Possibly, though not in the way Democrats think, and the size of the step remains to be seen.
Pres. Trump presented his first-year “skinny budget” and it’s skinnier than the client roster at Trump Model Management.
Trump focuses on a small shrinking slice of the budget: discretionary spending. Its not a real budget until it tackles entitlements/revenues pic.twitter.com/LJu1vhrrok
— Steven Rattner (@SteveRattner) March 16, 2017
So all we know so far is that Trump wants to shift $54 billion to DoD, DHS and Energy and cut that amount from the State Dept. domestic discretionary programs, including Education, EPA, NEA, NEH, NIH, LSC, LIHEAP, HUD CDBGs (which is where the Meals On Wheels kerfuffle is located) and still other combinations of letters of the alphabet. I am probably fine with cuts of this sort, though I suspect the numbers are pretty arbitrary (pending an OMB review of agency and program effectiveness due in May).
From these accounts, it further appears there was little coordination between the White House and Congressional GOP leadership on the budget proposals. Also, it seems that the White House is pushing back on Congressional suggestions of entitlement reform.
The lack of coordination has been a consistent theme in the short period this sideblog has been open (see here, here, and here, for examples). Yet it’s probably more important when we have a heterodox President like Trump.
Trump’s pushback on entitlement reform bothers me as a fiscal conservative. But Trump campaigned on leaving Social Security and Medicare alone. And as a cynic, I must note that most rank-and-file Republicans aren’t serious about it either.
It is therefore entirely possible we will get another year of borrow-and-spend, big government Republicanism. They can’t cut the big items because they’re big; they can’t cut the small stuff because it’s a drop in the bucket. And this on top of healthcare reform proposal that seems to excite no one. All coming in the first year, when the GOP should have maximum momentum.
Trump may blame Congress for rejecting his domestic cuts. The true conservatives at the grassroots will seethe. Much of talk radio (with and without video) will once again hand out the torches and pitchforks for a hearty round of “BURN IT DOWN!”
They won’t be entirely wrong, either. The GOP has far less excuse for timidity now that they control two branches of the federal government. This cycle of frustration (less justified when Obama was President) gets an exhibit in the Hall of How We Got Trump. Now we may get it again, even After We Got Trump.
Does anyone think that’s a way to ensure GOP turnout in 2018 against an energized Democratic base vote? Of course, the economy may improve, either organically or with GOP help. Or we may make progress against the Islamic State. If these big things happen, perhaps the dysfunction of the GOP leadership in both branches won’t matter much. But maybe it will matter.
PS: Consider subscribing to WHRPT in the sidebar (the posts come straight to your inbox; no muss no fuss). And following WHRPT on Twitter. Thanks for reading and sharing!