Demand Congress use its “power of the purse” to hold Trump accountable
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution says: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.”
The President of the United States does not have unlimited authority to decline congressional appropriations and decide what gets funded and by how much depending on his whims and which political adversaries he wants to punish.
By hijacking congressionally appropriated funds, Donald Trump and Elon Musk (and his unqualified, unscreened team) are yanking funding from people and programs in our communities―which will have a real impact on many of our neighbors as they face frozen funding for critical human needs programs that people rely on to survive.
Congress must stand up to stop this lawless power grab.
CHN Executive Director Deborah Weinstein had this to say in response to President Trump’s State of the Union Address: “Yes, Mr. President, unemployment is low. All across our nation, people are working hard when they can. But millions of people do not earn enough to be secure. That is the state of our union President Trump left out of his lengthy address. Close to half of American workers – 53 million people, or 44 percent – are earning a median hourly wage of $10.22. Their median annual pay is $17,950, because close to half of these low-wage workers don’t work full-time.”
More than 21,000 CHN supporters have submitted comments to the Social Security Administration in opposition to a proposal that could cause one million Americans to lose Social Security disability benefits.
This week, we saw yet another attempt by the Trump Administration to dismantle a major social safety net program and hurt the most vulnerable among us. On Thursday, the Administration released a letter to state Medicaid directors giving them an offer: we’ll give you federal Medicaid dollars in a lump sum up front, and you get to make restrictions in benefits or eligibility so you can spend less. The catch? Low-income people, many of whom gained access to Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, will be denied insurance, and state budgets will be even more ravaged down the road.
In 2019, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed three SNAP rules changes that together threaten to take food away from millions of people in need. USDA was required to review and take into consideration public comments submitted prior to moving forward with final rulemaking. Here is an update on the status of those USDA attempts to sidestep Congress to cut SNAP, and what advocates can do to continue to oppose implementation of those rules changes.
Join us for a CHN webinar, “The New Trump Budget: Why it Really Matters,” from 2-3 p.m. ET (11 a.m. PT) on Thursday, Feb. 13. Recently, President Trump asked a crowd of his donors: “Who the hell cares about the budget?” We do, and we think you should too. Why? If the new one is similar to his past proposals, there will be very big cuts proposed for human needs programs. Congress has rejected these in the past. But his plans matter, because the Trump Administration has aggressively sought to carry them out through administrative rule-making and moving or refusing to spend money despite Congressional intent.
CHN just released another edition of the Human Needs Report. Read on for the latest on Congress’s FY21 budget talks, disaster aid for Puerto Rico, diverting funds to the border wall, recent immigration rulings, and more.
President Trump was asked by very friendly interviewer Joe Kernen of CNBC, will “entitlements ever be on your plate?” The President replied, “At some point they will be.” And, when asked whether he’d “do some of the things that you said you wouldn’t do in the past” (specifically, Medicare), he…
2019 was a transformative year for administrative activism through the one-two punch of comments and litigation. Although our block-and-delay tactics have resulted in some early successes, we’re experiencing the ups and downs that come with litigation and the appeals process. We’ve also seen that injunctions alone aren’t enough to eliminate the intense fear that’s been building in immigrant communities since the start of the Trump Administration. We know that the proposals are designed to make immigrants and people of color feel afraid and unwelcome.
In Southern states in the U.S. that expanded their Medicaid programs under the Affordable Care Act, adults experienced low rates of decline in both physical and mental health compared with adults living in states that did not opt for Medicaid expansion. That’s the finding of a new study published this month in the journal Health Affairs. The study, conducted by researchers at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and Harvard Medical School, could create new incentives in the 14 states that have not expanded Medicaid to do so.
When Hurricane Maria slammed into the U.S. Virgin Islands in September 2017, it took roughly six weeks for low-income islanders to begin receiving emergency nutrition assistance. But when that same hurricane devastated Puerto Rico, similar emergency assistance did not begin to flow until six months after the storm’s landfall. Why the difference? Puerto Rico’s Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) is that island’s version of SNAP, which exists in all 50 states plus some of the U.S. territories. But NAP is different — unlike SNAP, it does not have the flexibility to respond to natural disasters such as hurricanes — or, more recently, earthquakes.
Tense debates have surfaced in the upper Midwest over whether to accept refugees at the local level. Local governments were given the authority to choose in an order signed by President Donald Trump. In response to the order, Gov. Tony Evers issued a letter affirming Wisconsin’s support of refugees. But at the county level, some of the debate has been more nuanced, including whether there should be caps on numbers of refugees.
Kansas could become the 37th state in the U.S. to opt for Medicaid expansion, good news for as many as 150,000 residents of the Jayhawk State who would have improved access to medical coverage – and the peace of mind and economic security that comes with it. More states could be on the horizon: Advocates in Oklahoma already have gathered – and had certified – enough signatures to qualify a ballot measure on Medicaid expansion for the November 2020 election; advocates in Missouri are attempting a similar ballot measure — they have until May to gather and submit signatures.
