President Trump Delivers His Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Outline – (Full pdf included)…

AMERICA FIRST

Beginning a New Chapter of American Greatness

A MESSAGE TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES: The American people elected me to fight for their priorities in Washington, D.C. and deliver on my promise to protect our Nation.

I fully intend to keep that promise.

One of the most important ways the Federal Government sets priorities is through the Budget of the United States. Accordingly, I submit to the Congress this Budget Blueprint to reprioritize Federal spending so that it advances the safety and security of the American people.

Our aim is to meet the simple, but crucial demand of our citizens—a Government that puts the needs of its own people first.

When we do that, we will set free the dreams of every American, and we will begin a new chapter of American greatness. A budget that puts America first must make the safety of our people its number one priority— because without safety, there can be no prosperity.

That is why I have instructed my Budget Director, Mick Mulvaney, to craft a budget that emphasizes national security and public safety. That work is reflected in this Budget Blueprint.

To keep Americans safe, we have made tough choices that have been put off for too long. But we have also made necessary investments that are long overdue. My Budget Blueprint for 2018:

• provides for one of the largest increases in defense spending without increasing the debt;

• significantly increases the budget for immigration enforcement at the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security;

• includes additional resources for a wall on the southern border with Mexico, immigration judges, expanded detention capacity, U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Border Patrol;

• increases funding to address violent crime and reduces opioid abuse; and

• puts America first by keeping more of America’s hard-earned tax dollars here at home. The core of my first Budget Blueprint is the rebuilding of our Nation’s military without adding to our Federal deficit.

There is a $54 billion increase in defense spending in 2018 that is offset by targeted reductions elsewhere. This defense funding is vital to rebuilding and preparing our Armed Forces for the future.

We must ensure that our courageous servicemen and women have the tools they need to deter war, and when called upon to fight, do only one thing: Win. In these dangerous times, this public safety and national security Budget Blueprint is a message to the world—a message of American strength, security, and resolve.

This Budget Blueprint follows through on my promise to focus on keeping Americans safe, keeping terrorists out of our country, and putting violent offenders behind bars.

The defense and public safety spending increases in this Budget Blueprint are offset and paid for by finding greater savings and efficiencies across the Federal Government. Our Budget Blueprint insists on $54 billion in reductions to non-Defense programs.

We are going to do more with less, and make the Government lean and accountable to the people. This includes deep cuts to foreign aid. It is time to prioritize the security and well-being of Americans, and to ask the rest of the world to step up and pay its fair share.

Many other Government agencies and departments will also experience cuts. These cuts are sensible and rational. Every agency and department will be driven to achieve greater efficiency and to eliminate wasteful spending in carrying out their honorable service to the American people.

I look forward to engaging the Congress and enacting this America First Budget.

Donald J. Trump

Tea Party ’09

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Budget, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Legislation, media bias, Mike pence, President Trump. Bookmark the permalink.

252 Responses to President Trump Delivers His Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Outline – (Full pdf included)…

  1. BAMAFan says:

    I’m not sure a 20 percent cut to the National Institutes of Health is the way to go. I’m sure Congress will weigh in to protect everyone’s pet research endeavor.

    Liked by 2 people

    • JoAnn Leichliter says:

      You are probably right. On the other hand, I suspect that government finances research that should be done (and would be better and more economically done) by the private sector.

      Liked by 10 people

      • wolfmoon1776 says:

        I think it’s very smart. Obama and the radleft will always used health and medicine – medical socialism – to usher in the full deal. Stop it at every level.

        Liked by 16 people

      • Chillin says:

        Remember Pres Trump negotiates. If he calls for 20% cuts and they respond with 10%, both sides will be able to claim victory.

        Liked by 3 people

        • oldtoenail says:

          As long as he gets 19.85% reduction. That would be a great compromise.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Southern Son says:

            What?
            You ain’t concerned that we don’t know how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill?
            We aint even started the shrimp on a bicycle study yet!
            And dont even think about cutting muscle research…
            Not kidding.
            They do have a foot!

            Liked by 5 people

            • BigMamaTEA says:

              SouthernSon, it wasn’t how long a shrimp could run on a treadmill…….{snicker} it was how long can a shrimp run on a treadmill WHILE out of water!!!!!

              BWHAhahahahahaha!

              Like

        • NO, President Trump negotiates over a 20% cut with the requirement for Congress to “pay for” any deficit funding they want to restore by cutting DOUBLE ELSEWHERE in departments that Trump has not budgeted for increases.

          This solution will either increase requirements to cut Waste, Fraud and Abuse faster than planned OR drive more areas of federal government to devolve to the States.

          Liked by 2 people

      • rashamon says:

        The last time I looked, Howard Hughes Medical Institute had more money than the Vatican Bank (just kidding), but it’s endowment is well over $18B. Oddly, Howard Hughes hated doctors and would probably be appalled that his fortune has benefited so many medical researchers and humanity in general.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Earl Smith says:

          Hardly likely. You have to remember that the Foundation was established by Hughes around 1948 to avoid the government seizure of Hughes Aircraft for National Security. So, rather than bow to the government he established the non profit (but still retaining control until his death). The IRS tried to tax him on the profits, but was defeated by the Supreme Court. It was specifically set up for medical research rather than benefiting any hospital or drug company.

          Even back in the old days the government was trying to gain control of most defense industries, and did not like the idea of an eccentric individual being the sole owner of a major defense firm. Note that the name ‘aircraft” was related to his hobby, in later days the firm was making few airplanes, but contributed everywhere in electronics for aircraft. He continued to own ‘Tool” until the ’70s.

          Like

    • derek says:

      should just point them to Sen. Jeff Flake’s research.

      http://www.flake.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/ef6fcd58-c537-491f-aa06-6f7a81038d0e/sen.-jeff-flake-s-twenty-questions—report.pdf

      Cut out dumb projects like

      3.9 million for What Makes Goldfish Feel Sexy

      bam there’s 8-10%

      Liked by 15 people

      • dbethd says:

        Also just because these areas have XXX amount in the budget doesn’t mean they can’t cut even more out and spend less, coming in “under-budget.”

        Liked by 3 people

      • mireilleg says:

        Oh darn, are we going to miss out on knowing what makes goldfish feel sexy? You have no idea how many sleepless nights people have spent not knowing.

        Liked by 10 people

      • Southern Son says:

        Inquiring minds Want to know!

        Liked by 1 person

      • BigMamaTEA says:

        FLAKE is a a piker. One of my retired Senators (Dr. Coburn) started those.I believe he was the first to ever do so. Now, a bunch of ’em are attempting to do it. Coburn’s also have all the statistical info, not just the more outrageous issues to get press.

        The reports coming out since Coburn, (which even one of my house members is attempting) are hit and miss at best.

        Like

    • mw says:

      Consider that wealthy universities get government funding for research. Universities shouldn’t get free ride.

      Liked by 7 people

      • litlbit2 says:

        Federal audit of all endowment funds.

        Liked by 5 people

      • singingsoul says:

        mw “Consider that wealthy universities get government funding for research. Universities shouldn’t get free ride.”
        ______________________________
        They do not get a free ride. My son is in medical research at Michigan . Often the government programs are lady back and it is in the University where there is competition long hours and the pay is not that great . When they make a medical breakthrough everyone benefits.

