Business
Column: The GOP attack on the safety net and middle-class programs begins to take shape
No one can be surprised that Republicans are hoping to exploit their Washington trifecta — the White House and majority control of the House and Senate — by implementing vast federal budget cuts in order to save their 2017 tax cuts from expiration.
Now we’re beginning to see some meat on the bare bones of GOP policies, thanks to a “menu” of fiscal policy reforms recently leaked to Politico.
The one-page document, which Politico reports was produced by the House Budget Committee chaired by Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), lists dozens of cutbacks adding up to supposed savings of as much as $5.7 trillion over 10 years.
We ought to be able to unleash growth through tax cuts … and we ought to be able to bend the spending curve.
— House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas)
The primary near-term goal appears to be staving off the expiration next year of the 2017 tax cuts, which disproportionately benefited corporations and the wealthy.
Many of these proposals are vague, presumably deliberately, though the drafters surely know the details. The ideas tend to match proposals that have been advanced by congressional Republicans in the past, and include some that were implemented by the first Trump administration and reversed or dropped by the Biden White House.
The main targets, moreover, are programs that the GOP has advocated paring back or eliminating for years, such as Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act and food stamps. Cuts in some programs are described in the “menu” under misleading headings.
Proposals that would cut Medicaid benefits or eligibility for thousands of Americans are titled “Making Medicaid Work for the Most Vulnerable.” A sheaf of proposals to raise costs for Obamacare enrollees comes under the anodyne heading, “Reimagining the Affordable Care Act.”
Arrington hasn’t commented publicly on the leaked document. His committee hasn’t responded to my request for comment. But he has made his name as a budget hawk: “We ought to be able to unleash growth through tax cuts,” he told the Wall Street Journal after the November election, “and we ought to be able to bend the spending curve.”
How many of these proposals can actually be enacted by the current Congress is unclear, since the GOP majority is narrow in the Senate and razor-thin in the House. Some proposals could hit hard in states and districts represented by Republicans. But the theme of the proposals is unmistakable — safety net programs and several Biden initiatives are on the chopping block.
Let’s examine some of the lowlights:
—Medicaid: Hostility to this federal-state program, which provides healthcare for low-income households, is a Republican hobbyhorse.
The proposal would change Medicaid into a block-grant program that provides federal assistance to states based on their population. As I’ve reported in the past — including when Trump proposed the change during his first campaign for office — block grants are just budget cuts in disguise. They’re invariably aimed at antipoverty programs.
Block-granting Medicaid would sap states’ ability to respond to changing conditions driving up healthcare spending, such as the COVID pandemic. The committee asserts that this change would yield as much as $918 billion in savings over 10 years. That’s the equivalent of about 15% of the federal share of Medicaid spending — potentially a major hit to state budgets.
The committee also advocates paring back the federal share of Medicaid spending on enrollees signed up under the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, which brought childless low-income adults into the program, to the percentage paid under traditional Medicaid. The ACA set the federal share for Medicaid expansion at 90% of costs.
The federal share in traditional Medicaid averages about 69% but varies by state, from a minimum of about 60% to a maximum of 83%. So this change, which the committee pegs at a 10-year savings of $690 billion, would place a further strain on state budgets. The proposal also would reduce the federal share of Medicaid administrative expenses, set by law at no less than 50%.
The committee also advocates imposing work requirements on Medicaid recipients. It claims that this would save $120 billion over a decade, but that could be achieved only by throwing thousands of enrollees out of the program. We know this because that’s exactly what happened when Arkansas tried it during the first Trump term.
The work rules did nothing to reduce joblessness, exacerbated a healthcare crisis, and raised administrative costs for the state. The Arkansas program was overturned by a federal judge, who also blocked other red states from proceeding. The Republican love for this policy despite ample evidence of its failure remains a mystery.
—Public assistance: Republican attacks on the most economically vulnerable Americans continue apace. The committee proposes reducing federal spending on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the federal-state program generally described as “welfare,” by 10%, to produce $15 billion in savings over a decade.
