As a café curator dedicated to nourishing both body and soul, I’m often asked about the intersection of policy, community wellbeing, and sustainable living. One area that has significant implications for families, small businesses, and the environment is government spending – particularly the budget proposals put forth by political administrations.
The Trump administration’s budgets, released annually from 2017 to 2021, provide a prime example of how executive policy can profoundly impact the lives of everyday Americans. While the former president often touted his desire to “drain the swamp” and reduce wasteful government spending, a closer examination of his budget plans reveals a very different reality – one that would have disproportionately burdened low- and moderate-income households, restricted access to vital social services, and undercut key environmental protections.
Targeting the Social Safety Net
At the heart of the Trump budgets were sweeping proposed cuts to a wide range of social programs designed to assist vulnerable populations. These included:
-
Medicaid and Affordable Care Act Subsidies: The administration sought to replace the ACA’s Medicaid expansion and marketplace subsidies with a block grant system that would have provided states with less funding over time, likely leading many to scale back coverage.
-
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): Trump’s budgets called for slashing SNAP (commonly known as food stamps) by 25-30%, which would have eliminated benefits for an estimated 3 million people. The plans also sought to shift substantial SNAP costs to the states.
-
Rental Assistance and Affordable Housing: The budgets proposed raising rents on low-income households using federal vouchers or living in public housing, as well as eliminating key funding sources for affordable housing development.
-
Disability and Cash Assistance Programs: Cuts were targeted at Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and aspects of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI).
“Strikingly, the first Trump administration budget also would have required states to pay 25 percent of SNAP benefit costs. For over half a century, the federal government has paid the full cost of SNAP benefits.” – Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
These proposed reductions didn’t just impact individual recipients – they would have had far-reaching consequences for local economies, public health, and the environment. Reducing access to nutrition assistance, health coverage, and affordable housing destabilizes families, undermines community resilience, and exacerbates challenges like food insecurity, homelessness, and chronic disease.
Eroding Educational and Job Training Opportunities
The Trump budgets also sought to significantly cut funding for programs that help Americans acquire the skills and education needed to gain economic stability. Proposals included:
-
Slashing Job Training and Workforce Development: Core job training funds for states and localities would have been reduced by 40%, and the Job Corps program facing nearly a 25% cut.
-
Scaling Back Student Aid: Plans called for reducing work-study program funding by about half, making student loans more expensive, freezing Pell Grant increases, and eliminating Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.
-
Terminating the Community Service Employment Program: This initiative connects low-income older adults to part-time work opportunities.
Diminishing access to job training, work-study, and other educational supports makes it exponentially harder for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds to improve their economic prospects. This undermines social mobility and perpetuates cycles of poverty.
“Such changes would make college education more difficult for some students from low- and moderate-income families to afford.” – Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Reducing Non-Defense Discretionary Spending
Underlying many of the Trump administration’s proposed social service cuts was a broader effort to dramatically shrink non-defense discretionary (NDD) spending. NDD encompasses a vast array of federal programs, from scientific research to environmental protection to veterans’ healthcare.
The initial Trump budget for fiscal year 2018 called for overall NDD funding to be 13% below the 2017 enacted level, with even steeper reductions in subsequent years. This would have pushed NDD spending as a share of GDP to its lowest point since the Hoover administration in the 1930s.
“NDD encompasses a wide array of programs, including job training, most education programs, veterans’ health care, federal courts and law enforcement, border security, air traffic control, national parks, scientific research, the Centers for Disease Control, the Food and Drug Administration, Social Security Administration operations (as opposed to the Social Security benefits that SSA pays), foreign aid, and much more.” – Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Targeting NDD spending disproportionately impacts lower-income communities, as this funding stream supports essential services like affordable housing, job training, and public health initiatives. Gutting these programs exacerbates economic inequality and environmental degradation, with ripple effects that can be felt throughout society.
Prioritizing Tax Cuts Over Fiscal Responsibility
Underpinning the Trump administration’s spending cut proposals was a broader agenda of tax reductions, particularly for high-income earners and corporations. This included a plan to permanently lower the top tax rate on capital gains and dividends to 15%, which the Wharton Budget Model estimates would reduce federal revenues by nearly $100 billion over the 2021-2030 period.
“On average, only those filers with income in the 95th percentile and above would see a tax cut. Those in the top 1 percent of income would receive 98 percent of the total tax cut while those in the top 0.1 percent would receive 75 percent of the total benefit.” – Wharton Budget Model
These tax cuts, combined with the spending reductions outlined above, would have dramatically increased the federal deficit, putting essential public services and long-term economic stability at risk. By prioritizing upper-class tax relief over fiscal prudence and support for vulnerable populations, the Trump budgets represented a stark departure from the traditional bipartisan consensus on the role of government.
Implications for Café Mila and Our Community
As a café committed to nourishing both bodies and communities, the policy proposals outlined in the Trump administration’s budgets would have had significant ramifications for our business and the local area we serve. Reductions in programs like SNAP, rental assistance, and job training would have directly impacted the economic wellbeing and food security of many of our customers, making it more difficult for them to afford healthy meals and access our wellness offerings.
Cuts to scientific research, environmental protection, and community development funding would have undermined our efforts to source locally, reduce waste, and foster a thriving neighborhood hub. The loss of educational and job support services would have made it harder for aspiring entrepreneurs and young people to gain the skills needed to open their own cafes or culinary businesses.
Ultimately, the Trump budgets represented an assault on the social safety net, educational and workforce opportunities, and environmental safeguards – all of which are essential to building resilient, equitable, and sustainable communities. As a café curator, I’m deeply concerned about the real-world impacts these proposals would have had on the wellbeing of our patrons, our staff, and the wider community we’re proud to serve.
While the specifics of the Trump budgets did not become law, the underlying philosophy and priorities they reflect remain highly relevant as we look ahead to future policy debates. As citizens and small business owners, it’s crucial that we stay informed, engage with our elected representatives, and advocate for budget and tax policies that truly support the health, prosperity, and environmental stewardship of all Americans. Only then can we build the kind of thriving, inclusive, and sustainable communities that café hubs like Café Mila aspire to foster.
