A budget proposal President Donald Trump released on Thursday would zero out the funding of nearly 20 federal agencies of critical interest in California, from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — a major funding source for NPR and PBS stations — to the national endowments for the arts and humanities.
The plan would boost defense spending by $52.3 billion, while slashing the Environmental Protection Agency’s $8.2 billion budget by a staggering 31 percent and the state department by nearly 29 percent.
“To keep Americans safe, we have made tough choices that have been put off for too long,” Trump wrote in his opening message. “But we have also made necessary investments that are long overdue.”
Congress writes the budget, not the president, but the document known as the “skinny budget” is what presidents use to signal their priorities. And those priorities, translated into dollars and cents, would deal a blow across the Golden State, from research and arts funding to programs to clean up the state’s air and water.
Police forces would be cut back, schools would face layoffs and cleanup of contaminated lands would be put off. Some of the state’s signature initiatives for the poor — such as the In-Home Supportive Services program, which provides care for the elderly and disabled, and the CalFresh food stamp program, which serves hundreds of thousands of needy residents — probably would have to be scaled back dramatically.
“American families deserve a budget that prioritizes their health, safety, and well-being,” Representative Mike Thompson said in response to the outlined budget. “Unfortunately, the President’s budget outline slashes funding for medical research, affordable housing, infrastructure, disaster relief, and so much more.”
In San Francisco alone, arts nonprofits have received $6.4 million in grants from the National Endowment for the Arts since 2015. The endowment, notes San Francisco Arts Commission, makes up 0.004 percent of the nation’s discretionary, non-defense spending.
Stanford university spokesman E.J. Miranda said the proposal “would have a significant negative impact on research in medicine and health, technology, the environment, the humanities and social sciences and many other fields.”
“Our long-standing national investment in research is why America is a global leader in innovation,” he said. “That research and innovation has created jobs and boosted the economy here in the Silicon Valley and nationwide.”
Rep. Ro Khanna, D-California, said the proposal would “underfund national priorities and hurt working families.”
“Investments in public education, research and development, the creative industries, and environmental protections support a vibrant and secure economy,” he wrote. “Yet, the White House wants to ignore American values by initiating massive cuts to these programs,” he said. “The strength of our nation is more than just our military might.”
The proposal would gut a number of programs and make significant cuts to FEMA, the State Department and affordable housing programs. Meanwhile taxpayer monies would be directed toward the border wall and military.
“This proposal is narrow-minded and misguided,” Thompson pointed out. “The President’s budget would kill jobs at the EPA, hamstring our ability to negotiate overseas, and cut countless critical agencies. In return, billions of taxpayer dollars would go towards a pointless border wall. We can and should do better.”
