Politics

Republican Budget Would Shred Safety Net

Published

12 years ago

March 25, 2015

Oakland Post

House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.)

By Jazelle Hunt
NNPA Washington Correspondent

WASHINGTON (NNPA) – The Republican House budget will shred the social safety net designed to protect the most vulnerable citizens, severely cutting programs ranging from student loans to food stamps, according to a nonpartisan think thank.

“The budget would cause tens of millions of people to become uninsured or underinsured, make it harder for low-income students to afford college, shrink nutrition assistance, and squeeze many other such programs,” writes Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). “Consequently, it’s sure to significantly increase poverty, hardship, and inequality.”

In an effort to balance the federal budget without raising taxes or restoring them to pre-recession levels, House Republicans plan to shrink spending in a variety of areas—especially health care and anti-poverty, food assistance, and housing assistance programs. The cuts will total $5.5 trillion over the next 10 years.

The House of Representatives Budget Committee’s proposal would drastically reduce or end federal funding to such programs, or reform them into state-run or meager versions of themselves.

Under this plan, the Affordable Care Act would be completely defunded, sacrificing the $1 trillion in federal income it generates through taxes, and also eliminating states’ expanded Medicaid. The CBPP finds that 14 million Americans would be left uninsured. The uninsured rate for Black people in particular has dropped from 24 percent to 16 percent, in the two years since ACA implementation.

Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and other health programs would also lose $1 trillion in funding by 2025. Greenstein, who has served three presidential administrations before creating CBPP, points out that this cut comes on top of the losses from repealing health care reform.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is slated to lose $125 billion. In 2013, Black people were 25.7 percent of all SNAP recipients; the same year, a national-representative Pew Research Center survey conducted the same year found that Black people were twice as likely as Whites to have used the food stamp program at some point in life.

The proposed budget would retain these and other mandatory safety net programs through federal block grants. Full responsibility for managing the grants and running the programs would be left to state governments. The CBPP asserts that block grants would not be enough on their own for most states to adequately administer these programs, and low- to moderate-income families would suffer most for it.

Medicare would lose $148 billion over the next decade, and would become a “premium support model” voucher system, in which seniors can choose their own insurance plan via marketplaces (similar to the current Affordable Care Act). Medicare would apply each recipient’s benefits directly to the insurance company he or she has chosen.

Black seniors with Medicare tend to have significantly lower-than-average incomes and savings as well as more chronic health conditions than others, making Medicare much more critical to their survival. As wealth gaps widen and health disparities persist, the need for effective Medicare will likely continue or deepen for Black retirees in the future.

In addition to weakening social programs, the proposed House budget also caps the maximum Pell Grant award limit for outstanding low-income college students, on the grounds that the recent expansion of what constitutes “need” shortchanges the most needy students.

There would be $759 billion less for discretionary funding. This money supports non-mandatory, but important provisions, such as job training opportunities, early childhood programs, climate change and renewable energy research, scientific and medical study, transportation, and more.

The only increased spending would go toward the War on Terror, which would see an additional $20 billion over the next 10 years.

In addition to spending less, the budget plans to revamp the tax code to secure new federal revenue. The proposal provides scant details on how this will be done.

The CBPP points out that the government already misses out on $1 trillion per year through waivers, credits, and tax breaks that disproportionately benefit the upper class; this is more than double the cost of the non-defense discretionary programs previously mentioned.

“Cutting only spending entitlements while shielding tax entitlements would be highly regressive,” Greenstein writes in a separate analysis of the budget. “It also would constitute a highly selective approach to so-called ‘entitlement reform’— cutting entitlement programs whose benefits go principally to poor and middle-class families, while asking for no deficit-reduction contribution from the entitlements that are heavily skewed to people at the top of the income scale and include some particularly wasteful and special-interest-oriented programs.”

Budget resolutions are only a blueprint for a future detailed appropriations bill that will allocate every penny and eventually reach the White House for signature.

Families USA, a national health care consumers group, said the repeal of the Affordable Health Care Act would be devastating.

“The Affordable Care Act is the most significant health care reform since the enactment of Medicare and Medicaid half a century ago,” it said in a statement. “In just five years, it has reduced by one-third the portion of the population that is uninsured. Approximately 16.4 million uninsured Americans have gained health coverage.”

