AMY GOODMAN: On Tuesday, the Trump administration
unveiled its $4.1 trillion budget.
The plan includes massive cuts to social programs,
while calling for historic increases in military
spending.
The budget proposes slashing $800 billion
from Medicaid, nearly $200 billion from nutritional
assistance programs, such as food stamps and
Meals on Wheels, and more than $72 billion
from disability benefits.
The plan would also completely eliminate some
student loan programs.
It would ban undocumented immigrants from
receiving support through some programs for
families with children, including the child
care tax credit.
On Tuesday, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont
slammed Trump’s budget.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: This is a budget which says
that if you are a member of the Trump family,
you may receive a tax break of up to $4 billion,
but if you are a child of a working-class
family, you could well lose the health insurance
you currently have through the Children’s
Health Insurance Program and massive cuts
to Medicaid.
At a time when we remain the only major country
on Earth not to guarantee healthcare to all,
this budget makes a bad situation worse in
terms of healthcare.
In other words, this is a budget that provides
massive tax breaks for billionaires and corporate
CEOs, and massive cuts to programs that tens
of millions of struggling Americans depend
upon.
When Donald Trump campaigned for president,
he told the American people that he would
be a different type of Republican, that he
would take on the political and economic establishment,
that he would stand up for working people,
that he understood the pain that families
all across this country were experiencing.
Well, sadly, this budget exposes all of that
verbiage for what it really was: just cheap
and dishonest campaign rhetoric that was meant
to get votes, nothing more than that.
AMY GOODMAN: That was Senator Bernie Sanders
of Vermont.
The ACLU, NAACP and Planned Parenthood have
all come out criticizing the budget.
Some conservatives are also criticizing the
budget.
Republican Congressman Mark Meadows of North
Carolina told The New York Times, "Meals on
Wheels, even for some of us who are considered
to be fiscal hawks, may be a bridge too far,"
unquote.
The budget also calls for an historic 10 percent
increase in military spending and another
$2.6 billion to further militarize the U.S.-Mexico
border, including $1.6 billion to build Trump’s
border wall.
In a rare proposed benefit for families, the
budget allocates $19 billion for six weeks
of paid parental leave for new families—a
project that’s been spearheaded by his daughter
and senior White House adviser, Ivanka Trump.
The budget projects 3 percent economic growth,
which economists say is widely unrealistic.
Unlike previous presidents, Trump is unveiling
his proposed budget while he’s abroad.
David Stockman, former budget director for
President Ronald Reagan, said, quote, "This
budget is dead before arrival, so he might
as well be out of town," unquote.
Well, for more, we go to Joe Stiglitz, Nobel
Prize-winning economist, Columbia University
professor, chief economist for the Roosevelt
Institute.
He’s the author of numerous books, most
recently, The Euro: How a Common Currency
Threatens the Future of Europe.
Joseph Stiglitz, welcome to Democracy Now!
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Nice to be here.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you respond to the budget
that’s just been revealed?
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: It’s like everything else:
It’s made up.
You could say it’s a collection of lies
put together.
It doesn’t make any economic sense.
I don’t think anybody who’s looked at
it has—can fathom the economics.
I mean, you mentioned one thing, the 3 percent
growth rate, which is the largest deviation
in estimate relative to the CBO on record.
You know, when I was chairman of the Council
of Economic Advisers, we wanted to be responsible,
and we always were conservative and were very
careful, getting the views of everybody, wanted
to make sure that our numbers were reasonable.
He’s made no pretense to be reasonable.
In fact, what’s striking is, while he assumes
that there’s going to be more growth, if
you look at the budget, it’s designed to
reduce growth.
He cuts out support for science, for R&D,
which is the basis of productivity growth.
He cuts out support for job retraining, so
when people leave one job, they can be trained
for the next job.
He cuts out support for Pell grants, so those
who have low income can get the education
so they can live up to their potential.
All these are things that actually lower economic
growth.
So I would say this is not a growth budget,
this is a no-growth budget.
And then he has the numbers, you know, the
gall to have things like—you know, just
mind-bending.
He says he’s going to—elsewhere, he said
he’s going to eliminate the estate tax.
And his budget says that he’s going to raise
several hundred billion dollars’ more money
from an estate tax that is zeroed out.
