Historically, lawmakers don’t pass presidential budgets introduced to much fanfare — like President Donald Trump’s was Thursday — even if the president is of the same party that controls Congress.

Share story

WASHINGTON — The nation’s new president unveiled a budget proposal Thursday. But its fate is likely to be the same as most presidential budgets: It won’t pass.

More on the president’s budget proposal

President Donald Trump’s $1.15 trillion spending plan envisions deep cuts to many government programs including those affecting Washington state.  

Historically, lawmakers don’t pass presidential budgets introduced to much fanfare — like President Donald Trump’s was Thursday — even if the president is of the same party that controls Congress.

“It’s kind of a tradition to declare the new president’s budget ‘dead on arrival,’” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan budget watchdog group. “Congress is going to do what it is going to do.”

Related developments

Health care: The House Budget Committee narrowly voted Thursday to advance the troubled Republican health-care bill, with defections by three GOP conservatives: Reps. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Dave Brat of Virginia and Gary Palmer of Alabama. Four GOP governors also wrote congressional leaders, saying the bill would not work for their states. Govs. John Kasich of Ohio, Rick Snyder of Michigan, Brian Sandoval of Nevada and Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas said the legislation “provides almost no new flexibility for states,” fails to ensure enough resources to protect vulnerable residents and shifts significant new costs to states.

Debt limit: The U.S. hit its debt limit again Thursday — a whopping $19.9 trillion this time — and the Treasury Department started using accounting maneuvers to buy Congress several months to raise it to avoid a potential federal government default. The borrowing limit had been suspended since November 2015, allowing the government to borrow as much as needed to meet obligations. However, the 2015 legislation set March 16 as the date that the debt limit would go back into effect at whatever debt level existed on March 15. A 2011 standoff in which the limit wasn’t raised until the last minute caused Standard & Poor’s to downgrade the nation’s AAA credit rating for the first time.

Seattle Times news services

Trump unveiled a $1.15 trillion spending plan that was chock full of the same proposals that have been offered up before by his Republican predecessors as they all aimed to make good on campaign pledges to shrink the size of the federal government, eliminate redundant programs and cut waste.

Some of those familiar proposals that made it into Trump’s plan: reducing funding for the Internal Revenue Service and the Environmental Protection Agency, and slashing federal dollars to Amtrak.

But lawmakers can’t seem to support those cuts when they consider what they would mean to their constituents.

“Cutting programs means cutting programs in their community,” said Leon Panetta, who served as President Bill Clinton’s budget director and chairman of House Budget Committee. “They can’t sustain it politically.”

Immediately after Trump’s budget was released, Democrats and Republicans alike criticized portions that would affect their constituents or their interests.

“While we have a responsibility to reduce our federal deficit, I am disappointed that many of the reductions and eliminations proposed in the president’s skinny budget are draconian, careless and counterproductive,” said Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., a former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. “We will certainly review this budget proposal, but Congress ultimately has the power of the purse.”

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, opposed a proposal to eliminate money for an initiative working to restore the Great Lakes. Rep. Frank LoBiondo, R-N.J., worried about a proposed premium increase for flood insurance. Rep. Kevin Yoder, R-Kan., whose district is home to a major medical-research institution, vowed to fight a proposed $5.8 billion cut to the National Institutes of Health.

“Of course, Congress controls the power of the purse,” Trump’s budget director, Mick Mulvaney, acknowledged Thursday. “And this will be the first step in that process.”

Trump’s spending proposal for fiscal 2018, which begins Oct. 1, includes a $54 billion increase in military spending, which would require Congress to end defense-spending caps agreed to in 2011. This increase in military spending, most of which is predetermined, would be offset by cuts in programs that lawmakers have a say over, what government experts call “discretionary spending.”

Military and border security would increase dramatically. Programs combating global warming and providing legal aid for the poor would be slashed. And $4.1 billion would be spent to start to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

If the president gets his way, funding for the environment, diplomacy, housing, health services and the arts would be cut 20 to 30 percent. In 19 cases, funding will be eliminated, including for the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corp. and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Mulvaney had a blunt message for critics of the proposal. He said that after-school programs had failed to help children in schools, that housing programs were “not well run,” that government health research had suffered “mission creep” and that grants to local communities “don’t do any good.”

Mulvaney waved aside questions about cuts to the United Nations, saying they “should come as a surprise to no one who watched the campaign.” And he said that the president made no apologies for eliminating the government’s efforts to curb climate change.

“We’re not spending money on that anymore,” Mulvaney said at the White House. “We consider that a waste of your money to go out and do that.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan, who has long asserted a need to overhaul entitlement programs as a means to fiscal discipline for the federal government, said he was “encouraged” by the proposed increases in military spending but said little else about the contents of the budget blueprint.

He did not address any of the proposed cuts.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, called Trump’s budget proposal “a solid step toward addressing the gross overspending that is driving our national debt.” He said the president should be “commended” for making some tough calls.

He did not pledge to support Trump’s spending plan, however, adding that he looked forward to working with his congressional colleagues “to craft and pass a balanced, fiscally sound budget in the coming months.”

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., said: “No matter who the president is or whose party controls the White House, this budget is not considered a viable and realistic plan for spending. As the saying goes: The president proposes and the Congress disposes. This means that it is the members of Congress who pass appropriation bills, not the president.”

The president’s budget is merely advisory. The Constitution gives Congress the power to dole out the money, and lawmakers are not eager to give up that control.

“It’s about institutional power and pride,” said Ross Baker, a congressional expert at Rutgers University. “Congress has given up a lot to presidents in recent years. They don’t want to give up this.”

The document Trump released Thursday is merely a blueprint — what’s dubbed a skinny budget — with a full budget being released in May, a common practice for presidents in their first year.

Trump’s fellow Republicans control both chambers of Congress, but even so lawmakers are expected to move forward with their own budget blueprint this spring, as they traditionally have done.

“Historically, presidential budgets do not fare well with Congress,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.