President Barack Obama has long asserted that he would veto any bill that spells an end to the Affordable Care Act. He also told a White House audience of educators last week that there would be “a major debate” on any attempts to divest in education. The stalemate will likely result in another partial or full shutdown this fall.

Greenstein warns: “If [the Committee’s] policies were to become law, ours would be a coarser, more mean-spirited nation with higher levels of poverty and inequality, less opportunity, and a future workforce that’s less able to compete with its counterparts overseas.”

###

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Giuliani Supporting Loretta Lynch Nomination

Don't Miss

US Counterterrorism Strategy in Yemen Collapses Amid Chaos

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Economy

Poll: Becerra Widens His Lead Over Hilton; Californians Split on Wealth Tax

A new Public Policy Institute of California poll shows Democrat Xavier Becerra leads Republican Steve Hilton by 22 points in California’s governor’s race, with 60% of likely voters supporting Becerra compared to 38% for Hilton. The September survey also reveals Californians are closely divided on a proposed one-time tax on billionaires, with 52% of likely voters in favor of Proposition 40. Affordability issues are a major factor for voters. Read more to learn about the poll’s additional findings on voter sentiment.

Published

4 days ago

September 28, 2026

Post News Group

Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Democrat Xavier Becerra holds a 22-point lead over Republican Steve Hilton in California’s governor’s race, while voters remain closely divided over a proposed one-time tax on billionaires, according to a new Public Policy Institute of California poll.

The September PPIC survey found that 60% of likely voters support Becerra, compared with 38% for Hilton. His lead is actually narrower than it was in July, when he led Hilton 61% to 36%.

Becerra leads among independent voters, with 57% supporting him compared with 38% for Hilton. Party loyalty remains strong, with 93% of Democratic likely voters backing Becerra and 92% of Republicans supporting Hilton.

Hilton leads in the Central Valley, where 52% of likely voters support him compared with 46% for Becerra.

Affordability remains a major factor: 65% of likely voters say candidates’ plans to address cost-of-living issues are “very important” to their vote.

“Affordability continues to be top of mind for Californians when considering their choice for governor,” said Mark Baldassare, PPIC Statewide Survey director and Miller Chair in Public Policy.

The poll also found a narrow split over Proposition 40, a proposed one-time tax of up to 5% on taxpayers with assets exceeding $1 billion. Fifty-two percent of likely voters said they would vote yes, while 46% said they would vote no.

Support for the wealth tax varies sharply by party. Seventy-two percent of Democrats favor Proposition 40, compared with 46% of independents and 21% of Republicans.

Two competing measures also drew majority support. Fifty-one percent back Proposition 41, while 54% support Proposition 42, both of which could affect the wealth-tax proposal.

The findings come as Californians express broader frustration with the state’s political direction. Seventy-one percent of likely voters expect bad economic times in California over the next year.

“Californians are clearly grumpy and aren’t enamored with any particular political party or movement,” Baldassare said.

The survey interviewed 1,745 California adults, including 1,103 likely voters, from Sept. 4-10. The margin of error for likely voters is plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Community

LIVE FREE Sunday Dinner Brings Faith, Fellowship and Civic Conversation to Oakland

Approximately 50 members and guests gathered at Imani Community Church for a LIVE FREE Sunday Dinner, sharing a meal with Pastor Michael McBride. The event, hosted by Imani Community Church Pastor Jeremy McCants, focused on faith, community preparedness, and civic participation. Participants discussed “sacred resistance” and how communities can collectively respond to challenges, including practical suggestions for emergencies. The conversation also touched upon the importance of civic engagement and voting in the upcoming election. Read more to learn about the specific actions discussed.

Published

4 days ago

September 27, 2026

Post News Group

Imani Social Justice Team (left to right): Angela Noel, Zakiya Jendayi and Diane Doss. Patty Hallm, Susan Burns, Diane Lewis, Pastor Michael McBride, Theresa ???, Jean Moses and Diana Bell. Front: Sloane Johnson and (man whose name I'm getting to complete the identification). Photo by Octavian Kelly.

By Tanya Dennis

Pastor Michael McBride joins Imani Community Church Members for Food, Faith and Conversation about Community Action

Approximately 50 members and guests of Imani Community Church gathered Sunday afternoon for a LIVE FREE Sunday Dinner, sharing a meal with Pastor Michael McBride while discussing faith, community preparedness and civic participation.