Now, you can make a statement that if we lowered
the estate tax a little bit, maybe people
will be induced to die more, and maybe we’ll
get more revenue.
You could make that kind of statement.
But one thing you don’t need a Ph.D. is,
zero times any number is zero.
So if you have a zero estate tax, no matter
how many people are dying and how wealthy
they are, you’re going to get zero revenue.
And remember, what he’s doing, he’s cutting
out the estate tax that benefits 0.2 percent
of the economy—of our society.
You know, you have to have an estate of more
than 10 million, if you’re a married couple,
in order to pay anything on the estate tax.
And meanwhile, he’s cutting benefits for
ordinary Americans—education, health, as
you mentioned, food, nutrition.
It’s not just the system of social protection
that we’ve created, but even the bottom
safety net that is—catches people when they’re
in trouble.
AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go to Donald Trump two
years ago, speaking—this is May 21st, 2015—to
the right-wing outlet The Daily Signal.
DONALD TRUMP: I’m not going to cut Social
Security like every other Republican, and
I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.
Every other Republican is going to cut.
And even if they wouldn’t, they don’t
know what to do, because they don’t know
where the money is.
I do.
AMY GOODMAN: So, he has said, when he was
campaigning—actually, he was campaigning
against other Republicans when he made the
point, "I’m not going to cut Medicare, Medicaid
or Social Security."
I mean, we had endless choices of clips to
choose from.
Joe Stiglitz?
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: He lied.
He is cutting Medicaid, the largest cut to
Medicaid, even beyond what was in his repeal
and replace, that didn’t get very far.
These are even bigger Medicaid cuts.
In terms of so Social Security, one important
part of Social Security is disability payments.
AMY GOODMAN: SSDI.
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: And, you know, that’s really
important.
People do get to say, well, they have auto
accidents, they get sick, they get cancer—you
know, all kinds of things that make them unable
to work.
AMY GOODMAN: They get hurt at work.
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: They can’t work.
And he’s cutting that.
It’s an important part of our Social Security,
of security that people—we provide, as a
society, as a basic system of social protection.
He’s cutting back on those expenditures.
So, all I can say is, you look at that clip,
and what he’s doing today is just the opposite.
AMY GOODMAN: So you’re talking about cutting—I
mean, already the proposed budget from the
House was massive when it came to cuts, something
like $880 billion in Medicaid cuts.
He’s suggesting $616 more billion—$616
billion more, which would basically gut Medicaid.
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: That’s right.
And remember, it’s not just for poor people.
It’s a major problem for our elderly, who
have to go into old age homes, hospice, you
know, all—so, it is an extraordinarily important
program.
Another way of seeing the massiveness of these
cuts is that, if you look at what we call
a non-defense discretionary—that is to say,
you take out Social Security, you take out
Medicare, and you take out military—he’s
proposing a 40 percent cut in all these programs.
And remember, these programs have been cut
year after year for the last 25 years, under
both Democrats and Republicans, so it’s
not like there’s a lot of fat on this.
These are already fairly lean.
And what he’s doing is just taking an ax
to them, a 40 percent reduction.
The consequence of his proposal, I don’t
think even he fully understands.
For instance, we would lose the vote at the
U.N. if he carried out his programs.
I mean, so, basically, we’re—we’re saying
to international—
AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean we’d lose
the vote at the U.N.?
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Well, because he’s cutting
out all support for international organizations.
And if we don’t pay our dues, our core dues,
to the U.N., we lose our vote.
And they’re an important source of our influence
in international politics.
So, you know—and this is a consequence of
what he is proposing.
There is no discussion of what the implications
of this 40 percent cut in government.
You know, there are some programs that can
be cut.
That’s clear.
But he hasn’t gone pruning.
He’s taken an ax and said, "Oh, I can get
a balanced budget, if I make up numbers about
growth and if I just pretend that I’m going
to take a 40 percent cut from somewhere."
AMY GOODMAN: Let’s go to Mick Mulvaney,
director of the White House Office of Management
and Budget.
MICK MULVANEY: I think, for years and years,
we’ve simply looked at a budget in terms
of the folks who are on the back end of the
programs, the recipients of the taxpayer money.
And we haven’t spent nearly enough time
focusing our attention on the people who pay
the taxes.
AMY GOODMAN: Mick Mulvaney.
Your response, Joe Stiglitz?
