Reflection on 'Trump's Budget Leaves Women and Girls Behind' Article

This assignment presents a student's reflection on a news article titled "Trump's Budget Leaves Women and Girls Behind," published in Ms. Magazine on February 13, 2020, by Mellisa Boteach. The article critiques President Trump's budget for removing welfare schemes targeting women, families, and LGBTQ+ individuals. The student summarizes the article, highlighting the author's criticisms of budget cuts affecting women and the potential for increased poverty and marginalization. The student connects the article to their psychology course, emphasizing the importance of understanding socio-economic impacts on individuals and demographics, particularly concerning working women and those in lower socio-economic strata. The student expresses personal viewpoints, acknowledging the article's claims while also presenting a balanced perspective by considering potential government justifications for budgetary changes and proposes further research. The reflection concludes with a commitment to advocating for the welfare of marginalized groups, particularly working women.

Reflection on the News article
A news article under the title “Trump’s Budget leaves Women and Girls Behind” was published
in Ms. Magazine on the 13th Feb 2020. The author of this article Mellisa Boteach has criticized
the recent budget tabled by President Trump for its removal of many welfare schemes mainly
targeted at women, families, and LGBTQ (Boteach, 2020).
This article starts on a satirical note where the author points towards the statement made by the
president regarding the complete alleviation of the poverty from the USA. Further, the author
pinpoints the downsizing of the budget allocated for the welfare schemes targeted at females and
families. The author also takes a hedge when she describes the concept of maternity leaves with
pay as a tokenism to hide the real massive cut in the resources. The second part of the article
presents a synoptic quantification of budget allocations that were removed.
A brief reading of this article forced me to think about the concept of “equal opportunity for all
in any given economy” from a different perspective. According to the author, two-third of the
existing budget provisions have been removed and in the coming future, it will leave millions of
women and kids struggling for necessary help from the side of the government. Further, she
suspects red-tapes in the existing welfare schemes because of the additional paperwork. In the
concluding part, she states that the existing budget will leave millions of the working US women
far behind in gaining a respectful place in the existing economy. As far as I think, on a
theoretical level, it seems like a deliberate marginalization of a majority in a major economic
decision.
It is very important to think about this marginalization because the cuts in the budget are drastic
and massive. Previous governments created a support system for a marginalized segment of the

society a sudden removal of this support system can lead to chaos. In order to corroborate my
thought process, I can also take the support of the author, where she mentioned the closure of the
skill workshops. The direct and indirect impacts of this closure can challenge the balance of a
healthy economy and a particular section of the society can suffer badly. It can lead to hunger
and poverty.
This news story is very important for the existing classroom because it presents a socio-
economic picture of a social segment. While pursuing a course in psychology, it is very
important to have a deeper understanding of the demographics and their consequences on the
individuals. The insights gained through this article will help me in understanding the problems
of the working women and the women living in the lower strata of society. It gives me an idea
that how the support is given by NGOs and other bodies actually makes a difference in their life.
I personally find the issues raised by this article as poignant issues for the formation of a uniform
society. It raises a valid question about the claims of the government related to the removal of
poverty. However, on the side of presenting a rebuttal, I must say that claims made by the author
sound one-sided, if the government of the USA is claiming that poverty removal programs have
met with the success then they should also have some facts to present. Apart from it, removal of
budgetary allocation, for the welfare tasks can be utilized in other tasks. I would like to launch
research on that; it can also be possibilities that the government is offering this help in other
forms in order to change an old system which is full of loop-holes.
While acting as a responsible citizen, I have a soft corner for the weaker sections of the society,
if I find that Trump’s proposed budget is anti-working women, I will certainly raise my voice on

various platforms, a middle path should be jotted down and drastic measures should be called
off.
References
Boteach, M. (2020). Trump’s Budget Leaves Women and Girls Behind. Ms.,
https://msmagazine.com/2020/02/13/trumps-budget-leaves-women-and-girls-behind/.