Hosted by Imani Community Church Pastor Jeremy McCants, the Sept. 20 gathering was part of LIVE FREE’s Sunday Dinner initiative, which draws upon the tradition of families, neighbors and faith communities gathering around the Sunday dinner table to break bread and discuss issues affecting their lives.

McBride is founder of LIVE FREE and lead pastor of The Way Christian Center on University Avenue in Berkeley. His Bay Area ministry has deep roots. The congregation traces its history to a church planted by McBride’s grandmother in 1969. McBride returned to the Bay Area in 2005 and became its fourth pastor.

His ministry later expanded into community organizing and national advocacy. McBride founded LIVE FREE in 2011 following organizing work in Oakland and has been involved in efforts addressing gun violence, mass incarceration and civic engagement.

At Imani, the Sunday dinner concept was simple: sit down together, eat together and talk.

McBride recalled a time when Sunday dinner provided families and neighbors an opportunity to discuss what was happening in their communities. LIVE FREE has adapted that tradition into gatherings where faith communities and neighbors can meet, communicate, and consider how to respond collectively to current challenges.

Much of Sunday’s conversation centered on what McBride described as “sacred resistance,” bringing faith into discussions about how communities respond during difficult and uncertain times.

Participants considered a fundamental question: How do we make sense of what is happening around us, and how do we move forward?

The conversation was grounded in faith and prayer, but participants also discussed action and preparation. Attendees talked about not assuming that institutions and everyday systems will always function as expected.

Practical suggestions included keeping basic food staples such as rice and beans available during emergencies. Participants cited the water crisis in Flint, Michigan, as an example as they discussed communities that have experienced disruptions to essential services.

The broader message was one of preparedness and connection: neighbors should know and support one another before a crisis occurs.

The conversation also turned to civic participation and the upcoming election.

McBride’s message was brief: “Vote. We must vote.”

Participants were encouraged to register to vote, verify that their registration is current, and learn what will appear on their ballots. The discussion included researching candidates and ballot measures, voting early, and making a voting plan.

An Oct. 3 workshop was announced as another opportunity for community members to learn more about candidates, volunteer phone banking, ballot measures, and issues before voters.

For Imani’s Social Justice Team, the gathering provided another opportunity to share information with the congregation and surrounding community regarding Imani member Zakiya Jendayi, fighting for her home, and how the community can support her by attending a vigil at her Oakland home every Tuesday from 6-7 p.m. at 3614 Randolph Ave. 94610.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Black History

Caribbean Nations Produce Action Plan Calling for UK Reparations Over Slavery

Caribbean nations are developing an action plan with legal options to press the United Kingdom for negotiations regarding slavery reparations. Officials at a recent conference indicated that regional leaders hope for targeted talks at upcoming Commonwealth and UN summits. However, if diplomatic efforts are resisted, the Caribbean nations are prepared to pursue international court action. A spokesperson for the British government recently reiterated its long-held position against paying reparations. Read more about the unified strategy being pursued.

Published

5 days ago

September 27, 2026

Post News Group

Bussa Emancipation Statue in Bridgetown, Barbados. Photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

By Post Staff

Caribbean nations are producing an “action plan” with legal options to push the United Kingdom (UK) into negotiating a decades-long slavery reparations deal, according to officials at a reparations conference.

Leaders in the region are hoping the UK would agree to targeted and constructive negotiation talks at upcoming Commonwealth and UN summits, but they are ready to take the matter to international courts if Britain continues to resist diplomatic options, according to the Guardian.

Earlier this month, a spokesperson reiterated the British government’s long‑held position that “the UK does not and will not pay reparations”.

Ralph Gonsalves, the former prime minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, said the Caricom Regional Conference on Reparations, which was hosted last week by Barbados with the Caricom Reparations Commission (CRC), was key for agreeing to a unified strategy to bring Britain to the negotiating table. Gonsalves is now an elder and adviser for the Repair Campaign, a social movement for reparatory justice.

He said that slavery happened over centuries and reparations had to be realistic and set over decades. “We need a concrete, multigenerational plan,” he said.

On the legal options available to the Caribbean, Gonsalves challenged arguments that Britain did not violate historical laws during transatlantic slavery, adding that the UK’s signature on contemporary UN conventions had established a binding legal obligation for reparative justice.

“The fact is that the consequences of slavery fall squarely under the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which obliges states to help address the consequences of native genocide and slavery,” Gonsalves said.