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Oh, totally wrong.
I mean, I was in the White House for four
years.
And we did a very, very careful analysis of
the benefits and costs, how it would affect
taxpayers and ordinary consumers, the rich,
the poor, the middle class, when we evaluated
the program.
We were very, very aware that this was money
that people had worked for, earned, and that,
on the other hand, they need help in a whole
variety of areas, help in sending their kids
to college, in buying a home.
You know, the—
AMY GOODMAN: This would drastically shrink
low-income student loan program.
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Oh, some of the programs
would be wiped out.
So, you know, the American dream, we’ve
gradually understood, is really a myth, the
fact that anybody can go from the bottom to
the top.
This is, what is remnant of that American
dream, he’s saying, "I’m going to hit
it with a sledgehammer."
AMY GOODMAN: Under Trump’s budget, the Environmental
Protection Agency faces a 31 percent cut,
the steepest cut of any agency or department
across the government.
Well, during a press conference on Tuesday,
a reporter asked White House budget director
Mick Mulvaney about the EPA cuts.
REPORTER: Can you characterize the treatment
of climate science programs and cuts to those?
And do you–do you describe those as a taxpayer
waste, if you do cut them?
MICK MULVANEY: You tell me.
I think the National Science Foundation last
year used your taxpayer money to fund a climate
change musical.
Do you think that’s a waste of your money?
REPORTER: What about climate science?
MICK MULVANEY: I’ll take that as a yes,
by the way.
AMY GOODMAN: There’s Mick Mulvaney.
Joe Stiglitz?
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Well, you know, of course,
every government program has the worst thing.
The financial sector and the private sector
makes a mistake.
Remember we had a crisis in 2008?
That was a misallocation of trillions of dollars.
So, I don’t want to pretend that every program
is perfect.
But if you get rid of environmental protection,
we’re going to be suffering from dirty air,
dirty water, toxic waste, that lower our health.
And here’s the point.
He wants faster economic growth.
A less healthy America is not going to be
as productive.
AMY GOODMAN: And the massive increase in military
spending?
I mean, you’ve written books about this,
about the wars and what they cost us.
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: That’s right.
And we’re fighting, we might say, a war
on terrorism.
But another aircraft carrier is not going
to win—help us in the war on terrorism.
You know, the Cold War, that fight with Russia,
in the form that it was, ended a quarter-century
ago, and yet we’re spending money as if
it hasn’t ended.
So we’ve been spending lots and lots of
money on weapons that don’t work, against
enemies that don’t exist.
If he used that criteria that he said for
shutting down a department, the Defense Department
would have been shut down long ago.
You know, the $1,000 toilet, the hammers that
cost $100 or things like that—if we used
the criteria of misspending, the Defense Department
is illustration number one.
AMY GOODMAN: So we just have a minute right
now.
Republicans have joined with Democrats in
condemning this, saying that this budget is
dead on arrival.
He has it released when he’s out of town.
What actually happens here?
You were a chief economic adviser in a White
House, under President Clinton.
What happens next?
What happens to this budget?
JOSEPH STIGLITZ: Well, actually, the House
Budget Committee starts putting together their
own budget.
You know, this will be a little bit in their
background.
It will give a little bit of impetus to the
extremists.
You know, it’s so ironic.
He’s talking about Islamic extremists while
he’s in Saudi Arabia, and here we have budget
extremists back home, really extremist.
And so, it is giving a license for that kind
of extremism in thinking about the social
fabric in our country.
But they will go ahead on their own and try
to structure.
The House, led by Ryan, is going to come up
with a more extreme budget than I think is
going to be acceptable to the American people.
Fortunately, the Senate will try to be—tame
it in and bring it in.
A good chance that they won’t be able to
compromise.
That is to say, they won’t be able to put
together the numbers that work.
And what happens then is, the government operates
on a continuing resolution, where what you
say is, "We haven’t figured out how to make
a new budget.
We’ll keep the old budget for another three
months or six months, until we can reach an
agreement."
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you very
much, Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning
economist, Columbia University professor,
chief economist for Roosevelt Institute, served
as chair of the Council of Economic Advisers
under President Bill Clinton, author of numerous
books, most recently, The Euro: How a Common
Currency Threatens the Future of Europe.
This is Democracy Now!
When we come back, the I-word, "impeachment."
Stay with us.
