Welfare and United States Geological Survey Expenditure - Paper Example

Background

According to Trump's 2019 budget, there will be a restructuring on the welfare system. The budget reform will include massive slash on spending, for instance, 27.45 percent cut to SNAP (food stamps) and 20.1% cut to housing assistance by 2028. The 2017 expenditure is approximately $449.3 billion-this means that $1.7 trillion will be saved by the new budget over the next decade (Duarte 2018, p.1). Trump's budget has an aggregate of $3.1 trillion in budget savings relative to existing law. It also includes $3.7 trillion in deficit decrease that is tremendously the outcome of spending cuts. The budget proposal also features about $800 billion in decreased spending on wars and disaster recovery and about $300 billion in savings because of lower interest payments on less debt (Carter 2017, p.1).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

At the same time, the new budget proposal resulted in sharp cuts in funding the United States Geological Survey (USGS) that studies the natural resources and potential natural disasters. The reforms reduced USGS allocation from $1.08 billion in 2017 to $859.7 billion to 2019, about 20 percent reduction (Malakoff 2018, p.1). The budget cuts will also eliminate about 1,200 full-time jobs at the USGS. It would slash financing by 19 percent for programs that assist in helping the country prepare for disasters (Showstack 2018, p.1).

Sustainable deficit is the capacity of the government to sustain its existing spending, tax and other policies in the long run without risking government insolvency or defaulting on some of its liabilities or pledged expenditures. Trump's cuts entail significant cuts in non-defense programs. One of these programs is housing programs that would impact a wide range of low-income families, with the inclusion of millions of working families with children, seniors and individuals with disabilities. The budget suggests the biggest cut on federal housing aid since the U.S. Housing Act was implemented in 1937. The budget cuts the housing programs by $6.8 billion below the 2017 level (Capps 2018, p.1).

Intertemporal budget constraint refers to an instance where logical individuals or institutions prefer to increase the quantity or quality of goods they consume. In regards to this concept, the budget cuts on welfare illustrate that people will focus more on purchasing the food of their choice. SNAP budget cuts are likely to be reduced the expenditure by more than $213 billion over the next decade (Golshan 2018, p.1). In addition to the proposed cuts to food benefits, the budget calls for cuts to housing, Medicaid and other basic assistance programs that assist low-and-moderate-income families makes ends meet and have access to suitable health care (Matthews 2018, p.1).

Analysis

Key Arguments the Minister Should Get Across

On food stamps, the budget proposal will decrease the amount that beneficiaries get in vouchers to spend on foodstuffs of their choice. However, there will be the introduction of USDA food packages which will entail products like ready to eat cereals, shelf-stable milk, beans, preserved fruit, peanut butter, and other items to improve the dietary value of the benefit offered.

The welfare proposals especially the farm bill has traditionally been bipartisan but had been marred by an increasing push over food aid in the recent years.

The largest SNAP saving in the budget will come from cutting family benefits and use about half of these finances to offer households government-purchased non-perishable foodstuffs that families would otherwise buy at the grocery store.

Welfare programs like SNAP and housing function as a bugbear for the right. Although there has been widespread criticism, low-income families have benefited from the programs.

The budget cuts call for the eradication of many federal research platforms, including a fleet of NASA satellites, climate, and environmental science programs as well as energy research efforts (Kwon 2018, p.1).

The budget proposal focuses on priorities such as security, mineral independence, and energy.

The plan decreases appropriations for all key areas within USGS except for amenities line item (King 2018, p.1).

Working families will bear the burden of rental increases and can no longer subtract child care expenditures from their proceeds in ascertaining their rent expenses.

The budget scripts illustrate that the federal government plans to suggest legislation that will make the rental policy changes and permit local housing institutions and private proprietors to end housing aid to working-age renters without disabilities.

Counter-Arguments Expected From Other Panel Members

The United States does not have an early warning system, and if the budget cuts go through, the growth of this studies made by USGS could be put on hold (Wade 2018, p.1).

The reforms will entirely stop continuing financing for the Earthquake Early Warning System.

Budget cuts will create invisibility of natural hazards occurring around people.

The cuts are amazingly regressive for a nation with the third highest number of active volcanoes in the world.

NASA has been researching on how to maintain the mission's cost, but the open cancellation means that the U.S. will be abandoning its leadership in space astronomy (Becker 2018, p.1).

In regards to welfare, they are massive and immediate. SNAP benefits are already limited and reducing the budget on the program in the quarter is not advisable.

The SNAP budget cuts will have a negative impact on the unwaged, the aging and low-income earning households with children. However, the wealthy are likely to benefit.

Welfare benefits like food aid and housing are one of the best apparatuses in the federal shed for assisting struggling households to lift themselves out of paucity and into freedom (Parrot et al. 2018, p.1).

