Donald Trump doesn’t care about poor people, and that is simply a fact with much evidence to back it up. Republicans in general are known to keep their constituents int he trailer park with policies that have billionaires paying slightly more in taxes than Americans living below poverty levels.
The coronavirus is making its way around the world, and the president of the United States is not helping in the slightest. Trump faced criticism Tuesday after asking for, what Democrats are calling, an inadequate amount of money to combat the virus.
According to Washington Post:
House Democrats tell us they are outraged by one aspect of the White House response in particular: The White House appears to have informed Democrats that they want to fund the emergency response in part by taking money from a program that funds low-income home heating assistance.
A document that the Trump administration sent to Congress, which we have seen, indicates that the administration is transferring $37 million to emergency funding for the coronavirus response from the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, which funds heating for poor families.
House Appropriations Committee Democrats spokesman Evan Hollander said this about the plan that could literally leave Americans out in the cold:
“After dithering for weeks as the coronavirus spread around the world, the Trump administration has now decided to pay for its belated response by cutting funding for heating assistance for low-income families.”
Even though it’s pretty normal for a back and forth to happen when it comes to issues of budget, this one has made headlines because of Mr. Trump’s dishonesty in the situation. WaPo reports that, “this $37 million might seem relatively small, but Mark Wolfe, the executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association, which oversees state LIHEAP program directors, says it could have real impact.”
According to Wolfe:
“Winter is far from over, and we need every dollar to help poor families,” Wolfe told us. “$37 million for example is enough to help close to 750,000 families. There is absolutely no good reason why programs designed to help poor families should be sacrificed to address the virus.”