Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate has passed an even larger $9 billion package of cuts in spending. This decision is consistent with President Donald Trump’s fiscal discipline. This legislative accomplishment follows the administration’s sustained efforts to reshuffle federal spending. In fact, it uniquely chokes off dollars Congress has already appropriated. The measure needs one more vote from the House before flying to the White House floor for Trump’s signature.
That’s not entirely surprising. After all, the federal budget is huge! $6.8 trillion. The $9 billion cut is a very small percentage of that total. The Trump administration has not released the money, even though Congress provided it four months ago. This scenario accurately represents the actionable and mounting tensions between the executive and legislative branches of government. This package goes a long way in prioritizing the programs that help foreign nations who are struggling with disease, war and natural disasters.
The biggest cut change in the worst direction is a $1.1 billion cut. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting was scheduled to get at least this much, staggered over the next two years. The shift has prompted outrage from across the political spectrum. Democrats are mostly out in front, claiming that the cuts imperil Congress’s constitutional prerogative to control all federal spending.
Trump and Republicans have made no secret of their belief that public broadcasting funding is redundant. They point to their perceived slant in the reporting as the reason for such cuts. Senate Majority Leader John Thune characterized the request as “a small, but important step toward fiscal sanity,” emphasizing a commitment to reducing government expenditure.
Dissent within Republican ranks was evident. Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, unusual among Republican Senators, not only voted against the legislation, but harshly criticized its implications. As Murkowski said, “You don’t have to be about gutting the entire Corporation for Public Broadcasting. She underscored her conviction that we can—and must—find better, more balanced approaches to fiscal responsibility.
These recent cuts are what has Democrats all up in arms. In response, they lash their GOP counterparts for weakening Congress’s long sacred power of the purse. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was searing in his denunciation of Senate Republicans. He said, “Today, they make this chamber a subservient rubber stamp for the executive, at the order of [Donald Trump].”
The discussion and debate surrounding these cuts is further complicated by the broader context of fiscal policy. That’s earlier in the year, when Trump was blocking around $425 billion in relief Congress had already appropriated. This ongoing standoff has ignited concerns among Democrats about future negotiations over government funding bills that require bipartisan support before the September 30 deadline.
Democrats have been sounding the alarm on these recent legislative changes. Such partisan cuts, they argue, could preclude any possibility of reaching bipartisan compromises on must-pass appropriations bills down the line. If enacted, these decisions would be devastating for public broadcasting and foreign aid. They will influence most of the sectors that depend on federal funding for their survival.
The approved substitution cuts are extensive enough to reduce the overall size of the package from the originally proposed $9.4 billion to $9 billion. This updated infographic illustrates that massive spending shift. Importantly, it foreshadows the brewing battle over the administration’s austere fiscal approach and the Democratic pushback.
Though the back and forth over these cuts still plays out, both parties are cognizant of what these cuts mean for governance and the public square. The upcoming House vote will be crucial in determining whether this package becomes law, setting the stage for future fiscal debates.