        Like

        • singingsoul says:

          But he way government grants are a small part.

          Like

        • amjean says:

          Every department supporter will have a similar
          excuse; same reason why we can’t get rid of
          McCain, etc. They bring jobs and $$$ to their
          states. We do good works. Well, do good works
          on the amount you will now get and hit your
          private sector donors harder.

          I was impressed with the continuing comments
          that they didn’t “want to over spend our money”;
          meaning the hard working taxpayers.

          Liked by 1 person

      • MaineCoon says:

        Let the leftie alums pay for their leftie research crap.

        Liked by 1 person

    • singingsoul says:

      My son is in medical research in Michigan University. They do rely on Government grants.
      I am not sure how it will affect his department. I guess we see.

      Liked by 1 person

      • The grad students and post-docs do all the work, the profs get most of the money. This can and should be cut. Private sector funders should or might pay closer attention. My DDH was also in scientific research at three universities – he was sick about the spending.and waste he saw that he finally quit and we moved to the West Coast to start out on our own. Best decision he ever made.

        Liked by 5 people

        • mimbler says:

          Yes, and although there is valuable research being done; a lot of it is totally worthless and is funded to support various ideologies,
          Mike

          Liked by 3 people

        • Earl Smith says:

          The profs get a large part, but you are forgetting that the grants have a major surcharge for administrative overhead. The grants pay the costs of the researchers, and profs, but the overhead (which can reach 50%) pay for the profs in the Department of Woman’s Studies, and the Anti Whiteness Departments. Sometimes useful work has to support trash studies.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Deb says:

        I think by “wealthy universities” he meant private schools like Yale who have multi-billion dollar endowments. They should not be asking the govt for grants.

        Liked by 4 people

      • oldtoenail says:

        No matter how it affects the department cuts must be made in many places. We can not continue to fund everyone’s selection. That is exactly how we reached 20 trillion in debt. in.

        Liked by 5 people

      • Katherine McCoun says:

        my husband was a MD/PhD at Duke. there are ways to improve the budget and reduce spending without cutting key research

        Liked by 5 people

    • MVW says:

      One NIH research project that is absolutely vital to continue full speed is the characterization of bacterial, fungi, and viruses by their DNA signature. It is the only way to really identify the species populating the human Microbiome, which is at the crux of chronic disease.

      And chronic disease yearly costs are $ trillions. Alzheimers alone is $200 billion yearly in care.

      Liked by 1 person

    • joninmd22 says:

      It’s from consolidation of programs and facilities. Look at the actual document for an the detais

      Liked by 1 person

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      Expect it. I lost a lot of respect for the NIH, when they funded the “study” about shrimp on a treadmill.

      That is a prime example of what has been happening with our tax $$$.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. A2 says:

    In the deepest bowels of the swamp our intrepid explorers have made a new scientific discovery:
    a Budget,
    (applause)

    Liked by 26 people

  3. Katherine McCoun says:

    I hope a lot of coverage includes the note of the submission of the budget on time and how often his predecessor did not submit a budget on time.

    Quick round up of the budget from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2017/0316/What-Trump-s-stark-budget-says-about-his-priorities
    Highlights of Trump’s proposed budget
    Budget increases:
    Defense: 9 percent funding increase. Uses include boosting the size of the Army and Marines, more Navy ships, increased readiness of Air Force combat planes.
    Homeland Security: 7 percent funding increase, including money for additional border, customs, and immigration agents, and a border wall.
    Veterans Affairs: 6 percent increase, to expand health services and modernize systems.

    Budget cuts:
    Environmental Protection Agency: 31 percent budget cut. Fifty programs would be eliminated, including funding for international climate-change programs and scientific research. Drinking water infrastructure would gain priority.
    State: 29 percent budget cut. Reductions in foreign aid and payments to UN and other international agencies.
    Agriculture: 21 percent cut. Most cuts as yet unspecified, but food stamps and crop subsidies remain.
    Labor: 21 percent cut, including reduced funding for some job-training programs.
    Health and Human Services: 18 percent cut, including cuts to the National Institutes of Health.
    Commerce: 16 percent cut, including cuts to climate-change research.
    Education: 14 percent cut, including cuts to teacher training and after-school programs. The department would add $1.4 billion to promote school choice, including charter schools and vouchers for private school.
    Housing and Urban Development: 13 percent cut, including community development block grants, a $3 billion program.
    Transportation: 13 percent cut, including privatization of air traffic control.
    Cultural agencies: National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps fund PBS and NPR, are all targeted for elimination.

    Liked by 15 people

    • ladypenquin says:

      Today I learned how a co-worker voted when he voiced his dismay over “reading through Trump’s budget.” Prefaced by why he “never liked Trump.” But he started with the defunding of the NEA and NPR. Disappointed, as this is a doctor who volunteers in the free clinic for the homeless (where I volunteer as an RN). The people who serve at this clinic are conservative Christians, but the logic of several of them is beyond my comprehension.

      I guess he would have been happy with HIllary…

      Liked by 9 people

      • pinkbeachlady says:

        Tell him/her we are $20trillion in debt, doubled by Obama, he maxed out our credit cards.

        Liked by 10 people

      • Lulu says:

        NPR and the NEA are completely immoral. Taking the labor of often times working poor and people working well into old age to fund “art” and radio for virtue signalers is beyond immoral.

        Liked by 17 people

      • ZZZ says:

        Christian? NEA –> crucifix in urine
        He supports that?

        Google it.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Gil says:

          Iif you didnt know beforehand what “piss christ” is, (thats the title), it isnt an ugly photo. The intent was not to be artistic, it was to piss everyone off, pun intended. And the title was chosen to drive it home. I still dont think we should pay for it. True artists create because they are driven, not because taxpayers give them a handout….

          Liked by 5 people

          • Eskyman says:

            True artists must starve, in or out of a garret. It seems to be a requirement.

            Van Gogh didn’t get any government grants, and he managed to paint a picture or two; if he’d been getting a paycheck from the government, would he have painted what he did, the way he did?

            Liked by 2 people

            • Linda says:

              The arts have been subsidized by leaders, religions, and the rich. We would not have the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel had not the popes employed Michelangelo (Clement VII). Artists of history were totally supported, even down to Rapharl, de Vinci, Titan, and Giogione for starters. Most of these were poor young starving artists and their work would never have been created without support.

              The Etruscan Kings, the Roman and Greek Senates, along with the aristocracy supported the arts. Right through to modern times, the arts have been supported, granted all throughout history there too have been objectionable art created.

              Like

      • Gil says:

        So bizarre when mds are openly liberal. A lot of nurses are much more liberal than mds. I dont understand the blindness by so many in healthcare. Its so much like police and fire. You see and hear the b.s. that isnt reported and know much more of the real story its way too hard to be liberal. Willful ignorance i suppose.

        Liked by 1 person

        • cuca305 says:

          Nah! I am a physician at VA and I am very conservative.Any liberal doctors who support Obamacare agenda should have their brain checked for Alzheimer’s.
          I supported PDJT from the very beginning and still do, more than ever.
          BTW,where is his official portrait? Two months later and we still have an empty wall.

