The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

How can you tell that the government isn’t taking a crisis seriously? One likely sign is the demand that funding to address the crisis be taken from another source of funds, injecting delay and controversy into an urgent matter for no good reason.

And that’s exactly what it appears the Trump administration is doing with its efforts to fight the outbreak of a new strain of the coronavirus, known as Covid-19. Officials have asked Congress for $2.5 billion to respond to the outbreak, but according to a report from the Washington Post, only $1.25 billion of this money would be new spending. The rest would come from existing programs.

Among the most galling of the sources of funds the administration wants to draw from is the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps poor families heat their homes in the winter.

“After dithering for weeks as the coronavirus spread around the world, the Trump administration has now decided to pay for its belated response by cutting funding for heating assistance for low-income families,” said Evan Hollander, a spokesman for House Appropriations Committee Democrats, in a statement to the Post.

The new measure would draw only $37 million from the heating program, a trivial number in terms of the federal budget. But that amount could mean a lot to families who need heat. An official told the Post the funds could help 750,000 families.

There’s no clear reason why anyone would want to take these funds away, and there’s certainly no reason it should be tied in to the negotiations around the response to Covid-19.

Another $535 million would also be taken from funds dedicated to fighting Ebola. While it’s at least sensical to consider emergency preparedness funds to all come from a single pool, the cut to Ebola programs is still hard to defend. And it will look profoundly short-sighted if Ebola re-emerges as a global threat.

No cuts need to be made at all. And the Post reports that the Democrats are working on a funding plan that wouldn’t cut spending from any other program, and it could include substantially more funds that the Trump administration has planned for. CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta has suggested that the $2.5 billion figure does not seem commensurate with previous outbreak responses, and even Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said Wednesday that the administration’s request is likely too low; he would rather see about $4 billion in funds allocated to fight the virus.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Donald Trump

Image via Twitter

A year after former President Donald Trump left the White House and Joe Biden was sworn in as president of the United States, Trump continues to have considerable influence in the Republican Party. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a former Trump critic turned Trump sycophant, recently told Fox News that having a “working relationship” with Trump must be a litmus test for anyone in a GOP leadership role in Congress. But an NBC News poll, conducted in January 14-18, 2022, finds that many Republican voters identify as Republicans first and Trump supporters second.

Analyzing that poll in the New York Times on January 21, reporters Leah Askarinam and Blake Hounshell, explain, “Buried in a new survey published today is a fascinating nugget that suggests the Republican Party may not be as devoted to Trump as we’ve long assumed. Roughly every month for the last several years, pollsters for NBC News have asked: ‘Do you consider yourself to be more of a supporter of Donald Trump or more of a supporter of the Republican Party?’ Over most of that time, Republicans have replied that they saw themselves as Trump supporters first.”

Keep reading... Show less

Ivanka Trump, right

Image via @Huffington Post

As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s select committee on the January 6, 2021 insurrection moves along, it is examining Ivanka Trump’s actions that day — especially the former White House senior adviser urging her father, then- President Donald Trump, to call off his supporters when the U.S. Capitol Building was under attack. This week, Ivanka Trump’s importance to the committee is examined in a column by liberal Washington Post opinion writer Greg Sargent and an article by blogger Marcy Wheeler.

Sargent notes that the committee’s “new focus on Ivanka Trump” shows that it “is developing an unexpectedly comprehensive picture of how inextricably linked the violence was to a genuine plot to thwart a legitimately elected government from taking power.”

Keep reading... Show less
x
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}