QueenAdrock
07-30-2005, 01:39 PM
The White House budget for the 2006 fiscal year includes your typical Republican-style cuts in programs for the elderly, education and law enforcement. However, it increases the Pentagon budget by billions of dollars. When it is all said and done, the budget adds up to a $2.6 trillion check for all the expenditures in 2006, which means that it will even rival the record-breaking deficit we are going to have in 2005. But what the budget does not include are the expenditures for the war in Iraq and the $2 trillion over ten years in transition costs for President Bush's privatized Social Security system (if it passes). In other words, the 2006 budget proposal is inaccurate. For that very reason, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called the White House agenda "a hoax on the American people." She elaborated, "The two issues that dominated the president's State of the Union address — Iraq and Social Security — are nowhere to be found in this budget." The budget also does not include Bush's next round of tax cuts, which will be made permanent.
Lets go through the main areas of the budget, starting with the cuts. The 2006 budget will either eliminate or at least scale back 150 government programs that Americans have depended on. 12 of the 23 government departments will have to live through drops in funding. Agriculture will be cut 9.6%, the Environmental Protection Agency by 5.6%, Housing and Urban Development by 11.5%, and Transportation by 6.7%. Farm subsidies will fall by 5.7% over the next decade. Food stamps for the poor will drop by $1.1 billion over ten years. Subsidies for Amtrak will come to a halt. The Science and Technology budget will decrease by $900 million. Grants to state law enforcement would be cut by 46%, from $2.8 billion to $1.5 billion. The worst impacting cut of all is the COPS program, going from $499 million to $22 million - a 96% drop. The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program would have all of their funds wiped out, and the government program would therefore cease to exist. The budget would also end $438 million worth of state grants given to schools that meet safety and drug free requirements (so what's the incentive now to be drug-free now?). Finally, $2 billion will be cut from high school programs such as Upward Bound, Talent Search and GEAR UP.
Even with all these cuts for the poor and our infrastructure, Pentagon spending will increase by 4.8% even if you don't factor in current costs for the ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The NAVY will get money for a new submarine and three surface ships. NASA's budget will increase to $16.45 billion in 2006.
Aside from the $2.6 trillion budget in 2006, President Bush is still promising to cut the deficit in half by 2009. Remember, we are talking about the deficit here, not the debt - two completely different issues that are often confused. A deficit has to do with spending more than you take in on a yearly basis (the budget). The debt on the other hand is the bigger number, the total money that we owe overall. So even if Bush did cut the deficit in half, we would still be adding over $200 billion to our overall national debt each year. But the pledge to erase half of the deficit by 2009 isn't really going to happen. Firstly, every budget projection so far under this Administration has been underestimated. And Secondly, according to Congressman John Spratt of South Carolina, if you add costs for the war in Iraq, tax cuts for the wealthy and Social Security privatization, "more than $4 trillion" will actually be added "to the deficit over the next 10 years." It all amounts to Republican reckless spending gone bad.
What happened to the good old days? In the year 2000, thanks to the fiscally disciplined policies of Bill Clinton and Al Gore, we had a budget surplus. Al Gore wanted to take some of that money and pay down a portion of the national debt. Today, not only are we unable to even think about paying off some of the overall national debt, but we can't even balance our yearly budget - meaning that we will be adding to our national debt every single year until the government starts respecting my generation and lowers Pentagon spending, which is rising out of control.
My argument about this budget is that too much money is being cut from education, law enforcement, environmental protection and basic infrastructure needs like transportation and farm subsides; while on the other hand, too much money is being awarded to the Pentagon, NASA as well as military branches such as the NAVY to build new submarines. Plus, we have Bush's Social Security privatization costs, which are not included in the budget, that will amount to more than $2 trillion, all of which will be added to our national debt from money we borrow from foreign banks.
But it only begins here. The budget also doesn't include money for the Iraq war - $80 billion plus billions more that we have already spent and will spend as long as our troops remain there. And finally, the most interesting fact of all, the budget does not include Bush's new round of tax cuts that will cost $1.3 trillion over the next ten years, about $600 million more than this year's total budget. And one-thirds of these tax cuts will go to the richest 2% of Americans.
Okay, so lets weigh the priorities. COPS , education, farmers, science, and transportation expenditures - bad. But war money, Social Security privatization, tax cuts for the rich, Pentagon missile defense system and new NAVY submarines (even though we aren't fighting a Cold War anymore) - good.
Now who do you think is looking out for you? The White House? The Republican Congressional majority? We have been living through the same false logic for the past four years. It is like a broken record. Middle class Americans are having to make sacrifices while we throw money at the Pentagon and hope that those dollars will offset the Administration's incompetence when it comes to understanding international politics. They are fighting the war on terror only on the military sphere of foreign policy, while forgetting that there are two other spheres: political and economic. You spread democracy politically by building alliances and winning the war of ideas. You enhance democracy on an economic level by building your economy at home and running a low trade deficit that enhances the power of the dollar against other currencies. By strengthening your currency you can spread your economic and political influence throughout the world. Therefore instead of forcing the money in your budget towards military expenditures, you grow your economy and reduce your deficit at home - because a strong economy at home leads to a stronger economic influence abroad, ultimately leading to more pressure towards democratic reforms throughout the world.
