The White House unveiled President Donald Trump’s budget proposal for 2026 on Friday, marking a significant reorganization of the nation’s domestic spending. The plan involves drastic reductions or even the complete elimination of funding for several government programs. This proposal is a reflection of Trump’s actions within his initial 100 days in office, such as the abrupt dismissals of federal employees.
The budget aims to impose sharp cuts on sectors like childcare, disease research, renewable energy, and international peacekeeping efforts. Despite previously initiated actions through the Department of Government Efficiency, under Elon Musk, the plan concurrently allocates substantial funds to bolster the administration’s mass deportation objectives.
The budget document aligns with Trump’s commitment to terminate so-called “woke programs,” which includes cutting preschool grants linked to diversity initiatives in various states. It also reflects Trump’s promise to curb the “weaponization of government” by slashing funding for the Internal Revenue Service. Critics argue this move enables him to use his authority to target personalities and organizations he opposes.
Overall, the plan represents a significant reduction in domestic spending, lowering it by $163 billion, equating to 22.6% less than the current yearly expenditure, as noted by the White House.
Meanwhile, the administration anticipates that Congress will release $375 billion in new funding for the Homeland Security and Defense departments, in alignment with Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” which merges tax cuts with spending reductions. The aim is to counter what Trump terms a “foreign invasion,” despite migrant arrivals hitting record lows.
House Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed the proposal, describing it as “a bold blueprint that reflects the values of hardworking Americans and the commitment to American strength and prosperity.”
Budget proposals like this typically do not become law directly but serve as a foundation for the upcoming fiscal debates. Seen as expressions of intent, this is the first budget after Trump’s re-election, and it sets the tone for the Republican president’s second-term ambitions alongside his Congressional party.
This proposal comes at a time when Trump has independently enforced what might amount to hundreds of billions in tax hikes via tariffs, instigating a trade conflict that leaves consumers, CEOs, and international leaders apprehensive about a potential economic slump.
In response to concerns surrounding an impending recession, Trump defended the economy’s robustness in a recent interview, asserting that despite some analysts’ worries, the U.S economy would perform “fantastically,” emphasizing optimism held by others on Wall Street about future economic conditions.
Democrats criticized the budget as a worrying indication of Trump’s strategic priorities for the country. Senator Patty Murray of Washington expressed her disapproval, highlighting that Trump’s proposals prioritize defunding programs aiding working Americans while providing substantial tax cuts to billionaires, including himself, and burdening middle-class citizens with tariffs.
The budget outline was provided by the White House Office of Management and Budget, under Russell Vought. It presents only the federal discretionary spending, amounting to about $1.83 trillion annually for defense and non-defense budget segments. Trump’s team proposes to cut this by $163 billion, resulting in $1.69 trillion, amidst a comprehensive $7 trillion federal budget that encompasses numerous other programs.
Federal budget growth has been accompanied by rising deficits nearing $2 trillion annually and interest payments approaching $1 trillion annually. This is largely attributed to the surge in pandemic-related expenses, tax code alterations reducing revenue, and increasing costs of Medicare, Medicaid, and other demands, especially healthcare. The national debt has soared to $36 trillion.
Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, highlighted the need for a comprehensive budget that considers full spending details and tackles deficit reduction.
Key aspects of the proposed budget include an 84% reduction in State Department and international program funding, pegged at $9.6 billion, reflecting deep budget cuts that are ongoing, including within the U.S. Agency for International Development. Health and Human Services would face a $33.3 billion cut, and education funds would drop by $12 billion, impacting institutions like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health.
Conversely, the Defense Department would receive an extra $113.3 billion, while Homeland Security would obtain $42.3 billion more, contingent on congressional approval of Trump’s big bill. This strategy drew criticism from defense advocates, including former GOP Leader, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who lambasted the proposed defense boost as a “gimmick.”
McConnell stressed the importance of the U.S. leading by example with substantial defense investment, affirming that Congress retains ultimate fiscal responsibility through its constitution-granted powers, dictating the eventual federal budget and funding allocations.
Congress is deeply engaged in drafting Trump’s expansive bill combining tax breaks, spending cuts, and enriched deportation funds, a legislative package with binding legal authority contrasting the budget plan’s suggestive nature.
Russell Vought is anticipated to testify before Congress soon as the Trump administration presents its fiscal case. An experienced budget strategist, Vought served under Trump during his first term and has extensively contributed to Project 2025, advocating for a federal government overhaul.
In alignment with Trump’s vision, Vought plans a $9 billion proposal eliminating current funding to the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Trump recently signed an order directing the cessation of federal funding for PBS and NPR, underscoring efforts to reallocate budget priorities.
Vought indicated that these budget-cutting measures could be part of a larger series designed to test congressional openness to reversing certain financial pledges.