Poloncarz says proposed federal budget cuts could cost Erie County over $100M by 2028
BUFFALO, N.Y. (WIVB) — Proposed federal budget cuts and changes to Medicaid and SNAP could cost residents of Erie County hundreds of millions of dollars by 2028, Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz said Friday.
Erie County would be hit with a direct cost of $12.3 million next year and over $100 million annually by 2028 if the proposed changes become law, according to estimates by the Erie County Department of Social Services.
Poloncarz said Erie County would have to pay ECMC to cover cut federal funds estimated at up to $50 million. Additionally, the county might have to pay for its portion of state SNAP cuts at around $84 million, among other costs.
He said the proposed budget would target poor, elderly, sick, and hungry Americans above all.
'While the president is accepting a $400 million bribe from a foreign dictator he's simultaneously taking away critical programs and services that residents in communities nationwide, including Erie County, rely on to improve their everyday lives,' Poloncarz said. 'Now is the time to speak up against these injustices and I implore everyone to do so.'
The tax break bill did not pass in the House Budget Committee on Friday, but the committee plans to reconvene on Sunday. Some right-wing lawmakers are reportedly calling for even steeper cuts to Medicaid before they vote in favor.
Kayleigh Hunter-Gasperini joined the News 4 team in 2024 as a Digital Video Producer. She is a graduate of Chatham University.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
What to know about 'No Kings' protests against Trump's policies on Saturday
Opponents of President Donald Trump's administration are set to rally in hundreds of cities on Saturday during the military parade in Washington for the Army's 250th anniversary — which coincides with Trump's birthday. The 'No Kings' protests are set to take place to counter what organizers say are Trump's plans to feed his ego on what is also his 79th birthday and Flag Day. The Army birthday celebration had already been planned. But earlier this spring, Trump announced his intention to ratchet up the event to include 60-ton M1 Abrams battle tanks and Paladin self-propelled howitzers rolling through the city streets. He has long sought a similar display of patriotic force. Why is it called No Kings? The 'No Kings' theme was orchestrated by the 50501 Movement, a national movement made up of everyday Americans who stand for democracy and against what they call the authoritarian actions of the Trump administration. The name 50501 stands for 50 states, 50 protests, one movement. Protests earlier this year have denounced Trump and billionaire adviser Elon Musk, the now former leader of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, a government organization designed to slash federal spending. Protesters have called for Trump to be 'dethroned' as they compare his actions to that of a king and not a democratically elected president. 'They've defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights, and slashed our services,' the group says on its website, referring to the Trump administration and its policies. 'They've done this all while continuing to serve and enrich their billionaire allies.' Why are they protesting on Saturday? The No Kings Day of Defiance has been organized to reject authoritarianism, billionaire-first politics and the militarization of the country's democracy, according to a press release from No Kings. It is happening to counter the Army's 250th anniversary celebration — which Trump has ratcheted up to include an expensive, lavish military parade. The event, will feature hundreds of military vehicles and aircraft and thousands of soldiers. It also happens to be his 79th birthday and Flag Day. 'The flag doesn't belong to President Trump. It belongs to us,' the No Kings website says. 'On June 14th, we're showing up everywhere he isn't — to say no thrones, no crowns, no kings.' Where are the protests? Protests in nearly 2,000 locations are scheduled around the country, from city blocks to small towns, from courthouse steps to community parks, according to the No Kings website. No protests are scheduled to take place in Washington, D.C., however, where the parade will be held. The group says it will 'make action everywhere else the story of America that day.' No Kings plans instead to hold a major flagship march and rally in Philadelphia to draw a clear contrast between its people-powered movement and what they describe as the 'costly, wasteful, and un-American birthday parade' in Washington, according to the No Kings website. What is planned at the No Kings protests? People of all ages are expected to come together in the protest locations for speeches, marching, carrying signs and waving American flags, organizers said in a call Wednesday. On the group's website it says a core principle behind all No Kings events is a commitment to nonviolent action, and participants are expected to seek to de-escalate any potential confrontation with those who disagree with them. How many people are expected to participate? The No Kings Day of Defiance is expected to be the largest single-day mobilization since Trump returned to office, organizers said. Organizers said they are preparing for millions of people to take to the streets across all 50 states and commonwealths.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
National Guard General Flames Trump for LA Deployment Orders
