Trump budget goals that target senior programs could spark backlash in Orange County ...Middle East

Tens of thousands of lower-income seniors in Orange County stand to lose federal money that helps them meet some basic needs – food, housing, job training – if the Trump administration’s preferred 2026 federal budget becomes law.

One proposed change to a federal initiative known as Commodity Supplemental Food Program could hit about 25,000 local lower-income seniors. Right now, those people get a 32-pound box filled with items like cereal, canned soup and peanut butter each month. It’s unclear how or if those boxes will be delivered under the administration’s proposed replacement plan.

Other proposed cuts to federal housing programs could affect all of the estimated 45,000 people in Orange County who currently tap federal dollars to help pay their monthly rent. About half of those people are 60 or older.

And an initiative that aims to help lower-income seniors earn money so they rely less on the government – the Senior Community Service Employment Program – would be eliminated entirely. That program, according to the Trump plan, “is effectively an earmark to leftist DEI promoting entities like the National Urban League, the Center for Workforce Inclusion and Easter Seals.”

None of the proposed changes are set. The White House memo is a wish list, and details of the budget will need to be passed in the GOP-controlled Congress, probably this summer.

But political experts, nonprofit workers – even an older voter who describes himself as a Trump supporter – all say the White House and its supporters should be wary about that wish list. They say local politicians who support those cuts, and politicians who don’t do much to stave them off, risk walking into a political trap that’s snared others in the past: the ire of voters of a certain age.

“Older people might be ready to get fired up,” said Jimmy Camp, a longtime political consultant in Orange who has worked with candidates across the political spectrum.

“The conditions for it are there, for sure.”

While the White House budget would trim everything from school lunches to clean water projects, many of the groups linked to those programs have little influence in GOP politics. Young children can’t vote, and their parents tend to vote for Democrats. Homeless people are infrequent voters. Climate scientists, physicists, entrepreneurs seeking federal health or research grants – all are relatively tiny voting blocs.

But seniors?

“People my age, we vote,” said John Deal, an 81-year-old retired steel industry executive in Irvine.

“And we don’t forget.”

Tribal politics

Older voters aren’t monolithic.

In November, nationally, voters ages 50 to 64 were far more likely to back Trump than were voters ages 65 and up, according to a post-election survey by AARP.  The middle-age cohort chose Trump (56%) over Kamala Harris (43%), while the 65-and-up crowd split their vote, with 49% going to each candidate.

It’s unclear if that pattern held in Orange County, where 2024 vote results by age group aren’t yet publicly available.

What is clear is that, politically speaking, local older voters tend to punch above their weight. Though people older than 65 account for about 17% of the county’s population, they’ve accounted for closer to 25%, or more, of all votes cast in recent elections.

It’s part of a long-term pattern. About 41% of county voters age 65 and up are so-called high-propensity voters, meaning they routinely turn out for most elections, according to Political Data Inc., which tracks voting trends in California. By comparison, about 27% of local voters ages 50 to 64 qualify as high propensity, something that’s true of 18% of voters age 35 to 49 and only 13% of voters 18 to 34.

All that means one thing: Older voters have the ability – and, according to Camp and others, the propensity – to respond to any perceived political slight by punching back.

“(Older voters) are more affected personally by the things that affect their whole group,” Camp said.

Deal, an older voter who identifies as a Trump supporter, agrees. He believes proposed spending cuts that touch lower-income older people could prompt a political response from local seniors of all economic means.

“Look, I voted for Trump. I don’t necessarily love him, personally, but I support his ideas,” said Deal, who noted that he doesn’t tap into federal programs targeted by the White House but does use Social Security and Medicare.

Taxes, Deal said, “should be lower.” And, in his view, federal spending “goes too far” on social programs.

“But I play cards with people who feel differently. And I can see they’re already getting active, going to their (anti-Trump) marches and whatnot.

“I bet these issues about federal programs will be pretty important for all the people running for Congress or even mayor.”

If federal programs are cut, and if there is a political backlash, it might be sparked more by facts on the ground than by age-oriented identity politics, say people who work with seniors and locals who work on the programs targeted by the White House.

“The (Commodity Supplement Food Program) is used by people 60 or older, who qualify income-wise. It’s for everybody. And it’s in every community, from La Habra to San Clemente, and it largely follows Orange County demographics, with the exception that recipients are slightly more likely to be Asian and Pacific Islander than the county as a whole,” said Mark Lowry, director of Orange County Food Bank, which administers the Commodity Supplemental Food Program in Orange County.

“But all of the people who get those boxes need to get them,” Lowry added.

“It’s income-vetted and, I can tell you, it isn’t a luxury item.”

The 55-year-old program, initially launched as a way to boost agricultural interests, is now only for people 60 and older whose income is 150% or less of the local poverty rate. In Orange County, the monthly income thresholds to qualify for a food box are $1,957 for one person and $2,644 for a couple. About 109,000 people in California and roughly 707,000 around the country get food each month through the program.

