Powered By Blogger

Publius Speaks

Publius Speaks
Become A Follower

10/10/2017

Trump Budget and Child Abuse

Caution!  This blog may be unsettling, because it is about child abuse, or the threat thereof.  The perpetrators may not only surprise you; the accusations against them may not be to your liking.
I encourage you to read further at a cautious pace, and absorb as much as you can.  It may change your mind about the level of child abuse in this country, and about who some of the people are behind a certain kind of child abuse.
First, let me paint a picture and see if you can envision why this is written in the way it is.
Suppose you knew of a large group of men (and some women) who were involved in a scheme or a plan to abuse or neglect a very large number of young children?  Suppose you found that they had access to some of your money, and were using your dollars to take away from these children some specific things that would cause them to become sick or to lose some safety items that enable them to ward off or protect themselves against harm or death?  Let’s say you had uncovered a conspiracy within this group to take away something from their parents that was enabling those parents to protect them and to enable them to develop into healthy and productive adults?  And, one step further, what if you discovered that this cadre of men and women was using your dollars and your backing to perpetrate this whole scheme while protecting themselves from responsibility, blame or consequences for their actions?  What would you do?
Second, let me give you a brief primer on child abuse definition.  Ready?
Child abuse is a crime that encompasses a variety of behaviors involving physical, emotional, or sexual mistreatment or neglect upon a child.”
State child abuse laws define child abuse as any act (or failure to act) that:
  1. Results in imminent risk or serious harm to a child's health and welfare due to physical, emotional, or sexual abuse;
  2. affects a child (typically under the age of 18);
  3. by a parent or caregiver who is responsible for the child's welfare.
In most states, the harm must have been inflicted by non-accidental means. This includes intentional acts, actions that were careless, and acts of negligence.   Also, the ‘harm’ inflicted upon a child need not be actual, but may include ‘threats’ or ‘risks of imminent harm’.”  http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/child-abuse-overview.html
Yes, I have taken liberties by bolding and underlining certain words, but those words are key to a definition of child abuse that most of us ignore.  We are much more apt to look for recognizable physical acts of abuse, rather than for inaction, negligence, or risks of imminent harm as being abusive.  But, according to these common definitions used by the states (and the feds as well), they are as illegal as physical or mental abuse.
So, hear me out.  What if you applied this definition of abuse to what you had discovered in the scenario above?  Would you begin to believe that the group was at the very least committing acts that could be labeled negligent, causing threats of harm to anxious parents, including the risk of imminent hurt to their children? Leaving that question aside for the moment,  let us take another step.
What I propose to do now is to lay out for you three examples of what I consider to be child abuse, not in terms of physical or mental or sexual abuse acts, but under the terms we have just discussed: inaction, neglect, threats and risks of imminent harm.  See if you can agree that the perpetrators could well fall under a general definition of caregiver:  "an unpaid or paid member of a person's social network who helps them with activities of daily living.” 
Moreover, if the definition of caregiver is expanded to reflect the care given by others in the social network (that could include all of us), then anyone paid to be responsible for domestic tranquility, the general welfare, and to secure the blessings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, might well be considered a caretaker in a very broad sense, but also in a very real sense.  More on that thought later.  First, the three examples of child abuse:
EXAMPLE (1) If you were interacting with a group of pre-school children in an educational, care-giving, developmental setting that included an opportunity for those children to develop skills and understanding that would give them a good chance to compare well withother children their age as they entered elementary school, what would you think of a cadre of adults who swooped down on that center and began moving out the furniture, shooing children out the door to fend for themselves?  What would be your response to their firing adult mentors and making them leave the building or of them telling any parents who showed up that their children would no longer have such ineffective and inefficient “fun and games?”  And then, have the raiders shut all the doors and windows and exit the building, leaving behind broken hearts, broken toys, no furniture no teachers and caregivers, just an empty building.
Sound familiar?  That’s right – it’s Head Start, on the Trump chopping block for cuts of enormous size, along with other Education programs (credit FirstFocus.org for much of what follows)