This is nothing but a cruel hit on America’s most desperate households. In no state do TANF benefits reach even 60% of the poverty level for a family of three. In 17 states — mostly those with large Black populations — they’re below 20% of the poverty level. In all but 11 states including California, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, TANF benefits were eroded by inflation between 1996 and 2023, sometimes by more than half.
A related proposal would reinstate the tightened standards for the “public charge” rule instituted in the first Trump term. This malevolent policy was aimed at immigrants by denying them entry or improvement in their immigration status if they were thought likely to access public assistance programs.
Trump added Medicaid and other noncash programs to the traditional roster of cash programs such as food stamps as signs the recipients would become a public charge.
As then-California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra noted at the time, the change was designed not only to throw millions of people out of public assistance programs, but also to have a chilling effect that would keep people who need healthcare and other help from seeking it. The Trump rule succeeded in doing so, according to an analysis by KFF; it was rescinded by Biden.
The menu lists “SNAP reforms” as the source of $22 billion in savings over a decade. It doesn’t specify the “reforms” sought in the food stmp program, but simple math suggests that they would involve either throwing people out of the program or reducing benefits, which currently average $6-$7 a day per person.
—The Biden Agenda: Other elements of the GOP menu take aim at key initiatives passed under Biden, including many that had bipartisan support.
It proposes dropping the green-energy provisions of the 2021 infrastructure bill, which included funding to modernize the nation’s public transit systems, building a national network of electric vehicle chargers and converting thousands of school buses to electric energy. The committee claims this would save $300 billion over 10 years, but since much of this spending is going to red states and conservative districts, rescinding it might be a tough lift for the GOP.
—The coming emergencies: The committee proposes to place restrictions on emergency spending — limiting the spending to the “recent average” to produce $500 billion in savings over a decade. This sounds like the elevation of hope over reality, since recent emergencies include not only the California fires, but tropical storms that leveled whole communities from Florida and Louisiana to Tennessee, North Carolina and Pennsylvania last year. Mother Nature, plainly, doesn’t pay much attention to budgetary posturing. Global warming is likely to raise the cost of emergency relief, not reduce it.
Politics as well as natural conditions will get in the way of these policies’ implementation. But it’s worth knowing what the Republicans aspire to achieve, and assessing their intentions.
Business
Commentary: Trump wants to let companies make fewer disclosures, thus keeping investors in the dark
Trump’s SEC is considering eliminating the mandate for quarterly corporate financial reports, but even some big investors call it a lousy idea.
This being the “information age,” it would be understandable if investors sometimes feel inundated with too much information to wade through about the stocks in their mutual fund portfolios.
The Securities and Exchange Commission, bowing like a puppy to the urgings of President Trump, is considering exactly the wrong solution to this supposed burden. It’s proposing to allow public companies to give their investors less information, as though that’s a good thing.
On May 8, the SEC proposed rescinding its mandate that public companies report financial results on a quarterly schedule. Instead, it suggests, semiannual and annual reports should suffice.
This takes an already-unlevel playing field where Main Street investors are already disadvantaged, and makes it more unlevel.
— Dennis Kelleher, Better Markets
The SEC left its proposal open for public comment for 60 days, meaning the window closed Monday. By then, the agency had received more than 68,000 comments, according to a tracker posted online by accounting professor Tzachi Zach of Ohio State.
Almost 99.9% of the comments were negative. Several organizations of institutional investors and auditing professionals, as well as a tsunami of individual investors, expressed opposition.
A similar initiative the SEC aired in 2018, during Trump’s first term, received an overwhelmingly negative response and was eventually dropped.
The tide of opposition coming from individual investors shouldn’t be surprising. “Taking away basic quarterly information means investors are blind for six months at a time,” says Dennis Kelleher, co-founder and chief executive of the investor advocacy nonprofit Better Markets.
That’s especially true for small investors, though perhaps not so much for major institutions, insiders or deep-pocketed individuals. “If you’re a big dog, you’ll get the information anyway,” Kelleher told me. “And insiders, who are trading in their own stock all the time, will have the information. This takes an already-unlevel playing field where Main Street investors are already disadvantaged, and makes it more unlevel.”