Though the White House wants to end the current food box program – saying it has been “misused for DEI and logrolling,” using terms that refer to diversity programs and political favor-swapping – it also hints at replacing it. The memo pitches the idea of using somebody other than nonprofits to deliver “MAHA food boxes,” referring to the federal “Make America Healthy Again” moniker. The memo adds that the boxes should go directly from farms to needy seniors.

But the White House memo also claims the switch would result in a $425 million savings for taxpayers. That number doesn’t include any cost that might be needed to come with a new distribution network for a new type of food box.

In a letter he wrote to other food bank operators who administer the food box program in counties around the country, Lowry suggested the White House proposal – if the administration is sincere about wanting to keep issuing food boxes – might actually result in taxpayers paying more in order to feed needy seniors.

“The Administration claims a $425 million savings by eliminating CSFP,” Lowry wrote. “They provide no cost, however, related to their alternative for MAHA food boxes. The Administration proposes to substitute non-profits who engage volunteers who assemble CSFP food boxes with for-profit companies who will pay employees to package MAHA food boxes. It is reasonable to assume that the Administration is proposing a more costly model that will provide no savings for taxpayers.”

That pattern holds in other safety net changes suggested by the White House. Though the memo says taxpayers would save $163 billion, overall – even when mixing in spending increases for defense and immigration enforcement – there are no cost estimates for proposed replacements mentioned for at least some of the safety net programs.

“The numbers don’t necessarily make sense,” Lowry said.

“Some of this seems like it might backfire.”

Surviving scrutiny

The backfire argument – the idea that budget cuts to social programs might actually mean a bigger tax bill rather than a smaller one, and that cuts to social spending would be a drag on the overall economy – is already part of the pushback that’s emerged in the days since the White House posted its budget memo.

“Safety-net programs do much more than just alleviate individual hardships. They are economic engines… ” wrote Orange County Supervisor Doug Chaffee, chair of the Orange County Board of Supervisors, in a May 7 letter to Rep. Young Kim, R-Anaheim Hills, whose CA-40 district includes parts of Riverside, San Bernardino and Orange counties.

In the letter, Chaffee urged Kim to vote against any cuts to the federal food program SNAP (which was once known as Food Stamps and in California is known as CalFresh), and school-based nutrition programs. He referenced federal research that shows every $1 spent in SNAP benefits generates $1.80 in economic activity, and that every $1 billion spent by taxpayers to boost the SNAP program supports more than 13,000 jobs.

Kim also nudged further into the political pushback against White House budget priorities. Last month, she was one of a dozen GOP House members who signed a letter saying they won’t back steep cuts to Medicaid, an issue that could hamstring the push to reduce taxes and lower the budget, or risk taking health care and health insurance away from millions of lower-income Americans.

And on May 8, Kim’s office issued a video showing her (gently) grilling Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent over proposed cuts to the Community Development Financial Institution, a program that provides credit and financial services to underserved communities.

Part of their exchange went like this:

Rep. Kim: “I’d like to urge you to continue your support for CDFI. CDFI Fund programs are statutory, as you know, and this has been critical in promoting the local economy in Orange County. Do you still agree that the CDFI plan has a critical role to play in fostering economic opportunity?”

Secretary Bessent: “We believe that if CDFI officials follow their statutory obligations and do not digress into more ideological boundaries, they can be important institutions.”

What went unmentioned was the fact that the White House wants the program cut.

In its budget memo, the administration said it would end the CDFI program, in part because it believes that past CDFI grants “may have made race determinant of access to loan programs …  and framed American society as inherently oppressive rather than fostering unity.”

But the biggest financial argument against the cuts might be about federal housing programs, particularly in Orange County and particularly as they relate to older people.

The White House projects that taxpayers would save around $34 billion if the federal government ended or trimmed a variety of federal housing programs. That’s a huge number. But senior advocates say those cuts almost certainly would mean more homelessness, and that numerous economic studies have shown that homelessness is, among other things, far more expensive than housing assistance.

“The programs that they’re talking about cutting were set up for a reason. And even though there’s a lot of talk about how they’re wasteful or ineffective, when you look closely at what they do, you usually see something different. They work,” said Trinh Phan, director of state income security issues for Justice in Aging, a nonprofit that offers legal help to senior organizations.

“Cutting rent subsidies will result in more people on the streets. It’s simple,” she added.

Already, the fastest growing demographic in Southern California homeless shelters is people ages 50 and older. And if housing vouchers go away, homeless retirees, as they’re often known, could become common in Orange County.

That, Phan said, will inspire a political response from older voters.

“We’re already seeing a rise in senior homelessness. And that’s a very public issue; people see the homeless and it affects them,” Phan said. “And, beyond the morality of it, it’s much more expensive to try to help someone who is unhoused than it is to make sure they don’t become unhoused in the first place.

“That could wake a lot of people up.”

Related Articles

Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Trump budget goals that target senior programs could spark backlash in Orange County )

Also on site :

• Trump announces gesture of ‘good faith’ by Hamas
• ''24 in 24: Last Chef Standing' Eliminations Tonight: Which Chefs Went Home in Season 2, Episodes 4 and 5?
• What Happens to Your Body if You Walk 20 Minutes a Day, According to Doctors