New Trump 2019 budge plan

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
25,445
14,967
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#1
The new budget proposal calls for

$18 billion for The Wall
$200 billion for infrastructure
$21 billion up front to jump start infrastructure
$23 billion for border security and immigration enforcement
$17 billion for Opioid related spending ($13 billion to the HHS)
$85.5 billion in VA funding for quality of life

Create a new program to allow each state to more carefully scrutinize 50% of all unemployment insurance claimants

Overhaul of Medicaid that shifts funding to a system of per-capita payments with a cap and give states more flexibility on benefits such as work requirements for Medicaid benifits

Medicare, allow recipients to save for out of pocket costs through tax deductible contributions to a health savings acct if the Medicare recipient has a high deductible insurance plan.

Reducing federal tax credits for states that have low balances in their unemployment insurance reserves

Expand the Federal Pell grant program to pay for short term and certificate programs that offer direct job training such as medical assistance or security guards...no specific $$ figure given or the particular programs covered

Expansion to Federal Work Study by $300 million and a call to refocus on students' career or academic goals

21% decrease in the overall funding for the Labor Dept. The proposal calls for the complete elimination of $400 million in income support to 60,000 Americans age 55 or older that are paid to participate in community service activities. Cut all together Federally subsidized worker safety training program, Cut all training programs that provide training to migrant farm workers, and cut Job Corps funding by $407 million

$200 million expansion to apprenticeship training of which $104 million will be used to increase apprenticeship grants and the rest used to help pay workers while they are learning.

Expanding Dept of Labor Management Standards dept at the Federal level with an $8 million increase in budget to support more audits and investigations to uncover Union Fraud including flawed officer elections, fraud, and embezzlement. This investigative staff has been cut by over 40% over the last decade.

Reduce the Treasury dept budget by 3% down to $12.3 billion but give the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence a 22.6% budget increase to $159 million and a 2.5% increase (to $118 million) to the depts anti money laundering and Financial Crimes division to focus on combat funding to NK and drug trafficking fueling opioid crisis.

Overall cut to Dept of Education budget of 10% or $7.5 Billion

Budget calls for $1.1 billion to expand school choice programs...$500 million to expand access to charter schools and $500 million to supplement voucher programs for private schools

$43 million for new program in Dept of Ed to assist schools fighting opiod crisis trhough trauma counseling and violence prevention

Increase of the amount Students must pay per month toward Federal Student Loans from 10% to 12.5%. Any balance owed after 15 years would then be forgiven for undergad...down from the current 20-25 years. Graduate debt would be forgiven after 30 years. All changes would only apply to loans made after July 1st 2019

creating a new fee on levied against firms that deal in Futures on derivatives market expect to raise $31.5 million from this fee

Adding spectrum user fees which would require FCC licenses holders that use airwaves to pay a fee to do so.

26% budget cut to the Dept of State and Us Agency for International Development.

Per Fox tax revenue would go down by $3.7 Trillion from 2018-2027 and the 2019 deficit would double to $1 Trillion beyond what was projected last year.

Elimination of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting after a wind down period

New Budget would see accumulating deficits of $7.2 Trillion in the next decade. Head of the budget office Mick Mulvaney said on Fox that while the budget isn't balanced it trends the trajectory down
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
25,445
14,967
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#2
Reduction of $1 billion in the transit grant program and a 50% reduction in Federal funding to Amtrak

Making certain generic drugs free and capping out of pocket drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
14,852
22,824
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#3
I always laugh at things like "$200 Billion over 10 years". The next Congress and President are not beholden to this one iota. How about submitting a budget that covers just fiscal year 2019. Period.

I do like the number of times I see the words "cut", "reduce", "decrease" and "eliminate" in there though.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
25,445
14,967
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#5
I do like the number of times I see the words "cut", "reduce", "decrease" and "eliminate" in there though.
Yeah, then you see Trump and WH say that balanced budget won't be a reality and WH spox on Fox saying it would add $7.2 Trillion to the deficit over 10 years those words have much less meaning. Basically all the cut, reduce, decrease etc etc were just cut from one budget and then re appropriated to different dept ...as well as expanding other spend.

Fiscally conservative is not something you can use to define this budget..
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
14,852
22,824
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#6
Yeah, then you see Trump and WH say that balanced budget won't be a reality and WH spox on Fox saying it would add $7.2 Trillion to the deficit over 10 years those words have much less meaning. Basically all the cut, reduce, decrease etc etc were just cut from one budget and then re appropriated to different dept ...as well as expanding other spend.

Fiscally conservative is not something you can use to define this budget..
Oh, I agree. It's not really a cut if you just spend it (and more) on something else. But the point I was getting at is that seeing something, anything, cut is at least a step in the right direction....if we can show that something CAN be cut, that's a victory in my book because it seems most of these buffoons in Congress operate on the notion that the country would explode if we do that. I will still oppose anything that adds so much new spending but if it should pass anyway without my approval, then I'll have to look for small victories where I can find them.
 

Lab Rat

Hold on while I make a chart
A/V Subscriber
Jan 5, 2012
6,510
9,479
743
#12
Hillary was the alternative.
I'm not blaming you for voting for Trump, but just pointing out that it's disingenuous for you to go around saying "I told you so" when he does something stupid or non-conservative.