          Liked by 3 people

          • cuca305 says:

            I meant Obama’s agenda

            Like

          • Snow White says:

            Stashed in a closet somewhere by some obozo leftover manager.

            Liked by 1 person

          • ladypenquin says:

            In general, most of the healthcare professionals I’ve met didn’t/don’t like Obamacare. But it will only take a few more years to get them all under the umbrella of a government stamped healthcare protocol, where there won’t even be the physicians and nurses who once practiced under the concept of giving care vs being bureaucrats.

            Big Hospital Corporations have bought up the practices, and instead of finding a RN or LPN doing intake and truly being a co-care provider for the patient, they’re now 6 wk trained “medical assistants” – who have little knowledge. Huge loss of “nursing” has happened along with the providers, MD, PA, NP who spend their time typing into a computer instead of hands on care.

            Like

          • Hannibal Smith says:

            He could cut out a few million by eliminating the official portraits.

            I worked for the feds for a little while back when HW was pres. I always thought having his picture in the lobby was a kinda creepy – like Hitler’s picture on Colonel Klink’s wall. I was working for the USA, and HW just happened to be in charge at the time. We should have just put up a flag.

            Like

        • john graham says:

          these are the same people ..who tell us we need to lose weight…as they are 300 lbs???

          Liked by 1 person

      • Benson II says:

        The sad part is he’s only happy with what he knows and most of what he knows isn’t true.

        Reagan said this in a remark, ““It isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so many things that aren’t so.”
        ― Ronald Reagan

        Liked by 6 people

      • Aparition42 says:

        It’s always baffled me how someone intimately familiar with the lack of appropriate medical care available to certain segments of our society could feel that it is in any way moral to spend so much as a dime of federal money on “the arts”.

        Art is by definition a luxury. It does not serve any primary need. Who cares if it’s only a drop in the bucket budget wise, $147,949,000 buys a lot of warm blankets and hot meals. The federal poverty level for a family of three is $20,420. So the 2016 NEA budget divided by the family of three FPL and multiplied by three means that that’s enough money to raise 21,735 people from ZERO income to above the poverty level for a YEAR. I welcome anyone to try and convince me that any hunk of “art” is worth more than that.

        https://www.arts.gov/open-government/national-endowment-arts-appropriations-history

        Liked by 6 people

        • ladypenquin says:

          Aparition, and everyone else who commented, you’re all correct. And it does shock me. The MD and I spent the next 2 hrs trying to get care and medicine for one patient – with complex medical needs, and the doc, though he didn’t outright say negative stuff about Trump, it was clear that he was prepared to be indignant about something that seemed so trivial in life, let alone, of course, that those taxpayer subsidized groups spend this money pushing Leftism, insulting Christianity and taking morality out of the culture.

          Like

      • NPR and Other tax funded news isn’t funded hardly at all by the taxpayer.. They can afford to be cut completely like most programs, grants and in between. Military is constitutional everything else should go to save our great country.

        Liked by 2 people

      • buzzybee says:

        Maybe for a while at first… until reality and the dark ages set in.

        Liked by 1 person

        • buzzybee says:

          My last reply appeared further down than I’d intended. The reality and dark ages comment was intended for Lady Penquin about the doctor who would have been happy with Hillary. My meaning was he may have been happy until reality and the dark ages set in if Hillary had won. Just to clarify.

          Liked by 1 person

          • ladypenquin says:

            Thanks, Buzzybee. Sometimes the reply thread goes way down, but I’ve been reading the thread, and you’re absolutely right, The MD is a good man, he is volunteering in a Christian ministry where we do not get subsidized by the Feds, all donations… it’s clear he and the rest of us have conservative, traditional moral values, but now I know of at least 2 who don’t like Trump… Which left Hillary, and it’s a trajectory that I can’t comprehend.

            OTOH, it’s also shows you how deeply embedded the “Government” is embedded into the lives of the people. Which makes the damage that much worse, because the government we’ve had for several decades has moved sharply left, and it’s now what’s acceptable in the public’s consciousness.

            President Trump brought quite a few back to reality, but it remains to be seen if there are more of us than them in the long run. I mean, even weather has people being afraid – a nice little nugget that Bill Clinton pushed in the 90’s. Have people look to and depend on government, otherwise one is helpless.

            Like

            • buzzybee says:

              Yes, unfortunately, propaganda does work, even on some conservatives at times. Even good Christian people can be deceived. But you have your foot in the door and can plant seeds, which the Holy Spirit can water and help grow. A good site for countering the climate alarmist propaganda is junkscience.com by Steven Milloy. Also items written by Gordon Fulks, Ph.D is always worthy. Just searching his name should lead you to his articles. Dr. Fulks has argued that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is a scare perpetuated by certain politicians and scientists for their personal gain.

              Unfortunately there are some well-meaning conservatives who have bought the poisonous idea that things that say ‘national’ this or that are automatically credible. We can challenge that thinking at every opportunity. I can sympathize. I discovered my own doctor is a Democrat, although I think he’s conservative in many ways. I was sad, as I like my doctor and intend to keep him as he gives me good care. So I plant seeds when I can. He’d wanted single payer. He’s smart, but doesn’t know everything.

              The ideologies we battle didn’t creep in overnight, and it will take time to repair all the damage. But we are off to a really great start. God is good. Keep up on your logic and real science, and you’ll likely find opportunities to tactfully challenge your mistaken colleagues. Bless you for what you do. May God be with you.

              Like

      • Jenny R. says:

        Ask him why he doesn’t love/care about the arts and sciences.
        The NEA is one of the organizations that helps to ossify the arts as much as anything — new artists who aren’t producing things the directors don’t like have no hope of breaking through, very mediocre (to outright hideous) stuff gets funded because it’s what the directors approve of.
        The NEA stifles the arts in much the same way a lot of good research gets smothered at the universities. And the NPR and PBS trumpet carry the propaganda water.

        If one truly loves the arts and sciences, then the best thing to do is to defund these things and give the people who create a more even playing field — or at least one that rewards innovation, creativity, and merit.
        Because these two things always rely upon patronage, there has to be a reboot every so often…because it always turns into a case of the court mandarins getting all the lucre while the potential genius of the age stagnates.

        Liked by 1 person

      • BigMamaTEA says:

        Start with showing your friends this……….This is just “welfare” programs across the spectrum. This was compiled in 2015. Click to enlarge. (This comes from the Ways and Means committee in the House)

        Like

    • mw says:

      Thank you so much for this breakdown!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Lindenlee says:

      Waiting for him to get the waste out of the Pentagon. It is enormous. This is why McCain and Miss Lindsey are all up in arms. Their Big War donors.

      Like

  4. Joe Collins says:

    The Swamp will not want to be drained.

    Liked by 11 people

    • wolfmoon1776 says:

      BWAHAHAHAHAHA.

      (As I help Trump throw a medical anti-gun cottonmouth onto the bank, for Congress to shoot it with two barrels of #6 DEFUNDIT® Critters & Varmints.)

