3d ago

Bernie Sanders blasts Trump for federal loans and grants freeze: ‘He is not a king’

www.theguardian.com Bernie Sanders condemns Trump for federal loans and grants freeze: ‘He is not a king’

Senator denounces order to pause all funding and says it’ll have ‘devastating impact’ on ‘most vulnerable people’ in US

Summary

Senator Bernie Sanders condemned Trump’s order to freeze all federal loans and grants, calling it a “dangerous move towards authoritarianism” and “blatantly unconstitutional.”

The directive, exempting Social Security and Medicare, is expected to impact universities, nonprofits, food assistance programs, health centers, and disabled veterans.

Sanders emphasized that Congress holds the “power of the purse” and urged Americans to oppose the order.

Attorneys general are preparing legal challenges to overturn the freeze.

United States | News & Politics @lemmy.ml

Alas Poor Erinaceus @lemmy.ml

3d ago

Bernie Sanders blasts Trump for federal loans and grants freeze: ‘He is not a king’

www.theguardian.com /us-news/2025/jan/28/trump-federal-loans-grants-bernie-sanders

198 33

You're viewing a single thread.

127 comments

Legality aside, you guys should consider doing a rundown of wasteful spending. There is this growing concern on the taxpayer citizens that many, if not all, of the projects that the federal government funds through grants are ridiculous.
It also seems like a lot of federal grants go to NGOs that are carrying out essentially political activities.
I also wouldn't be surprised if many of the federal departments were still awarding grants and loans that directly went against the executive actions Trump put into place.
Say what you want, but at least is logically consistent to do a broad review of federal grants and loans as long as they eliminate some of the wasteful spending. Now, even though there's not a lot of details about how this is going to be carried out, I'm pretty sure it's not going to fix the budget, but it's a start.
I'm guessing (because why not) that the concern Trump has is that if they just did a spend review on a case by case basis, things would get slow-walked to the point that the reviews never happen.
By stopping everything and making re-starting it conditional on passing a review to ensure it's in line with the new standards it provides a strong motivating force to get the reviews done ASAP. Basically subsidizing on demand.
IMO this is a direct result of all the #resistance undermining of Trump during his first term by administrative staffers.
BTW, all this craziness? It really highlights how much power the executive branch has accumulated over the years.
Remember to never give power to someone you like if you’re not willing for someone you don’t like to have that same power. That’s why failsafes and spreading out the keys to power is important in a democratic republic
The government giveth, the government taketh away
- You might be giving Trump too much credit here with regards to this move being an attempt to review and reduce wasteful government spending. This is just another move to force organizations to kowtow to him or be dissolved.
  Totally agree with you on reducing the concentration of power in the executive branch though.
  
  If the organizations are not that vital but still deemed necessary, they might secure private funding, with all it implies.
  Also reducing the number of organizations on the budget WILL reduce spending, like it or not, wasteful or not.
  About the kowtowing, I am unsure. If you read the text of the official memo:
  "The use of Federal resources to advance Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies is a waste of taxpayer dollars that does not improve the day-to-day lives of those we serve.”
  They clearly think some of the things the taxpayer money is going are not improving their lives.
  So basically if that's not true, there should be like, maybe protests of people demanding those organizations to be kept, surely.
  Like it or not, People voted for this. You can look up hundreds of polls where the American people view the federal government as wasteful and bloated.
  And how not to think like that? Look at the doc of the programs they look to pause:
  https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25506813/govdoc20250128-263582.pdf
  Just a cursory search gave me 17 hits on programs related to counter terrorism.
  22 related to railroad maintenance and workers safety
  2 duplicate sexual assault programs that apparently differ in that one of those is due minorities and other is not?
  Do you really believe someone will bat an eye if those 17 counter terrorism, or 22 railroad programs are gone and rolled into one? given that, for the common voter, just having one central program for those specific needs would probably look better on an audit, and more streamlined?
  We will see what happens if the status quo for most people changes, for better or worse, after all these cuts are made.
  
  We're talking about a pause on all federal grants and loans, he's going to disrupt the economy and people's lives just to reduce spending to maybe more efficiently allocate funding. You bring up the number of programs for counter terrorism and railroad maintenance and safety, but they probably have different goals or jurisdictions. Not to say that they couldn't be merged or their spending audited, but Trump's method of just breaking everything and see what happens is dangerous and irresponsible.
  Also the polls you bring up don't justify Trump's method here. Most people agree that some government spending is wasteful but that can't justify all actions Trump takes so long as he says it's for reducing government spending.
  
  That is your opinion.
  Clearly the majority disagree.
  Myself, do not see it as breaking things. It's very simple for those programs to continue, they just need to comply with the requested.
  Those who don't, will get culled just by not qualifying. This might translate in lower taxes in the long run. But it has to start somewhere.
  I think that it is irresponsible to spend the taxpayers money "just because" it is simpler for inertia to take hold and just do nothing.
  I also think that taking 4 years twiddling your fingers, bidding the time to do those changes as carefully as possible to not bother anyone is irresponsible as well for the taxpayer who's breaking their backs working everyday to fund things that they may or may not see a direct benefit.
  In the end, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs
  
  As if anything he’s doing is to help the fucking taxpayers… Certainly not the majority of them. Maybe the ones in the top brackets, so they can pay even less while the working class gets tax hikes and inflated prices for everything essential.
  I will agree that this is what was voted for. Now the idiots get to lay in the bed they’ve just shat in.
  
  Those "fucking taxpayers" are voters.
  And if you ever dream of winning another election, you need them
  So yeah maybe take that into account
  About it helping or not, we will have to wait and see. You don't usually reduce spend just for the kicks of it. Ideally it is to stop taxing the people or redirecting to specific emergency needs
  
  Why are the eggs being broken always regular people's paychecks and food stamps? Why not rich people's third vacation homes or yachts?
- Bullshit Trump troll trying to muddy the waters
- The world is richer than ever my guy. There are more super rich than ever. Fuck this underfunding attitude.
  
  Yep, and austerity kills people. If you want to force the Pentagon to pass an audit before giving them another penny, be my guest, but "the government" isn't wasteful.
  Also even if everything ends up being funded again, this put a whole ton of needless stress on people wondering if they're gonna get paid.

127 comments