SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
economic growth
Trump’s Budget Breaks His Campaign Promise to Help Those Struggling to Make Ends Meet
His partial budget fails to propose a serious agenda for the U.S. economy or for people who haven’t been included enough in the country’s overall prosperity.
May 03, 2025
The Trump administration’s partial budget plan released Friday is just its latest repudiation of the Trump campaign’s promises to help people struggling at the margins of the economy—an economy that President Donald Trump’s misguided tariff policies are threatening to tank.
This partial budget does not discuss the president’s intended tax breaks—tilted to the well off—or policies he will include (like those he supports as part of the reconciliation bill) to take food assistance and health coverage away from people who need them to meet their basic needs and to make college more expensive. The full budget will come later. But while the administration’s partial plan is limited to the part of the budget that Congress funds through the annual appropriations process, its proposal to cut that funding by nearly one-quarter is plenty bad enough, harming people, communities, and the economy.
During the campaign, President Trump said, “As soon as I get to office, we will make housing much more affordable.” But his budget proposes a devastating cut to rental assistance—which makes rent affordable for 10 million people—reducing funding by $27 billion below the amount provided in 2025 across five programs. This would cause millions of people to lose assistance they need to pay the rent each month, placing them at risk of eviction and homelessness.
Policymakers of both parties in Congress need to see this budget, and this entire agenda, for what it is—a direct assault on people, communities, and the economy.
These cuts would likely grow even deeper over time, since the budget would also consolidate multiple rental assistance programs into to a block grant that would be more vulnerable to cuts in the future. The budget also would impose a two-year time limit on rental assistance (apparently except for seniors and people with disabilities), a policy that would abruptly evict or end assistance for many low-paid workers and others who aren’t able to afford market rents after that period.
In addition, the budget proposes severe cuts to other housing programs, such as sharply reducing funding for housing and other services for people experiencing homelessness, cutting housing resources for Indigenous people, and eliminating funding for local agencies protecting people from housing discrimination and other fair housing violations, and block grants that fund affordable housing and community development at the local level.
The president also said “your heating and air conditioning, electricity, gasoline—all can be cut down in half,” but this budget eliminates LIHEAP, the program that helps low-income households afford to heat and cool their homes; reduces availability of the most affordable sources of energy—solar and wind—by cutting efforts to bring these sources online and make them available in low-income communities; and cuts programs that reduce energy waste.
As the President’s ill-conceived trade policies threaten to tip the country into a recession later this year, the budget disinvests from key sources of long-run economic growth. The budget cuts the National Science Foundation (NSF) by more than half and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) by about 40%. This is short-sighted: NSF and NIH funding supports foundational research that spurs innovation, leading to greater economic growth. The private sector will not support this work because there is no financial incentive to do so.
The budget also disinvests from America’s future workers, cutting $4.5 billion from K-12 education despite the Trump campaign’s statement that “we are going to keep spending our money” on education.
Most fundamentally, the budget fails to propose a serious agenda for the U.S. economy or for people who haven’t been included enough in the country’s overall prosperity. The budget presents no agenda for addressing housing or childcare affordability, improving educational outcomes for those our education system doesn’t serve well, maintaining and strengthening innovation, or broadening opportunity.
And today’s funding request again breaks President Trump’s repeated promises to protect Social Security, including “Save Social Security. Don’t destroy it.” On paper, the administration provides the same amount of funding next year as this year, but this is not enough to keep up with inflation, fixed expenses, and growing demand as the number of Social Security recipients grows as the population ages. The administration has already pushed out 7,000 Social Security Administration staff despite having the money to pay them, and it has already made it harder for seniors and people with disabilities to get the Social Security benefits they’ve earned. This is not what Congress intended when it passed this year’s budget.
The administration is claiming these massive cuts are necessary under the guise of fiscal responsibility, but the proposed $2.5 billion cut to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) funding—primarily for tax enforcement—reveals that any commitment to fiscal responsibility is limited. Funding for IRS enforcement pays for itself multiple times over: It provides the staff and technology to catch wealthy tax cheats and encourage everyone to pay the taxes they legally owe.
The administration justifies many cuts by saying that states are better positioned to cover the costs of various public services and infrastructure needs. This ignores the federal government’s important role in ensuring adequate investment nationwide, including in states and communities that face more economic challenges. The problems would be compounded by potentially large cost shifts in Medicaid and SNAP being considered in Congress. States would face even greater challenges—and the impacts on people and communities would grow—in a recession when state revenues fall but they still have to balance their budgets.