Trump set off the latest initiative with a social media post on Sept. 15, advocating the move to a six-month reporting schedule. It read, in part, “This will save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies. Did you ever hear the statement that, ‘China has a 50 to 100 year view on management of a company, whereas we run our companies on a quarterly basis???’ Not good!!!”
As was usual with Trump, his argument was a string of uninformed and irrelevant non sequiturs.
It’s doubtful that eliminating quarterly reports will save much, if any, money. Most 10-Qs are cookie cutter documents disclosing financial figures already embedded in corporate records.
The idea that managers would become empowered to “focus on properly running their companies” if only they were relieved of the burden of preparing a report every three months is just malarkey: Any CEOs who feel the impulse to drop everything and involve themselves in what is essentially an automated process can’t be very good at their jobs.
As for China’s “50 to 100 year view on management of a company,” what would that even mean, even if it were true? China doesn’t operate on a 50 to 100 year corporate horizon, but rather on a string of five-year plans. The most recent of these was adopted by the government in March, covers the period up to 2030, and is its 15th in a row.
Despite the flaws in Trump’s arguments, Trump’s SEC Chairman Paul Atkins, a former corporate lawyer and securities industry consultant, fell into line. Within a few days of Trump’s post, he showed up on CNBC to minimize the potential effect of the change. Private companies rely on semiannual reports, after all, he noted, although the idea of taking private companies as models for publicly traded corporations might not strike experienced investors as the wisest thing.
Atkins cited an enduring chestnut, for which there’s no evidence, that quarterly reporting is responsible for “short-term thinking” in corporate suites (though he admitted that his evidence was “anecdotal”). And he suggested that small investors have ample access to corporate information even without quarterly reports — why, he said, they can just tune in to CNBC!
“To propose change in what our rules are now would be a good way forward,” he said. “So I welcome the president’s putting this up for discussion.”
Something more insidious undergirds the SEC’s proposal than its immediate effect on corporate behavior. The agency rationalizes its proposal as seeking “a tradeoff between reducing regulatory burdens … and promoting efficient financial markets through timely disclosure.”
The problem here, Kelleher points out, is that “reducing regulatory burdens” isn’t part of the SEC’s mission in any way, shape or form. It’s a regulatory agency, and its mission since its founding in 1934 has been to protect investors, not to make things fluffier for stock issuers.
The history of financial disclosure in the U.S. shows a long-term trend favoring more disclosure, not less. In the 1880s, quarterly reporting by railroads and other transportation companies were common.
Early on, pressure for more frequent disclosure came not from government regulators, who barely existed before 1934, but from investors. The reporting of quarterly earnings, notes corporate finance expert Owen Lamont of Acadian Asset Management, was “a bottom-up historical phenomenon reflecting voluntary arrangements between firms and investors, not a top-down phenomenon imposed by law.”
By 1931, according to financial historians, 63% of New York Stock Exchange-listed firms were publishing their quarterly earnings. The Big Board mandated that frequency for most listed companies in 1939. The SEC mandated semiannual reports in 1955 and quarterly reports, as Atkins said, in 1970.
The evidence in favor of dropping the quarterly reports is uniformly thin. Some advocates cite a 2018 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and Warren Buffett that was headlined “Short-Termism Is Harming the Economy.”
Couple of points about this: First, the target of Dimon and Buffett wasn’t quarterly financial reporting, but quarterly earnings guidance — that is, the practice of some top executives who project their earnings into the future. (This guidance usually comes at the same time they issue their SEC disclosures.)
It’s guidance, they wrote, that is “a major driver” of short-termism in corporate behavior. That’s because management is giving itself a target it feels obligated to meet, even if factors outside its control interfere with the quest.
Furthermore, Dimon and Buffett wrote, “Our views on quarterly earnings forecasts should not be misconstrued as opposition to quarterly and annual reporting.” They called transparency about financial and operating results “an essential aspect of U.S. public markets … so that the public, including shareholders and other stakeholders, can reliably assess real progress.”
