This statement is false.
Since the middle of the 1960s, the expansion of social welfare programs has been a major concern for American domestic politics.
Conservatives criticized the continuous growth of these programs, saying it had put an unacceptably high cost on the American taxpayers while doing little to help the poor's long-term concerns.
Reagan quickly slowed the rate of growth in domestic spending after being elected president in 1980 in part due to dissatisfaction with social programs.
Reagan has maintained that his budget-cutting initiatives are primarily intended to benefit low-income people who have been able to generate significant incomes by fusing their work-related gains with federal funding and "inkind" benefits.
The "really needy"—those with the lowest incomes—would be exempt from budget cuts. In February 1981, Reagan remarked, "Those who, through no fault of their own, must depend on the rest of us, the poor, the handicapped, the aged, all those with actual need, can rest confident that the social safety net of programs they depend on are exempt from any reduction."
To know more about Reagan, visit:
brainly.com/question/4784629
#SPJ4
Answer:
I think it will latter B .... Because it is a best solution
First, the case must be appealled to even make it to the SCOTUS. However, probably the most important condition is that a given case must pose a question about the constitution.
The answer is B
American workers lose job opportunities