      Liked by 4 people

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      Very true, Joe Collins. THIS is one area, where We the People can be helpful…….
      I pay close attention to the bills, committees, etc. The POTUS Budget will be totally picked through, and through committees, the congress-criminals, first in committee, will try to “protect” their pet projects. (And if they worked 40hrs/week doing their actual jobs, it would still take months to sort this out)

      The POTUS Budget is a starting point, and as the process begins, (if they remember HOW this is supposed to actually work, seeing how there has been no budget, or planning for more than eight years!!) There will be points in time, as this thing works its way through, where contact on the the committees and the congress-criminals( I mean shut down the phone system type of action) will have a real affect on the process!)

      Like

  5. Tom Richardson says:

    What a terrific start! Every single program scheduled for cuts or elimination will have its squealing pigs and beneficiaries. Here’s a thought. How about using the greatest founding document in world history, our Constitution, as a guide in setting priorities? It is very specific on what the Federal government is to be doing.

    Liked by 16 people

    • Wend says:

      As the BF said “they’re not going to go quietly”.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Aparition42 says:

        “It’s never a pretty sight. No two blood suckers go out the same way. Some yell and scream, some go quietly, some explode, some implode. But, all will try and take you with them.” – Edgar Frog

        Liked by 3 people

    • Mike24 says:

      Would be great but you have someone like Senator Rob Portman of Ohio who wants to keep his Great Lakes Restoration Initiative which costs $300 million this fiscal year, let alone what it will cost next year, and you understand that when these guys get to Washington DC their only job is to get as much money for their home state as possible.
      I love Trump. I love this budget. Its everything I’ve ever wanted going back to Reagan. But even Reagan couldn’t get it through and had to give on things like Legal Services for Low income (which became the go to source for illegal immigrants – not Appalachian Whites who couldn’t pay their mortgage vs. the bank), NPR which even the GOPe seems to like (which could make it on their big donors alone), PBS (which sells dvds of its shows so it must have some profit along with Big Bird), and every cut from each department goes toward upgrading Veteran services, Military preparedness, – the basics of what we’re supposed to do re: the Constitution. Every representative and senator has forgotten that.

      Liked by 5 people

      • 22CatsInTN says:

        God bless President Reagan–but he is not President Trump. My money is on President Trump.

        He has picked the right message: everything he is doing is for Americans.

        Liked by 13 people

        • Benson II says:

          There’s no reason to denigrate one to praise the other. Reagan was an extraordinary man in every way and definitely a man for that time. I shudder to think what would have been without him. Every great man in history had a unique set of problems for the time he was living in so comparison has to be set in that time also. We are fortunate indeed to have President Trump and his unique intelligence and love of country in this time just like we were to have Washington in his time.

          Liked by 2 people

          • 22CatsInTN says:

            I wasn’t denigrating him. Not at all. I voted for him and supported him his entire presidency. I merely stated I believe President Trump will be better than President Reagan.

            There are a number of reasons I believe that way. Trump owns the power of social media. Reagan did not have that advantage. Reagan had the same ability to bypass conventional wisdom and go straight to the people, but those of us old enough to remember those days know Trump has far wider choices to accomplish that because technology has changed. In Reagan’s day, there was virtually no way to go around the MSM. Trump has multiple ways to do that.

            Reagan was forced to compromise on some legislation. Even though Trump virtually stands alone, I believe he will find a way to accomplish his goals.

            Trump also has 4 decades of real world experience, not just domestically, but internationally. Reagan did not have that advantage. Trump is a negotiator extraordinaire and pulls people into his way of thinking.

            I believe Trump has a greater strength of will then Reagan did. Not by much, mind you, but he is fierce in his loyalty to this nation and her citizens.

            They are both extraordinary men. I have nothing but respect and honor for President Reagan. He accomplished great and wonderful things. He restored the soul of the nation. He ushered in fresh economic prosperity. He healed many wounds. He made us proud to be Americans again.

            I just think President Trump will accomplish even greater things because he has been gifted with even more fortitude, he does not need the financial backing or permission of anyone and is a man of great wisdom, insight and will. That is all.

            Liked by 6 people

            • amjean says:

              Trump will definitely be a better
              president than Reagan; and in
              times that are much more
              troublesome. We were one
              step away from giving our nation
              away to the communists; enter
              Trump. He has a gigantic job
              to do and has the cojones and
              smarts to get the job done.

              We citizens have to do our part
              and support him loudly. And, if
              that means yelling louder than
              the socialist/Marxist/communist
              democrats, then so be it!

              Liked by 5 people

            • Fe says:

              Reagan was also a governor, which right away makes him different from Trump, a true outsider to politics.

              I fully supported and voted for Reagan, but I gotta say his wife was not my favorite or his kids except for his adopted son Michael (he always touched my heart with his great love for his dad).

              Trump on the other hand has a family that I truly love. Melania brings a sharp perspective on being a legal immigrant who grew up behind the iron curtain plus she speaks several languages. She has a charm and a warmth, graciousness, beauty that This country sorely needs at this time.

              I adore the Trump kids, none of whom act like spoiled brats like the two biological Reagan kids, Patty and Ron Jr, both are very liberal. Even though Ivanka tends to be more liberal, she would never do or say anything that would embarrass her father. Never.

              Liked by 4 people

              • 22CatsInTN says:

                Yes, he was my governor too. I also had a problem with Nancy and the kids. None of them displayed the grace, wit or strength Reagan had, though I think Nancy eventually got at least part of it in her dotage.

                Totally agree on the Trump kids. I’d match them up against ANY politician’s kids. I think Ivanka is going to learn a LOT of lessons about liberalism in the next 8 years. And methinks she is wise enough that she can learn vs. mutinously holding onto demonstrably false beliefs. She has grace, poise and strength of character, things most liberals are completely lacking, especially feminists.

                Liked by 1 person

      • mireilleg says:

        There may have been a time when helping NPR, or PBS may have been justified, but we are not there now. Just as we needed a certain amount of immigration at one point does not mean we need the same today. It makes perfect sense to give more now to rebuild the military and we should at some point reduce that amount again. But it seems in the swamp we can never get rid of any program for any reason. We are due for a major spring cleaning.

        Liked by 7 people

        • Benson II says:

          NPR and PBS have become just another extension of leftist propaganda. Let the left and ignorant support them. I’ll truly miss the non-political shows they have which were excellent and seen no where else but elsewhere they went from subtlety to outright propagandizing which shouldn’t be tolerated or paid for by taxpayers. Let em scream. It’s music to my ears.

          Liked by 12 people

          • E C says:

            I miss the days of McNeil and Lehrer. At least they seemed to not be as biased as he news hour has become.

            Like

          • andyocoregon says:

            I’m betting NPR and PBS will both survive due to huge donor contributions and the fact they sell advertising just like MSM. Anyone who claims PBS is commercial-free hasn’t watched it in the last 20 years. They are just as Benson II says; both are left wing mouthpieces, worse than CNN and NBC. Our federal taxes should not support politically oriented and biased broadcasts.