The president’s budget counts on funding in the emerging tax and budget bill for immigration enforcement. With that, it continues to prioritize a mass deportation apparatus that has gone too far already by disappearing people without due process and ending lawful immigration status for hundreds of thousands of people.
Since taking office, the Trump administration, often acting through DOGE, has unilaterally frozen congressionally approved funding, implemented large-scale staffing reductions that are harming public services, and threatened the security of people’s personal information. Having frozen funding in contradiction to enacted funding laws, the president’s budget now asks Congress to codify and continue these unilateral cuts next year, including through the proposed cuts to NIH, NSF, and the Department of Education. Codifying these cuts would make congressional supporters accomplices in this administration’s endeavor to make government less effective in finding cures for diseases, maintaining American technological leadership, and getting a good education.
The president’s harmful agenda goes well beyond what was released today. The president and his congressional allies are moving forward on a budget and tax bill that deeply cuts health coverage through Medicaid, food assistance through SNAP, and college aid to partially pay for expensive tax cuts skewed to the wealthy.
At the same time, the president’s chaotic, indiscriminate, and steep tariffs have sharply increased the risk of recession, which could lead to a rise in unemployment and the number of people who need help to afford the basics, just as those supports are slated for cuts.
Policymakers of both parties in Congress need to see this budget, and this entire agenda, for what it is—a direct assault on people, communities, and the economy—and plan a better course for the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Since 1975, $79 Trillion Has Flowed From Bottom 90% to Top 1% in US: Analysis
Sanders used the findings of a recent working paper to denounce Republicans' determination to pass tax cuts that will benefit wealthy Americans the most.
Mar 04, 2025
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday used a new working paper about income distribution over the past several decades to push back against congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump's effort to pass more tax giveaways for the rich.
The recent working paper from the nonpartisan research organization RAND, which was authored by Carter Price, aimed to quantify how much money the majority of workers—the bottom 90% by income—would have made if earnings growth had not begun to disproportionately flow to those with the highest incomes starting in the 1970s.
According to Price, assuming the same distribution of income among workers as in 1975—and taking into account continued economic growth, continued growth in inequality, and inflation—the majority of workers would have made an additional $3.9 trillion dollars in 2023. Cumulatively, "the gap between what workers from 1975 to 2023 earned and what they would have earned with the counterfactual income distribution" tallies at $79 trillion in 2023 dollars, per Price.
"The massive income and wealth inequality in America today is not only morally unjust, it is profoundly damaging to our democracy," wrote Sanders (I-Vt.) on Tuesday in response to the study.
The analysis updates earlier numbers on the same topic. A previous analysis from Price and a co-author found the gap between what the majority of workers earn and what they could have earned if the more "uniform growth rates from the 50s and '60s" had continued totaled $47 trillion in 2018 dollars.
Sanders used the update from RAND to discuss the current aims of Trump and Republicans in Congress.
"Over and over again, my Republican colleagues have expressed their deep concern about the redistribution of wealth in America, and they are right," Sanders continued. "The problem is that it has gone in precisely the wrong direction."
Sanders opposes Republicans' intent to provide tax cuts primarily for the wealthy, which will almost certainly be paid for by cuts to Medicaid, nutrition assistance, and more. "We must do the exact opposite," he wrote.
Last week, House Republicans were able to pass a budget resolution that tees up those tax cuts after Trump intervened to pressure wavering members to vote for it.
The resolution instructs the House Energy and Commerce Committee to "submit changes in laws within its jurisdiction to reduce the deficit by not less than" $880 billion over the next decade. That panel has jurisdiction over Medicaid, which the GOP has repeatedly targeted in public and private discussions, with one leaked document floating over $2 trillion in cuts to the program.
Republicans also rejected numerous Democratic amendments that would have prevented Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cuts in the upcoming budget reconciliation process as their resolution moved through committees.
Sanders has been a consistent voice speaking out against the cuts. "Trump and his Republican friends want to enact massive cuts to the [Medicaid] program. We won't let them," wrote Sanders last week.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Economic Growth Is the World’s Most Dangerous Game
The game of growth has convinced us that the only way we can win is to continue to play.