Individual investors may be unmoved by the SEC’s proposal because — let’s be candid — how many of them read quarterly earnings reports, anyway? But that’s unimportant, Kelleher says, because other market participants are reading them. “So that information is in the marketplace, and that’s what actually enables price discovery, so stock prices roughly reflect what’s going on at a company, most of the time.”
More to the point, the quarterly reports reflect the highest-quality, detailed information, the information the SEC requires executives to disclose on pain of facing a civil lawsuit from the agency or even criminal liability for faking data. “Main Street investors, whether they read quarterly reports or not, are the real beneficiaries,” Kelleher says.
That’s so. The bottom line is that quarterly financial reporting helps investors. It doesn’t promote short-term behavior and its costs, modest as they are, don’t outweigh its benefits.
Over the decades, scandal-ridden corporations have hidden fraudulent behavior in the interstices between mandated disclosures—think Enron, WorldCom and Tyco, among others. Why give any corporation, even an honest one, the opportunity to disclose less?
The luxury shopping center in Pacific Palisades will reopen next month after more than $100 million in renovations forced by the January 2025 wildfire that devastated the Los Angeles neighborhood.
Palisades Village will reopen Aug. 15, owner Rick Caruso announced Wednesday. The outdoor center survived the blaze that destroyed homes and other businesses but needed refurbishment to eliminate contaminants that the fire could have spread.
Crews are putting finishing touches on mall buildings after tearing them down to the studs, treating the wood and rebuilding the walls, Caruso said.
“Everybody’s working, and stores are moving their products in,” he said. “It’s a really cool feeling that people have really locked arms and are working together.”
An electrician installs lighting for a restaurant at Rick Caruso’s Palisades Village on Thursday. The shopping center is scheduled to reopen mid-August.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
Pacific Palisades resident Allison Polhill, who is rebuilding the home of 30 years that her family lost in the blaze, said she is “thrilled” at the prospect of returning to the mall she used to frequent. Its comeback is a boost for the community, she said.
“Every single step that we make to reopen our commercial corridors is going to bring more people back into the Palisades,” said Polhill, who expects to move back into her home at the end of August.
A total of 6,822 structures were destroyed in the Palisades fire, including more than 5,500 residences and 100 commercial businesses, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Caruso previously attributed the mall’s survival to the hard work of private firefighters and the fire-resistant materials used in the mall’s construction.
The $200-million shopping and dining center opened in 2018 with a movie theater and a roster of upmarket tenants, including Erewhon, which may be the only grocer in the heart of the fire-ravaged neighborhood when it opens.
Caruso’s company was able to fill the mall with tenants despite the long shutdown.
Palisades Village is 99% leased, with the majority of tenants returning, said Jackie Levy, chief financial and revenue officer. Nearly one-third of the shops and restaurants are new to the property.
A firefighter carries a hose back to his rig while walking through a destroyed home from the Palisades fire in Pacific Palisades on Jan. 7, 2025.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
Last year, Pacific Palisades-based fashion designer Elyse Walker said she would reopen her eponymous store in Palisades Village after losing her 25-year flagship location on Antioch Street to the inferno.
Other neighborhood shops destroyed in the fire that are reopening at the mall include K Bakery and Loomey’s Toys, which caters to children up to age 12 and used to be across the street from Palisades Elementary Charter School.
“It’s been a journey and I’m excited because I wasn’t sure that there was going to be a place to come back to,” said toy store owner Amanda Rastegar. “Hopefully we can bring some of that magic back.”
Rastegar’s home in the Palisades survived but was damaged by the fire. The family returned about eight weeks ago. Her last memory of the fire was a burning supermarket.
“I just couldn’t wrap my brain around what was happening,” she said. “By the time I left, Gelson’s was on fire.”
Among the returning tenants is Angelini Ristorante & Bar. Well-known Los Angeles chef Gino Angelini said he will be in the kitchen next month for a return of the Italian restaurant.
“We won’t do a big celebrity open,” he said. “We want to have a very soft opening and see our customers come back.”
