Lincoln Would Weep

The proposed House budget cuts are the target of some much-deserved criticism; criticism that it is coming from both progressives and religious leaders. The House budget makes severe cuts to several programs that serve low-income Americans, including Medicaid, funding for student loans, funding for food stamps, funding for child care.
For decades, Republicans have regarded America’s poor with an almost pathological animosity. The Republican narrative of poverty is one of laziness, weakness, and other character flaws. In other words, if you’re poor, it’s your fault. What’s more, Republicans have demonized the poor, portraying them as welfare queens and king who feed like parasites on the labor of hard-working Americans. All of this, of course, is a myth. Most low-income families are working families who struggle to meet the basic needs of life.
Republicans characterize these cuts as necessary to pay the costs related to post-Katrina recovery, as well as to bring spending under control. Let’s put aside the fact that Katrina funds are a one-time expense that will have little effect on the deficit. I’m all for a balanced budget, but I have sincere doubts about conservatives’ sincerity in this matter. Why? In the next phase of budget planning, the House will consider a $70 billion tax cut package. Even with $50 billion in cuts (the target established in the House), that still leaves a $20 billion deficit.
These proposed cuts have nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. They are a naked display of a cruel and selfish ideology, perpetuated by a party that has abandoned all principles of responsible governance. They also illustrate the utter contempt these lawmakers must feel for so many of their fellow Americans.
But there is hope. The scope of these cuts is making many moderate Republicans nervous. In the end, they might be enough to restore some sanity to our nation’s budget priorities.