2006 Cuts In Domestic Spending On Table

Washington Post ^ | May 27, 2004 | Jonathan Weisman

[RWR8189]

The White House put government agencies on notice this month that if President Bush is reelected, his budget for 2006 may include spending cuts for virtually all agencies in charge of domestic programs, including education, homeland security and others that the president backed in this campaign year.

Administration officials had dismissed the significance of the proposed cuts when they surfaced in February as part of an internal White House budget office computer printout. At the time, officials said the cuts were based on a formula and did not accurately reflect administration policy. But a May 19 White House budget memorandum obtained by The Washington Post said that agencies should assume the spending levels in that printout when they prepare their fiscal 2006 budgets this summer.

[COEXERJ145]

Since this is a Washington Compost, I suspect that "Spending Cut" really means a smaller than expected increase.

[RWR8189]

ping

[xrp]

You're probably right. There's a related post on FR where someone said they'll just come out and say something like, "well we were going to raise spending 30% but we decided to only raise it 20% so that's a spending cut of 10%"

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEAH.

[Moonman62]

The government is already using Enron style accounting tricks to hide their spending increases. Extending the fraud to give the appearance of cuts should be a simple matter.

[SierraWasp]

If he really did some serious spending reductions upon being re-elected, the "New Tone In Washington" would become a bunch of screamin banshees screamin pure unadulterated hate speech while doin war dances in circles like a bunch of drunken savages!!! They'd be screamin for his scalp!!! (and lookin for his scalpel to castigate him instead of them)

[CGTRWK]

You're probably right. There's a related post on FR where someone said they'll just come out and say something like, "well we were going to raise spending 30% but we decided to only raise it 20% so that's a spending cut of 10%"

Nope, that is a 33% cut! Mean spirited conservatives cutting vital spending to the bone, women and minorities especially hard hit...

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

Tell it to the Appropriators. The Cardinals won't even stop eating their lunch from their balconies from the Capitol to respond to this "may contain" spending cuts for every dept. blah blah blah.

I'm not buy what their selling on the domestic side.

[ilgipper]

I'd like to see a common sense, politically smart proposal, such as breaking it down by administrative fees, benefit payouts etc. Announce an across the board freeze or reduction in administrative budgets to start with, then require a minimal cut, say 5% of admin. The people would like this, it makes sense, and doesn't 'threaten' those receiving the handouts. It would be dumbed down enough for the sheeple to grasp.

[Veracious Poet]

Why the sour grapes?

Don't you just love BIG conservative government?

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

It's just more proof that a President can't get anything done to control spending (if he even wants to) unless the American public makes it a priority when electing their reps..

The GOPers are in power and getting used to doling out the cash and they found out they like it. It's like a drunken, drugged out orgy to end all spending orgies right now. And that's even taking into account a lot of the spending increases are due to homeland security issues.

[JohnnyZ]

unless the American public makes it a priority when electing their reps..

The American public wants smaller government, with more spending on health care, security, education, transportation, industry subsidies, local earmarks, the environment, and did I mention health care?

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

And it's all for the children.

[MamaLucci]

bttt