The Republicans have had four long years to demonstrate their responsibility and courage in Congress by standing up to Bush's irrational spending. They have helped outspend the Clinton Administration in only five years, and they also have outspent the hearts and minds of the American people. Their time as a majority is about 20 months away from being up. In November of 2006, Americans across the country will send a clear message about which party should control spending and help us recover from this budget disaster.
Lets go through the main areas of the budget, starting with the cuts. The 2006 budget will either eliminate or at least scale back 150 government programs that Americans have depended on. 12 of the 23 government departments will have to live through drops in funding. Agriculture will be cut 9.6%, the Environmental Protection Agency by 5.6%, Housing and Urban Development by 11.5%, and Transportation by 6.7%. Farm subsidies will fall by 5.7% over the next decade. Food stamps for the poor will drop by $1.1 billion over ten years. Subsidies for Amtrak will come to a halt. The Science and Technology budget will decrease by $900 million. Grants to state law enforcement would be cut by 46%, from $2.8 billion to $1.5 billion. The worst impacting cut of all is the COPS program, going from $499 million to $22 million - a 96% drop. The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program would have all of their funds wiped out, and the government program would therefore cease to exist. The budget would also end $438 million worth of state grants given to schools that meet safety and drug free requirements (so what's the incentive now to be drug-free now?). Finally, $2 billion will be cut from high school programs such as Upward Bound, Talent Search and GEAR UP.
Even with all these cuts for the poor and our infrastructure, Pentagon spending will increase by 4.8% even if you don't factor in current costs for the ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The NAVY will get money for a new submarine and three surface ships. NASA's budget will increase to $16.45 billion in 2006.
Aside from the $2.6 trillion budget in 2006, President Bush is still promising to cut the deficit in half by 2009. Remember, we are talking about the deficit here, not the debt - two completely different issues that are often confused. A deficit has to do with spending more than you take in on a yearly basis (the budget). The debt on the other hand is the bigger number, the total money that we owe overall. So even if Bush did cut the deficit in half, we would still be adding over $200 billion to our overall national debt each year. But the pledge to erase half of the deficit by 2009 isn't really going to happen. Firstly, every budget projection so far under this Administration has been underestimated. And Secondly, according to Congressman John Spratt of South Carolina, if you add costs for the war in Iraq, tax cuts for the wealthy and Social Security privatization, "more than $4 trillion" will actually be added "to the deficit over the next 10 years." It all amounts to Republican reckless spending gone bad.
What happened to the good old days? In the year 2000, thanks to the fiscally disciplined policies of Bill Clinton and Al Gore, we had a budget surplus. Al Gore wanted to take some of that money and pay down a portion of the national debt. Today, not only are we unable to even think about paying off some of the overall national debt, but we can't even balance our yearly budget - meaning that we will be adding to our national debt every single year until the government starts respecting my generation and lowers Pentagon spending, which is rising out of control.
My argument about this budget is that too much money is being cut from education, law enforcement, environmental protection and basic infrastructure needs like transportation and farm subsides; while on the other hand, too much money is being awarded to the Pentagon, NASA as well as military branches such as the NAVY to build new submarines. Plus, we have Bush's Social Security privatization costs, which are not included in the budget, that will amount to more than $2 trillion, all of which will be added to our national debt from money we borrow from foreign banks.
But it only begins here. The budget also doesn't include money for the Iraq war - $80 billion plus billions more that we have already spent and will spend as long as our troops remain there. And finally, the most interesting fact of all, the budget does not include Bush's new round of tax cuts that will cost $1.3 trillion over the next ten years, about $600 million more than this year's total budget. And one-thirds of these tax cuts will go to the richest 2% of Americans.
Okay, so lets weigh the priorities. COPS , education, farmers, science, and transportation expenditures - bad. But war money, Social Security privatization, tax cuts for the rich, Pentagon missile defense system and new NAVY submarines (even though we aren't fighting a Cold War anymore) - good.
Now who do you think is looking out for you? The White House? The Republican Congressional majority? We have been living through the same false logic for the past four years. It is like a broken record. Middle class Americans are having to make sacrifices while we throw money at the Pentagon and hope that those dollars will offset the Administration's incompetence when it comes to understanding international politics. They are fighting the war on terror only on the military sphere of foreign policy, while forgetting that there are two other spheres: political and economic. You spread democracy politically by building alliances and winning the war of ideas. You enhance democracy on an economic level by building your economy at home and running a low trade deficit that enhances the power of the dollar against other currencies. By strengthening your currency you can spread your economic and political influence throughout the world. Therefore instead of forcing the money in your budget towards military expenditures, you grow your economy and reduce your deficit at home - because a strong economy at home leads to a stronger economic influence abroad, ultimately leading to more pressure towards democratic reforms throughout the world.
The Republicans have had four long years to demonstrate their responsibility and courage in Congress by standing up to Bush's irrational spending. They have helped outspend the Clinton Administration in only five years, and they also have outspent the hearts and minds of the American people. Their time as a majority is about 20 months away from being up. In November of 2006, Americans across the country will send a clear message about which party should control spending and help us recover from this budget disaster.