The budget cuts including SNAP and housing programs are likely to increase after 2019.

The welfare benefits cuts are likely to hit low-income families, individuals with disabilities, and working households with children.

Recommendation

The budget cuts on USGS should be aimed at ensuring there is proper management of resources. Cost-cutting may not be the overall solution. Cutting funding means that research in some areas will be affected. The budget proposal should ensure that there is an effective framework of internal controls to assure that all allowable costs in USGS are recovered and that costs charged are suitable and correctly recorded for the costs recoverable identified in projects.

In terms of welfare, SNAP is a highly effective plan targeted to families that require its aid to fulfill their basic food requirements. Proper application of the SNAP program means that millions of people will be lifted out of poverty. SNAP has also demonstrated long-term benefits for kids who participate, including better education and health outcomes. The proposed budget cuts should not be a detriment to the achievement of suitable education and health outcomes. Contrary, the budget cuts should ensure that proper strategies are established to continue improving the lives of the low-income households. There is a need to ensure that SNAP is a nationwide program accessed by all people. It should not be implemented on a state-to-state basis.

There is a need to re-examine the issue of welfare cuts. In the case of SNAP, providing people with food to eat and affordable housing is a strategy to shore up the economy, therefore, to examine at the programs in narrow monetary lens is not the best thing to do. Such activities can properly be assessed on the impact they bring to households and the society at large. The issue of housing is critical and requires proper handling by the Congress. Before approving the budget proposal, Congress needs to re-assess the impacts of cutting funding on housing. If the benefits surpass the disadvantages, then they should approve it, and if it does not, they should make amendments to ensure that there is no increase suffering among low-income citizens.

Conclusion

Conclusively, various aspects of the budget need to be re-examined. Welfare benefits and USGS are crucial and require a considerable amount of funding for efficient flow of operations. USGS has numerous project it wishes to undertake before 2022, and this will be achieved through proper funding. Welfare benefits such as housing and SNAP are crucial in ensuring that low-income families improve their living status. Budget cuts on the welfare benefits show that a large number of low-income families will be subjected to hard life and inability to cater for their basic needs.

References

Becker, R. 2018. How Trump's 2019 budget would leave us vulnerable to natural disasters. Retrieved from: https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/14/17006424/donald-trump-2019-budget-proposal-usgs-geological-survey-funding-cuts-earthquakes-volcanoes on date 5/12/2018

Capps, K. 2018. Why Reform SNAP? Food Aid Is Working. Retrieved from: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/02/snap-benefits-and-anti-poverty-measures/553505/ on date 5/12/2018

Carter, B. 2017. Trump budget will slash Medicaid, food stamps programs: reports. Retrieved from: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/334493-trump-budget-will-slash-medicaid-food-stamps-programs on date 5/12/2018

Duarte, P. 2018. Threats to SNAP and WIC by Trump Administration's Proposed Budget. Retrieved from: http://www.cunyurbanfoodpolicy.org/news/2018/5/14/threats-to-snap-and-wic-by-trump-administrations-proposed-budget on date5/12/2018

Golshan, T. 2018. House Republicans' push to slash food stamps in the farm bill, explained. Retrieved from: https://www.vox.com/2018/4/25/17262764/farm-bill-food-stamp-snap-house-republican on date 5/12/2018

King, P. 2018. Trump's budget would erase USGS impact research. Retrieved from: https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060074101 on date 5/12/2018

Kwon, D. 2018. Trump Administration Plans to Eliminate USGS's Biological Survey Unit. Retrieved from: https://www.the-scientist.com/the-nutshell/trump-administration-plans-to-eliminate-usgss-biological-survey-unit-30071 on date 5/12/2018

Malakoff, D. 2018. First take: Trump's 2019 budget not as disastrous for science as it first appears. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/02/first-take-trump-s-2019-budget-request-not-quite-disastrous-science-it-first-appears on date 5/12/2018

Matthews, D. 2018. Trump's 2019 budget: what he cuts, how much he cuts, and why it matters. Retrieved from: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/12/16996832/trump-budget-2019-release-explained on date 5/12/2018

Parrot, S., et al. 2018. Trump Budget Deeply Cuts Health, Housing, Other Assistance for Low- and Moderate-Income Families. Retrieved from: https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/trump-budget-deeply-cuts-health-housing-other-assistance-for-low-and on date 5/12/2018

Showstack, R. 2018. Administration Plan Would Cut USGS Budget by More Than 20%. Retrieved from: https://eos.org/articles/administration-plan-would-cut-usgs-budget-by-more-than-20 on date 5/12/2018

Wade, A.B. 2017. President Proposes $922 Million FY18 Budget for USGS. Retrieved from: https://www.usgs.gov/news/president-proposes-922-million-fy18-budget-usgs on date 5/12/2018