President Clinton was elected to his second term by women, but the 5-year budget he proposed to Congress is a far cry from the feminist budgets advocated by women's rights organizations. Clinton's 1998 budget continues high military spending, low corporate income taxes, and an emphasis on balancing the budget which relies on cutting domestic programs.

When Clinton presented his budget to Congress he emphasized his increases in spending on education, an issue which women tend to be more concerned about than men. While his budget does call for increased education spending, the education budget only grows from 4% of discretionary spending to 6% by the year 2002.

While in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars Clinton proposes that the defense budget be cut by $5.3 billion dollars in 1998 and by $23.2 billion in 2002, Clinton proposes that non-defense spending be cut by $27 billion in 2002. As a result, defense spending would remain at 50% of discretionary spending. High military spending not only prevents more money from being spent on social programs such as poverty reduction and student loans, which women use more than men, but also creates primarily male-dominated jobs.

Economist Max Sewicki of the Economic Policy Institute points out that Clinton based his budget on three fallacious assumptions: the budget must be balanced in five years; taxes cannot be increased for anyone; and the military budget cannot be significantly cut. "If you buy into those three things, you're paralyzed," Sewicki said. "Clinton is doing worse than President Bush, who increased spending on domestic programs."

Clinton has proposed a "middle-class tax cut" which primarily benefits people with children. Yet under Clinton's proposed budget, individuals would continue to pay for 44% of federal revenues in addition to 35% from social security and other social insurance taxes, half of which are paid by individuals. Corporations would continue to pay just 11% of federal revenues. In contrast, in 1967 corporations paid 23% of federal revenues.

The President's budget proposes slight increases (between $2 million and $10 million) in funding for: Title X family planning clinics; breast and cervical cancer early detection; rape prevention; and other programs benefitting women. Medicare, which older women tend to rely on more than older men, would be reduced by $100 billion over five years, but according to economist Edie Rasell of the Economic Policy Institute, the cuts come from lower payments to HMOs and doctors, and not reduced services to individuals. Medicaid, used by poor women and children, would be reduced by $9 billion over five years, but it is not clear where these cuts would come from.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Paul Wellstone (D-MN) are planning to introduce amendments this summer and fall to cut the military budget. See the Take Action section to write to your members of Congress in favor of cutting the military budget. For more information on the federal budget's impact on women, see the Feminist Majority Foundation's Feminist Budget Center.