Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

One of the few bright spots in Trump’s budget blueprint was bogus

Trump’s budget claimed to add $500 million to fight the opioid epidemic. It turns out it doesn’t.

One of the silver linings in President Donald Trump’s first budget blueprint was the supposed addition of $500 million in fiscal year 2018 to fight the opioid epidemic. Finally, it seemed, Trump was living up to his promise to “expand treatment for those who have become so badly addicted.”

We now know, however, that Trump’s budget blueprint line on opioids was misleading — and Trump is not, in fact, proposing an increase in drug treatment spending above funding that already exists.

The budget blueprint promised “a $500 million increase above 2016 enacted levels to expand opioid misuse prevention efforts and to increase access to treatment and recovery services to help Americans who are misusing opioids get the help they need.”

Related

It turns out that the $500 million referenced in this line is actually funding that was already approved by Congress and President Barack Obama — not Trump — late last year in the 21st Century Cures Act. That law added $1 billion for drug treatment over two years — $500 million in the current fiscal year (2017) and $500 million in the next fiscal year (2018). Trump played no role in this additional funding.

Asked by US Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) about this, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price confirmed that’s the case. “I think the $500 million is the $500 million from the Cures Act,” Price said. “Yes, ma’am.”

I previously asked Trump administration officials if this was the case, but I got no straight answers. Now we have confirmation — an indication that Trump really may not do much more on one of the biggest public health crises facing America today, even as drug overdoses now kill more people annually than cars or guns.

So far, Trump is all talk, no action on opioids and drug treatment

The news is telling: It suggests that despite Trump’s promises on the campaign trail, he won’t, based on his planned budget and other actions, spend more on drug treatment to deal with the opioid crisis.

But there’s a case to be made for more spending. According to 2014 federal data, at least 89 percent of people who met the definition for a drug abuse disorder didn’t get treatment. Patients with drug use disorders also often complain of weeks- or months-long waiting periods for care. (Even Prince, a rich superstar musician, couldn’t access care quickly enough — and died as a result.) More spending could help alleviate these gaps.

Trump on Wednesday rolled out a commission, headed by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, that may in part evaluate whether some federal funding streams could be redirected to address the crisis. But it remains unclear whether the commission will actually do, well, anything. It will put out a preliminary report in three months and a final one in the fall with its findings, and it will then be up to the Trump administration to decide whether to put those recommendations into effect.

What we do know is that Trump’s budget won’t increase drug treatment spending. We also know Trump has proposed $100 million in cuts to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s mental health block grants, which could ultimately impact some addiction services. And we know the health care reform bills that Trump has supported could cut as many as 2.8 million people with drug use disorders from their health insurance.

This is the reality of Trump’s policy on opioid epidemic: a lot of talk, but so far very little, even negative, action — as tens of thousands of people die of overdoses every year.

For more on the opioid epidemic, read Vox’s in-depth explainer and visual explainer.

See More:

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters