Donald Trump claims he will advocate for working-class Americans, yet his record during his first presidency tells a different story. His policies and proposals raised concerns about his commitment to the most vulnerable populations, particularly low-income families, children, and the elderly.
During his time in office, Trump sought to increase rent for at least 4 million impoverished individuals, including many elderly and disabled citizens. He proposed cutting federal disability benefits for 250,000 low-income children by arguing that their families already received some form of assistance. Trump also aimed to impose regulations that would force single mothers to disclose personal information before qualifying for food assistance, showcasing a troubling approach to support for struggling families.
Further actions included attempts to allow employers to keep workers’ tips and implementing rules that denied overtime pay to millions of low-wage employees earning over $35,568 annually.
More Read
Despite his claims of prioritizing the working class alongside his running mate, Senator JD Vance, critics highlight Project 2025—a plan suggesting deep cuts to social safety nets for lower-income families while offering significant tax breaks for the wealthy. Although Trump has distanced himself from this initiative, his past actions indicate a consistent pattern of undermining support for working Americans.
ProPublica’s review of Trump’s proposed budgets from 2018 to 2021 reveals a significant push to cut healthcare, food assistance, housing programs, and labor protections. Robert Greenstein, a federal poverty policy expert, noted that Trump proposed deeper cuts to programs for low- and modest-income families than any other president, including Ronald Reagan.
Many of Trump’s proposals failed to advance due to his lack of preparation upon entering office in 2016 and a shift in focus during his first two years when Republicans controlled Congress. Instead of pursuing poverty issues, he prioritized tax cuts for the wealthy and efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA). By the end of his presidency, the number of uninsured Americans had increased for three consecutive years, leaving millions without health coverage.
Although President Joe Biden has reversed many of Trump’s detrimental changes, a potential second Trump presidency poses a risk of reinstating those harmful policies, especially if he regains majorities in Congress.
Trump’s first-term agenda indicated intentions to:
- Cut the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) significantly.
- Rescind nearly a million children’s eligibility for free school lunches.
- Freeze Pell Grants for low-income college students.
- Overhaul the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), defining those with assets above $2,250 as ineligible for aid.
- Eliminate programs aimed at increasing affordable housing.
- Shrink funding for job training programs that help individuals transition off government assistance.
Moreover, Trump remained committed to dismantling the Affordable Care Act, cutting enrollment periods and slashing funding for outreach programs, disproportionately impacting lower-income Americans.
Despite these alarming proposals, Trump’s campaign continues to appeal to working-class voters, particularly among those feeling economically marginalized. His focus on the working class resonates, even in areas with rising food stamp usage, where residents remain supportive despite his policies aimed at reducing such assistance.
During his first term, Trump did initiate temporary pandemic relief measures, including stimulus checks, which helped lower poverty rates, but these were largely influenced by congressional Democrats rather than his administration’s policy agenda.
The current presidential campaign presents an opportunity to scrutinize Trump’s previous record on poverty and its implications for the working class. Questions remain regarding his intentions for a second term—whether he would continue to support welfare reforms aimed at assisting low-income families or revert to policies that could exacerbate poverty levels.