Dec 14, 2024
In Richard Connell’s popular short story “The Most Dangerous Game,” hunter Sanger Rainsford goes overboard while sailing to the Amazon, washing up on an island owned by deceivingly charismatic General Zaroff. Rainsford expects Zaroff to help him off the island, but instead, Zaroff invites him to participate in a hunt.
A hunt, to Rainsford’s utter disbelief, in which he is the prey.
Our reckless pursuit of economic growth has become society’s “most dangerous game.” It keeps us trapped on an island of inequality, environmental degradation, and corporate power, all while convincing us there’s still a chance we can win if we continue to play.
To win this game, we can’t keep playing by the rules, but rewrite them entirely. We can start by challenging one of the most dominant rules of the growth model: Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
But there is no “winning” in a game dependent on the exploitation of people and nature. As long as “growth” is defined by profits and production, people and the planet will always lose.
That is, unless you are one of the few Zaroffs of the world: According to an Oxfam report, the world’s top 1% own more wealth than 95% of humanity, and over the past 30 years, income inequality has steadily risen to the point where many economists believe wealth is more stratified today than any time since the Gilded Age.
If economic growth doesn’t deliver its promised benefits, then why do we continue to play? Because those who preach economic growth as a path to prosperity—usually the same people who bag the most benefit—have engineered a game of forced “choice:” Hunt, or be hunted. As Zaroff explains to Rainsford, “I give him his option, of course.” But if they decline, he hands them over to his servant for torture. “Invariably,” Zaroff muses, “they choose the hunt.”
The same logic is used to silo economic and environmental objectives, perpetuating the false premise that reducing poverty and raising living standards must come at the cost of climate action. Such “choice” is equally manufactured—if economic growth is truly a means of improving societal well-being, shouldn’t actions that secure and sustain access to basic necessities be a vital part of our economy?
Even Americans seem to agree that economic growth is an incomplete measure of prosperity. In a nationally-representative survey of 3,000 participants, conducted by survey organization Verasight between October 21 and November 5, only 12.8% (with a 2.3% margin of error) responded that economic growth is a “mostly accurate” way of assessing societal well-being. The rest were skeptical, with 50.8% calling it “somewhat accurate” and 36.5% deeming it inaccurate altogether.
And yet, despite the dissatisfaction, dissonance, and destruction that our economic model begets, pundits and policymakers “invariably” brandish growth as the hallmark of prosperity. Meanwhile, the Zaroffs of the world continue to indulge their unchecked appetite for profit, capitalizing off the preservation of the status quo.
To win this game, we can’t keep playing by the rules, but rewrite them entirely. We can start by challenging one of the most dominant rules of the growth model: Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
GDP is a measure of aggregate production, not a reflection of progress and well-being. It excludes the costs of pollution and exploitation and ignores 16.4 billion hours of unpaid labor, much of which is performed by women. It also omits many non-materialistic goods (health, family, and equality) that define happiness and quality of life. In fact, economists have always warned against conflating GDP with societal well-being—even one of its founders, Simon Kuznets, told Congress that GDP was a poor tool for policymaking.
As Robert Kennedy put it in his 1968 election speech, GDP “measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.” By adopting more inclusive measures of progress that consider health, equality, and environmental well-being, we can move beyond the flawed metric of GDP as a measure of prosperity. In doing so, we build economies that prioritize people and the planet instead of outrageous profits.
Such measures are already gaining traction in the U.S. and across the globe. For example, India’s Ease of Living Index assesses the well-being of 114 Indian cities, using a total of 50 indicators that fall under three pillars: Quality of Life, economic ability, and sustainability. At the international scale, the United Nations is working to advance a “Human Rights Economy” that anchors all economic decisions in human rights. In the U.S., Vermont became the first state to adopt an alternative to GDP called the “Genuine Progress Indicator” in 2012, shortly followed by Maryland and 19 other states.
These measures aren’t perfect, nor should they be the only way we address a system that continues to inflict irreparable damage on global ecosystems and communities. However, they play a crucial role in disrupting our current growth paradigm, establishing an economic model where well-being isn’t exclusive to the wealthy, and where societal and environmental objectives are aligned.
It’s time we expose the injustices of our economic system, rewrite the rules, and beat the Zaroffs of the world at their own game.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular