In Saturday’s White House Weekly Address, President Obama previewed a budget plan that he expects to gain bipartisan support despite the deep sacrifices called for. “My budget freezes annual domestic spending for the next five years – even on programs I care deeply about – which will reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, The President said in his weekly address. “This freeze will bring this type of spending to its lowest level as a share of the economy since Dwight Eisenhower was president. We’ve stripped down the budget by getting rid of waste. For example, we’re getting rid of thousands of government-owned buildings that sit empty because they aren’t needed. I’ve also proposed freezing salaries for hardworking government employees, because everyone has to do their part. And I’m going to make sure politics doesn’t add to our deficit, by vetoing any bill that contains earmarks.”
Here’s President Obama’s Weekly Address:
But not all liberals are in agreement that Obama’s plan, which amounts to a $3.7 trillion proposal, is the way to go. In an interview with Amy Goodman at Democracy Now, Washington correspondent for the Nation magazine had this to say: “[T] there are dramatic cuts in humanitarian programs and, well, in programs that we think of as basic social services. The LIHEAP program, which is Low Income Heating [Home Energy] Assistance, really, really vital program for people in the northern tier of the United States, is going to take an absolutely dramatic cut. And that cut’s important, Amy, because that’s going to have to be made up someplace, and if the federal government is not funding it, that money is going to have to come from state, county and municipal governments that are already incredibly hard hit. So it’s a brutal attack, frankly… .”
President Obama’s plan calls for ending a program that allows students to qualify for two Pell Grants in a calendar year, to allow them to attend college year-round, and for eliminating the subsidy through which the government pays the interest on student loans for graduate students while they are in school. Funds for career and technical education in the Education Department, some of which flow to community colleges, would take a major hit, dropping by about $250 million.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a call with reporters Monday that the programs under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act “haven’t lived up to their promise” and that the administration wants to “strengthen them before we invest in them further.”
Other casualties would be a separate, $103 million stream of funds for the Tech-Prep Program, which provides funds to states for partnerships between school districts and (mostly two-year) postsecondary institutions.
Graduate and professional students with student loans, who would lose the benefit of having the federal government pay the interest on loans while they remain in graduate school, will be deeply affected, as yearly tuition and fees are often at least $70,000/year in California. However, Obama’s administration budget documents insist that the interest subsidy “has no effect on encouraging students to pursue graduate education.”
In contrast the major slashing of benefits for the poor and for students, President Obama’s proposed budget calls for only modest tax hikes for banks and oil companies, an end to the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans in 2013 rather than now, and a return to 2009 levels for estate taxes. Moreover, Obama’s plan actually grants a 3% increase in defense spending.