EARLY CHILDHOOD--    Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) funding decreased.  This is the primary government program that helps low-income families obtain child care.  
Head Start funding reduced. Like the CCDBG, the proposed FY 2018 budget seeks to fund Head Start at FY 2016 levels and excludes the increase contained in the FY 2017 final Omnibus appropriations bill. The highly successful Head Start program provides comprehensive health, education, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income families to improve the early health and education of young children.   
Preschool Development Grant eliminated.  These grants encouraging states to improve their preschool infrastructure by enabling them to develop high quality preschool programs have been zeroed out in Trump’s budget.  But there’s still more…
EDUCATION Title I reduced. The budget is asking for $578 million below FY17 for Title I, which addresses disparities in education resources for low-income students by targeting funds to public schools in areas of concentrated poverty.
Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) cut.  The budget includes a 7 percent reduction to EHCY, which serves more than 1.2 million students experiencing homelessness in the public-school system by providing protections and services to ensure they can enroll in and attend school, complete their high school education, and continue to higher education.
 21st Century Learning Centers eliminated. The budget does not fund the $1.2 billion for before- and after-school programs that support academic achievement for low-income students, including providing nutrition to students during the summer.
EXAMPLE (2) Picture having a child or grandchild with a serious disease, a malformed heart, or a cancerous liver.  Let’s say the only treatment available is at one of the premier children’s hospitals in the nation.  The first thing that comes to mind is, of course, the ability of the child to undergo major treatment and even surgery to repair the damage.  The second thing, undoubtedly, is the expense, not only of treatment, surgery, doctors, surgeons, tests, equipment, etc., but also the added cost of having to arrange and pay for temporary residential arrangements away from home at some distance because back-and-forth trips would not be feasible.  Oh yes, and what about the other kids at home?  Another story perhaps. 
Parents find themselves facing costs they never expected in their lives.  They begin to search for financial aid from government and the social worker at the hospital says, “I’m terribly sorry, but the main source of funds in these cases used to be Medicaid, but it isn’t available now for your child’s case.  We’ll have to look elsewhere.  How about family or friends?  Money-raisers? Savings?  All-of-a-sudden, the situation becomes darker with the prospect of long-term care being a necessity.  Where do the parent’s turn?  Bankruptcy becomes one of the options, and despair and fear begin to creep into the picture. 
Got the Picture?  It’s all related to Medicaid and CHIPS re-structuring and funding.
HEALTH-- The Trump budget cuts Medicaid funding by $610 billion, ending the Medicaid entitlement and changing the program into a system financed through block grant or per capita payments to states beginning in 2020.  With more than 37 million children in America relying on Medicaid for their health insurance, cuts of this magnitude would have a dramatic impact on health care access, coverage, and benefits for our nation’s children. The proposed Medicaid cuts are in addition to $880 billion in Medicaid cuts that are currently pending before Congress.  Combined, those Medicaid cuts would result in slashing the program by an astonishing $1.5 trillion over the next decade.
While some child-focused programs remained flat or received modest increases, others are zeroed out in the president’s budget. They include Emergency Medical Services for Children, Autism and Other Developmental Disorders, and Universal Newborn Hearing Screening.  And then, there is CHIPS
Should Congress fail to extend CHIP funding, states will rapidly exhaust their federal allotments. MACPAC estimates that by March 2018, 31 states and the District of Columbia will run out of CHIP funding; by June 2018, all states but Wyoming will be without funding.
 The Trump administration has proposed significant reductions to current CHIP funding levels:
a lowering of CHIP’s upper income eligibility limit to 250 percent of poverty, which would affect programs in 28 states.   
 For the 4.7 million CHIP children covered through Medicaid, federal payments to states would drop to the normal Medicaid matching rate, creating a considerable funding shortfall that states would need to offset.
 For the 3.7 million children covered through separate CHIP programs, all federal funding would cease and states would have to move these children to Medicaid, replace separate program funding out of state revenues, or end coverage entirely.
MACPAC estimates that ending CHIP funding could translate into a complete coverage loss for 1.1 million children, while millions more would face significantly higher coverage costs. Furthermore, ending a public program involves months of planning, multiple administrative steps, and enough time to try to help families find alternative coverage. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2017/sep/extending-chip-high-stakes-families-states