            Like

        • Aparition42 says:

          PBS is outdated and outmoded. When the idea that children’s educational television was a worthwhile expenditure was first defended, most truly poor children didn’t have a TV to watch it on anyway. Today, at least as many families have some access to the internet as had access to broadcast PBS back in those days. So if people want to provide free, quality educational content to children, the internet is logically the most efficient method for doing just that. I support this statement by the fact that millions of people are already doing that exact thing. We homeschool our children and the free content already available on the internet is already so much more than we could every fully use in a lifetime. Everything from shapes and colors to advanced Trigonometry and Calculus. Arts and crafts instructions, science experiments, foreign language programs, history all the way from current events back to the currently taught hazy guesses about the dawn of civilizations all available at your fingertips for free and with much more depth of discussion and citation of sources than anything on PBS ever delivered.

          No matter what someone’s thoughts were about the role of PBS in the past, it has outlived its usefulness. If we had to spend the money, I’d rather issue block grants for low-income families to get affordable access to you-tube.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Jenny R. says:

          Back when I was a child (which was a very long time ago) NPR and PBS had some decent programming. Although even back then the rot was setting in.
          I lived in the back of beyond, and often we only got the PBS channel and one other, sometimes two local channels, and a third came in if “the wind was in the right direction”.
          And even back then there were families that didn’t avail themselves of any of the classical music programming or the good documentaries (a shame really — they did have some very nice programming interspersed with the junk; Live from the Met was a big deal at my house, but probably not any other house in town).
          Just hideous Sesame St. and The Electric Company, bleck. (Capt. Kangaroo and Mr. Rogers were kinda sweet, but those Schoolhouse Rock shorts on the regular station actually taught me more).

          And now, you get: The Prairie Home Companion and some other. worse drivel, which makes even the junk of my youth look like quality stuff.
          And with the advent of the Internet et al. the market is even smaller: the only people who are going to sit for a performance of Turandot now are those who actively want to experience it — not people who watch it because there’s nothing else on. The paradigm has indeed shifted (it’s not all a good thing, but it is what it is).
          Time to pull the plug.

          Liked by 1 person

      • WSB says:

        Rob can have a bake sale.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Mt.Vernon says:

        I wrote Senator Portman today as soon as I read this and reminded him that the people of Ohio elected President Trump and we expect Portman to support our President. He huddled with McConnell on the island in GA, then endorsed Trump when he was leading in OH to get votes, then became a Never-Trumper after the Billy Bush recording (if not that, it would have been something else). He is a member of the globalist McConnell group, and will never support Trump.

        Liked by 2 people

    • ladypenquin says:

      I just wonder how long we’ll have to listen to the squealing and how much damage they can do. These months are painful, watching the process of how desperate they are to take down Trump, and while there isn’t really even an recognizable opposition party – GOP – since they morally joined the Uniparty years ago, I know that the media would be just as corrosive toward any GOP president… and we wouldn’t fight back.

      Like

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      WHUT? Tom Richardson!! READ the instruction book?!!! {snicker}

      Like

  6. uc i says:

    McCabe
    McCain
    McTraitor

    March 16, 2017, 3:04pm

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Disgusted says:

    As I sit here this afternoon reading this document I’m just rocking with joy. We actually succeeded. He is President Trump and he has submitted his budget as he must to hold this office, and he is willfully planning to save our country. Something a year ago I never believed we would ever see happen. Back then we talked about what we could ever do to get rid of the left, but didn’t know we had the power to rid the U.S. of hillary and company. They kept growing and eating everything in sight like a big blue amoeba. Now I’m rocking and smiling, knowing they are shrinking away.

    Liked by 18 people

  8. Pinkie says:

    From Little Marco:

    “The administration’s budget isn’t going to be the budget. We do the budget here. The administration makes recommendations but Congress does budgets.”

    Liked by 4 people

  9. Qbinky says:

    Katherine, thank you for the breakdown. What’s not to like about the President’s budget? It’s what conservatives have been dreaming about. What I’d like to hear a talking head ask is “Why would we BORROW money from China to pay for aid to foreign countries, and for some of the silliness in our current budget?”

    Liked by 5 people

  10. Lynnielu says:

    My liberal friends at work are already screaming.

    Liked by 21 people

  11. I would like to see POTUS also use re-location as a swamp-draining tool. Questionable departments and groups should be moved from DC to Nome AK, Bowbells ND, Tabiona UT and any other locations that the caviar-crunching left might find inhospitable.

    Liked by 14 people

  12. FofBW says:

    Having been through deep budget cuts several times in the corporate world, the first reaction in “deer in the headlights”, then “it can’t be done”. Takes strong leadership at multiple levels with out of the box thinking. In other words, there will probably be a lot of management shake up. Including Congress!!

    A GOOD thing!!

    Liked by 8 people

  13. A2 says:

    Breaking news: At the International Committee on Taxonomy of Political Economy a new species has been named:
    Pecuniae rationis americanus trumpii. 2017.

    Liked by 10 people

  14. yakmaster2 says:

    Eloquent statement from POTUS explaining and defending his Budget. I expect the RHINOS to cave to special interests despite the validity of POTUS’s common sense approach.
    I hope our President forcefully points out the INCREASES to all these agencies under Obama because Dems and Rhinos alike certainly WON’T do that. They’ll act as if these cuts will cripple the State Dept. and eliminating some agencies will cause the sky to fall! Horror!

    Liked by 3 people

  15. barton2016 says:

    EVERY damned budget needs to be cut, including “defense”. It’s not really defense anymore when you spend 10x every other country and have a base in almost every country.

    Liked by 4 people

    • booger71 says:

      The military is one of the few constitutional items allowed to spend money on

      Liked by 3 people

    • Benson II says:

      I would think by now you’d understand when Trump says more spending on military he doesn’t mean wasting even one penny on something unnecessary. If he thinks it’s not necessary it will be gone and either the money saved or spent on what is necessary.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Here’s another good thing about this budget. The funds available are discretionary to the departments spending the money. It can, and probably does, happen in the fed govt the way it does here in Oregon.

      Counties that vote R get less to none of the state’s money, except for the schools, of course, which do not belong to the counties or the people any more – the schools belong to the unions and the administrators (an association).

      Look for the West Coast and other Dem states to get waaaayyyyy less money than before! Already Seattle is crying that some of their highway funding may be cut!

      Headline from a Seattle newspaper: “‘A massive hole:’ Trump’s budget risks Sound Transit 3, other transportation projects” bwahahahaha!

      Liked by 1 person

    • amjean says:

      Every time a democrat president
      is elected they reduce the military.
      That is why it needs to be built
      up again and with more sophisticated
      weapons in order to keep up with
      China and Russia; our strength
      keeps other countries in line.

      Liked by 4 people

    • bessie2003 says:

      My understanding was that the actual budget will be submitted in a few weeks, the item submitted today covered discretionary funding for the various departments with an overview of the intentions of the Administration that will be reflected in a greater level when the full Budget is submitted. It’s possible there may be some defense cuts, perhaps in departments no longer functional but that didn’t fall under the discretionary spending framework.

      Like

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      In time, I think that will change too barton.

      Like

  16. Irons says:

    NOW we’ll see who the actual conservatives are. Here is your dream, here is everything YOU have been telling US you stand for.
    Fish or cut bait muchachos.
    We are watching, we are looking forward to your actions.

