Budgets, it has been said, are moral documents.
By examining what they include and exclude – fund and don’t fund – the apparent priorities of their makers are revealed.
With a new U.S. presidential administration and Congress in office, questions are percolating about federal budget priorities and tax policies – and the related decisions that will either help or hurt the most vulnerable citizens.
On Jan. 29, a online panel discussion – “Budget Priorities and Tax Policies to Help Poor Children and Families: Protecting the Safety Net and Strengthening the Child Tax Credit” – convened leaders and experts to examine both threats and opportunities for assistance to the poorest families in America. The dialogue was hosted by the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life at Georgetown University in Washington.
“Reports indicate that major cuts to food assistance, Medicaid, and housing are being considered to help pay for tax cuts that would primarily benefit more affluent individuals and corporations,” said moderator Kim Daniels, director of the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life.
“This new administration and Congress have a real opportunity for bipartisan collaboration on policies that would help lift millions of kids out of poverty,” Daniels added. “Policies that support poor children and families represent an opportunity to unite pro-life advocates and social justice advocates in the Catholic Church, and in the nation.”
The panel members agreed with the urgency of the situation, adding perspective from their experience.
“We’re facing major debates and decisions on budget and tax policies that could shred the safety net, could take nutrition assistance and health care from poor kids and poor families. Or could provide tax help to those families,” said John Carr, founder of the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life and the Circle of Protection, a coalition of Church bodies and related ministries advocating for low-income families.
“The Scriptures tell us the moral measure of our lives in our society is how we respond to the least of these,” Carr continued, referring to Mt. 25:31-46. “Jesus literally told us that our salvation depends on feeding the hungry, welcoming the strangers, care for the sick and lifting up the least of these, our brothers and sisters. In the weeks ahead, we face stark choices on whether we protect the lifelines, or reduce the health of kids who could go hungry and families who need health care.”
Carr then issued a call to action.
“Catholics, people of faith – all people of goodwill – need to use our voices to stand with and support those kids and families in the middle of these divisive debates and decisions,” he said. “These are moral choices with enormous human consequences.”
Related statistics are stark.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops reports that In 2023, 36.8 million people lived in poverty in the United States – the number of children living in poverty also increased to 10 million, nearly one million more children than the year before – while 47.4 million people also live in food insecure households, including 13.8 million children.
Rents are up 26 percent nationwide since early 2020, and half of renters spend over 30 percent of their income on housing.
Nearly 26 million people – 8 percent of the population – do not have health insurance, while more than one in 20 children is uninsured.
“We’ve got to start moving from being above poverty being the measure of success to being able to have a living wage,” shared Peggy Bailey, executive vice president for policy and program development at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington. “Or have government be able to supplement what we are not paying people, so that people can thrive and do more than just survive.”
“Sadly, the proposals that we are hearing from the administration and from the Republican-led Congress will set us back,” Bailey noted. “They will shift billions in Medicaid costs to states; take coverage away from millions of families; they can make it harder for eligible people to get Medicaid coverage in the first place. ... They could take the Affordable Care Act marketplace coverage away from many people, and there are proposals to cut or make it harder to get food assistance.”
Michael Strain – director of economic policy studies and the Arthur F. Burns Scholar in Political Economy at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based public policy think tank – said it’s difficult to predict outcomes.
“If I had to sum up my view of things in one word, it would be uncertainty,” he said. “I suspect that they’re going to try to cut some money for low-income programs and use that to finance tax cuts. There’s going to be a big debate about whether to increase spending to low-income households.”
“There are some Republicans – including the vice president – who have expressed support for expanding the child tax credit,” Strain continued, “including expanding the portion of the child tax credit that goes to households with no tax liability or with just a little bit of tax liability. So those households would get a check from the government. And there are a lot of Republicans who don’t want to do that, and who are strongly opposed to that. And that’s going to be a big fight.”
“It’s possible,” suggested Strain, “that food stamp benefits get cut by a smaller amount than the child tax credit gets raised and low-income households could use some of that child tax credit funding to purchase food, for example.”
Sandra Jackson – president and CEO of the House of Ruth, a nonprofit supporting D.C.-area survivors of domestic violence and/or houselessness – has seen families transition from poverty to thriving taxpayers.
“That’s what we should want,” explained Jackson. “That’s what I want for my family; that’s what you want for your family.”
Speaking of Congress, Jackson said she “would like to help them to consider the families that we see, they are just like our families; they want the very same things – they want their children to be successful; they want their children to succeed.”
“They don’t want anything different – and they don’t want handouts,” she emphasized. “That’s not their desire. They would prefer to be able to take care of themselves and be independent. But they just need a little help and a little support,” suggested Jackson. “If we do that, then we will have people that will transition out of this – and into a way that they can thrive, and be on their own.”