EXAMPLE (3) Picture, if you will, the enormous factor adequate food is to a child’s life and development. Here’s a brief paragraph that tells the story:







Why Is Nutrition Important for Children?  Nutrition is very important for everyone, but it is especially important for children because it is directly linked to all aspects of their growth and development; factors which will have direct ties to their level of health as adults. For example, a child with the right balance of omega fatty acids in his/her daily diet has a much better chance at creating a more solid foundation for brain activity and capabilities in later life. 
 HUNGER AND NUTRITION -  President Trump’s proposed FY 18 budget seeks to cut SNAP (food stamps) by $193 billion over 10 years. Currently, more than 20 million children are served by SNAP.  With nearly half of every SNAP dollar going directly to kids, the program combats hunger for the 1 in 5 children living in “food insecure” households. SNAP is one of the most effective ways to fight child poverty and is also credited with boosting academic performance in kids, which, in turn, helps them lay a foundation for economic self-sufficiency.

And, please don’t forget those school meal programs that are also being cut.  Going hungry in class is not amenable to achieving a quality education.
In many other ways, Trump’s $4.1 trillion budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2018 seeks massive cuts to critical programs that help American children and families.  It takes aim at all areas of life that impact kids: health, education, poverty, housing, immigration, and foster care.    Below is a brief account of how other administration proposals for FY 2018 spending will affect the well-being of children and families. 
HOUSING, RENT and HOMELESSNESS -  The homelessness rate of American children and youth continues to skyrocket, but President Trump’s proposed budget aims to make massive cuts to homeless assistance and affordable housing programs that help children and families:   National Housing Trust Fund  This program provides resources to build and rehabilitate housing, including rental housing, for low-income families. About one-quarter of this spending, or $35 million, goes to children. 
 Legal Services Corporation (LSC) eliminated. This important organization provides civil legal services for low income families, including representation for families facing eviction.    The proposed budget also seeks to cut $133 million from Homeless Assistance Grants, $15 million from the Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes Grants, and cut the Tenant Rental Assistance Program by 5 percent.
INCOME SUPPORT -- The White House budget proposes a devastating cut of $21 billion over 10 years to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, the primary cash assistance program for low-income families with children. Fully 75 percent of TANF funding goes to children. Income support is critical to healthy child development and academic achievement. It helps parents provide the resources needed for economic mobility – such as transportation to work, childcare, and educational materials for their kids. 
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) eliminated. This vital program currently funds an array of services for children, including child care, child abuse prevention, adoption assistance, and transitional services. Currently, states use about 35% of SSBG dollars for child welfare services… 
Cuts to Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. Trump wants to cut $40 billion from the Earned Interest Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC) over 10 years. In 2015 alone, the EITC and CTC helped lift more than 5 million children out of poverty. Low Income Heating Assistance Program (LIHEAP) eliminated. Nearly one-quarter of all funding for this critical program is directed toward children.   
CHILD WELFARE -- there are several programs that have been reduced or cut that will heavily impact how states use federal dollars to support their child welfare programs, which puts the safety and well-being of children in care at risk.
 Adoption Opportunities Program cut by $9 million - helps children achieve permanency by providing funds to eliminate barriers to adoption and helping find permanent families for children
 The elimination of the Social Security Block Grant and reduction of TANF funds also greatly impacts child welfare systems since states use these funding streams to supplement child welfare programs. Cuts to Medicaid also significantly impact child welfare populations since most are covered through Medicaid and rely on it for physical health exams and mental health services and therapies.
One more point (and there are many more to make in this story): some programs that hurt and harm children with cuts are programs we so not readily associate with them.  Take just two of many: 

 Affordable housing
“President Trump’s fiscal 2018 budget request seeks to raid some of the most flexible and effective grant dollars that communities receive from the federal government to meet affordable-housing and economic-development needs.