The former vice chief of the National Guard has denounced President Donald Trump's deployment of troops in Los Angeles as 'bad for all Americans concerned about freedom of speech and states' rights.' Trump made the extraordinary decision to send 2,000 troops into L.A. over the weekend as anti-ICE protests continued to intensify. The president said federalizing troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California after protesters opposed an illegal immigration crackdown from ICE officials by blocking highways and setting self-driving cars on fire. The president previously called in the National Guard against Black Lives Matter protesters during his first term in 2020, where the deployment request was approved by many local governors. This time however, the ruling has been strongly opposed by California's Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who accused Trump of 'manufacturing a crisis' and said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' In a statement reported by Fox News on Sunday, retired Maj. Gen. Randy Manner, the former acting vice chief of the National Guard Bureau, condemned the president's actions. 'The president's federal deployment of the National Guard over the official wishes of a governor is bad for all Americans concerned about freedom of speech and states' rights,' Manner said. 'The governor has the authority and ability to respond to the civil disturbances with law enforcement capabilities within his state, augmented as necessary by requesting law enforcement assistance from other governors. 'There are over a million badged and trained members of law enforcement in this country for the governor to ask for help if he needs it. While this is presently a legal order, it tramples the governor's rights and obligations to protect his people. This is an inappropriate use of the National Guard and is not warranted.' Typically the National Guard is forbidden from carrying out civilian law enforcement except in times of emergency, but this was sidestepped after Trump invoked a federal law known as the Title 10 authority under which the president can supersede the state governor as the top of the command chain during times of emergency. The law can be invoked under three circumstances, AP reports: If the U.S. has been invaded or is in danger of being so, if there is a significant threat of rebellion against the federal government or in the event the president is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' through conventional means. However, the law also states that the orders are to be executed 'through the governors of the States,' meaning it is not clear if Trump has the authority to deploy National Guard troops in California without Newsom's consent. In an interview on Sunday, Newsom accused the president of being a 'stone-cold liar' after claiming the two of them spoke about deploying the guardsmen during a phone call on Friday. 'We talked for almost 20 minutes and he barely, this issue never came up,' Newsom told MSNBC. 'I tried to talk about L.A., he wanted to talk about all these other issues. We had a very decent conversation.' 'He never once brought up the National Guard. He's a stone-cold liar,' the governor added. 'He said he did. Stone. Cold. Liar. Never did.' 'There's no working with the president. There's only working for him, and I will never work for Donald Trump.' Newsom said on Sunday the state of California planned to sue the Trump administration for deploying troops without their consent, in a move which has little precedent in U.S. history. 'Donald Trump has created the conditions you see on your TV tonight. He's exacerbated the conditions. He's, you know, lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire, ever since he announced he was taking over the National Guard—an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act,' Newsom said. 'And we're going to test that theory with a lawsuit tomorrow.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Senate GOP unveil long-awaited SNAP proposals for Trump bill
Senate Republicans on Wednesday rolled out a suite of proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as a key component of President Trump's 'big beautiful bill' – but it dials back some of the proposals sought by the House that drew intraparty concerns. The new legislative text from the Senate would require states to cover some of the cost of SNAP benefits, which are currently completely funded by the federal government, if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent beginning in fiscal 2028, while allowing states with rates below that level to continue paying zero percent. It also proposes states with higher payment error rates cover a greater share of benefit costs. If the error rate is 6 percent or higher, states would be subject to a sliding scale that could see its share of allotments rise to a range of between 5 percent to 15 percent. The House, by contrast, called for all states to cover 5 percent of the cost of allotments in its agricultural proposal passed as part of a broader plan to advance Trump's tax agenda last month, with states that had higher payment error rates having to pay anywhere between 15 to 25 percent. The softened proposal comes as Senate Republicans expressed concerns about how the House pitch would have impacted states. 'This bill takes a commonsense approach to reforming SNAP-cutting waste, increasing state accountability, and helping recipients transition to self-sufficiency through work and training,' Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman (R-Ariz.) said in a statement on Wednesday. 'It's about being good stewards of taxpayer dollars while giving folks the tools to succeed.' 'At the same time, our farmers and ranchers are facing real challenges,' he said. 'This legislation delivers the risk management tools and updated farm bill safety net they need to keep producing the safest, most abundant and affordable food, fuel, and fiber in the world. It's an investment in rural America and the future of agriculture.' Like the House bill, the Senate bill would also decrease the administrative cost the federal government is required to pay to help cover program operations in the states by 25 percent, but beginning in fiscal year 2027. The proposals in both chambers also seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future and beef up work requirements, as well as farm provisions that GOP leaders have argued will make it easier to craft a bipartisan farm bill in the months ahead – although Democrats have said otherwise. Republicans on the Senate Agriculture Committee estimated the recent legislation would generate $144 billion in net savings in the years ahead as the party looks to ramp up cost-cutting measures in Trump's plan amid concerns about the overall deficit impact of his tax priorities. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