    Liked by 11 people

  17. WSB says:

    Since Mulvaney just mentioned that there are quite a few programs in place that have NEVER been authorized, I just needed a few minutes to redline:

    Liked by 6 people

    • Your Tour Guide says:

      Disagree with small business administration. It picks winners and losers, and
      if you happen to be “white,male” you are in the latter category. Saw an application
      for SBA loans about 15 years ago. Long list of qualifying applicants by country
      of origin, gender. Conspicious in it’s abscence: aforementioned white male.

      Liked by 4 people

      • WSB says:

        I was going to slash and burn it as well, but they now have Linda McMahon and $826M, $70M of which are loans and veterans training. If that is the only training avenue for vets in small business, I say let Linda loose, and she’ll give back the change!

        Liked by 4 people

    • teajr says:

      Love it, but might I make one suggestion regarding a sacred cow? Military Waste, Fraud and Abuse…. Big Prob, that is systemically driven and promoted. Also, the DoD has way too many Contractors.

      Liked by 5 people

      • WSB says:

        The Military wanted an additional $90B? I think. Trump is only offering $52B, so he will squeeze them for the additional $40B. He’s already done some cutting but he will make them work for the rest.

        Liked by 2 people

        • WSB says:

          Whoops! $38B? Plus or minus…I don’t remember the actual numbers the generals were throwing around. It’s only money. Right?

          Like

        • teajr says:

          Yep, he needs to take the pressure off of Commanders to keep their fiscal budgets fat,… in case they need the $$$ down the road, or worse – being responsible for the downsizing of funds (in the current mil culture, this is viewed as a failure).

          If you have spent any amount of time in the mil community, you always hear the phrase, “Different Pots of Money,” as a defense against making purchases that are needed vs unnecessary bloated progs always seem to have funding. This practice needs to stop as well.

          Liked by 1 person

      • joninmd22 says:

        Slash the F-35 and LCS to zero and there’ll be huge savings for rebuilding the military.

        The budget increase is to rebuild and add troops which is separate from procurement.

        Liked by 1 person

        • oifoefvet1969 says:

          While I agree the LCS is a complete waste of time/money with almost no survivability/lethality, the F35 is critical to America’s combat/air superiority/support plan for decades to come.

          Like

          • platypus says:

            Except the F-35 has supposedly failed every simulated wargame/combat it has been in. I lost count of how many military types commenting on the “sitting duck” status of the F-35, meaning it could be taken out before it even knew an enemy was threatening it.

            I’m not military so I don’t know how accurate this is.

            Like

            • Juzjon says:

              I have a certified financial planner who is a retired naval top gun. He flew many sorties in desert storm and said the F-15’s could out maneuver anything in the air back then. His son is now training at Mirimar on F-17’s. Both agree that a lot of naval and air force pilots are not too whoop-dee-doo about the F-35’s.

              Like

            • Guyver1 says:

              Same here.
              Every comment I have seen from military pilots has been to the effect that ‘it has no acceleration, it can’t climb and it can’t turn.’ A sitting duck. And its avionics are a disaster.
              Plus the idea of having only one engine on a jet fighter- and the F 35 in particular- is stupid.
              These are not cars, where if the engine fails you just pull over and park.
              That one engine has a catastrophic fail, and the plane comes down- a 94 million dollar lawn dart.
              The F-35 is a very heavy beast, and that engine that powers it can barely handle it. They are having all kinds of problems with it. And that one overloaded engine is the reason why the plane is slow, can’t climb fast enough, or turn fast enough.
              Whoever was responsible for the one engine idea should be shot.
              Twin engines with thrust vectoring would have made more sense.
              But then some politician’s pet company would not have got the contract, and the politician would not have received kickback money under the table.

              Like

              • andyocoregon says:

                From what I’ve read and seen, the F-16 is far superior to all the other jet fighters in maneuverability, speed and cost. It’s why Lockheed-Martin still makes them. There is huge international demand for the F-16 still.

                Like

                • Guyver1 says:

                  Although it only has one engine, the F-16 is far lighter than the F-35, and its thrust to weight ratio is far better than the F-35. And its engine is far more dependable than that of the F-35.
                  But it has no stealth capabilities. In today’s world, that means the enemy can see them before they can see the enemy. Not good.
                  It is an outmoded fighter, that is why the Air Force no longer buys them. So those countries still buying it are buying an aircraft that will look and fly pretty, but will not survive an engagement with a stealth fighter.
                  The F-35 is almost twice as heavy as the F-16, and its one engine can just barely handle it.
                  The argument against single engine fighters still stands.

                  Like

          • Jenny R. says:

            Knew a guy who worked on the F-22 project. He got redirected to F-35 and was not at all happy about it. “A pig on ice” I think is what he called the F-35, among other less charitable things (this could have been sour grapes, but so far that plane has failed to impress many).

            Like

            • Gary says:

              “but so far that plane {F-35} has failed to impress many.”

              It is a total waste to spend $$$ on military hardware to support an obsolete war style. We have more military than the next 12 powers combined. The added budget needs to be spent fortifying out digital infrastructure. Replace the XP and Win95 software being used by the utility companies for starters.

              Like

      • Aparition42 says:

        As an active duty member of the military who will be retiring during President Trump’s second term, I can attest to the fact that under Former President Obama, actual service members are getting squeezed badly. I personally don’t need any more money or benefits, but I do need at least two more people in my work center. They slashed us to the bone. Every unit I’ve served in in the last 8 years was a skeleton crew with at least one full person’s worth of work left over at the end of every day. A lot of money is going to the Department of Defense, but it isn’t necessarily going to the military.

        My personal suggestions?
        1. Cut every one of the hundred or more liberal social workers that every single military base and large ship has on hand to make sure we all get our semi-annual indoctrination in the latest social engineering experiment.

        2. Stop spending billions on private companies that can’t design a functioning website or database to save its life and make web design and application programming an in-house assignment. We have bright, capable, and qualified programmers and IT professionals in the military that would LOVE an opportunity to serve their country in this way and they know better than any low-bidder about what we actually NEED from our software.

        3. Allow billeting to give preferential assignments to people who want to continue doing what they’re already trained and experienced at doing. Rather than spending four years to train a person on how to fix a certain type of plane, then paying to move him and his family across the country to send them to a different set of expensive schools to learn a new platform every three to four years, allow service members to actually use the accumulated specialty knowledge they have gained in their previous tours. I know this won’t always be practical, but at this point they are randomly yanking a person that knows how to be an electrician for an FA-18E and sending them to be a logbook clerk for C-130Ts while taking an experienced C-130 administrator and throwing them across the country to go be a hull technician on a frigate. It’s insanity.

        Whatever sort of job you do, imagine what would happen to productivity if every few years the owner took everyone who works there and just reassigned them all to different positions like they’re shaking up a Boggle game in the name of “fairness”, and you’ll have an inkling of what’ I’m talking about. I’ve known technically brilliant, highly experienced master welders totally demoralized by being “force converted” to an unfamiliar job halfway through their career. The worst part is, these new converts are the higher ranking personnel that are expected to be able to train the new check-ins. We’ve completely broken the chain of competency. We’d save a few easy billions in redundant schooling and rework alone just by letting as many of our military personnel as possible keep doing the jobs they’re already trained for and good at.