As Max Boot wrote in WaPo yesterday, the entire GOP has lost its way. It's not just Trump. People were calling Tom Coburn a "RINO" when he criticized Trump, but if he is truly a RINO then that's only because Coburn's brand of fiscal conservatism is extinct in today's GOP. So, embrace the new GOP, where Trump is the quintessential Republican and Coburn is a RINO.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
61,274
45,311
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#13
I'm not blaming you for voting for Trump, but just pointing out that it's disingenuous for you to go around saying "I told you so" when he does something stupid or non-conservative.

As Max Boot wrote in WaPo yesterday, the entire GOP has lost its way. It's not just Trump. People were calling Tom Coburn a "RINO" when he criticized Trump, but if he is truly a RINO then that's only because Coburn's brand of fiscal conservatism is extinct in today's GOP. So, embrace the new GOP, where Trump is the quintessential Republican and Coburn is a RINO.
Trump's done a few things that I agree with such as cutting taxes and decreasing regulations. There are a couple of more things he might do that I agree with. There would be nothing Hillary would have done that I would agree with. So, when Trump does something I agree with I will give him credit, and when he does things I disagree with then I will call him out on it. When he acts in ways that I disliked before the election I'm going to call him on that, too. I'm neither going full Trumpian or anti-Trumpian. That ain't disingenuous, though it is so rare these days it might be hard for you to recognize.
 

Lab Rat

Hold on while I make a chart
A/V Subscriber
Jan 5, 2012
6,510
9,479
743
#14
Trump's done a few things that I agree with such as cutting taxes and decreasing regulations. There are a couple of more things he might do that I agree with. There would be nothing Hillary would have done that I would agree with. So, when Trump does something I agree with I will give him credit, and when he does things I disagree with then I will call him out on it. When he acts in ways that I disliked before the election I'm going to call him on that, too. I'm neither going full Trumpian or anti-Trumpian. That ain't disingenuous, though it is so rare these days it might be hard for you to recognize.
Trump and the GOP-led House and Senate have cut taxes but have not decreased spending. If you support cutting taxes without cutting spending, then you're not fiscally conservative. Say what you will about the Clintons, but Bill was able to balance the budget.

The new budget proposal calls for

$18 billion for The Wall
This needs more discussion. :popcorn:
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
61,274
45,311
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#15
Trump and the GOP-led House and Senate have cut taxes but have not decreased spending. If you support cutting taxes without cutting spending, then you're not fiscally conservative. Say what you will about the Clintons, but Bill was able to balance the budget.


This needs more discussion. :popcorn:
I am for a balanced budget. That doesn't necessarily mean decreasing spending after cutting taxes.

P.S. What year did Clinton not run a deficit?
 

Lab Rat

Hold on while I make a chart
A/V Subscriber
Jan 5, 2012
6,510
9,479
743
#16
I am for a balanced budget. That doesn't necessarily mean decreasing spending after cutting taxes.
How then do you suggest balancing the budget? (And don't say some fairy-tale 6% economic growth rate.)

P.S. What year did Clinton not run a deficit?
1998, 1999, and 2000. Both legislative chambers had GOP majorities those years, so credit goes to both parties. Perhaps Hillary could have also done well in today's political environment, although Trent Lott and Pedo Hastert were willing to work with Bill more than McConnell and Paul Ryan would be with Hillary.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
14,852
22,824
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#17
How then do you suggest balancing the budget? (And don't say some fairy-tale 6% economic growth rate.)
How about just 4-4.5% growth rate. Isn't that how it happened under Clinton?

Unfortunately we don't just need to balance the budget, we need to run hundreds of billions in surplus for decades on end to have a chance of getting the debt down to a sane number. Almost nobody in DC right now is interested in accomplishing that, including Trump. But as Rx said, cutting taxes and regulations helps a lot, and that is something we simply would not have gotten under Clinton. Doesn't make Trump's actions on spending good in the least, just better than the alternative.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
61,274
45,311
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#18
How then do you suggest balancing the budget? (And don't say some fairy-tale 6% economic growth rate.)


1998, 1999, and 2000. Both legislative chambers had GOP majorities those years, so credit goes to both parties. Perhaps Hillary could have also done well in today's political environment, although Trent Lott and Pedo Hastert were willing to work with Bill more than McConnell and Paul Ryan would be with Hillary.
Then tell me what year actual debt went down? I don't think either party deserves credit because the "budget surplus" didn't actually exist. The government borrowed money every single year and the debt increased every single year. It slowed in the late 90's, but still increased.


You mean fairy-tale economic growth like 4.6% in 1983, 7.3% in 1984 and 4.2% in 1985?

From WSJ:
One irony of the current moment is that the Keynesians who presided over nearly a decade of secular stagnation are now worried that the economy is “overheating.” Then again, they said faster growth wasn’t possible, so they almost have to dismiss it.
 

John C

Cowboy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
830
1,625
643
62
#20
One reason for the Clinton "success" was that he was President back when the government was auctioning off the airwaves. The NYT reported that in 1996 alone, the Feds auctioned off licenses for lower-quality spectrum, raising $20 billion. www.nytimes.com/1997/03/27/opinion/giving-away-the-airwaves.html

Obviously, the Feds could follow that success story again and just auction off things that didn't cost them anything to produce. I say that only somewhat sarcastically. The biggest land owner in the western part of the US is the Federal Govt. That should start a debate.