog. Good day.

SRV's picture

Bet you could have come up with that comment last week...

Faeriedust's picture

Look at the bright side.  By going full throttle down the same rabbithole that has already swallowed Obama & Company, Trump is doing the best possible job we could ask for, of destroying the current political system.  By the time he's done, not even Pollyanna will be able to believe in the unquestionable sanctity of The Constitution As Currently Interpreted.

St. Alphonzo's picture

As a few have stated here: Trump is doing exactly what he said he would do during the elections: Effing refreshing! There is so much pork and the establishment pricks see their money train departing soon. Most of his cuts are so obvious any one of us who can balance a check book would do. STFU and let the man do his job. Spend more time telling the a-hole politicos game over and swamp is draaaaiiiinnniiiiinnng whether they like it our not. He is a master negotiator. Sit back and enjoy.

There's picture

Negotiations with Mexico did not go well.

Faeriedust's picture

If he follows his promises to withdraw from NATO and other crippling overseas military commitments, HE MOST CERTAINLY DOESN'T NEED TO INCREASE THE ALREADY EXHORBITANT DEFENSE BUDGET.

Another situation where his promises are self-contradictory.  A sane, HUMBLE foreign policy that stops trying to rule the world and concentrates on keeping America safe instead, COULD CUT THE MILITARY BUDGET IN HALF.

 

Pitchman's picture

Many both within and beyond America's borders labor under the delusion that US policy is determined by the nation's elected representatives amid a careful balancing act between the judicial, legislative, and executive branches of government. In reality, the inner workings of US policy resemble nothing of the sort.

 

Exposing the Real Deep State

 

affirmed_78's picture

Defense spending should not be increasing, certainly not by that amount. 

Someone grow a pair and cut entitlement spending too.

DistortedPictures's picture

Somebody has to pay for Zionism.  Might as well be us. 

LawsofPhysics's picture

from page 22; "Reduces the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) spending relative to the 2017 annualized
CR level by $5.8 billion to $25.9 billion. The Budget includes a major reorganization of NIH’s
Institutes and Centers to help focus resources on the highest priority research and training
activities, including: eliminating the Fogarty International Center; consolidating the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality within NIH; and other consolidations and structural changes
across NIH organizations and activities. The Budget also reduces administrative costs and
rebalance Federal contributions to research funding."

 

Yeah, invest in weapons of destruction instead...

...morons.

 

Roll the motherfucking guillotines already, nothing changes otherwise.

lasvegaspersona's picture

As a physician I'll say not everything the health related agencies produce is essential or even good. I'm sure a budget cut could cause some improvement. It will likely just cause further poor choices as fiefdoms are protected but it COULD cause better application of resources.

ali-ali-al-qomfri's picture

i think he's doing what needs to be done to  MAGA reduce oversight and regulation that has strangled US industry across the board. Bad trade(give away) deals that forced companies to look for ever cheaper sources.

 

 

Rolln's picture

Cutting back on the Coast Guard doesnt even make sense with his Pro defense, Anti Immigartion, Anti Drug stance.

There's picture

What does make sense with this gang?

lasvegaspersona's picture

Perhaps the EPA could raise some cash by selling back the 'rights' it has stolen from property owners over the years.

There's picture

All of this Administrations laughable plans are Dead on Arrival.

Confusion, chaos and disaster is all this conspiracy entertainment gang is capable of. 

BitchesBetterRecognize's picture

If the pie is 60 billion -like it always has been - and Trump says I'm cutting a good chunk of money for certain agencies while increasing greatly on military budget, BUT when all is adding up to a grand total of a 60 billion bill ........... That ain't budget reduction at all - that's simply budget "allocation"!!    

rosiescenario's picture

Why do we spend anything on foreign aid when we cannot take care of our own needs?

 

Why do we fund the DEA when all they accomplish is to boost the street price of drugs?

 

Why do we need the FBI, CIA, DHS, and NSA operating as 3 individual kingdoms?

 

We also could get rid of 90% of the IRS drones with a simple tax schedule and would most likely take in more revenue.

HRH Feant's picture
HRH Feant (not verified) rosiescenario Mar 16, 2017 3:13 PM

I agree about the IRS. We should be able to fill out a simple one-page tax form. For people that are employe and I would include DBA / sole proprietor business that are one person.

To Hell In A Handbasket's picture

The gravy train for the MIC, just keeps on rolling. Trump expanding the military for more oversea adventures? And the Trump supporting plebs thought Trump would be different. lol. The USSA must cut 2 types of welfare. Not just social welfare, but the welfare the MIC lives on. Both bring little value, but to suck on the teats of others. But alas, Trump had to look after the military. The Orange cunt is a fucking comedian and he fooled many of his supporters..