Two New CBPP Budget Pieces
Tiffany Kaszuba
Good Afternoon NDD United,
Happy Friday! Below are two new CBPP budget pieces. The first previews President Trump’s forthcoming 2018 budget. The second highlights the cumulative impact of seven years or austerity’s squeeze on appropriations and examines both funding trends and the needs that funding is intended to address. Happy reading! J
Previewing the Trump Budget: More “Robin Hood in Reverse” and Gimmicks?
“President Trump’s forthcoming 2018 budget will likely propose policies that would significantly damage the well-being of tens of millions of low- and middle-income people, both now and in the future, while lavishing large and costly tax cuts on those at the top. Thus, at a time of intensely concentrated income and wealth, the budget would likely shift trillions of dollars of resources away from low- and middle-income people and toward the highest-income Americans, thereby increasing inequality, hampering mobility, and worsening poverty and hardship.”
Read the full report here: http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/previewing-the-trump-budget-more-robin-hood-in-reverse-and-gimmicks
Unmet Needs and the Squeeze on Appropriations
“As the White House and Congress begin work on fiscal year 2018 funding for discretionary programs, they face a fundamental choice: (1) continue providing at least partial relief from the 2011 Budget Control Act’s (BCA) deep sequestration cuts, (2) let sequestration take full effect for the first time, or (3) as President Trump proposes, significantly deepen sequestration on non-defense programs while eliminating it for defense.
The cumulative impact of seven years of austerity under the BCA’s tight annual appropriations caps and the sequestration cuts below those levels has been substantial. The 2017 non-defense funding level is 13 percent below the comparable 2010 level after adjusting for inflation and 18 percent below after adjusting for inflation and population growth. In 2018, with full sequestration in place, those cuts would grow to 16 and 21 percent, respectively.
The real test, however, is not the funding levels themselves but their impact on the government’s ability to provide important services, invest in the productivity of the workforce, and meet national needs. This analysis highlights examples from various agencies and programs, examining both funding trends and the needs that funding is intended to address.”
Read the full paper here: http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/unmet-needs-and-the-squeeze-on-appropriations
You can also see separate sections linked individually with specific looks at:
- Child care
- Job Training
- SSA operations
- Water treatment infrastructure
- Elementary and secondary education
- Head start
- IRS operations
- Census bureau
- Humanitarian aid
- National parks
- Rental assistance
- Tribal schools
See the separate sections here: http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/unmet-needs-and-the-squeeze-on-appropriations#toc_both
Tiffany Kaszuba, MBA
Vice President
Cavarocchi Ruscio Dennis Associates
600 Maryland Avenue, SW
Suite 835W
Washington, DC 20024
F: 202.484.1244
Please visit our website and blog at www.dc-crd.com