Trump Proposes Slashing National Institute of Health by $1.2 Billion Now

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

President Donald Trump, who had just proposed slashing the National Institutes of Health's budget for next year by 20 percent, suggested an immediate $1.2 billion cut to the agency Tuesday.

There's still not a proper budget to run the country this year. Congress passed a kind of holding measure called a continuing resolution at the end of last year and left the real work for after Trump took office.

Trump laid out a vague plan for 2018 earlier this month, and on Tuesday the White House released ideas for this year's budget. Congress is responsible for spending bills, but whoever's president usually lays out a plan for the House and Senate to follow.

Congress, however, has in general been supportive of medical research spending.

The 2017 budget year ends in October. Trump's plan for this year would mean agency heads will have to move funding from programs that are already under way.

"His focus is on cutting science programs," Charles Kieffer, Democratic staff director on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told a panel at the Bipartisan Policy Center on Tuesday.

"They are forcing these rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul decisions that will have consequences for a generation," Kieffer added.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-proposes-slashing-nih-by-dollar12-billion-now/ar-BByZkCa?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=edgsp#image=1

[global1]

1. It's Really Important To Look At All Aspects Of Health Care As There Is Such A Synergistic.....

relationship with all aspects and how screwing with one can effect the other.

If the Repugs are really serious to making health care affordable - the other things that they need to keep in perspective is how an agency like the NIH is an important piece of the puzzle.

Research in disease states aids in finding new cures and new methods of detection is important in hopes of saving more American's lives and lowering the costs of care.

Without NIH doing their job - health care costs continue to rise. More sick people. Requiring more care. Care costs money. Health insurance premiums go up due to an influx of more and sicker patients thrown into the system utilizing more pharmaceuticals, medical devices, testing, hospitalizations, etc.

That is why it is important to put a focus on Preventative Healthcare. Keep people healthy. Keep them out of the system.

Having the NIH's budget cut by $1.2B seriously hampers their efforts to forge ahead on research that is important in keeping costs down.

Think of all the damage Trump is doing to our environment; lack of regulations; underfunding of these things - just begs for making the health of American's suffer. Again - sicker American's - require more healthcare - at a time when people would be kicked off of their health insurance - when the environment makes them sicker - when regulations that protect them are removed, etc.

It just spiral's out of control. Costs will go up and not down.

One thing Obama thought through is how all of these things interact to make our healthcare system better and keep American's healthy and out of the system. That was the beauty of ACA. It might have been 2000 pages long - but they took into account all aspects of healthcare.

The problem with Trump and the Repugs - it is a knee-jerk reaction to wanting to undo anything that Obama accomplished. They will destroy the delicate balance just to spite Obama and deny him a legacy. Sure - their ACHA was a quarter of the size of ACA. The reason is that they didn't bring in all the healthcare stakeholders to make sure that any of their decisions for ACHA didn't cause more problems and upset the balance.

I read the complete ACA Act. It was really comprehensive and well thought out. Not so with the Repugs. You can't put something so complex together in a back room somewhere and try in pass it in 17 days without bringing into account the providers of healthcare - the stakeholders - and considering all aspects of the healthcare system.

Until they do this - anything that they will try and pass will just work against the system.

[Hortensis]

6. Well written--for us. But for most pubs it's not about health.

For conservative wealthy, it's about lowering taxes, deregulating, and permanently reorienting the function of government.

For their voters, as you say, it's "knee-jerk" opposition, an irrational, amoral, hyperpartisan opposition so strong that it threatens to destroy our democracy.

Grim, but on top of everything else the forces behind all this have actually managed to create an ideological fusion between anti-tax/anti-regulation conservatism and religious conservatism. Many tens of millions know they are on the side of God and good government.

[Blue_Tires]

14. This isn't even about healthcare anymore

this is the latest front in an unfettered war against science and intellectualism... We need to start calling this what it is...

[DemocraticSocialist8]

2. The NIH does a LOT of good medical and scientific research

SMFH!!!!!!!!

[SticksnStones]

3. Gotta find the $ for the wall somewhere

[onenote]

4. We sure wouldn't want the National Institutes of Health spending money on scienc-y stuff.

They should be investing in the kinds of health stuff that was around when America was "great" -- like using leeches and electro-shock therapy. Maybe bring back forced sterilization.

Jeez I hate these people.

[Ilsa]

5. Mika B. nearly called 45 out on it this morning.

She told how one of her best friends, only 50 years old, just died of pancreatic cancer. Said she went all over the world looking for the best, most advanced rreatment. Mika gave her an awesome tribute.

Then she spoke up about what is needed to find cures for diseases like pancreatic cancer. She spoke of how research centers in conjunction with the NIH need both private and government funding to discover and develop cures.

Mika needs to be one of the faces of opposition to 45's insane, draconian budget.

[leftyladyfrommo]

7. Is he just pulling these numbers out of his ass? nt

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

9. Easy for one with tiny hands

[Turbineguy]

8. Killing Americans is far more efficient

Last edited Wed Mar 29, 2017, 03:49 PM - Edit history (1)

if done by an epidemic. Although parking lot shootouts are good for entertainment value.

An epidemic will do more than an ACA repeal and burn less political capital.

[Cha]

10. KICK

[dalton99a]

11. Gotta make Russia great again by killing Americans faster

[eniwetok]

12. STOP WHINING!!!! We have to pay for those tax cuts for the rich somehow!!!

[JTFrog]

13. Ann Romney said she would be the first to protest this.

I guess we will see.

[Tom Rinaldo]

15. We need a simple graphic

We need one of those illustrations with side by side piles of chips representing huge sum of money.

The pile on the left would be labeled "Proposed tax cuts in Trump's budget." Different colored chips would represent percentage cuts going to different income brackets. A chip might represent 10 million dollars. So part of the pile would be a number of chips with a color for the top one percent, another part of the stack would be chips representing the top 5% etc.

The pile on the right would also be made of chips representing 10 million dollar increments. However this would be labeled "offsetting budget cuts that pay for the tax cuts in Trump's budget". There it would include cuts to the center for disease control, cuts to airport security, cuts to meals on wheels, cuts to FEMA funding, cuts to the EPA, etc,

Seems to me that would drive the point home where Republican priorities lie.