        Liked by 5 people

        • Weather Watcher says:

          Thank you for your service! Great ideas – I hope you send an email with your recommendations to Mr. President Trump! God Bless

          Like

        • Guyver1 says:

          Right on the money.
          And #1 was the main reason why I decided to retire in ’97.
          When they started bringing in the social engineers to use the military as guinea pigs for their pet theories, I knew the military would become heavily politicized.
          While stationed at the Coast Guard base in Honolulu, I had to take several of these progressive animals on because they had an anti-military social engineering agenda- and the politically minded base command was backing them up.
          In the space of one year, their agenda caused over 30 divorces, and sent countless people- men, women and children- into psychiatric counseling because of the stress.
          Then they screwed up and came after my family, and that of another coastie who was married to a navy woman.
          The navy lady and me sat down and planned a military style counter attack- a pincer move coming from 6 different directions.
          Each of us wrote a report on the situation, and sent 3 copies to our respective Admirals, through 6 different routes (in case some got intercepted). Amazingly, all 6 copies made it through. The Admirals sent their command master chiefs to investigate.
          End result:
          1. Base CO- relieved of command (career ender).
          2. Base XO- relieved (career ender).
          3. The Lieutenant in charge of the ‘Work/Life Program’- relieved of command (Career ender).
          4. The proggie civilian woman who caused the whole mess- fired.
          5. The proggie’s assistant- quit before being fired, and in his resignation letter he confirmed everything we had stated.
          Good. But with two weeks left before her termination became final, the proggie woman caused one suicide (something I had warned the Admiral would eventually happen if they did not get rid of her fast enough. He acted fast, but by then it was too late for the man involved).
          A good, religious, well liked man who left behind a wife and two young children.
          The whole base was boiling mad about this. We decided to enlist our families to help us destroy the proggie no matter where she went.
          First we chased her out of Hawaii. Then she ran to Oklahoma- no dice, the relatives of the navy woman’s husband (he had 4 relatives working in the state government) chased her out of there too. Then she ran to South Carolina- where her boyfriend (who she had been passing off as her ‘husband’ while in Hawaii) ended up shooting her dead.
          God collected justice for the life she took, and the families and people she destroyed.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Les says:

        They are already cutting civs and contractors on the large posts and returning duties to active duty SMs. And the hiring freeze is holding. They are retiring out everybody they can and moving people they can’t. Things are changing quickly and pennies are being pinched. Hopefully in the right places.

        Like

    • Les says:

      There shouldn’t be a Dep’t of Education, states pay for 90% of public schools but have to abide by unfunded mandates handed down from DC. Screw that, shut it down.

      Liked by 2 people

  18. tax2much says:

    Few Congress members have seen a budget since there hasn’t been one submitted for 8 years.

    And I’m sure they will be surprised to see the line for bribes and corruption missing from this submission as well.

    Liked by 6 people

  19. FofBW says:

    This is where reality really hits them in square in the face.

    Liked by 5 people

  20. Sandra-VA says:

    I like the direction of this budget, but I think the cutting of block grants which provide for Meals on Wheels that some seniors depend on for their meal AND human contact, and the aftershool programs that ensure poor children at least get an evening meal is bad optics.

    This is something that I am sure President Trump would not be happy to see cut. Maybe there can be a specific grant for those specific programs instead of a general block grant could be worked out.

    Also, the way that Mulvaney claimed it was “compassionate” to cut these programs is not a good optic either.

    Otherwise GREAT budget! I also loved that Mulvaney was able to completely answer every question factually – it is very clear that a great deal of thought has gone into this budget.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kelly says:

      Liked by 19 people

    • Red says:

      I agree we should be careful in cuts to elderly programs, but if children qualify for free breakfast, lunch and dinner at school we need to take a look at the amount of food stamps the household is receiving.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Tejas Rob says:

        Let me tell you a little story about “Meals on wheels”. A little old windowed lady used to live two houses up from me. Known her all my life, one reason being her daughter is married to my uncle. Very sweet lady, like her daughter (who was my favorite aunt) as as she got older she had some medical problems.

        When she came home from the hospital, her daughter signed her up for a visiting nurse program. They just needed the nurse to come by once a day to do her “breathing treatment” with her nebulizer. However, to get the visiting nurse program she had to also sign up for Meals on Wheels. She didn’t want it, didn’t need it, but had to take it.

        They delivered her three meals every day, which she didn’t eat, and I don’t blame her looking at them. She saved them, gave them to me and I fed them to my dogs.

        There’s your government program for you.

        Liked by 9 people

        • Tejas Rob says:

          “Widowed”, not “windowed”.

          Like

          • singingsoul says:

            Meals on wheels is not a federal funded program let that sink in . The media is going to spin it. I am for all the cuts whee it would hurt is social security and medicare. I am not complaining. I am elderly I guess at 72 but I will never avail myself to meals on wheels and leave it for those who really ned it. I know to many who do not need it but is cheap .
            I used to bring meals on wheels to people. Today with microwave meals one does not ned it . One can always avail oneself to that if one really needs it.

            Liked by 1 person

        • mireilleg says:

          I had to have some home visiting nurses for a while. I did not have to sign up for meals on wheels, but I can certainly attest to a fair amount of money wasted in the program. Large amount of supplies that were not needed were left at my house and could not be taken back even though they had not been opened.

          Finding waste should not be very difficult.

          Liked by 4 people

      • Pam says:

        That last part of your sentence explains where a lot of the waste comes in. Some are receiving food stamps that shouldn’t qualify for them. I also agree that we need to exercise caution in cuts to elderly programs but at the same time, take drastic steps to cut waste, fraud, and abuse in these programs which could net some substantial savings to the budget.

        Liked by 5 people

    • amjean says:

      The meals for seniors program is
      not a federal program; it is funded at the
      state level.

      Like

    • Weather Watcher says:

      Cut food stamps & education and all other benefits to illegal aliens and give the savings to Meals on Wheels. Done. Next

      Like

    • Les says:

      Don’t give to the United Way, they fund abortions. The United Way denies this, but they give millions to Planned Parenthood. Give to Meals on Wheels instead. Better yet, donate your time to deliver meals.

      Like

    • Jenny R. says:

      This could be an opportunity for small business. I have a friend who does the cleaning for some shut ins; she took over cooking for them because they liked her food better than MoW.
      She used to babysit, and did the same thing with afterschool homework help — people liked her better than the licensed daycares (had an entire room in her house she converted into a “classroom” with supplies and learning stations); she had to turn people away.
      She is a very clever, resourceful, and hard working person — imagine if she and people like her could get the opportunity to expand those sorts of businesses?
      Right now the necessary licensing and tax structures make it impossible or at least severely prohibitive; this has stifled people like her.

      Like

  21. Joe says:

    My Facebook timeline is just loaded with libs freaking out over NEA budget elimination: I ask “Is Piss Christ art?” Furthermore would “PIss Allah/Muhammad be considered art?”

    Crickets.