Construction takes place at Rick Caruso’s Palisades Village on Thursday. The shopping center is scheduled to reopen mid-August.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
An elaborate celebration would not feel “correct for me,” Angelini said, because the devastation has been “very sad” for so many.
Other new tenants include local chef Nancy Silverton, who has agreed to move in with a new Italian steakhouse called Spacca Tutto. Women’s activewear retailer LESET will open its first West Coast location.
Caruso said he is optimistic that customers will return to the center, even though many Pacific Palisades residents are still dispersed. One tracking system estimated that about 30% of the Village’s customer base was impacted by the fire, he said.
“That means 70% did not get impacted, so there’s a lot of customers still left out there,” Caruso said. Historically, the center drew customers from as far away as Beverly Hills and Calabasas, as well as Malibu, Brentwood and Santa Monica.
He also hopes many will be inspired to visit the revived mall.
“I believe in the goodness of people and I believe that people are going to want to support the Palisades,” he said. “They’re going to want to be there and support the businesses that have had the courage and the heart to reopen.”
Walmart is rapidly expanding its network of electric vehicle chargers designed for customers to use while they shop.
The network could help fill gaps in EV infrastructure in states with greater need for chargers. Walmart, which has more than 5,000 locations in the U.S. and hundreds in California, says more than 90% of Americans live within 10 miles of one of its stores.
The chargers also offer an incentive for customers to choose Walmart — Walmart Plus members will receive a 10% discount off an average price of $0.46 per kilowatt-hour of energy at the company’s chargers.
Walmart chargers are already available at more than 75 locations in 17 states, with Texas boasting the most charging stations, followed by Florida and Arizona.
Matthew Nelson, Walmart’s director of energy policy, said last week on LinkedIn that the network will soon reach 29 states, including California.
“We are delivering on the promise of affordable, reliable and convenient charging,” Nelson said in his post.
According to Walmart’s website, six charging stations are coming to California soon, though the company did not offer a specific timeline.
The chargers will be installed at stores in Antelope, Brea, Fresno, Stockton, Suisun City and Vallejo.
Most charging sites in California will include eight to 16 fast-charging stalls, said Walmart spokesperson Kelsey Bohl.
The company first announced plans in April 2023 to install its own EV chargers at Walmart and Sam’s Club stores, with a goal of installing thousands of chargers by 2030. Partnering with ABB E-Mobility and Alpitronic, it added 25 new charging sites this past May and six more in June.
“Walmart is building a leading retail-integrated EV fast-charging network, focused on delivering an affordable, reliable and convenient charging experience where customers already shop,” Bohl said in an emailed statement. “Customers can charge while they shop, access stations through the Walmart app they already use, and benefit from affordable pricing.”
The charging stations already available include 612 individual charging stalls using 400-kilowatt chargers. Each stall has a dual charging cord with both Combined Charging System and North American Charging Standard connectors. The standard connectors, designed by Tesla, are smaller and lighter than the combined systems.
The primary way to pay for the chargers is through the Walmart app, but the company is also experimenting with built-in credit card readers to allow those without the app to use the stations.
Customers can check charger availability on the Walmart app. The company said the chargers will be available 24 hours a day.
-
Finance2 minutes agoHow Banreservas mobilised diaspora capital
-
Fitness9 minutes agoI’d Fallen Into an Exercise Rut—Until Trail Running Reminded Me How Joyful Movement Could Be
-
Movie Reviews17 minutes agoMovie review: Supergirl is a blast
-
World22 minutes agoTrump Says He Thinks He Will Remove Syria From US Terrorism Sponsor List
-
Lifestyle1 hour agoAppeals court denies Trump’s request to halt removal of his name from the Kennedy Center
-
Technology1 hour agoMeta is reportedly working on smart glasses that would be recording all the time
-
World1 hour agoTrump says ‘Iran lies and cheats’ as IRGC emerges as dominant force in negotiations with US
-
Politics1 hour agoWho is Valli Geiger? Meet the Maine Dem that Platner urged to run for Senate