Governors, mayors and other officials use funds from Department of Housing and Urban Development initiatives, such as the HOME Investment Partnerships and the Community Development Block Grant programs, to build and preserve housing, support first-time home buyers, open community centers and supplement services for the homeless, elderly and disabled. These funds would be eliminated in this proposal, which could result in 580,000 fewer affordable homes created and more than 350,000 jobs lost over the next five years. Eliminating these programs will leave cities and towns with too-limited funds, leading to local tax increases that stifle economies and limit mobility. (Henry Cisneros (HUD secretary, 1993 to 1997) quoted in the Washington Post)
Environmental Protection – see my Blog post for 6/3/2014 titled ‘Misusing the Power of the Purse” and let me conclude today’s blog post with some words from that posting:
“Now let me add to that the abuse of children that Congress has allowed to happen by neglect and inaction, as well as by active cutting of programs that benefit children and families.  Because I have spoken before of this (see blog postings for 4/13/2014, 2/17/2014, 3/14/2013, 3/3/2013), I will make it brief and to the point.  Pre-natal care is essential for children yet unborn.  Affordable healthcare is a must for children if they are to grow as they should and to face life without the effects of childhood diseases; they must have a first-class education that prepares them for life's work and life's demands, beginning with a pre-K program that starts them off with an advantage; they must be protected from environmental hazards; they must be encouraged and enabled to graduate from college;  they must be nurtured by families that are themselves not put at risk by either private or public decisions that can harm their lives.  Children must be nourished in many ways:  by caring people, with the right foods, the best education possible, and with a vast array of possibilities for living a fruitful and meaningful life. 
 “The Republican Radicals in Congress have decided that none of this is true or possible.  They have instead decided to cut funding for almost every program that benefits, encourages, nurtures and promotes children:  research, universal pre-K education, housing for the homeless and the poor, adequate funding for all schools and the resources necessary to bring about a world-class education for all; they cut Head Start, Aid to children and families, food stamps, and housing subsidies, and still want to repeal the Affordable Care Act.  They have neglected children with special needs; have cut Pell grants and neglected to cut back on interest rates for student loans.  They neglect entirely the special needs of homeless children, children with disabilities, children who will not go to college, and of those who drop out of school.  They have done nothing to reform the juvenile justice system or the over-incarceration of drug-abusers.  They have neglected the potential of minority children and have instead laid the groundwork for them to be labeled as perpetual felons with no vote, no rights and no jobs.  I call this abuse and neglect of children who are our most valuable resource.  The congressional naysayers are child abusers and for that they must be called to account.  Impeachment for them is too mild.” 
I would simply add that the burden of proof as to whether “direct harm” or the threat of such, has been caused to specific children by congressional and presidential action or inaction (neglect) is no further away than the records of social service, Medicaid and other offices, doctors’ medical records, hospital records, housing authorities, etc.  It is simply a matter of equalizing the investigation of abuse and neglect by these politicians with the same unrelenting sleuthing when parents or relatives or strangers are involved.  The proof is there – passing or signing legislation is a potentially abusive action, and we need to make that fact stick through numerous class action lawsuits on behalf of the millions and millions of children who have been abused and neglected by the politicians we elect to represent and protect them as their surrogate caregivers. (Is that why Legal Services got eliminated, so the poor have nowhere to turn?)  
And let’s not forget, voters who continuously return abusive politicians to office are themselves abettors of abuse, neglecting their duty to protect their own children and grandchildren.  I speak directly to those many seniors who supported Donald Trump, and who, by so doing, have unleashed a child abuser upon their own grandchildren and on my grandchildren.  Shame on you!  You, and others, can redeem yourselves by never ever voting again for politicians who willfully or neglectfully support cutting back on programs that benefit our children and grandchildren. It’s time to stand up and challenge the child abusers in the White House and in the Congress.