    Liked by 15 people

  22. rf121 says:

    This will require several veto’s and at least one government shutdown to even come close to passing. The Congress can barely reduce the rate of growth in programs let alone do actual cuts. I bet they had to have a conference to work out what removing and cutting programs actually meant.

    Liked by 4 people

    • FofBW says:

      The next election the public will be more informed who their congressmen really are than they have ever been due to President Trump. He IS draining the swamp, one step at a time!

      Liked by 5 people

    • WSB says:

      Ha! The Dems shutting down Congress! That’s rich!

      Like

      • Guyver1 says:

        Yep!
        I noticed how they stopped their ‘party of no’ schtick as soon as President Trump was elected.
        It was a lie to begin with, they blocked just about everything the Republicans tried to do.
        And now they are fixing to pull the final mask off by doing what they accused the other side of.
        I will have a lot of fun rubbing their faces in it!!!

        Liked by 2 people

  23. bulwarker says:

    My take:
    The president’s budget is merely a guideline. The current budgetary situation is occurring in a span of time that’s a partial fiscal year ending in September, thanks to the election. I believe the congress, in January, already set its budget, called a resolution, for this interim period. That is why they (Congress) are forced to do Obamacare first than tax reform via reconciliation, because that is how they laid out their resolutions. Therefor, Trumps current budget is largely a bargaining chip, meant to signal to everyone what he intends to do with government funds and what will come in his next budget in October. It’s all about leverage, he’s signalling to the different factions that, “hey, this is the cutting I will make. Want it to change, lets make a deal!” As head of the executive branch he can already make the cuts/downsizing he’s shown. The congress’ power of the purse is largely for raising money and allocation, which is wholly ineffective when the President is looking to cut expenses *gasp*. What is congress going to do (besides threaten total shutdown?), send the president more money than he requested in his budget? Okay, let me just sit on it lol.

    Liked by 7 people

  24. Pam says:

    Liked by 6 people

  25. EWSoCal says:

    Can’t find bottom line. I see where $$$ is moving out of and into various programs but is the overall spend less?

    Like

    • dbethd says:

      I did a rough calculation, and I’m no accountant; but the total spending was roughly 1.1 trillion with the increases/decreases roughly the same (59.1 billion cuts, 59.2 billion increases). Feel free to correct me, anyone, if i figured incorrectly.

      Like

  26. Kelly says:

    Fast facts to keep handy when the histrionics go to a fever pitch: 93% of PBS is not funded by the government | 99% of NPR is not funded by the government.

    Liked by 6 people

    • mireilleg says:

      Thank you, I had a really different impression. So why are they in an uproar? I know they will be screaming even if it hasn’t started just yet.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Kelly says:

        Screaming is all they know how to do. lol

        Liked by 4 people

      • Guyver1 says:

        The very fact that you ask that question proves that you are a normal, rational person.
        Something which progressives are not. They are sick in the head.
        In order to understand why are they so upset about this, you have to shut down your rationality and become an irrational, hate driven beast for a few seconds (in other words, become a ‘progressive’ for a few seconds- scary, but it can be done.)
        The answer is, because it is a power trip for them.
        Even if it’s only 7% or 1% of their funding, the very idea of using our own tax dollars (our money) to produce propaganda against us makes them feel giddy.
        Just like Hollyweird uses the money they get from people like us to finance people who want us dead- which is one reason why I quit going to the movies and cut cable over 10 years ago.
        Cut off all funding to the NEA. Let the proggies finance their own hate propaganda machine.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Benson II says:

      I don’t want any of my money going to leftist propaganda. Not one penny.

      Liked by 2 people

  27. sundance says:

    Liked by 3 people

  28. citizen817 says:

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Rino Hunters United! says:

    Remember when Congress voted on Obama’s budget . . .

    “Obama’s Budget Goes Down in Flames 1-98 in Senate Vote.”
    and
    “Senate rejects Obama budget in 99-0 vote” | TheHill
    and
    “House kills Obama budget 2-413” | TheHill
    and
    “Obama budget defeated 414-0” – Washington Times
    and
    on and on…

    Like

  30. TwoLaine says:

    Budget Man has about as much personality as Paul Ryan. Someone needs to sit him down and teach him some camera skillz. Here’s a freebie. Look at your audience.

    Like

  31. andi lee says:

    Some things are rather obvious…

    … heads should roll.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Doug says:

      What id like to hear to is how they will address the idea that departments are basically punished for being efficient … like if they don’t spend all their funds they get them cut… that’s ass backwards . We should reward the departments that are efficient and save money … perhaps with a raise for the remaining employees or something

      Liked by 2 people

  32. 2x4x8 says:

    Downsizing:

    Like

  33. amjean says:

    Citizens for government waste has all
    the PIG (waste) items listed on their website.

    Like

  34. wodiej says:

    Someone did their homework. I’m certain there’s alot more cuts where those came from. They are just getting started.

    Like

  35. Martin says:

    Liked by 2 people

  36. 2x4x8 says:

    if Trump fires all those employees, he just might win the DC vote at re-election

    Like

    • MVW says:

      More hands make work. A maxim told by someone with an IQ of 80.

      At work, by eliminating two employees, moving them to another department, the whole group changed character and performance took a step change upward.

      Across the board only works when the poison persons are removed intelligently.

      Like

  37. Sharon says:

    It’s hard to remember that normal Americans actually do occupy the same world as the yahoos that have been running us into the ground for decades and decades.

    I just finished doing what I do frequently: balancing my checkbook (to the penny), knowing that limited funds are sufficient when I budget carefully, spend even more carefully, and make no math errors when entering figures in my little systems.

    I suspect that most of you actually do those simple things in one form or another – even those who make “a great deal of money” do well only when they budget money, limit spending, track $ in real time, and pay attention.

    We have gotten accustomed to their lies and embezzlement (that have been established in law and regs …..). If we had not gotten accustomed to it, we would be yelling “lock them up” as frequently and as loudly as that phrase was called out with regard to Hilary.

    We are compromised in our perceptions as demonstrated by our responses and lack of – I’m beyond grateful for Mr. Trump’s courage and insights but the eager outcries that meet his every move really reveal the prior sense of decades-long compliant helplessness. Stockholm Syndrome at a deadly national level.

    Like

  38. fobdangerclode says:

    Last attempt

    Like

    • Ad rem says:

      fobdangerclode….the reason I didn’t let your first TWO posts through was to save you embarrassment. Everyone’s initial comment has to be moderated. I would have preferred you to have written something of “substance” so I could have judged the appropriateness of letting you in.

      Like

  39. In Az says:

    I told my children to pay careful and close attention to the next eight years under President Trump, as they may never see a President like this again in their lifetime. We are at war with the Communists for the soul of the United States.

    Liked by 2 people

  40. dreadnok89 says:

    why should new york recieve massive amounts of terror funds when they do nothing to curn it and let anyone stay there.

    Like

    • Jim says:

      “Why should new york recieve massive amounts of terror funds when they do nothing to curn it and let anyone stay there.”.

      Maybe it should pay for the millions of dollars NY spends to secure trumps visits against terrorism. They certainly “curn” is with every one of his visits.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s